AKA Lyraeus comes closer to his wish for weekly episodes!

We will also be recording Episode X shortly with a special guest!

Link: http://www.wwpd.net/2015/08/intensify-forward-firepower-episode.html

The sub-episodes continue as the crew of the FSD bring you Intensify Forward Firepower Episode 9.6: The Tub Continued! This show continues where the last one ended, with Drunk Tarkin's return and a session detailing the latest tournament list. Unbeknownst to the boys at the time, Steve would ultimately play the list in a tournament before DT, so the "Garm's Gups" list devised in this episode truly was a group effort!

That Link again: http://www.wwpd.net/2015/08/intensify-forward-firepower-episode.html

Just what I needed driving home today. But dare I ask for the link to the flesh star destroyer pics...?

Hey, I'm famous! I think I appear (via vague un-named references) in this one. I should litigate for some revenue rights.

Am I the only person who thinks Paragon with Gunnery Teams is a viable ship build?

AKA Lyraeus comes closer to his wish for weekly episodes!

Amazed Lyraeus hasn't completely fan-girled out in this thread yet.

Sadly, I can't find the FSD out there any more. Unsurprising I suppose, considering the madness it inspires.

AKA Lyraeus comes closer to his wish for weekly episodes!

Amazed Lyraeus hasn't completely fan-girled out in this thread yet.

Lyraeus' enthusiasm is infectuous and encouraging! He can fangirl on about whatever he wants.

Oh man, wave 2 pre-release. So good.

Flesh Star Destroyer: http://imgur.com/a/VSKBG

Am I the only person who thinks Paragon with Gunnery Teams is a viable ship build?

Probably not, but I don't think it's a viable build. The upgrades are at odds with each other. Not efficient enough for my tastes!

Am I the only person who thinks Paragon with Gunnery Teams is a viable ship build?

Probably not, but I don't think it's a viable build. The upgrades are at odds with each other. Not efficient enough for my tastes!

But your not restricted to using one or the other. By granting you boost depending on the current situation for that ships activation, you give yourself more flexibility by adding more firing solutions.

It's about economy of force. If flexibility is what your list needs, then go for it! But each turn you're only using one or the other, and never both. So you're leaving points just sitting. Thankfully, this game has lots of room to explore! Your mileage may vary, but I am not a fan of Paragon.

I can get behind egg's thinking, but I also understand the gamer's point of view that any unit not tailored specifically for one use is somehow inefficient.

Know what, egg? I can sort of get behind what you're saying. It's like using Leia or a liason upgrade - they both require you to issue a sub-optimal command before they can be used. Gamers are driven away from this because it (realistically) implies that mistakes will be made. You often hear gamers blaming everything but themselves on a loss or a failed plan - I've even read this recently regarding a Raleigh tournament report - so it's unsurprising that this would be the mindset.

I think I might buck the trend, though, and go with what you're selling. I definitely make mistakes when I'm playing, and I'll talk all about it then next chance I get on the show.

Hey, I'm famous! I think I appear (via vague un-named references) in this one. I should litigate for some revenue rights.

We will send you 100% of the revenue we've collected to date!

Well, eggman and DrunkTarkin have valid points.

Paragon + Gunnery Team is interesting in the sense that the opponent will try his "hardest" to avoid triggering Paragon. And you might have pesky fighters on the same side as the ship you're trying to fire at, or just targets of opportunity. It works even better with Enhanced Armaments in the mix.

To echo Drunk's comments, many gamers try to optimize their fleets and their tactics on the tabletop in a vacuum. Which is a sound behavior, but leads to "easy" counters due to predictable behavior. For a Paragon without Gunnery team, as soon as the entire enemy fleet has either flanked it or is out of red range, the points are wasted.

In most cases, the opponent will make sure that your fleet isn't operating at peak efficiency. Having ships that are too specialized will make upgrades wasted and will telegraph the intentions

If Rebel ships can't really afford to be extremely versatile compared to Imperial ships (ex : Expanded Hangar Bays is not wasted on a Victory with XX-9 Turbolasers, because the Vic has sufficient firepower to trigger the XX-9 effects, especially with Screen somewhere in the fleet), the AFMK2 is the Rebel ship that affords the most flexibility, and it shouldn't be discounted.

EDIT : BTW guys, loving what you do with the Podcast ! Though I'd love it if you could give squadrons another go. I've got a few ideas that I've realized playing squadron heavy lists that you could Mythbust after some playtesting

EDIT : BTW guys, loving what you do with the Podcast ! Though I'd love it if you could give squadrons another go. I've got a few ideas that I've realized playing squadron heavy lists that you could Mythbust after some playtesting

Hey, Eric won a tournament with lots of points invested in Squadrons!

XX9s on a VSD isn't the same argument though! Both are getting used in the same turn! Y'all do your thing, but I'll keep focusing on hyper efficiency- even to my own detriment!

edit- in all seriousness, I think being flexible is one thing. Taking two upgrades that are literally at odds with each other just feels really inefficient to me.

I'm not saying I would do it myself either But it's not as crazy as it sounds I find, hehe. Paragon is one of the hardest upgrade cards to trigger in my humble opinion, and more often than not you'd have more chances to take advantage of Gunnery Team than Paragon due to the way the arcs are set up on the Guppy. Now, it's another debate of whether Paragon is worth taking or not (hint : with Enhanced Armament, Sensor Team and proper use of Navigate commands it works like a charm, specially with Opening Salvo).

It's a trade off between forgivingness and efficiency of the upgrades.

Congrats to Eric on the win Due to the VGGG feedback of GenCon, even here in France we see people going for squadronless builds that aren't geared well to deal with efficient squadron lists, so it's going to be interesting to see what happens at the Worlds. I'm sure we're going to see some squadron builds stand out.

I really wish I didn't see that, Steve It looks less fleshy and more flayed. VSD Meathook.

You know Tarkin, I remember reading an article about the whole 'playing in a vacuum'/theorymada (I couldn't come up with a good portmanteau). The North American gaming body was more frequently associated with assuming all the variables as if they had played it with all the conditions in their favour as dictated by the law of averages, then blaming everything but themselves for the loss because they couldn't cope with the unfolding situation that actually occured. Basically, too much theory, not enough practice. Ahhh gamers: they were never wrong and they were never at fault, you just misinterprited them

Anyway, I'd agree that it's probably the best plan to synergies the basic structure of a fleet, but keep that bit of variety and redundant overlap in order to allow for divergences (read as: complete gaffs). Leia and Liaisons really do help for that, Paragon doesn't feel overly pricy in the end, so it might work.

Am I the only person who thinks Paragon with Gunnery Teams is a viable ship build?

But your not restricted to using one or the other. By granting you boost depending on the current situation for that ships activation, you give yourself more flexibility by adding more firing solutions.Personally I would rather run Intel Officer as my 7 points. That way I can possibly force a sacrificed token with my Paragon attack. That is just though.

Now, wave two is going to be amazing. I like the way they are setting up the pre-release and I hope I can up my game well enough to win 2 tournaments. . . (I want both factions of ships. . . .)

I can get behind egg's thinking, but I also understand the gamer's point of view that any unit not tailored specifically for one use is somehow inefficient.

Know what, egg? I can sort of get behind what you're saying. It's like using Leia or a liason upgrade - they both require you to issue a sub-optimal command before they can be used. Gamers are driven away from this because it (realistically) implies that mistakes will be made. You often hear gamers blaming everything but themselves on a loss or a failed plan - I've even read this recently regarding a Raleigh tournament report - so it's unsurprising that this would be the mindset.

I think I might buck the trend, though, and go with what you're selling. I definitely make mistakes when I'm playing, and I'll talk all about it then next chance I get on the show.

Clearly I am in the minority in thinking the two cards who literally cannot both work together in the same activation are not a good choice Y'all do it up!

Now a Paragon with an Intel Officer and an "Advanced Gunnery" in my objective reportoire is a bit more to my liking!

Man I cannot wait for Wave II pre-release. Just informed the wife that that weekend is blacked out for me

I'm not saying I would do it myself either But it's not as crazy as it sounds I find, hehe. Paragon is one of the hardest upgrade cards to trigger in my humble opinion, and more often than not you'd have more chances to take advantage of Gunnery Team than Paragon due to the way the arcs are set up on the Guppy. Now, it's another debate of whether Paragon is worth taking or not (hint : with Enhanced Armament, Sensor Team and proper use of Navigate commands it works like a charm, specially with Opening Salvo).

It's a trade off between forgivingness and efficiency of the upgrades.

Congrats to Eric on the win Due to the VGGG feedback of GenCon, even here in France we see people going for squadronless builds that aren't geared well to deal with efficient squadron lists, so it's going to be interesting to see what happens at the Worlds. I'm sure we're going to see some squadron builds stand out.

Having a Paragon means that being first player and picking someone's Advanced Gunnery objective may just be worse for them.

Lyraeus' enthusiasm is infectuous and encouraging! He can fangirl on about whatever he wants.

I agree.

However, for some strange reason, I just get this image of Lyraeus in a cheer leader uniform with pom poms. Goooooooo Tarkin!!

Lyraeus' enthusiasm is infectuous and encouraging! He can fangirl on about whatever he wants.

I agree.

However, for some strange reason, I just get this image of Lyraeus in a cheer leader uniform with pom poms. Goooooooo Tarkin!!

All your points make sense (even better is how you guys explain the reasoning behind things)!

Some quick thoughts...

1 - I agree that Paragon... in order to optimize it, you have to "combo" and combo-ing may put you in bad situations. The easiest combo may be a squadron alpha strike and then follow up with Paragon. Seems like a lot of effort for one black dice (e.g., it's a concentrate fire).

2 - I beg to differ that Guppys are the best ship but I'm biased. :-)

1 - I agree that Paragon... in order to optimize it, you have to "combo" and combo-ing may put you in bad situations. The easiest combo may be a squadron alpha strike and then follow up with Paragon. Seems like a lot of effort for one black dice (e.g., it's a concentrate fire).

Just to clarify, the "you" in the Paragon card refers to the ship and not the player. So you have to have already thrown one attack from another facing of Paragon to get the bonus

I wanted to chime in and make an argument for "efficiency" over flexibility in army builds. The reason I support this is because they have a point cost to it. In real life, it's a little different, but in war games, everything has a cost. Like Steve mentioned, points are being unused if you have two upgrades that contradict each other. I have to retreat to a 40K example from back in the day, but it still applies. A normal space marine used to hover around the 14 point mark, depending. A Grey Knight ( a super, hardcore army of Space marines) was 25 points. A Grey Knight could kill harder, better, faster, stronger. BUT, it's defensive stats were exactly the same (They also had to walk everywhere, but that's a different problem). Essentially, when someone shot at you, and some of your Grey Knights died, your extra point cost was being wasted. Many Grey Knight players struggled during those early days. There are ways to mitigate this, and it's not the only answer, just another perspective. But in wargames, when cost is an issue, unless an upgrade is small, you could just be bringing more of something else to help you fight. I have found that generally (not always) less is more with upgrades. Take one or two and then move on, as often you could can fit more "bodies" so to speak on the field.

My two cents.