That's great that your group plays like that, but actual fleet construction is very clear on the matter. If FFG intended that you must run Squadrons, they would have the rules say that. They may alter those rules at a later time, but as presented they unequivocally do not in any way force you to take Squadrons. As such unless you think FFG is completely unaware of what thier rules say you can not conclude that it is FFGs intent that Fleets include Squadrons. If it were the rules would say as such, and until they do you can not assert that is FFGS intent (given that the rules are clear on the subject).

Thanks ScottieATF.

Your opinion is understandable.

BTW- Were there any Star Wars battles in which capital ships fought without squadrons?

I can't seem to find a single one.

If you know of any, please post the link.

Thank you sir.

Well, the sample size is very small, though. There are only three 'fleet' battles in the OT: The opening scene in ANH, the escape from Hoth in ESB, and the Battle of Endor in ROTJ. There were only two ships involved in ANH, and fighters were only marginally involved in ESB. Thus, most of what is being argued is on the basis of one battle, which is hardly definitive either way.

Under the current rules you can have your squads ride the maneuvers of slow ships for free. Just place them at the front of the ship to force your opponent to overlap your squads. Then replace them in front again. Since they never activated, you still get to fire. Sure they could speed up to stop the overlap, but now you are controlling their strategy.

On second thought I see no reason to derail this thread further with a debate over opinion and semantics.

It's a bit off that by destroying 200 points of ships (and leaving 100 points of squadrons on the table) that you can score a 300 point win. That's a problem.

It would make better sense to get points for those squadrons that are not hyperdrive fitted, but not points to those that can jump home when all capital ships are destroyed

It would, lol but then you'd be faced with a really difficult task balancing most Imperial ships.

It's a bit off that by destroying 200 points of ships (and leaving 100 points of squadrons on the table) that you can score a 300 point win. That's a problem.

I think the main problem is the point range you get for winning. If it was a 7 point spread instead of 10 point one and if they evened out the scoring breaks I think it would make the game overall better. For example a buddy of mine and I played yesterday and we had a great game and it seemed very close and he had one ship left out of 3 and he got a 10-1 victory over me. Didnt seem right. A 7-3 victory would have seemed more in line. I think if they can find a way to re-balance the scoring again they might be able to help mitigate this issue. Right now I feel its less about squadrons and more about scoring.