And they can be stopped by a single tie fighter long enough for the ship in question to move away.

For 2 points more I get a CR90 that comes with red and blue dice, has shields, redirects, commands, and is speed 4.

For 3 points less I get a CR90 that is speed 4 has commands, redirects, can't be tied up by a single squadron, gets 2 attacks and can shoot up to 6 dice a turn with a reroll somewhere in there.

B-Wings are great but (and remember now that my first 2 videos were on the B-Wing) they can only keep up with a VSD, every other ship in the game moves past them fast, Interceptors lock them down as well as tie fighters, and for all their firepower they are limited on targets because while they can move and shoot a bit past medium range, the next turn they will be lucky to b4ing that power to bear.

Inconsistent firepower is weaker everytime to consistent firepower. Even if it is just a comparison of the CR90 to 3 B-Wings, if I can shoot the cr90 every turn and only shoot the B-Wings every other turn, which pumps out more damage?

IMO squadrons are something of a disappointment.

The big problem is that they require commands to be fully effective.

That's it really - every other problem associated with squadrons derive from this.

- every squ command is a command that could be used for something else, like repair, maneuvers, or gunnery

- squ commands are very time critical; they must be timed correctly or they are pretty much wasted

- it's so easy to put your squadrons out of command range

- especially since squadrons get engaged so easily

I prefer to play Rebels. A small detachment of A-wings are what works for me. They can delay any squadron-heavy enemy list + are semi-useful vs capitals, even if flown in the squadron phase.

This is curious whenever I hear it...as people seem to keep assuming squadron commands are never worth taking: when I've already pointed out they are often better than ConcFire commands (depending on ships of course, still only very few).

...

B-Wings are great but (and remember now that my first 2 videos were on the B-Wing) they can only keep up with a VSD, every other ship in the game moves past them fast, Interceptors lock them down as well as tie fighters, and for all their firepower they are limited on targets because while they can move and shoot a bit past medium range, the next turn they will be lucky to b4ing that power to bear.

Inconsistent firepower is weaker everytime to consistent firepower. Even if it is just a comparison of the CR90 to 3 B-Wings, if I can shoot the cr90 every turn and only shoot the B-Wings every other turn, which pumps out more damage?

Bold mine

This is my reasoning behind the balanced approach. The idea that you NEED a fighter screen to protect your bombers; but only against a list with fighters. So if you take your 5 Superiority fighters and 2 bombers against a list with no squadrons, you're using 5 sub-par squads. So yes, the all-ship list is going to have an advantage out-of-the-gate against you.

This, I guess, is the crux of the argument with squadrons. If all-ship lists don't have to worry about bomber-heavy lists (which are theoretically a hard-ish counter to them) since they aren't likely to see them in a tourney since anyone with a few fighters will shut-them down; then why not take all-ships? There's effectively no downside, perhaps? If flown well.

My guess, then, is that the best squadron load-out is hybrid fighter/bombers (TIE/adv, B-Wings, A-Wings, even X-Wings) that can not die to a screen, and hold off even dedicated superiority lists; but also can lay out 8+ red/black dice against all-ship lists.

This is my reasoning behind 4adv 4bomber list (vader/rhymer as one each) as a "competitive" list with squadrons. To give me the most power I can muster VS all-ship lists and still be able to screen my bombers against superiority lists.

Still need some games to test...it's pretty fruitless to test alone, as one person making all the choices can skew things greatly one-way-or-the-other.

IMO squadrons are something of a disappointment.

The big problem is that they require commands to be fully effective.

That's it really - every other problem associated with squadrons derive from this.

- every squ command is a command that could be used for something else, like repair, maneuvers, or gunnery

- squ commands are very time critical; they must be timed correctly or they are pretty much wasted

- it's so easy to put your squadrons out of command range

- especially since squadrons get engaged so easily

I prefer to play Rebels. A small detachment of A-wings are what works for me. They can delay any squadron-heavy enemy list + are semi-useful vs capitals, even if flown in the squadron phase.

This is curious whenever I hear it...as people seem to keep assuming squadron commands are never worth taking: when I've already pointed out they are often better than ConcFire commands (depending on ships of course, still only very few).

Well the latest IFF put it into perspective for me.

In a Concentrate Fire command all I need is the ship, I don't need more points allocated to my build since the ship does it itself.

For a Squadron Command I need to put more points in squadrons. While I may get more dice and the capacity to whittle away at a ship in the end I am using all those points to attack a target for 1 turn before they are possibly out of range for a second command (and if you are not stacking squadron commands bad things can happen, see below example)

Now Beatty has seen me juke an engagement where he/she thought I was going to have my ships and squadrons and now suddenly i am not there because I slowed down the turn before. Now his squadrons would be out of attack range and and be open to my squadrons engaging them so he just takes a token.

Effectively a Squadron Command is my ships cost (in the case of the Nebulon-B and the Assault Frigate that can mean what type of ship I use which dictates cost) AND the cost of the squadrons. The plus side is a temporary increase in DPT (damage per turn) but the downside is that it not only changes a ships play style (assault frigates shepherding squadrons into range) but at the same time I cant always guarantee that extra damage.

In the end it all comes down to efficiency.

...

B-Wings are great but (and remember now that my first 2 videos were on the B-Wing) they can only keep up with a VSD, every other ship in the game moves past them fast, Interceptors lock them down as well as tie fighters, and for all their firepower they are limited on targets because while they can move and shoot a bit past medium range, the next turn they will be lucky to b4ing that power to bear.

Inconsistent firepower is weaker everytime to consistent firepower. Even if it is just a comparison of the CR90 to 3 B-Wings, if I can shoot the cr90 every turn and only shoot the B-Wings every other turn, which pumps out more damage?

Bold mine

This is my reasoning behind the balanced approach. The idea that you NEED a fighter screen to protect your bombers; but only against a list with fighters. So if you take your 5 Superiority fighters and 2 bombers against a list with no squadrons, you're using 5 sub-par squads. So yes, the all-ship list is going to have an advantage out-of-the-gate against you.

This, I guess, is the crux of the argument with squadrons. If all-ship lists don't have to worry about bomber-heavy lists (which are theoretically a hard-ish counter to them) since they aren't likely to see them in a tourney since anyone with a few fighters will shut-them down; then why not take all-ships? There's effectively no downside, perhaps? If flown well.

My guess, then, is that the best squadron load-out is hybrid fighter/bombers (TIE/adv, B-Wings, A-Wings, even X-Wings) that can not die to a screen, and hold off even dedicated superiority lists; but also can lay out 8+ red/black dice against all-ship lists.

This is my reasoning behind 4adv 4bomber list (vader/rhymer as one each) as a "competitive" list with squadrons. To give me the most power I can muster VS all-ship lists and still be able to screen my bombers against superiority lists.

Still need some games to test...it's pretty fruitless to test alone, as one person making all the choices can skew things greatly one-way-or-the-other.

Can that list get a 10-0 win consistently? That is what it comes down to. Consistency to get those high end wins. Currently they can not, simply because they can not keep up the DPT like a ship can.

Bitrane, I will gladly play you on vassal. Let me update it and get the armada module after work when I get home in oh 7 hours and we can set some times to test these out.

I have to test it, but i think it can. It's funny, cuz I am with Darth on the whole "table them" mentality. I also like to wrack up more points through objectives. I also think people underestimate the power of squad dice, as you claim, simply, that ships put out more DPT. I don't really Agree here.

The game is brutal once you engage, so I do feel people underestimate how much damage loads of squads can do in a short time.

As to having to spend points to use squad commands: well ya, that's the point. You have spent points on them, so they are still useful. Can you think of situations where it'd be useful to use a "coordinate fire" command that allowed you to order another ship to fire now instead of later? I sure can.

As for Vassal games, I'll let you know if I can play tonight...going out of town tomorrow till Thursday, so I might be busy and then I'll bemgone till Friday :/ def up for some games when I'm back!

I have Friday off so if I am not prepping for the tournament Saturday it will work.

The speed bumping is why squadron tokens are a great way to go vs commands. The token is only used when needed, so if you're only running a few squadrons, that jockeying is all part of the equation.

If the opponent is only running a single TIE, then it's pretty to make sure it only locks 1 B-wing. Furthermore, how often do you see someone running a single TIE?

Finally, you're still stuck in the mindset of tying squadrons to particular ships. Your squadron play will improve significantly once you divorce yourself of this idea.

You should watch my second B-Wing video before you say that. While I know squadrons work well on their own, they don't do so well against fast targets.

I would take a single TIE if it allowed me to tangle up a Rhymer ball of bombers for a turn or so.

a single tie fighter is a very optimistic gamble that you'll do any sort of tying up for a turn. One activation, at most.

It's definitely an visual explanation of what happens on the tabletop with Demolisher and Nebs.

A few comments as a mainly Rebel player, to make the comparison fair :

1) The Neb was poorly deployed and maneuvered. It should always orient its front to any ship that is coming for it fast. I don't care it's wasting side arcs shots, that's definitely not the role of a Neb B. Had it just banked right 1 in your example, it would have been much harder for the Demolisher to get easy side arcs shots. Not saying it is impossible but much more difficult due to the fornt hull zone blocking the other ones. If you expose the side arcs of a Neb B, you deserve its destruction, that's as simple as that.

Thanks for the reply MoffZen

For the sake of fellow rebel players, I thought I'd have a look at the moves with the bank right 1 you're suggesting, and find out if it would be possible for the demolisher to get side arcs.

(Note this uses the exact same Ship set up as before; one of the advantages of vassal is all games can be recorded )

The Yavaris at long range from the Demolisher.

The rebel player correctly anticipates a fast move forward from the Demolisher, and adjusts yaw to the right.

The Demolisher does a simple move, directly forward at its speed 3.

The Demolisher then does an Engine Tech move directly forward, and turns left. It will now overlap the squadrons, which can be placed by the Rebel player, but it will still get to fire its black dice into the side of the Yavaris.

The squadrons may be able to ping off a shield or two, but the Demolisher will almost certainly activate first next turn and put 4 more dice into the side of the Yavaris, with the option to do more after it finishes moving.

Unless it needs to make a big adjustment to speed to get the rear guns to kill the (probably already dead) Yavaris, the squadrons are going to be left in the dust as the Demolisher speeds off.

Question: if in the example aptly illustrated above, the Neb-B bends right before the GDS can move, why ever should in the next turn the Demolisher GSD move before her?

Thank you.

alby1: I'm guessing your asking about activation order? What the example illustrates is the best-possible-scenario for the Demolisher against the Yavaris w/buddies. He's assuming he has first player and more activations than the rebel player. Again, this is why some of us are not thrilled with these examples; as the context is pretty much useless since you need an entire game to really comment on real-world applications.

Question: if in the example aptly illustrated above, the Neb-B bends right before the GDS can move, why ever should in the next turn the Demolisher GSD move before her?

The example is based on a match where the Empire has both more capital ship activations and is player 1. Under those circumstances an imperial ship (eg the demolisher) could move both last in one turn and first in the following one.

What the example illustrates is the best-possible-scenario for the Demolisher against the Yavaris w/buddies. He's assuming he has first player and more activations than the rebel player. Again, this is why some of us are not thrilled with these examples; as the context is pretty much useless since you need an entire game to really comment on real-world applications.

It's also a really common scenario; if you look around this forum or tournament reports online, you can see a lot of examples where a squadron heavy fleet features just 2 ship activations, AND are at, or very close to, 300 points.

You can see examples with 2 Ship Imperial fleets, but even more common are Rebel fleets with an Assault Frigate (sometimes Gallant Haven) and Nebulon (very often Yavaris).

Bitharne, Chucknuckle and Tranenturm are correct that it doesn't have to be the case, and that a fleet with more ships to go with their squadrons would avoid this problem and not be as vulnerable to having their key craft destroyed before activating.

This demonstration illustrating the ranges of squadron commands and the speed a gladiator can move may in fact be an endorsement of their approach to building Squadron fleets with a good number of Ship activations, instead of the more common AF+Yavaris+squadrons.

You don't want to point the Yavaris to the Demolisher. You want to stay out of range of the black dice, out of the front arc and let the squadrons do the work, because no Nebulon B, let alone the Yavaris is going to shoot it out with the Demolisher. If you can get a shot in with the Yavaris, it is a bonus. If you want to hunt more nimble ships like the Gladiator, don't use B-Wings.

Well again, it all depends on the activation order and first turn. If Yavaris has scored the last activation AND the first turn (essentially flipping the original scenario on it's head) then the Yavaris will have the Demolisher for breakfast.

It moves last, ordering it's squadrons (BBX) to throw 4 black, 4 blue and 2 red dice. Then it throws it's own 3 red dice. Then it activates first and dumps another 4 black, 4 blue, 2 red, and then it's own side arc shots into the Demolisher. That's 8 black, 9 blue, and 8 red dice, and most of them are broken down into small attacks mitigating the ability of the Demolisher to use it's defense tokens.

Now obviously it's not that clear cut. There's a whole battle going on and even if you have the last activation, other circumstances may have forced you to move either the Yavaris or Demolisher before hand. And even if you are the first player, you might not be able to move the Demolisher or the Yavaris first due to other circumstances. But it goes to show just how important control of the activation phase and first player is. In the scenario laid out by OP, whichever ship moves last and activates first will obliterate the other. I'll be honest, it's caused me to pause and consider my list building habits. And it's really made the space whale more unattractive to me. 2 nebs and 2 CR90s will be the next rebel fleet I try.

Honestly, the move last then first activation thing is such a powerful ability I'm considering a house rule where the player with the least activations gets the choice of first or second player, not the player with the least points.

But it goes to show just how important control of the activation phase and first player is. In the scenario laid out by OP, whichever ship moves last and activates first will obliterate the other. I'll be honest, it's caused me to pause and consider my list building habits.

Honestly, the move last then first activation thing is such a powerful ability I'm considering a house rule where the player with the least activations gets the choice of first or second player, not the player with the least points.

I am glad to hear it's had an impact on your planning and list building.

I'm not conviced House Ruling it will do anything other than reinforce suboptimal list building and habits that will come back to bite you if you also play at tournaments. If you don't, of course, you can do what you like.

(In which case, I'd recommend long range Squadron Commands as the one to house rule though )

Honestly, the move last then first activation thing is such a powerful ability I'm considering a house rule where the player with the least activations gets the choice of first or second player, not the player with the least points.

Oh, do I need to mention that the winner of Nationals in the US, won while going second for his games.

Honestly, the move last then first activation thing is such a powerful ability I'm considering a house rule where the player with the least activations gets the choice of first or second player, not the player with the least points.

So now you are going to make initiative biding and completely ruin the advantages of objectives.

No. I'm going to change initiative bidding from points, to activations. And this would in no way affect objectives.

EDIT: On a related note, back when I used to play Confrontation, the player with the lowest number of activations was allowed to pass, but could only pass as many times as the difference in activation numbers. So if I had five activations and you had three, you could pass twice. That would be a good way to prevent the 'two activations in a row' shenanigans.

Well no more use for under bidding people let's all take 300 point lists and compete with who has more activations! That darn CR90 swarm fellow will never get to choose even he is under 295.

You are going to add the new Pass rule from IA. . . Well good luck to you. I sense some bad things coming. Make sure to teach any new players the real way of playing first please.

Well no more use for under bidding people let's all take 300 point lists and compete with who has more activations! That darn CR90 swarm fellow will never get to choose even he is under 295.

You are going to add the new Pass rule from IA. . . Well good luck to you. I sense some bad things coming. Make sure to teach any new players the real way of playing first please.

Why would I want to encourage people to take less than 300 points? Instead lets encourage a conscious decision during the list building process. Do I want to move first, but give up the last activation, or do I want to move last, but give up the first activation? Having both is a massive advantage, and letting a 1V3G list or a CR90 swarm player have both, just because his list is 294 instead of 300, is pretty silly if you ask me.

I mean, just look at the scenario presented by the OP. Whichever ship gets to move twice in a row will obliterate the other. Hell, the Yavaris was able to drop 25 attack dice down on the Demolisher, and in return it only takes two red dice! Yes, I know there's a lot more going on on the tabletop than just this one simple duel, but IMO no ship should be able to activate twice in a row.

And? This is a game about tactical capital ship combat. Having more ships should be an advantage. Sacrificing some points to get the jump on a player should be a thing.

This game is what a bit over 130 days old and you already want to "fix it"? This game is not like IA with other models giving extra activations away. Putting this rule in will completly mess with the turn order not to mention the ship phase.

" Oh dear I have less activations and if I move I will come into range of that big bad Gladiator! I pass my turn, now you HAVE to move into my range. Tee hee!"

Go ahead make this game more about luck then skill, I won't advocate for it and I will denounce it because all this does is dumb the game down and make it easier for people to play but not make them think.

They no longer have to consider if they will go first or second because it no longer matters. They no longer have to worry about the initiative bid because what's the point of it. You are thematically saying that every fleet with less ships got the jump on the fleet with more ships.

Video to prove my point. 3 important capital ships versus 2 rebel capital ships.

Why would I want to encourage people to take less than 300 points? Instead lets encourage a conscious decision during the list building process. Do I want to move first, but give up the last activation, or do I want to move last, but give up the first activation? Having both is a massive advantage, and letting a 1V3G list or a CR90 swarm player have both, just because his list is 294 instead of 300, is pretty silly if you ask me.

I mean, just look at the scenario presented by the OP. Whichever ship gets to move twice in a row will obliterate the other. Hell, the Yavaris was able to drop 25 attack dice down on the Demolisher, and in return it only takes two red dice! Yes, I know there's a lot more going on on the tabletop than just this one simple duel, but IMO no ship should be able to activate twice in a row.

Hi Chucknuckle,

While the Confrontation activation rule works in that game, most people are going to want to talk about Armada as it is, rather than how any individual would like it to be. What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their gamesroom is completely up to them, but most readers want to talk tactics based within the confines of the rules.

That makes the second part of the post probably the more important to discuss: 'Whichever ship gets to move twice in a row will obliterate the other.'

If the Yavaris was able to move last and then first next turn, which would mean it is part of an unusually ship-heavy list for one with squadrons, the transfer of advantage isn't quite a simple as that. It would definitely, absolutely be to the Yavaris' advantage to move last then first, but it doesn't gain as much because the Demolisher has much better control over the movement in the game. Its standard upgrades (Engine Techs, Wulff) have gone into the capability to change speed and yaw; in fact if it starts a turn at speed 2 it could change to anything from 0 to 4 with a Nav order and its recycling nav token.

(Speed 2 plus order plus token = equivalent of 4 but with better yaw. Speed 2 minus order minus token = 0, with ability to speed up to 2 next turn)

Dropping to 0 is rare, but if it means the Bwings would be out of range (as they would be in the example image I posted earlier) and that they'd need to move and shoot next turn (losing their double tap) then it's absolutely worth it. Defence tokens are disabled, but 25 dice become 4 plus the 3 from the Neb.

And this isn't a bad capability, it's the sort of thing that really rewards a tactical player, but it does illustrate firstly that the Demolisher build has options to avoid squadrons, and secondly why a Demolisher list is more likely to bid low for initiative than a squadron-heavy list: the payoff is so much larger.

I think all fleets are likely to bid low for initiative, and I think the payoff is equally large for any fleet. That last+first activation bonus is enormous, no matter which ship/s are using it.

We'll leave the houserules discussion where it is for the moment, Lyraeus seems to have an allergic reaction to them