I see where you're coming from Heychadwick. I don't want to bore the forum by re-posting my argument. It can be found here where Vorpal and I do some number crunching...

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/183754-inquisitors-tie-vs-tie-advanced/page-18

I hope your version of the TAP turns out to be more true than mine. I'm thinking the TAP is going to be the equivalent of the Z95 to the X-wing. Because of the boost action, it already looks like they will be doing more than just reducing the primary attack by one, changing the speed of the greens, and reducing a point of hull. Just how much more though? Other than the addition to the boost... we just don't know.

A new twist to my argument, as to why I believe it will cost more than 16 points at its base, is the value of the top Z95 (19). Again, we see that 7 point spread I've been talking about between top and bottom pilot skills. If we subtract 7 from 25 we get 18. There is an 8 point spread between Vader and the Tempest. Let's argue that The Inquisitor's skill is just as valuable as Vader's (mind you we still don't match up on PS differences as Vader is a 9 and a Tempest is a 2, while The Inquisitor is an 8 and the base is a 2.) that places the base TAP at 17 points.

There are lots of ships with a PS+1 gap between the most expensive pilot and the least expensive pilot. There are also lots where the gap is bigger, and a couple where it's smaller. It's really hard to draw conclusions based on that day, though--the correlation between PS and cost is about 0.4, meaning increases (or decreases) in PS only explain about 16% of the variation in ship costs.

I honestly hope I'm wrong VS. I'm guessing this is a 17 or 18 point ship with a faster TA dial. I hope it is a 16 point ship with a TIE Fighter or better dial!

I feel the Imperial Navy needs to get back to what it does best... Victory through numbers and stupid amounts of fire power.

If A-wing is 15 at PS 1 with no missiles, 16 for the TAP at PS2 for a worse dial and a missile slot seems not unfair. 17 might be more conservative to prevent it from raiding TIE fighter territory.

There are lots of ships with a PS+1 gap between the most expensive pilot and the least expensive pilot. There are also lots where the gap is bigger, and a couple where it's smaller. It's really hard to draw conclusions based on that day, though--the correlation between PS and cost is about 0.4, meaning increases (or decreases) in PS only explain about 16% of the variation in ship costs.

The list:

That's everything through Wave 7, with the exception of the YT-1300 (which, due to the changes in the stat line, isn't a fair comparison). You're right that the most typical pattern is for the cost gap to be (PS gap)+1, which would be 7-8 points here, but there's a lot of variation there.

Assuming this one won't fall outside the Cost Gap range - then, given that the Inquisitor is 25 pts, that suggests that the upper limit for the PS2 TAP's cost will be 25-6 pts (19 pts) and the lower limit will be 25-10 pts (15 pts).

I see where you're coming from Heychadwick. I don't want to bore the forum by re-posting my argument. It can be found here where Vorpal and I do some number crunching...

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/183754-inquisitors-tie-vs-tie-advanced/page-18

I hope your version of the TAP turns out to be more true than mine. I'm thinking the TAP is going to be the equivalent of the Z95 to the X-wing. Because of the boost action, it already looks like they will be doing more than just reducing the primary attack by one, changing the speed of the greens, and reducing a point of hull. Just how much more though? Other than the addition to the boost... we just don't know.

A new twist to my argument, as to why I believe it will cost more than 16 points at its base, is the value of the top Z95 (19). Again, we see that 7 point spread I've been talking about between top and bottom pilot skills. If we subtract 7 from 25 we get 18. There is an 8 point spread between Vader and the Tempest. Let's argue that The Inquisitor's skill is just as valuable as Vader's (mind you we still don't match up on PS differences as Vader is a 9 and a Tempest is a 2, while The Inquisitor is an 8 and the base is a 2.) that places the base TAP at 17 points.

I've read that thread and I see you guys discussing the point difference between high PS pilots and generics, but......what does that have to do with the dial? No matter what the point costs of the base generic, the game developers are going to pick a dial they think makes sense for the ship. They don't have to base the dial on whatever the base cost of the generics are. If the base cost is 17 pts, it says nothing as to what the dial is going to be. If it's base 20 pts it again says nothing as to what the dial is supposed to be. The game designers develop the ship to fill a niche. They base the costs on making it an effective and worthwhile tool to take. While a good dial effects how useful it is, it does not equate to 17 pts = xyz dial. It could be 16 pts and have the same dial as the Tie Interceptor. Or the Tie Fighter. Or the X1.

I think it's obviously going to be better than the X1 as that ship is designed as a bulky tank. Yes, it's a Tie Fighter, but it's got a very limited dial due to the ship being loaded down with systems and shields and jump drives. The V1 obviously isn't bulked down with a lot as it's only got 2 hull and is pretty slim. The fact that it's slim and that it has the boost function indicates it's going to have a maneuverable dial. Or at least a dial as good as the Tie Fighter that it's based on.

The dial matters alot in relation to points.

If it's close to a tie fighter in points and has a dial that's as good or better thanks to actions then no one will use the iconic ties anymore.

If it's close to an interceptor and its similar that iconic ship wins because it has better attack values.

If it's close to 20 points you may as well take an advanced with free sensors you can use AC and take an evade action and do better than the TAP.

How good the dial is and what points it costs are closely tied together when you decide which generics to take.

I understand that the dial matters and how many points it is matters, but you can't really say that a 18 pt generic will equate to a specific kind of dial.

You can also have ships that are similar, but different in the game. Just look at the Tie Bomber and the Punisher. So, you can have something similar to an Interceptor dial, but the V1 is a different ship. It doesn't have 3 attack, but it's got more hull/shields and can take a missile. They can be similar and different and each have their uses.

I understand that the dial matters and how many points it is matters, but you can't really say that a 18 pt generic will equate to a specific kind of dial.

You can also have ships that are similar, but different in the game. Just look at the Tie Bomber and the Punisher. So, you can have something similar to an Interceptor dial, but the V1 is a different ship. It doesn't have 3 attack, but it's got more hull/shields and can take a missile. They can be similar and different and each have their uses.

I guess we're just not seeing what you're proposing for the TAP and why. Break it down for us. What will the dial look like and why? What are you basing the point value of the lowest cost TAP on?

The popular comparisons right now seems to be the A-wing and I'm arguing for a "Z95 treatment" of the TA.

I'm thinking the V1 will have a dial at least as good as a Tie Fighter, but possibly closer to the Tie Interceptor. It might be as good as the Interceptor, but probably a little less. Why? Just because how it looks and how it is in the show. That and going off the assumption of basing it off a standard Tie, but needs to have jump drives. They made the wings/panels S-foil for the jump, but overall it's a bit less sturdy than a Tie Fighter (2 hull). They beefed it up with 2 shield to protect. It's got Boost with 3 Agility, so I see it as an agile ship. At least as good as a standard Tie Fighter, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's better...since they made it so sleek. It's definitely better than the X1. I mean, look at the X1. It's loaded down with systems, and shields. It's a tank.

Points? I'm not sure. Probably somewhere between 16-19 for the generic. If I had to guess a specific number, I'd say 18. If it had the same dial as the Interceptor, I don't think it would steal thunder from the Interceptor. That has 3 attack dice, Boost, and Evade. The V1 doesn't have Evade and only 2 attack dice. It will be cheaper than the Tie Interceptor because it's not as good as the Tie Interceptor. I don't think there will be much competition between mid-point generics of the Interceptor and the V1. Each fills a different role. The mid-V1 will probably use the Missile slot.

Perhaps, we should compare the TAP to something other than the Interceptor or the A-wing for a fresh perspective. There are only two ships in the game (currently) with boost AND barrel roll; the Interceptor and the Starviper. Let's take a look at the Starviper.

From what we know, how they differ is the Starviper has 1 more attack die and 1 less shield than the TAP. The TAP has one less attack die, 2 less hull and one additional shield than the Starviper. The Starviper can equip a torpedo and the TAP can carry a Missile. The only thing we know about the TAP's dial is it has a green straight 4. (The Starviper has Green 1 banks and straight 1-3).

So, what if the dial is closer to that of a Starviper? Here are the questions to ask. What are the S-turns worth (over a k-turn)? What is the value of green 1 banks? (or the ability to move 1 straight or bank at all!) So let's assume that the TAP's dial is like the Starvipers with the following changes: 3 K (instead of S-turns), NO 1 banks or 1 straight, green 2 banks and 2-4 straight.

If my proposed dial ends up being the TAP's dial... what would you place the base value of the TAP at?

I don't think the V1 will be anything like the Starviper. I also don't think it's worth comparing to an A-wing, either. Why? Because it's an Imperial ship from the Tie Fighter line. I don't like comparing ships of different factions. Also, the Starviper is designed an utterly different way. I think it's best to keep things in the Tie family. That's where the designs started and moved on afterwards.

You start with Tie Fighters. They are cheap and nimble ships that were used throughout the Empire. They looked to improve on the design, specifically to give it jump drives. They came out with the V1. It had jump drives, missile launcher, and was still nimble. For whatever reason, they didn't like it. Still, I see it as staying true to the main idea of a Tie Fighter as being nimble. You can see this as it adds the jump drives, but suffers structurally. It requires shields to make it able to survive combat. It stays as true to the original Tie Fighter as close as possible.

Next came the X1, which was a tank. It was loaded with jump drives, systems, missiles, and shields. They decided to push the envelope with this one. Give it everything they can. Make it faster, better, stronger, and improved in every way. It became bogged down with so much tech. I recall reading that the X1 became too expensive for mass production and that's why it didn't see much use. Still, they made lots of advances in the technology for other ships. The bent wing design proved effective and all the research into add ons improved later ships.

Tie Interceptors were the end result in improvements on the Tie Fighter. If the X1 was too much, you have to scale it back to make it more affordable. What is needed? What worked on the Tie Fighter? Nimble ship - but needed more firepower. OK...they take the Tie Fighter and add on only improvements that make it faster and improve the guns. Boom - Tie Interceptor.

One of my avenues of geekness is thinking about backstory and technical development like Heychadwick just did. That makes sense to me. They probably didn't like the v1 because it was a sharp cost increase (hyperdrive and shields) for something that was really no more combat effective than a stock TIE Fighter. It ended up being useful as an armed VIP courier (so long as the VIP was the pilot), and that's what the first and only run ended up being used as.

The x1 took the lessons they learned from the v1. They decided if they were going to invest real money on all this support equipment, they needed to make the ship last. The hyperdrive, sensors, and highly trained pilot was more important than maneuverability, because this thing goes out and attacks, it doesn't defend fleets and do basic presence patrolling like the TIE Fighter does. If the mission planners and military intelligence are doing their jobs, the x1 is not facing off against enemy line fighters in equal numbers. It's using the hyperdrive to hit poorly defended targets. The problem with the x1, though was cost again. It was modestly effective when it was performing its assigned role, but Imperial mission planners were used to thinking about fighters as disposable assets, and didn't use x1 squadrons as raiders, they used them as brawlers, and they were too expensive for that. Even when successful, pilot feedback requested additional offensive power. They needed something to overwhelm unexpected defenses once the magazines were empty and two lasers on a slower frame wasn't ideal.

From here, Seinar designers tried to incorporate lessons learned from x1 squadron pilots Imperial command officers. As line fighters, they made the Interceptor and Bomber. These ships incorporated improvements panel architecture that were part of the x1 project. As the Imperials used massed fighters in battle, there was no need to give the dogfighter version missile magazines, you'd just have both ships present. These fighters stayed basic and cheap, but just improved over the TIE fighters. They were still not as cheap as the basic TIEs though, so those stay around, because there's lots of missions where the number 1 requirement is just to show up, and TIE fighters are great at showing up.

The Assault Gunboat, at this time, starts shouldering in on the x1's core competency, hyperspace raiding. It doubles down on what the x1 was good at: durability, warhead magazine, and shields. It's a marginally worse dogfighter, but makes up reasonably well for this by having an excellent load of anti-fighter missiles. Seinar has to answer, so they start developing the TIE Defender. No half measures were taken. Anything the Gunboat can do, the Defender can do better, plus the Defender can dogfight like a beast, so when it's caught off guard, it can turn the tables very quickly. It is also very appealing to the Imperial nobility, because it's a TIE, and it's necessarily elite. They don't mind high casualty rates for most TIE pilots, but their sons and daughters deserve better. Unfortunately the treasonous Admiral Zaarin spikes the program before anything really can become of it, and there's never enough made for it to make an impression in Imperial doctrine. The nobility sticks to capital ships, except for a few eccentrics.

//end headcanon dump

The proposed dial I gave (based off the Starviper rather than the TA) is actually very much like that of a TIE Fighter.

Again, point wise... what is this worth? Let's simplify even more. Let's say the PAT has the TIE Fighter's dial (but with a green straight 4 and only 1 K turn) The TIE Fighter has one more hull and the PAT has two shields, boost, no Evade, and the TL action. What is this worth at a base PS2?

The Starviper has no 3 hard turn and it has an S-loop. The V1 should have a 3 hard turn and why would it ever have an S-loop? It's not that different from all the other Tie Fighters that it would get an S-loop. I think that would be too much of a departure from the norm.

What do I think it's worth points wise? It doesn't matter. FFG is going to assign the points. I'll have to accept it or not. I think it's pointless and could add potentially negative impacts by guessing. If I decide (for whatever arbitrary reason) that it's worth 16 pts....and it comes out at 17, then I'll be disappointed. I can spend a few months berating the fact that I think it should be 16 because x,y, and even z. It won't matter. I'll just be happy to wait for the points and try to have faith in FFG to bring a ship that is balanced. They've been more successful in that arena then they haven't, so I'm happy to just wait.

the point cost issue is going to be relative to its utility outside of jousting

A-wings, for example, are not very efficient ships. They're main strengths is in their hilarious dial + boost (utter blockage!), and their effectiveness is far more on how you handle them and far less on the dice (unless you run into a PWT and don't have thrusters ).

With the Tie/x1 filling as a very potent and chuncky ship, and the interceptor filling the role of pure arc-dodging glass cannon, the Tie/v1 could easily be priced as a pure utility ship (hence the tracer rounds included in the package)

the only exception (so far) would be the inquisitor, who has a wholly offensive ability

the point cost issue is going to be relative to its utility outside of jousting

A-wings, for example, are not very efficient ships. They're main strengths is in their hilarious dial + boost (utter blockage!), and their effectiveness is far more on how you handle them and far less on the dice (unless you run into a PWT and don't have thrusters ).

With the Tie/x1 filling as a very potent and chuncky ship, and the interceptor filling the role of pure arc-dodging glass cannon, the Tie/v1 could easily be priced as a pure utility ship (hence the tracer rounds included in the package)

the only exception (so far) would be the inquisitor, who has a wholly offensive ability

And we see this in another TIE utility ship... The TIE Bomber. The Bombers fill secondary roles such as blocking and forcing travel lanes. Rhymer is designed to be offense first with his ability, high PS, and an EPT. You could be on to something here in bring our attention back to the idea of this being a support ship first. Looking at the TIE Bomber might also give us clues in what FFG thinks is the Imperial strategy (or feel) for support ships.

the point cost issue is going to be relative to its utility outside of jousting

A-wings, for example, are not very efficient ships. They're main strengths is in their hilarious dial + boost (utter blockage!), and their effectiveness is far more on how you handle them and far less on the dice (unless you run into a PWT and don't have thrusters ).

With the Tie/x1 filling as a very potent and chuncky ship, and the interceptor filling the role of pure arc-dodging glass cannon, the Tie/v1 could easily be priced as a pure utility ship (hence the tracer rounds included in the package)

the only exception (so far) would be the inquisitor, who has a wholly offensive ability

I know that the point cost will have a big impact on the ship and whether it gets used or not. What I'm saying is, though, is that finding out the point cost isn't really finding out what the dial is like, either.

As for the Inquisitor being the only offensive, I don't think so. The V1 title card makes all the ships relatively offensive. You get a free evade for a TL. That means you get a free PTL without the stress!

The proposed dial I gave (based off the Starviper rather than the TA) is actually very much like that of a TIE Fighter.

Again, point wise... what is this worth? Let's simplify even more. Let's say the PAT has the TIE Fighter's dial (but with a green straight 4 and only 1 K turn) The TIE Fighter has one more hull and the PAT has two shields, boost, no Evade, and the TL action. What is this worth at a base PS2?

That's a difficult question for me to answer neutrally, but here's what I'd take into account:

• 133% of a TIE fighter's durability, plus a nudge due to increased resistance to critical hits compared to a TIE fighter.
• The same offense as a TIE fighter, with a small nudge for target lock.
• A step forward for native access to boost.
• A nudge backward for missing evade.
• No nudge for PS, since PS2 still maneuvers early and fires late, but can be blocked by PS1.
• No nudge for the dial, because (by definition, here) it's a wash when compared to the TIE fighter.

Also keep in mind that the cost curve isn't linear, so that 33% increase in durability (for example) adds less than 33% to the ship's value.

The proposed dial I gave (based off the Starviper rather than the TA) is actually very much like that of a TIE Fighter.

Again, point wise... what is this worth? Let's simplify even more. Let's say the PAT has the TIE Fighter's dial (but with a green straight 4 and only 1 K turn) The TIE Fighter has one more hull and the PAT has two shields, boost, no Evade, and the TL action. What is this worth at a base PS2?

That's a difficult question for me to answer neutrally, but here's what I'd take into account:

• 133% of a TIE fighter's durability, plus a nudge due to increased resistance to critical hits compared to a TIE fighter.
• The same offense as a TIE fighter, with a small nudge for target lock.
• A step forward for native access to boost.
• A nudge backward for missing evade.
• No nudge for PS, since PS2 still maneuvers early and fires late, but can be blocked by PS1.
• No nudge for the dial, because (by definition, here) it's a wash when compared to the TIE fighter.

Also keep in mind that the cost curve isn't linear, so that 33% increase in durability (for example) adds less than 33% to the ship's value.

So, even if we did go with the 33% number you came up with and our assumed variables.... we're looking at a 16 point ship.

I'd be happy if all of this turns out to be the case!

The TIE bomber is actually an interesting comparison. Same firepower, a bit better durability, same starting PS, probably worse dial, no boost. 16 points as well. Its added durability and Target Lock and ordnance access hasn't bumped the base TIE out of the meta, so a 16 point TAP very likely wouldn't. People do love their Boosts, though.

We the players have "logically" placed this ship at 16 (and no more than 18). FFG doesn't have the greatest track record in this... I'm looking at you Scyk....

The Empire needs new cheap toys to handle those nasty B-wings and YTs!

The TIE bomber is actually an interesting comparison. Same firepower, a bit better durability, same starting PS, probably worse dial, no boost. 16 points as well. Its added durability and Target Lock and ordnance access hasn't bumped the base TIE out of the meta, so a 16 point TAP very likely wouldn't. People do love their Boosts, though.

well the Tie bomber is another case

it's very efficient (very close to the tie fighter), but maneuvers like a brick in wet cement (so, better than a shuttle)

the tie fighter is stupid efficient and has an excellent dial

in the case of the bomber, you're paying for efficiency with your dial

in the case of the A-wing (which the v1 resembles) you're paying for your dial (and action bar) with efficiency

The TIE bomber is actually an interesting comparison. Same firepower, a bit better durability, same starting PS, probably worse dial, no boost. 16 points as well. Its added durability and Target Lock and ordnance access hasn't bumped the base TIE out of the meta, so a 16 point TAP very likely wouldn't. People do love their Boosts, though.

Boosts good on high ps ships but not so much on generics, also you use boost your not TL so you get no evade and have no focus to modify those tricksy green dice and you go pop.

Without PTL I doubt you'll see a TAP boost very often but it's still gonna get charged for that ability.

Native boost gives you access to autothrusters though, that's worth something.

I'm really looking forward to the TAP dial, because it will help answer one of the questions I posed here . Specifically, are we likely to see new ships overlap existing niches, or will FFG use gimmicks to keep new ships unique?

I'd there's no attempt to differentiate the TAP, then we might be looking at future waves with plenty of overlap - good for EU fans who want the CloakShape, the Assault Gunboat, the R-41, the T-Wing - but maybe less good for the game long term. Alternately, I'd they do differentiate it, then we might see the first Imperial ship with Segnors? Possibly even both Segnors and a K turn? That might be better, our it might mean more and more outlandish gimmicks.

Either way, the dial will be very interesting.

Native boost gives you access to autothrusters though, that's worth something.

I'm really looking forward to the TAP dial, because it will help answer one of the questions I posed here . Specifically, are we likely to see new ships overlap existing niches, or will FFG use gimmicks to keep new ships unique?

I'd there's no attempt to differentiate the TAP, then we might be looking at future waves with plenty of overlap - good for EU fans who want the CloakShape, the Assault Gunboat, the R-41, the T-Wing - but maybe less good for the game long term. Alternately, I'd they do differentiate it, then we might see the first Imperial ship with Segnors? Possibly even both Segnors and a K turn? That might be better, our it might mean more and more outlandish gimmicks.

Either way, the dial will be very interesting.

The title is pretty much their way of differentiating from other ships. I think titles will be key in giving ships with similar stats different roles.