I would like to raise an idea I have not yet seen on the forums, namely that the Raider's name is ironic. It is ironic because the Raider is actually best suited as a light cheap picket for Imperial fleets, with raiding, leaping out and touching vulnerable enemy starships actually a secondary function for the ship.

The Raider is cheap, coming in at 44 and 48 for the Raider-1 and Raider-2 respectively. While not quite as cheap as a CR90, I propose that this is actually the more versatile and aggressive ship, and well worth the literal handful of points over its obvious Rebel comparison. Once kitted out to provide a fighter screen, the ship is still quite cheap. Two Raider-1s, each with Ordnance Experts to guarantee damage, the two titles Instigator and Impetuous, and Quad Laser Turrets if you are really feeling spendy, set an Imperial admiral back a whopping 114 points.

But those are points I could have put into another Imperial-1 class Star Destroyer, you say. Well you could, if you're the sort of fellow who likes naked Star Destroyers. However, with instead investing in two moderately upgraded Raiders, you now have two Speed 4 ships capable of dealing 4 damage per turn to any squadron they run down between them. They have the ability to be a truly devastating anti-fighter combo.

So far I haven't told you anything you don't already know. What you should consider however, is that a Raider-1 throws 2 black dice forward. With OE, that's a 2/3 chance (approximately) of a critical hit, and your Raider has an Ordnance upgrade. A picket ship needs to do more than just blast fighters into scrap. It needs to be able to harass enemy ships effectively ahead of its larger brethren, and both Raider-1 and Raider-2s can do this quite effectively. If you feel like Raider-1s, giving each ship Assault Proton Torpedoes all but ensures any ship pushing through the screen does so already bleeding fire. If Raider-2s are more up your alley, you can trade in your APTs and Ordnance Experts and field NK-7 Ion Cannon for the same total price (price of upgrades, you're still spending four more on the ship) and you can whittle away at those pesky defense tokens. (I see your Turbolaser Reroute Circuits and raise you having no evades.) In short the Raider is far more of a threat to capital ships than Overload Pulse or its impressive anti-fighter ability might lead the average commander to expect.

For a sense of scale, a Raider-1 kitted out as above, minus QLT, is 57 pts. Such a ship is more than capable of racing ahead of a fleet, slicing into Y-wing and B-wing formations, before handing a crit over to a MC80 or an MC30, the latter a ship with identical hull point value to its attacker. Ram the MC30, it's halfway into the grave, and you're spending a lot less to do it. Earlier this evening, this exact attack along with support from a Rhymer ball threw my opponent's formation into utter disarray and destroyed the MC30 I selected before it had a chance to fire on anything other than the Raider barrelling down on it, destroying it on turn 2. A Victory and Gladiator proceeded to mop up the mess, but the Raider, which lived long enough to wound another Nebulon, had served its purpose. It had mortally wounded a superior (more expensive anyway) ship, and shattered my opponent's battle plan.

I think many of us are underestimating the lethality of a Raider judiciously used in close-quarters combat in front of a larger Imperial fleet. As food for thought, here is an example fleet, focused on using Raiders to support an advance from an ISD.

Imperial-2 class Star Destroyer

- Admiral Motti (Now our Raiders are tankier than the vaunted Death Shrimp. HAH!)

- Gunnery Team

- Advanced Projectors

- XI7 Turbolasers

- NK-7 Ion Cannons

- Avenger (Can be swapped with Relentless/dropped for Screed if you so please)

Raider-1 class Corvette

- Assault Proton Torpedoes

- Ordnance Experts

- Instigator

Raider-1 class Corvette

- Assault Proton Torpedoes

- Ordnance Experts

- Impetuous

Raider-2 class Corvette

- NK-7 Ion Cannons (You weren't planning to use those were you?)

Slave 1 (He's got Bomber and Rogue, what more do you want?)

Hound's Tooth

(Some Rogues never hurt anybody but the other guy. To mop up anyone slipping around three Raiders, which is an awfully long detour.)

Total: 399 pts

Motti Factor: 6

Now you have the durability and god-awful stopping power of an Imperial class Star Destroyer, the lethal zone of anti-fighter generated by three Raiders, three small ships capable of hitting way out of their size class (same ships as before), and Rogue backup because Boba Fett is awesome, and Bossk hits like a freight train. What more could an Imperial admiral want?

Comments, concerns, constructive criticism, queries?

EDIT: Adjusted second paragraph to indicate handful of points meant over a CR90, not its cost period.

That's not really what irony is. Also the ship can't cost a literal handful of points.

Personally I'd switch Advanced Projectors out for ECM (you'll want that Brace.) If also probably take off the XI7. Maybe throw an Intel Officer on there, or Needa?

And with every ship having a crit effect I'd try to go for Screed myself.

I very much like your analysis. Still, the raider is a double-edged sword for me, and I am not yet fully sold. The AS capability is not that impressive for the price tag, and the advantage of having it mounted on a capship that can mow through interceptors with impunity is offset by the disadvantage of having it mounted on a capship that will fall to any good broadside from other caps. The def tokens are not stunning me either, 2 evades on something that has med-close range batteries and close-range AS? Meh. Where do you think are those enemy soft targets going to stay which I want to pummel with my black dice Flak? Assume somewhere near to a big guy that eats raiders for breakfast. And while the ordnance upgrade slot has some value, the raider still falls short in terms of fire- and stayingpower to our dedicated missile r*petrain, the GSD.

Anyway, I will of cause try him and see some potential, but I doubt there will be lots of raider swarms zooming around.

Nice idea with the Raider force. Also has the benefit of giving the Mon Cal a tough choice (it can only kill one per turn!) Flying up and letting off a proton torpedo into your opponent's best ship for a crit will be great with first player. (Montferrat might even help the raider survive)

However, I would suggest there is almost too much anti-fighter redundancy in this build. Swapping one of the raiders and Hounds's Tooth for Demolisher and ACMs might work better. In which case I would definitely take Screed. Otherwise these could be wasted against squadron-lite builds.

How does it get into that close range anyway?? I fear its bopping. =P

Motti looks good here.

But dang, these Raiders start to get expensive.

Adding One Demolisher seems like a better smasher than 3 raiders also...

For me the problem is black dice on a light ship. You're right its going to be better at finishing things off but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn. When you have a ship moving quickly this causes all kinds of overshoot problems and because you have to wait a turn before you can unload you're going to take a solid hit before it happens unless you out activate your opponent. You could go really wide and somehow approach his rear but with such a small range unless the ship you're tailing is moving really slowly you wont get a full black shot into him. The Demolisher was the only ship to get around this problem and is a little more tank for it.

The other problem is it cant lock fighters in position because when it activates again it moves away from them so it lacks decent anti fighter capabilities. People don't generally go on a tangent with their fighter/bombers so this brings you close to whatever mother ship is commanding them and makes picking off squadrons without return fire very difficult.

The problem with the list you have is the only long range threat is the ISD. Rebels especially will stay wide and try to pick off raiders attempting to lock down and engage their fighters. If you consider most bomber wings will try to sit on the bow of the ISD, the Raiders will need to pull forward to combat them putting them at risk of being long shotted by the enemy fleet.

I think the Raider is a great anti light ship and will eat rebel CR90s and Nebs for breakfast. I think they offer another activation and are a worry to any admiral being flanked by them. I don't think they can make up half of a fleet and live long as they would all need to get in the face of your opponent which abandons your other ships and wont do well at a drawn out circling game. I don't think they are effective at locking up enemy fighters away from your capital ships. I'd bet they were designed to counter light ships and have enough anti squadron to mop or lock down bombers that didn't get engaged at the begging of the game.

Do you think my summary is fair? I thought your summary was a very interesting read and gave me a lot to think about, thank you for posting it. Keep them coming.

Edit: No idea what I said that got censored so I rewrote the line.

For me the problem is black dice on a light ship. You're right its going to be better at finishing things off but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn. When you have a ship moving quickly this causes all kinds of overshoot problems and because you have to wait a turn before you can unload you're going to take a solid hit before it happens unless you out activate your opponent. You could go really wide and somehow approach his rear but with such a small range unless the ship you're tailing is moving really slowly you wont get a full black shot into him. The Demolisher was the only ship to get around this problem and is a little more tank for it.

The other problem is it cant lock fighters in position because when it activates again it moves away from them so it lacks decent anti fighter capabilities. People don't generally go on a tangent with their fighter/bombers so this brings you close to whatever mother ship is commanding them and makes picking off squadrons without return fire very difficult.

The problem with the list you have is the only long range threat is the ISD. Rebels especially will stay wide and try to pick off raiders attempting to lock down and engage their fighters. If you consider most bomber wings will try to sit on the bow of the ISD, the Raiders will need to pull forward to combat them putting them at risk of being long shotted by the enemy fleet.

I think the Raider is a great anti light ship and will eat rebel CR90s and Nebs for breakfast. I think they offer another activation and are a worry to any admiral being flanked by them. I don't think they can make up half of a fleet and live long as they would all need to get in the face of your opponent which abandons your other ships and wont do well at a drawn out circling game. I don't think they are effective at locking up enemy fighters away from your capital ships. I'd bet they were designed to counter light ships and have enough anti squadron to mop or lock down bombers that didn't get engaged at the begging of the game.

Do you think my summary is fair? I thought your summary was a very interesting read and gave me a lot to think about, thank you for posting it. Keep them coming.

Edit: No idea what I said that got censored so I rewrote the line.

Well Ozzel plays very nicely with an isd + raiders list, allowing you to play very aggressive while also being able to switch to a passive game mode.

Also, rebels playing wide was a thing because imperials literally had nothing that could intercept and block asf lines. A well placed raider can limit the ability for mc80s and asf to skirt around the edges, and if a raider gets into the front arc of the mc80 he gets free damage and basically no return fire because of how bad the front arc is. 3 raiders will play alot like 3 nebulons, except with a stronger front arc and better anti squadron, speed 4 and arguably more useful commanders. I'm a much bigger fan of comparing the raider to the neb as that's the playstyle its going to have.

So much like a solid 3 neb 1 asf list, I think this has alot of potential. Boba fett and bossk are a reliable way to kill smaller squadrons and tie down large blobs with a raider or two, and offer up rogue to maintain late game usefulness

"but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn"

that is why you attack with all 4 ships (counting the ISD) on 1 target at the same time, giving the target overwhelming targets

"but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn"

that is why you attack with all 4 ships (counting the ISD) on 1 target at the same time, giving the target overwhelming targets

Sounds like something my favorite captain once phrased:

"Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it. On my command all ships will line up and fly directly into the alien death cannons, clogging them with wreckage."

"but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn"

that is why you attack with all 4 ships (counting the ISD) on 1 target at the same time, giving the target overwhelming targets

Sounds like something my favorite captain once phrased:

"Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it. On my command all ships will line up and fly directly into the alien death cannons, clogging them with wreckage."[/size]

[/size]

You see, rebel ships have a preset kill limit. So I sent wave after wave of my ships until they shut down

I think the Raider will be a great addition just to make sure my larger ISD has the upper hand in activations. After watching my ISD torch a Nebulon-B and an Assault Frigate with its Gunnery teams in a single turn I want this things guns on target lol.

Also, I agree that it can be more lethal then it looks. The ability to take Ion Cannons alone makes me happy.

"but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn"

that is why you attack with all 4 ships (counting the ISD) on 1 target at the same time, giving the target overwhelming targets

Sounds like something my favorite captain once phrased:

"Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it. On my command all ships will line up and fly directly into the alien death cannons, clogging them with wreckage."[/size]

[/size]

You see, rebel ships have a preset kill limit. So I sent wave after wave of my ships until they shut down

You disgust me with your heart full of neutrality.

"but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn"

that is why you attack with all 4 ships (counting the ISD) on 1 target at the same time, giving the target overwhelming targets

Sounds like something my favorite captain once phrased:

"Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it. On my command all ships will line up and fly directly into the alien death cannons, clogging them with wreckage."[/size]

[/size]

You see, rebel ships have a preset kill limit. So I sent wave after wave of my ships until they shut down

You disgust me with your heart full of neutrality.

But what makes a man turn neutral?

That's not really what irony is. Also the ship can't cost a literal handful of points.

I like this because somebody else took the being-a-pedant bullet for me so I don't have to.

That's not really what irony is. Also the ship can't cost a literal handful of points.

I like this because somebody else took the being-a-pedant bullet for me so I don't have to.

Yeah, that also bugged me but I decided I'm not on the clock for being English Policeman today so I wasn't going to be that guy.

Otherwise, I like the OP. I am excited to try out the Raider. I've always loved big heavy models supported by lighter faster models so the Raider fits the bill. The first job for my Sullust Raider is going to be supporting the Demolisher as they wander around the flanks making a nuisance of themselves. The maneuverability of a Raider at speed 2 is simply astounding and not something we get access to regularly in the Imperial fleet. You can approximate it with Engine Techs and a ready supply of Navigate orders/tokens on a Gladiator, but the cost of the latter is much higher than the former in both points and support required.

If/when I find I'm up against enough squadrons, I'm thinking a Raider-1 with Ordnance Experts and the Impetuous title gives me an awful lot of accurate flak for a fairly cost-effective 8 cost of upgrades (the cost of 1 TIE Fighter for 2 rerollable black dice of flak and one extra freebie shot at one squadron). Still room left on the ship for an ordnance upgrade (ACMs or Assault Proton Torpedoes or what have you) and an Offensive Retrofit (...not really that useful right now, really) too.

So far I haven't told you anything you don't already know. What you should consider however, is that a Raider-1 throws 2 black dice forward. With OE, that's a 2/3 chance (approximately) of a critical hit, and your Raider has an Ordnance upgrade. A picket ship needs to do more than just blast fighters into scrap. It needs to be able to harass enemy ships effectively ahead of its larger brethren, and both Raider-1 and Raider-2s can do this quite effectively. If you feel like Raider-1s, giving each ship Assault Proton Torpedoes all but ensures any ship pushing through the screen does so already bleeding fire. If Raider-2s are more up your alley, you can trade in your APTs and Ordnance Experts and field NK-7 Ion Cannon for the same total price (price of upgrades, you're still spending four more on the ship) and you can whittle away at those pesky defense tokens. (I see your Turbolaser Reroute Circuits and raise you having no evades.) In short the Raider is far more of a threat to capital ships than Overload Pulse or its impressive anti-fighter ability might lead the average commander to expect.

For a sense of scale, a Raider-1 kitted out as above, minus QLT, is 57 pts. Such a ship is more than capable of racing ahead of a fleet, slicing into Y-wing and B-wing formations, before handing a crit over to a MC80 or an MC30, the latter a ship with identical hull point value to its attacker. Ram the MC30, it's halfway into the grave, and you're spending a lot less to do it. Earlier this evening, this exact attack along with support from a Rhymer ball threw my opponent's formation into utter disarray and destroyed the MC30 I selected before it had a chance to fire on anything other than the Raider barrelling down on it, destroying it on turn 2. A Victory and Gladiator proceeded to mop up the mess, but the Raider, which lived long enough to wound another Nebulon, had served its purpose. It had mortally wounded a superior (more expensive anyway) ship, and shattered my opponent's battle plan.

I think many of us are underestimating the lethality of a Raider judiciously used in close-quarters combat in front of a larger Imperial fleet. As food for thought, here is an example fleet, focused on using Raiders to support an advance from an ISD.

The thought of Raider Is + APTs + Ordnance Experts had occurred to me (though that was hardly an original thought, given how the spoiler article was laid out ), but I had not thought of deploying Raiders as a picket fence. The biggest question mark for me about the Raider is its survivability in a Wave II world, so attacking (and staying) in the front hull zone of an AFII or MC-80, especially when Ackbar is involved, sounds like a good plan. Given how narrow those front arcs are, it remains to be seen whether the Raider can maneuver successfully into that arc without popping. But if the Raider is waiting in the wings, so to speak, fencing a larger ship like an ISD, and then pounces when there's an activation advantage or another unavoidable target, that could be lethal.

Personally, I would probably swap out one of the Raiders for Demolisher, as Mundo has suggested, but that has more to do with Demolisher's proven awesomeness than any deficiency in the Raider. I'd also be inclined to put Heavy Turbolaser Turrets on my ISD, but that's a discussion for another thread. All in all, fantastic thoughts on what appears to be a very unique ship.

For me the problem is black dice on a light ship. You're right its going to be better at finishing things off but you need to park this ship extremely close to your opponent (and in his path) to guarantee the shot next turn. When you have a ship moving quickly this causes all kinds of overshoot problems and because you have to wait a turn before you can unload you're going to take a solid hit before it happens unless you out activate your opponent. You could go really wide and somehow approach his rear but with such a small range unless the ship you're tailing is moving really slowly you wont get a full black shot into him. The Demolisher was the only ship to get around this problem and is a little more tank for it.

The other problem is it cant lock fighters in position because when it activates again it moves away from them so it lacks decent anti fighter capabilities. People don't generally go on a tangent with their fighter/bombers so this brings you close to whatever mother ship is commanding them and makes picking off squadrons without return fire very difficult.

The problem with the list you have is the only long range threat is the ISD. Rebels especially will stay wide and try to pick off raiders attempting to lock down and engage their fighters. If you consider most bomber wings will try to sit on the bow of the ISD, the Raiders will need to pull forward to combat them putting them at risk of being long shotted by the enemy fleet.

I think the Raider is a great anti light ship and will eat rebel CR90s and Nebs for breakfast. I think they offer another activation and are a worry to any admiral being flanked by them. I don't think they can make up half of a fleet and live long as they would all need to get in the face of your opponent which abandons your other ships and wont do well at a drawn out circling game. I don't think they are effective at locking up enemy fighters away from your capital ships. I'd bet they were designed to counter light ships and have enough anti squadron to mop or lock down bombers that didn't get engaged at the begging of the game.

Do you think my summary is fair? I thought your summary was a very interesting read and gave me a lot to think about, thank you for posting it. Keep them coming.

Edit: No idea what I said that got censored so I rewrote the line.

Well Ozzel plays very nicely with an isd + raiders list, allowing you to play very aggressive while also being able to switch to a passive game mode.

Also, rebels playing wide was a thing because imperials literally had nothing that could intercept and block asf lines. A well placed raider can limit the ability for mc80s and asf to skirt around the edges, and if a raider gets into the front arc of the mc80 he gets free damage and basically no return fire because of how bad the front arc is. 3 raiders will play alot like 3 nebulons, except with a stronger front arc and better anti squadron, speed 4 and arguably more useful commanders. I'm a much bigger fan of comparing the raider to the neb as that's the playstyle its going to have.

So much like a solid 3 neb 1 asf list, I think this has alot of potential. Boba fett and bossk are a reliable way to kill smaller squadrons and tie down large blobs with a raider or two, and offer up rogue to maintain late game usefulness

Rhinehard has a point about Instigator, and it's something I've been trying to wrestle with. Unless you slow the Raider down to speed 0 (which you don't want to do...), it's moving on from whatever you tied up. If you tied up slow B-wings, and it sets them back far enough that they can't catch your ISD or Demolisher, than maybe that's enough (assuming the Raider survives the bomber barrage). But if they're speed 3 bombers (or speed 4 TIE bombers or speed 3 Rogue firesprays, boosted by Corruptor in imperial mirror matches), then it's probably not going to be enough on its own. The OP's list offers one counter to this: bringing Boba and Bossk in after the Raider engages, to destroy 1-2 of the pinned targets. Both are Rogue, so as long as they're in engagement range a turn in advance, bringing them to bear should not be a problem. Between their two attacks, the Raider's ensuing anti-squadron spray on the following turn, and then additional attacks from Boba and Bossk (if necessary), even a large squadron wing (5-8 squadrons) should be in pain by the time they're free to move (even more so if the Raider gets some Quad Laser Turret shots in before it scoots). A pair of Interceptors, if activated with a squadron command, could also do some damage (though with less survivability and flexibility--and cost--than Boba and Bossk) before they're eliminated. Beyond that, distance 1 isn't huge, but it's a good size. A Raider moving at speed 2, with an aim to encircle a fighter furball, could conceivably keep most of a fighter force locked down for a couple of turns if it's properly positioned at the outset (90 degree turns!). Or the Raider can just plow into the fighters on turn 2, which would force them all to be deployed adjacent to the Raider (and thus within distance 1) for another turn. Four yaw at speed 2... can't wait to get these on the table to see how they go.

Truegreek's comparison of the Raider to the Neb is an interesting one, I think. There are some differences (less engineering, more side shields, less front shields, more speed, long-range vs. close-range preference), but some similarities in how armaments are distributed. My original (subconscious) thought was that the Raider would play a lot like a Glad, but perhaps revisiting Neb tactics would be more in line with the Raider's strengths... something similar to the picket fence suggestion made by the op.

That's not really what irony is. Also the ship can't cost a literal handful of points.

Apparently posting in the wee hours doesn't help your ability to write clearly. The original intent of the sentence was that the Raider is worth the handful of points it is over a CR90. I'm well aware 44/48 pts is nothing to casually throw to the wind. The ironic part was the Raider name when in fact I'm proposing it as more of a Guard/Sentinel. Ah, Internet, you do wonders for my puns and other wordplay. (PS I've edited the original to show as such.)

To many of the people who having been comparing the Raider to the Gladiator, I agree by and large. If I want something dead, I'm going to send a Gladiator. It is perfectly viable in this build to swap out a Raider and one/both Rogues for a Gladiator. However, that is missing the subtle difference in the Raider's job, and the point of the example fleet. The point of the example fleet was to show how this concept could be built out, perhaps to a mildly unreasonable extent. The other point of a Raider, beyond anti-fighter support, isn't actually to kill anything. It's to wound things. Imagine stripping an MC30 of one evade. Or an MC80 of a shield face. Or forcing a CR90 to not change speed without being damaged further. The Raider is going to have a hard time killing anything bigger than a CR90. What it will have an easy time doing is making a general nuisance of itself and softening up enemy ships to be finished by another more powerful ship (Gladiator, Imperial etc.).

I had ackbar on an mc80 with defiance leading shots and enhanced armament. I was one shotting gladiators reliably. Didn't matter what facing I fired at. I would get one accuracy to stob brace and ten damage. This is at medium range. I feel like the raider would have that problem as well but even more so.

Why would demolisher or a raider get into an mc80 side arc? That simply shouldn't happen if he's smart about his approach.

Why would demolisher or a raider get into an mc80 side arc? That simply shouldn't happen if he's smart about his approach.

Agreed. Theoretically, one should never do this.

Practically, the size of those side arcs doesn't leave much margin for error. Flying around an MC-80 is going to become an important skill, I think (much like learning how to box AFIIs was in Wave I).

....Unless you slow the Raider down to speed 0 (which you don't want to do...), it's moving on from whatever you tied up.....

Not necessarily. The Raider has a very impressive speed chart. At speed 1 it has a yaw of 2. At speed 2, it has a yaw of 2 at both first and second joint. Depending on initial positioning of the raider and fighters, you should be able to keep them in range at least for an extra turn if you are going speed 1.

I for one am looking forward to using the raider. It finally gives the imperials a (fairly) cheap ship that can be used for support and also to help with activation numbers. I see myself generally running a Raider 2 with either overload pulse or NK-7 in almost any of my lists.

....Unless you slow the Raider down to speed 0 (which you don't want to do...), it's moving on from whatever you tied up.....

Not necessarily. The Raider has a very impressive speed chart. At speed 1 it has a yaw of 2. At speed 2, it has a yaw of 2 at both first and second joint. Depending on initial positioning of the raider and fighters, you should be able to keep them in range at least for an extra turn if you are going speed 1.

I for one am looking forward to using the raider. It finally gives the imperials a (fairly) cheap ship that can be used for support and also to help with activation numbers. I see myself generally running a Raider 2 with either overload pulse or NK-7 in almost any of my lists.

Agreed, that 45 degree turn (or 90 degree turn at speed 2) could end up being enough, if you plan for it in advance. That said, I still don't think you'd want to drop it to zero, especially if you're tying down bombers without any escorting squadrons for them to shoot at.

I lean slightly towards the Raider I with Ordnance Experts and APTs myself, but a Raider II with OP or NK-7 is awfully tempting, too.

....Unless you slow the Raider down to speed 0 (which you don't want to do...), it's moving on from whatever you tied up.....

Not necessarily. The Raider has a very impressive speed chart. At speed 1 it has a yaw of 2. At speed 2, it has a yaw of 2 at both first and second joint. Depending on initial positioning of the raider and fighters, you should be able to keep them in range at least for an extra turn if you are going speed 1.

I for one am looking forward to using the raider. It finally gives the imperials a (fairly) cheap ship that can be used for support and also to help with activation numbers. I see myself generally running a Raider 2 with either overload pulse or NK-7 in almost any of my lists.

Agreed, that 45 degree turn (or 90 degree turn at speed 2) could end up being enough, if you plan for it in advance. That said, I still don't think you'd want to drop it to zero, especially if you're tying down bombers without any escorting squadrons for them to shoot at.

I lean slightly towards the Raider I with Ordnance Experts and APTs myself, but a Raider II with OP or NK-7 is awfully tempting, too.

Oh, definitely do not want to drop to speed 0, that's just a death wish lol.

What about Raiders that hit as hard as a naked ISD (same expected value for damage) and can zip around real fast?

Points Quantity Total

Expanded Ordnance III

ISD-I 110 1 110

Relentless 3 1 3

Leading Shots 4 1 4

Wulff Yularen 7 1 7

Admiral Ozzel 20 1 20

Raider-I 44 4 176

Instigator 4 1 4

Impetuous 4 1 4

Expanded Launchers 13 4 52

Ordnance Experts 4 4 16

396

What about Raiders that hit as hard as a naked ISD (same expected value for damage) and can zip around real fast?

Points Quantity Total

Expanded Ordnance III

ISD-I 110 1 110

Relentless 3 1 3

Leading Shots 4 1 4

Wulff Yularen 7 1 7

Admiral Ozzel 20 1 20

Raider-I 44 4 176

Instigator 4 1 4

Impetuous 4 1 4

Expanded Launchers 13 4 52

Ordnance Experts 4 4 16

396

Edit: oh, I get it. Did you try do do some formatting that got deleted?