not trying to be dense but how are you getting it to 7?

not trying to be dense but how are you getting it to 7?

That was worked out when the Squadron Rating on the Card was 5.

The Card has been Changed for 4, now. For the full maximum of 6.

Who knows, maybe in an hour, it'll be Changed back again.

not trying to be dense but how are you getting it to 7?

That was worked out when the Squadron Rating on the Card was 5.

The Card has been Changed for 4, now. For the full maximum of 6.

Who knows, maybe in an hour, it'll be Changed back again.

It wont, sorry.

It wont, sorry.

So, apparently, you know.

WHY HAVE YOU BEEN HOLDING OUT ON US IF YOU KNOW! THERE ARE THINGS! THINGS WE WANT TO KNOW! TELL US NOW !!!

Okay, I reread Cluster Bombs and in my excitement missed the fact that it was just a single use...

Still definitely good, still awesome on a Corvette, but not OP

This thread is going to be really annoying if people keep only reading half the posts.

FWIW my article still shows a squadron value of 5. I fully expect the real thing to have a 4.

So I know people are worried about getting shots from both sides of the MC80, but I think it won't be too bad.

Plenty of people us flanking ships. Demolishers and corvettes looking to prey on poorly armed and armored rear arcs are pretty common. And in Rebel fleets, often an AF will swing wide while a Yavaris or Salvation drives hard down the middle, and this is where you put your MC80. I don't think Slashing is going to mean plunging directly in to the heart of the enemy. I think it will involve cutting inside the flanking maneuvers, and punishing people for trying to get behind you.

Maybe it won't work against a brick wall of Star Destroyers advancing across the board, but it will have uses.

I

The titles are awesome. I'm just curious about Independence which we haven't seen yet, but much surprise for the squadrons.

Actually, not many cards were spoiled. Neither SW7 Ion Cannons nor the squadron upgrades. I'm curious (probably we'll see them in the Rogues and Villains article).

I am hoping this is the case. I want to see those squadron upgrades!

I'm still wrapping my head around the idea of 10 Red Dice off a MC80 AC, Defiance, Admiral Ackbar, enhanced Armament and a Concentrate Fire Token.

Expensive but that is one big nasty gun that can slap you from a long distance.

So 8 points. . . 8 points. . . For just a red dice change. . . Oh and a second defensive upgrade slot. . . So ECM's and AP are a thing. . . Always have brace in other words.

The differences here are bigger than people seem to think.

I know I have been spouting the difference in base sizes for some time now but. . . This picture hammers it home for me. . . The large bases are huge compared to the medium bases.

@Lyraeus : BTW, what did I tell you about Broadsiding 2 ships ? The Force is with me, I preview the content of articles !

EDIT : BTW, can someone calculate the odds of the MonCal having the exact same roll against the Glad that it has with the Victory ?

@Lyraeus : BTW, what did I tell you about Broadsiding 2 ships ? The Force is with me, I preview the content of articles !

EDIT : BTW, can someone calculate the odds of the MonCal having the exact same roll against the Glad that it has with the Victory ?

I nec3r said it was impossible I said it was a bad idea.

That MC80 only went speed 2 at best through the front arc of a VSD and is now at close range of a GSD. . . Those are bad days

This will definitely be a fun ship.

I'm as big a fan of Garm as anyone, but I will really struggle to not play Ackbar for just 13 more points. While I know you can stack Ackbar with Enhanced Armament, I think Ackbar + XI7s will be more effective overall.

I'd been really excited about the Home One title, but wow Defiance will be hard to not take.

Wallex is an interesting idea and a possible counter to Intel Officers to keep your Brace alive that much longer. If you're going for a tank build he seems useful.

What I wonder about is the effect of Ackbar/MC-80 on the Advanced Gunnery objective. It's one I see a lot, but even as first player I almost have to grab it if I'm playing an Ackbar boosted MC-80.

I wonder if Cluster Bombs will be able to be taken by some of the Scum and Villainy Squadrons?

Depends on your build, if you can field 7 B-Wings in a single command that's 14 dice to roll against an ISD...

As an Admiral in the Imperial Navy, that's a scary thought. Especially if the Ackbar Slash opens up right after that with those extra dice.

Enhanced Armerments +1 Red, Ackbar +2 Red, and if you have Defiance and I've already gone, throw in another red or blue die.

That's 14 from bombers + 10 from the MC80.

This is where things start to get crazy... one dedicated bomber carrier, sporting 6 b-wing squadrons, plus two Escort Neb-Bs to keep enemy bombers off of the Mon-Cal and to command X-wings to escort and A-wings to pin down interceptors. Squaring off against two ISDs deploying a Rhymer-ball with TAs to protect and a TIE swarm to pin down, plus a raider or two to shepherd the rebel scum away from the command ships. Add 2+ intel Rogues/Villains to both sides, and all of a sudden our once-stagnant fighter furballs turn into dynamic dogfights between, among, and around the most important capital ships. Do you focus on wearing out the enemy fighters and bombers, focus on supporting your own bombing run (leaving the enemy bombers free), or split your forces to do both at the same time? And what does your opponent do to counter? And this doesn't even account for the possibility of long-range command, faster speed squadrons, and all the Rogue/Villain specials that we're hoping to get...

Is it just me, or is the combat in this game about to become waaaaaaay more cinematic?

Hmmm new squadron concept popped into my head. . . It's not about how efficient your carrier is. . . It's about how much damage you can put onto a single shield face in a single ship activation. . .

Admiral Ackbar needs his cereal

Hmmm new squadron concept popped into my head. . . It's not about how efficient your carrier is. . . It's about how much damage you can put onto a single shield face in a single ship activation. . .

Yeah, I think this is where we're going. B-wing dice are optimal, obviously, because there's potential for 3 damage per roll--meaning a full B-wing complement with expanded hangers and a token can top out at 18 damage before the MC-80 shoots (preferably with its broadsides). But even if that damage is halved, that's nine damage to a shield facing in a single turn... and again, that's before the MC-80 shoots (preferably from its broadsides). Even if you downgrade to Y-wings/TIE Bombers, six of them still tops out at a whopping 12 damage (with 9 damage probable), which is still brutal. Even half damage is going to bore into a shield hull, or deplete overall shield strength considerably.

Defense tokens can take some of the bite out, but just in small increments (a brace halves 3 damage to 2, redirecting 9 damage is still a pain, and evades at close range are useless (empire) or semi-useless (Mon Mothma))... and with the MC-80 about to shoot you (again, preferably from its broadsides), is your opponent really going to spend a brace token on the bomber attacks until it becomes absolutely necessary?

Hmmm new squadron concept popped into my head. . . It's not about how efficient your carrier is. . . It's about how much damage you can put onto a single shield face in a single ship activation. . .

wasn't that always how it was? Sure as hell was when I was using Yavaris

more ships = more activations

more squadrons = bigger activations

you only need efficiency if you're going squadron on squadron, where a ship's batteries are nice support but woefully inefficient by themselves. An ISD-2 flinging bombers at an enemy ship will be awe inspiring, but flinging sh*tty ties at an enemy screen? that's a job a flight controller VSD-1 can handle.

You sure can spend a lot of points on this puppy, you can easily build the most hideous ship that tanks like a beast and shoots like a seven headed hydra on caffeine over dose. I think the big trick is to take a good balance of what is needed and not over do it.

Hmmm new squadron concept popped into my head. . . It's not about how efficient your carrier is. . . It's about how much damage you can put onto a single shield face in a single ship activation. . .

wasn't that always how it was? Sure as hell was when I was using Yavaris

more ships = more activations

more squadrons = bigger activations

you only need efficiency if you're going squadron on squadron, where a ship's batteries are nice support but woefully inefficient by themselves. An ISD-2 flinging bombers at an enemy ship will be awe inspiring, but flinging sh*tty ties at an enemy screen? that's a job a flight controller VSD-1 can handle.

This just hit it home for me

Seeing this release so far and coming up with how my lists will change made me realize something. So far, people complain heavily about the excellence of the Screed Gladiator build with 3-4 Gladiators (And or a VSD1) But bumping it up to 400 pts, you just swap the Vic for an Imp, add another Gladiator, and you're still swimming pretty with 5 ships. Meanwhile any big Rebel build relying on a pumped up MC80 really only has enough points for two bare bones escort vessels and some fighters. Those fighters won't be enough when the blows come from 4 Gladiators surrounding Home 1 and doing 6 damage each. Those big broadsides hits will be big, but they won't be big enough.

I'm not saying this is Doom and Gloom, I'm just sayin' the big guy said it best. Watch out for the MC80.

IT'S A TRAP!

Meh, I will be having fun with heavy strikes with 2 Assault Frigates and squadrons.

Additionally, a break down of dice per point with EA and Ackbar in Command:
CR90A: 54pts. 13.5 pts per Red

AF B: 82pts. 13.666 pts per Red

MC80 Assault: 124 pts. 17.86 pts per Red (>.<)

We don't know what the MC30 can do yet, and the Nebulon would be garbage in the role (clearly.) Points efficiency is not THE most important consideration, but we should consider it while building for Ackbar. More Ships = Better with him in charge.