Also, a Corvette with Slaved Turrets comes in at 50 points for 4 Red dice (and a Blue) out the side, or 3 Red and a Blue out the front under Ackbar. That's the same armament as an Assault Frigate with Enhanced Armaments and Gunnery Teams, for almost half the cost, with higher speed and more Evades. I'm imagining an Ackbar fleet of those and MC30s whipping around the edges of the board may be very happy with Slaved Turrets.

Add Akbar into that fleet and you have 5 from the side.

From the side of what? Ackbar's already in that fleet. Did you mean the Assault Frigates? You can get them up to 6 Red out their sides with EA and Ackbar, but two Corvettes gets you more dice that can be trained on the same target.

The MC30s? Yes, they get 5 Red if they take slaved turrets too...although with their defensive tokens and ability to have Gunnery Teams, I think I'd rather outfit them with Turbolaser Reroute Circuits: the average damage is higher than a Red die, and it keeps them more flexible, as with their Black dice they might also want to close with enemy ships and perform an impromptu Ackbar Slash.

Also, a Corvette with Slaved Turrets comes in at 50 points for 4 Red dice (and a Blue) out the side, or 3 Red and a Blue out the front under Ackbar. That's the same armament as an Assault Frigate with Enhanced Armaments and Gunnery Teams, for almost half the cost, with higher speed and more Evades. I'm imagining an Ackbar fleet of those and MC30s whipping around the edges of the board may be very happy with Slaved Turrets.

Add Akbar into that fleet and you have 5 from the side.

From the side of what? Ackbar's already in that fleet. Did you mean the Assault Frigates? You can get them up to 6 Red out their sides with EA and Ackbar, but two Corvettes gets you more dice that can be trained on the same target.

The MC30s? Yes, they get 5 Red if they take slaved turrets too...although with their defensive tokens and ability to have Gunnery Teams, I think I'd rather outfit them with Turbolaser Reroute Circuits: the average damage is higher than a Red die, and it keeps them more flexible, as with their Black dice they might also want to close with enemy ships and perform an impromptu Ackbar Slash.

CR90 with Slaved Turret can select one side hull and add a red die then 2 more red dice from Akbar for a total of 10.

CR90 with Slaved Turret can select one side hull and add a red die then 2 more red dice from Akbar for a total of 10.

10?!? I want to run that ship! Tell me how it's done!

I said above 4 Red (and a Blue). Can you get more than that on a CR90?

EDIT: Oh, did you just mean across two ships? Yeah, that's what I said at first, 4 Red dice each, and 1 Blue.

Remember, slaved turret is not a may ability. You CANNOT attack more than once, and you MUST add one red dice your your single attack.

But, lets talk nebulons. 1 turbolaser slot, 1 officer, and 1 support crew slot. The only slot that has cards with the modification keyword is the turbolaser slot, so you can't take Enhanced Armaments, no big loss there. It is also within the point cost range for nebulons, being around 10-12% of the ships cost. It increases your attack dice by 1 out of all of your arcs, but restricts you to only firing out of 1 of them. So, no anti-squadron attacks for you! 51+6 is 57 points, as much as the escort version, but with a 4 dice front arc base, before commands.

It would be nice to take 1 or 2 of, not make a fleet of them. Like a filler ship like the anti-squadron raider will be.

It is too expensive for the CR90. Reroute basically adds 2 damage for 1 more point, and you still have both your shots. Now that is a worthwhile upgrade!

Anyone else thinking about running Jaina's Light with Redundant Shields and Projection Experts behind your MC 80 and just spamming repair commands on them both and keeping that super tank topped up?

You should visit the Projection Experts thread my friend

CR90 with Slaved Turret can select one side hull and add a red die then 2 more red dice from Akbar for a total of 10.

10?!? I want to run that ship! Tell me how it's done!

I said above 4 Red (and a Blue). Can you get more than that on a CR90?

EDIT: Oh, did you just mean across two ships? Yeah, that's what I said at first, 4 Red dice each, and 1 Blue.

7 slaved corvettes. Get sum.

7 slaved corvettes. Get sum.

why not 7 corvettes with turbolaser reroutes? Better in every way.

7 slaved corvettes. Get sum.

why not 7 corvettes with turbolaser reroutes? Better in every way.

7 slaved corvettes. Get sum.

why not 7 corvettes with turbolaser reroutes? Better in every way.

Don't you get one Reroute card per MC30 pack?

So you'd need seven MC-30s to make this work?

7 slaved corvettes. Get sum.

why not 7 corvettes with turbolaser reroutes? Better in every way.

Don't you get one Reroute card per MC30 pack?

So you'd need seven MC-30s to make this work?

Only if you follow silly tournament rules. Having seven copies of the same card on the table like that is just bonkers. One is fine.

Possibly a stupid question but it just dawned on me. The raider name that counts squadrons as engaged does that mean they can't shoot the raider at all? Or it it just that they can't move?

Possibly a stupid question but it just dawned on me. The raider name that counts squadrons as engaged does that mean they can't shoot the raider at all? Or it it just that they can't move?

I dont know. . . I am hoping a FAQ comes out soon or someone who asked FFG is responded too. . . I am not sure how to rule it. . . I know it is meant to counter Grit though. . .

There's nothing to rule, the RR document is quite clear. When engaged, a squadron must *if possible* attack the engaging squadron(s) rather than a ship. It's not possible to attack squadrons that aren't there, so Instigator is a perfectly valid target.

There's nothing to rule, the RR document is quite clear. When engaged, a squadron must *if possible* attack the engaging squadron(s) rather than a ship. It's not possible to attack squadrons that aren't there, so Instigator is a perfectly valid target.

That is what I expect FFG's answer to be actually. It would fit in line with their current system.

I'm not sure why you even feel the need to ask them.

There's nothing to rule, the RR document is quite clear. When engaged, a squadron must *if possible* attack the engaging squadron(s) rather than a ship. It's not possible to attack squadrons that aren't there, so Instigator is a perfectly valid target.

That is what I expect FFG's answer to be actually. It would fit in line with their current system.

I am confused. That is a quote from the rulebook. Why do you need to FAQ something spelled out in the rulebook?

There's nothing to rule, the RR document is quite clear. When engaged, a squadron must *if possible* attack the engaging squadron(s) rather than a ship. It's not possible to attack squadrons that aren't there, so Instigator is a perfectly valid target.

That is what I expect FFG's answer to be actually. It would fit in line with their current system.

I am confused. That is a quote from the rulebook. Why do you need to FAQ something spelled out in the rulebook?

Because intent can be different here.

It is like Xi7's and Advanced Projectors. I expect them to rule that the can attack the Raider but I am unsure of their intent. there have not been many rules that deal in "if possible" situations so I have no basis to go by.

Cool. Would seem broken as hell if you couldn't attack the ship.

Independance over priced? Are you mad? Maybe I overestimate the advantage of speed four everything but A's, but to me this card seems crazy good. I probably wouldn't use it for X's or Y's no, but B's? And vanilla YT-1300? I'm going to jump my 7 hull meatshield out ahead of the more vulnerable fighters at speed four. It doesn't get to attack you, but it DOES get to counter-attack you. Maybe for giggles someone will have Jan Ors go with it so it can use Brace to compliment that 7 hull. I realize everyone has different playstyles (and mine suck) but the giant speed boost for some of our Squadrons seems far to powerful to dismiss at not even 10% of a Mon Cals base cost.

I also second whoever said the Mon Cal paint scheme is awful, 'cause it's awful. Might have to dig out ye olde paints and see what I can do with it.

I also second whoever said the Mon Cal paint scheme is awful, 'cause it's awful. Might have to dig out ye olde paints and see what I can do with it.

I believe there is a very simple explanation for this. IIRC Lucasfilm gave FF access to the original models of ships used in the movies for the purposes of scaling and reference and this is what the Home One model actually looks like without blue screen and lighting effects:

http://www.rebelsquadrons.org/oob/browse2.php?class=16

As you can see FF seems to have tried to stay somewhat true to the physical model itself which is why we have a greyish miniature with colour splashes as opposed to the blue colour that Home One is normally portrayed as having. That is also why I think the aft section of the Nebulon-B Frigate was painted white. If you look at the image presented in the link closely, you can see that the fore section plating and aft section are indeed white:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/EF76_Nebulon-B_escort_frigate/Canon

Because intent can be different here.

It is like Xi7's and Advanced Projectors. I expect them to rule that the can attack the Raider but I am unsure of their intent. there have not been many rules that deal in "if possible" situations so I have no basis to go by.

What intent can there possibly be other than the one made crystal clear by the written rules?

EDIT: For completeness, the boxes should say "an engaged squadron" rather than just "a squadron" (thanks ScottieATF).

Because intent can be different here.

It is like Xi7's and Advanced Projectors. I expect them to rule that the can attack the Raider but I am unsure of their intent. there have not been many rules that deal in "if possible" situations so I have no basis to go by.

What intent can there possibly be other than the one made crystal clear by the written rules?

What seems crystal clear and reasonable to you is vague enough to cause arguments and game slow downs to someone else. While it's perfectly reasonable to assume it works that way, until FFG gives a clear answer on the interaction, it's also reasonable not to get too set in your ways.

I also second whoever said the Mon Cal paint scheme is awful, 'cause it's awful. Might have to dig out ye olde paints and see what I can do with it.

I believe there is a very simple explanation for this. IIRC Lucasfilm gave FF access to the original models of ships used in the movies for the purposes of scaling and reference and this is what the Home One model actually looks like without blue screen and lighting effects:

http://www.rebelsquadrons.org/oob/browse2.php?class=16

As you can see FF seems to have tried to stay somewhat true to the physical model itself which is why we have a greyish miniature with colour splashes as opposed to the blue colour that Home One is normally portrayed as having. That is also why I think the aft section of the Nebulon-B Frigate was painted white. If you look at the image presented in the link closely, you can see that the fore section plating and aft section are indeed white:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/EF76_Nebulon-B_escort_frigate/Canon

I'd actually never seen that picture before, and you're totally right I think. The model does look much more like that image than the artwork we've seen more recently, so it seems to make sense that they're keeping it closer to the films.

What seems crystal clear and reasonable to you is vague enough to cause arguments and game slow downs to someone else. While it's perfectly reasonable to assume it works that way, until FFG gives a clear answer on the interaction, it's also reasonable not to get too set in your ways.

What seems crystal clear and reasonable to you is vague enough to cause arguments and game slow downs to someone else. While it's perfectly reasonable to assume it works that way, until FFG gives a clear answer on the interaction, it's also reasonable not to get too set in your ways.

While I agree with your point in general terms, where the specific example of Instigator is concerned I still have not heard any argument (at least not one based on the rules) supporting a different interpretation.

Totally fair. The "If Able" clause seems pretty black and white to me as well, but I've played with enough lovers of rules debates to fear the wiggle room.