Their speed is nice, but dang... Sometimes you still can't catch nothing.

This may be part of your issue. You are flying reactive to your opponent. Try using the ISD to drive your oppenent into where you want them. Count on them trying to stay out of your front arc and have another ship cover the ISD weak areas.

Sometimes a big gun is more about their fear of being hit than actually landing that shot.

Victory does not always rest with the big guns, but if we rest in front of them we shall be lost.

Answer to question in title is: nnooooo

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

There is plenty of whelming going on with ISDs. They're the toughest ships in the game, can put out an incredible amount of firepower and equip Gunnery Teams. They cost a lot but deliver on that cost (and don't even need nearly as many upgrades to be powerhouses like the MC80).

OI! Let's do this proper:

I'm a little worried with MC80s having higher shields and access to a support team. With Ackbar, Mc80 broadsides fire the same amount of dice (and with more red dice), and have a higher ability for self-repair. The only thing the lack is gunnery team, but it's not like an attacking ISD gains a second attack on the same ship with a gunnery team either.

So my worry is that a self-healing eternal MC80 can hold off the supposedly monsterous Imperial star Destroyer simply by spamming engineering and let Ackbar and the passive gunners (with any passive turbolasers) do the work for him, along with the rest of the fleet.

Sounds like XI7s will be very popular this time around, so I don't buy the "MC80s have more shields" argument. I'd rather have hull than shields.

Their speed is nice, but dang... Sometimes you still can't catch nothing.

This may be part of your issue. You are flying reactive to your opponent. Try using the ISD to drive your oppenent into where you want them. Count on them trying to stay out of your front arc and have another ship cover the ISD weak areas.

Sometimes a big gun is more about their fear of being hit than actually landing that shot.

Their speed is nice, but dang... Sometimes you still can't catch nothing.

This may be part of your issue. You are flying reactive to your opponent. Try using the ISD to drive your oppenent into where you want them. Count on them trying to stay out of your front arc and have another ship cover the ISD weak areas.

Sometimes a big gun is more about their fear of being hit than actually landing that shot.

Like another said. You plop them on the table And can't expect them to do all the work...I know everyone knows that and I am not trying to be a smart as, but just reminding people more than anything.

I only have built list around these things and mock flown them on the table so keep that in mind. Theory and practice are different than experience. However, my thought is don't sink too much points into an one ship. Go with the cheaper I instead of two to get 4 upgrades instead of two. Heck even put you admiral on the flanker furthest from the action and more likely to get behind the enemy with some squadron support. Simply adding one or two upgrades to do whatever trick you want him to do. Instead of making it a multitrack pony rely on other ships for that. Driving forces into the glads broadsides or VSD Is front arcs with advance gunnery and expanded launchers might be a good idea.

ISD I 110

Ozzel 20

GT 7

NK-7 I think this is a real stand out of the entire wave...IMHO

***

Love to find points to put boosted coms on this if this Rhymer ball below is with the ISD, instead of the glads, helping the ISD push funnel things toward the gunline of the glads.

Glad I 63

GT 7

Glad 63

GT 7

Glad 63

--

Howl-runner 16

Tie advanced 12

3xTie 24

Major 16

-----------

397

ISD I 110

Screed 26

GT 7

NK-7 10

3x Glad I with Assualt Concussion Missiles 189

Howlrunner. 16

Tie advanced 12

3x tie fighters 24

-------

394 for initiative or spend the 6 on Phylon tractor Beams, 2 veteran captains, Admiral Mont 5, 1 ordnance expert on a glad 4, insidious and a veteran captain, or Avenger on ISD for 5.

I don't like NK-7's. . . Everytime I use them on an ISD, that ship is going to die or is just about to die. . . It is never worth that 10 points. . .

I don't like NK-7's. . . Everytime I use them on an ISD, that ship is going to die or is just about to die. . . It is never worth that 10 points. . .

I don't like NK-7's. . . Everytime I use them on an ISD, that ship is going to die or is just about to die. . . It is never worth that 10 points. . .

Take them out add X17 TL and you got 10 points to spend on what?

What are other people finding with the NK-7?

I'm a little worried with MC80s having higher shields and access to a support team. With Ackbar, Mc80 broadsides fire the same amount of dice (and with more red dice), and have a higher ability for self-repair. The only thing the lack is gunnery team, but it's not like an attacking ISD gains a second attack on the same ship with a gunnery team either.

So my worry is that a self-healing eternal MC80 can hold off the supposedly monsterous Imperial star Destroyer simply by spamming engineering and let Ackbar and the passive gunners (with any passive turbolasers) do the work for him, along with the rest of the fleet.

Sounds like XI7s will be very popular this time around, so I don't buy the "MC80s have more shields" argument. I'd rather have hull than shields.

Bloody things are on my shopping list now...

Been saying it since Sullust... the ISD looks a lot tougher than it is.

I wonder how much of that is based on people's concept of damage based on Wave 1. I mean in Wave 1 VSD's and the MKII's were fairly durable (at least compared to other Wave 1 ships). So it's an understandable leap to think that more shields, more hull would be a pretty big upgrade in terms of durability.

But people didn't really come to grips with just how much more damage a fleet would be doing now.

I'm a little worried with MC80s having higher shields and access to a support team. With Ackbar, Mc80 broadsides fire the same amount of dice (and with more red dice), and have a higher ability for self-repair. The only thing the lack is gunnery team, but it's not like an attacking ISD gains a second attack on the same ship with a gunnery team either.

So my worry is that a self-healing eternal MC80 can hold off the supposedly monsterous Imperial star Destroyer simply by spamming engineering and let Ackbar and the passive gunners (with any passive turbolasers) do the work for him, along with the rest of the fleet.

Sounds like XI7s will be very popular this time around, so I don't buy the "MC80s have more shields" argument. I'd rather have hull than shields.

Bloody things are on my shopping list now...

The mom cal MC80 is awesome but I bough 2 ISDs and 2 MC80s for 500-600 point games and wish I would have only purchased one each. They are bloody big!

I feel like people expected the Imperial to be like some indomitable god of war striding across the battlefield laying waste, but at the end of the day it's just the Victory's older brother.

Been saying it since Sullust... the ISD looks a lot tougher than it is.

I wonder how much of that is based on people's concept of damage based on Wave 1. I mean in Wave 1 VSD's and the MKII's were fairly durable (at least compared to other Wave 1 ships). So it's an understandable leap to think that more shields, more hull would be a pretty big upgrade in terms of durability.

But people didn't really come to grips with just how much more damage a fleet would be doing now.

*cough*Ackbar*cough*

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

Hey Ly,

I've been playing rebels as of late actually. I've only played 1 or 2 games with the ISD, so I do think you have some merit to saying I should play with it more. ... I've actually won all of my 8 or so of my games recently... To the point where my usual Imperial opponent is needing a break so he can think about a better way to play for a bit.

However, the games I've played with the ISDs have been only partial wins, based on lucky CR kills and points. I could not kill Ackbar either. Just.. won out on objectives and such. Which is different from what I'm used to as Ackbar, blowing away entire lists for 10-0.

I was more thinking about build options, and I haven't been able to create a build I like for myself or for him.

Also, I see the ISD deploy countered a lot. Or having its front arc dodged. And always shooting from far range cuz everything that seems it tries to go the long way around it. And by the time you turn the behemoth, they've skirted your front arc.

Oh and dying. a lot of dying. I've seen 3 or 4 ISDs go down now. By my hand or otherwise.

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

Hey Ly,

I've been playing rebels as of late actually. I've only played 1 or 2 games with the ISD, so I do think you have some merit to saying I should play with it more. ... I've actually won all of my 8 or so of my games recently... To the point where my usual Imperial opponent is needing a break so he can think about a better way to play for a bit.

However, the games I've played with the ISDs have been only partial wins, based on lucky CR kills and points. I could not kill Ackbar either. Just.. won out on objectives and such. Which is different from what I'm used to as Ackbar, blowing away entire lists for 10-0.

I was more thinking about build options, and I haven't been able to create a build I like for myself or for him.

Also, I see the ISD deploy countered a lot. Or having its front arc dodged. And always shooting from far range cuz everything that seems it tries to go the long way around it. And by the time you turn the behemoth, they've skirted your front arc.

Oh and dying. a lot of dying. I've seen 3 or 4 ISDs go down now. By my hand or otherwise.

I sense a disturbance in the force, as if a nerf-hammer was swinging and complaints were suddenly silenced.

Seriously, my gut feeling is that we'll see Grand-high-gunner's-mate Fishsticks get adjusted sometime soonish.

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

Hey Ly,

I've been playing rebels as of late actually. I've only played 1 or 2 games with the ISD, so I do think you have some merit to saying I should play with it more. ... I've actually won all of my 8 or so of my games recently... To the point where my usual Imperial opponent is needing a break so he can think about a better way to play for a bit.

However, the games I've played with the ISDs have been only partial wins, based on lucky CR kills and points. I could not kill Ackbar either. Just.. won out on objectives and such. Which is different from what I'm used to as Ackbar, blowing away entire lists for 10-0.

I was more thinking about build options, and I haven't been able to create a build I like for myself or for him.

Also, I see the ISD deploy countered a lot. Or having its front arc dodged. And always shooting from far range cuz everything that seems it tries to go the long way around it. And by the time you turn the behemoth, they've skirted your front arc.

Oh and dying. a lot of dying. I've seen 3 or 4 ISDs go down now. By my hand or otherwise.

I sense a disturbance in the force, as if a nerf-hammer was swinging and complaints were suddenly silenced.

Seriously, my gut feeling is that we'll see Grand-high-gunner's-mate Fishsticks get adjusted sometime soonish.

Something like a Motti-esque scaling effect would be nice, where small ships get one red die, medium get two, maybe large get three?

I think I could take a pair of MC-80s chucking three extra dice since they can't take gunnery teams.

Basically, in wave1, I was really really bad at Rebels. I played Imperials, but Rebels looked completely different and fun, so I tried it. Learned about the conga, learned to do da conga. Learned my own specialty tricks with the conga, learned how to fly within centimeters of the board while conga-ing.

So, in essence, I sucked at Rebels cuz I didn't have a movement plan.

Now I'm back to Imperials... and I can't figure out how to fly ISDs or GSDs anymore (in relationship to the new Ackbar meta).

Le gaspe!~

=( I'm kind of meh on them right now. They seem to die faster than you'd really hope, move earlier than you'd want them to and just... never have stuff to shoot at when you're playing an opponent who's equally or more competent than i am.

Their sheer expense makes them prohibitive to find in a 4 ship list, and being counter deployed sucks. Their speed is nice, but dang... Sometimes you still can't catch nothing.

You want more upgrades, but then it starts getting expensive. And its massive bulk makes it hard to coordinate with other ships.

Also, 2 ISD lists so far suck. =/

And 3ISD? LOL.

Maybe 3ISD with Cluster Mines... WAIT THATS IT.

Just as some food for thought, it is possible to have a fairly decked-out ISD II in a 4 ship build with a fairly sizeable squadron screen, though it's fairly light on "extra" upgrades, abuses the fact that the Empire gets dirt-cheap stunt fighters, and requires taking a couple of Raiders (which I realize isn't everyone's cup of tea). So yeah, disclaimers.

A list like this has basically everything I'd consider to be a need/optimization for a list focused around a single ISD:

• An ISD II for durability (optimization-bordering-on-need)
• Gunnery Teams to maximize that huge front arc (need, I think)
• ECMs to use dat Brace (need)
• The ever-useful GSD I Demolisher (I mean seriously, does anyone ever want to leave home without this? And if so, why?)
• Two Raiders for early deployment/activation shenanigans and objective-running (I feel at least one is a need with an ISD, so you have a feasible chance of recovering from a sub-optimal "first deployment" before the game ends. You know... just in case that happens occasionally to you, too )
• Catastrophic roll insurance (Leading Shots on the ISD II, Ordnance Experts on the Glad and two Raiders) (optimization)
• Ozzel to make your speed 3-4 ships more finesse-able for you, and unpredictable for your opponent (optimization)
• Eight TIE fighters for deployment shenanigans/fighter screen (at least some fighters are a "need," and eight feels about right--coupled with supporting fire from two well-positioned Raiders, that's a surprising amount of anti-squadron damage)
• A 12 point initiative bid (12 probably isn't a "need," at least for me... though it may be for some ).

Stack the deck with objectives that will favor your fleet. My default (post-Ackbar) is usually Most Wanted for choice of objective ships (it's the red I can most easily live with), Hyperspace Assault since Demolisher is built for that, and either Superior Positions (calculated deployment--yay!) or Minefields (funnel, funnel, funnel, baby...), although this list is capable of doing any of the navigate objectives and can get advantages from any of them--Intel Sweep if you're seeing a lot of AFII-only builds in your local meta (dat Raider), or Dangerous Territory if you're tired of running over asteroids with your ISD.

A twelve-point bid ought to be enough to get you choice of initiative basically all the time, which can be huge.

On deployment, if you deploy a Raider first, then the eight TIEs, then the other Raider and Gladiator, you can see seven opposing deployments before you commit your ISD to its starting position (eight if you're second player). Unless your opponent is running a super heavy fighter build (like, 12-14 squadrons-heavy), you should have a pretty good idea where the fight will materialize by the time the ISD goes on the table (and, as an aside, even against said super-heavy squadron build, you'll have answers in the form of your TIEs, especially if you can bring supporting fire to bear from the Raiders and ISD II).

On activation order, four ships (two being fast, semi-expendable Raiders) gives the opportunity to "pass" on the ISD a couple of times before activating it in the round (even if you decide you want to wait to activate Demolisher last), which can be used to allow more advantageous attacks to materialize.

If the twelve point bid seems a bit... excessive, there's lots of room for customization, including:

• Taking up to two more TIEs (10 squadrons total) if you drop an upgrade like Leading Shots (400 points)
• Upgrading the GSD I to a GSD II if you're worried about enemy squadrons escaping your Raiders and TIEs (394 points)
• Putting ACMs+Montferrat (398 points) or Intel Officer+APTs (400 points) or Engine Techs (396 points) on the GSD I Demolisher, or Expanded Launchers if you drop Leading Shots (397 points)
• Any title(s) on the Raider(s) (392-396 points)
• Swapping one Raider I with Ordnance Experts to a Raider II with Overload Pulse (396 points)
• Any of the ISD titles (including Devastator) (391-398 points)
• Xi7s on the ISD (394 points)
• Needa + TRCs on the ISD (397 points)
• Chiraneau on the ISD (for selectively nibbling at squadrons with your TIEs?) (398 points)
• A generic Jumpaster (for seven squadrons, and selectively nibbling at squadrons with your TIEs?) (400 points)
• Swapping a TIE for Dengar (for selectively nibbling at squadrons with your TIEs? ... and so on, and so forth...) (400 points)
• APTs on up to two ships (three if you drop Leading Shots) (398-399 points)
• Quad Laser Turrets on two ships if you're still worried about squadron bombers (398 points)
• Two tractor beams (though having only one medium-large base ship limits your options) (400 points)
• Upgrading Admiral Ozzel to Motti, Screed, Vader, or even Tarkin if you drop Leading Shots (392, 394, 400, and 398 points, respectively)
• [And probably 20-30 more, but you get the point--in this game, 12 points can buy a ton of stuff]

Regardless of whether you opt for big initiative bid or more goodies, I find that careful deployment is incredibly valuable for the ISD, maybe more so than for any other ship given its large base, more complicated speed choices ("Do I start at 3? Slow-walk at 1? Start at 2 and adapt? Where am I going? Where's everyone else going? Will I clear that huge rock? Who's even driving this thing? Oh look, the edge of the universe..."), and the fact that everything shoots at it all the time. When out-positioned/out-activated, all the potential issues you identified are magnified, so "stacking the deck" with an above-average numbers of ships and/or squadrons has helped me. The fact that the ISD II has extended range and ECMs is a big boon, too.

If you went with the less durable (and more range-dependent) ISD I, the base list could hold 10 TIEs with a 13 point initiative bid, meaning you could take any of the above upgrades/combos, plus Expanded Launchers on the Demolisher, or a whole host of upgrades to the squadron core. Even Tarkin is in play if you drop something like Leading Shots (with four ships to benefit, this is tempting), and you can add Relentless to Tarkin if you want the ISD to be more responsive (397 and 400 points, respectively).

I definitely agree the problems with the ISD (high cost, deployment/activation difficulties, etc) are more difficult to work around the more ISDs you add to the ledger. If you really skimp (and I mean reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally skimp), you can get two naked ISD IIs with a naked Raider I and Ozzel with twelve TIEs (400 points exactly), which offers some deployment advantages and... um, not much else. Go with a more realistic build that capitalizes on the fact that the ISD IIs are, you know, ISD IIs, and it tops out at three ships and eight TIEs with Ozzel (396) or Motti (400). Not exactly the sort of stuff that dreams are made of. Take the dangerous Demolisher instead, and you're topping out at three ships and five TIEs (without Raider support), four TIEs if you go with Motti or Screed rather than Ozzel. You could always drop the Raider/Glad to get more squadrons in, but then you're committing to deploying an ISD first, which kind of defeats the point... With three ISD builds there's virtually nothing else left to deploy, so... problem solved, I guess?

Personally, I'm enjoying the ISD (new challenges and all) far more than the VSD (and no, this isn't a "knock-the-VSD" comment, I just personally like the ISD's speed and upgrade composition more, plus its thematic feel on the table, etc.), so I'm purposefully building the rest of my fleet around the ISD in a way that tries to balance out its limitations, especially in deployment and activation choices. Now if I could only figure out what to do with squid-head...

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

While I agree it's far too early to pronounce a ship unfit for service (even non-Yavaris/Salvation Nebs seem to be having something of a resurgence), I don't think that's what the OP was doing. I read the OP as identifying issues--primarily the sheer expense, which leads to difficulty getting deployment/activation advantages, maneuvering a base of that size, etc--that are real issues for the ISD. Not insurmountable issues, for sure, but new issues (since we haven't had a ship this large or fast or focus-able or expensive before). Asking for feedback from the broader community on how to address these new issues seems like a profitable forum discussion to me.

Just my two cents, as someone who's found so many of these forum discussions extremely valuable, even on topics that I thought I was pretty well-versed in.

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

Hey Ly,

I've been playing rebels as of late actually. I've only played 1 or 2 games with the ISD, so I do think you have some merit to saying I should play with it more. ... I've actually won all of my 8 or so of my games recently... To the point where my usual Imperial opponent is needing a break so he can think about a better way to play for a bit.

However, the games I've played with the ISDs have been only partial wins, based on lucky CR kills and points. I could not kill Ackbar either. Just.. won out on objectives and such. Which is different from what I'm used to as Ackbar, blowing away entire lists for 10-0.

I was more thinking about build options, and I haven't been able to create a build I like for myself or for him.

Also, I see the ISD deploy countered a lot. Or having its front arc dodged. And always shooting from far range cuz everything that seems it tries to go the long way around it. And by the time you turn the behemoth, they've skirted your front arc.

Oh and dying. a lot of dying. I've seen 3 or 4 ISDs go down now. By my hand or otherwise.

I sense a disturbance in the force, as if a nerf-hammer was swinging and complaints were suddenly silenced.

Seriously, my gut feeling is that we'll see Grand-high-gunner's-mate Fishsticks get adjusted sometime soonish.

Something like a Motti-esque scaling effect would be nice, where small ships get one red die, medium get two, maybe large get three?

I think I could take a pair of MC-80s chucking three extra dice since they can't take gunnery teams.

OW. Time will tell if the MC80 really needs that, but from my current perspective, imo, its not worth it. Adding an extra red dice nearly guarantees that the MC80 can 1shot any small ships. as a guarantee. Instead of as a high probability, which ... it is now.

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

Hey Ly,

I've been playing rebels as of late actually. I've only played 1 or 2 games with the ISD, so I do think you have some merit to saying I should play with it more. ... I've actually won all of my 8 or so of my games recently... To the point where my usual Imperial opponent is needing a break so he can think about a better way to play for a bit.

However, the games I've played with the ISDs have been only partial wins, based on lucky CR kills and points. I could not kill Ackbar either. Just.. won out on objectives and such. Which is different from what I'm used to as Ackbar, blowing away entire lists for 10-0.

I was more thinking about build options, and I haven't been able to create a build I like for myself or for him.

Also, I see the ISD deploy countered a lot. Or having its front arc dodged. And always shooting from far range cuz everything that seems it tries to go the long way around it. And by the time you turn the behemoth, they've skirted your front arc.

Oh and dying. a lot of dying. I've seen 3 or 4 ISDs go down now. By my hand or otherwise.

I sense a disturbance in the force, as if a nerf-hammer was swinging and complaints were suddenly silenced.

Seriously, my gut feeling is that we'll see Grand-high-gunner's-mate Fishsticks get adjusted sometime soonish.

Something like a Motti-esque scaling effect would be nice, where small ships get one red die, medium get two, maybe large get three?

I think I could take a pair of MC-80s chucking three extra dice since they can't take gunnery teams.

I could see +1 small, +1 +reroll medium, +2 large.

But that's probably a bit too complicated.

My roommate suggested his effect eliminate the zone restriction and simply be to add one die of any color to each attack a ship makes against ships during its activation.

Not sure if that's a good or bad suggestion.

Le gaspe!~

=( I'm kind of meh on them right now. They seem to die faster than you'd really hope, move earlier than you'd want them to and just... never have stuff to shoot at when you're playing an opponent who's equally or more competent than i am.

Their sheer expense makes them prohibitive to find in a 4 ship list, and being counter deployed sucks. Their speed is nice, but dang... Sometimes you still can't catch nothing.

You want more upgrades, but then it starts getting expensive. And its massive bulk makes it hard to coordinate with other ships.

Also, 2 ISD lists so far suck. =/

And 3ISD? LOL.

Maybe 3ISD with Cluster Mines... WAIT THATS IT.

Just as some food for thought, it is possible to have a fairly decked-out ISD II in a 4 ship build with a fairly sizeable squadron screen, though it's fairly light on "extra" upgrades, abuses the fact that the Empire gets dirt-cheap stunt fighters, and requires taking a couple of Raiders (which I realize isn't everyone's cup of tea). So yeah, disclaimers.

A list like this has basically everything I'd consider to be a need/optimization for a list focused around a single ISD:

• An ISD II for durability (optimization-bordering-on-need)
• Gunnery Teams to maximize that huge front arc (need, I think)
• ECMs to use dat Brace (need)
• The ever-useful Demolisher (why not???)
• Two Raiders for early deployment/activation shenanigans and objective-running (I feel at least one is a need)
• Catastrophic roll insurance (Leading Shots on the ISD II, Ordnance Experts on the Glad and two Raiders) (optimization)
• Ozzel to make your speed 3-4 ships more finesse-able for you, and unpredictable for your opponent (optimization)
• Eight TIE fighters for deployment shenanigans/fighter screen (at least some fighters are a "need," and eight feels about right--coupled with supporting fire from two well-positioned Raiders, that's a surprising amount of anti-squadron damage)
• A 12 point initiative bid (12 probably isn't a "need," at least for me... though it may be for some ).

Stack the deck with objectives that will favor your fleet (my default is usually Most Wanted for choice of objective ships, Hyperspace Assault since Demolisher is built for that, and either Superior Positions or Minefields, although this list is capable of doing any of them--Intel Sweep if you're seeing a lot of AFII-only builds in your local meta, or Dangerous Territory if you're tired of running over asteroids with your ISD ).

A twelve-point bid ought to be enough to get you choice of initiative basically all the time, which can be huge.

On deployment, if you deploy a Raider first, then the eight TIEs, then the other Raider and Gladiator, you can see seven opposing deployments before you commit your ISD to its starting position (eight if you're second player). Unless your opponent is running a super heavy fighter build (like, 12-14 squadrons-heavy), you should have a pretty good idea where the fight will materialize by the time the ISD goes on the table (and even against said super-heavy squadron build, you'll have answers in the form of your TIEs + Raider fire).

On activation order, four ships (two being fast, semi-expendable Raiders) gives the opportunity to "pass" on the ISD a couple of times before activating it in the round (even if you decide you want to wait to activate Demolisher last), which can be used to allow more advantageous attacks to materialize.

If the twelve point bid seems a bit... excessive, there's lots of room for customization, including:

• Taking up to two more TIEs (10 squadrons total) if you drop an upgrade like Leading Shots (400 points)
• Upgrading the GSD I to a GSD II if you're worried about enemy squadrons escaping your Raiders and TIEs (394 points)
• Putting ACMs+Montferrat (398 points) or Intel Officer+APTs (400 points) or Engine Techs (396 points) on the GSD I Demolisher, or Expanded Launchers if you drop Leading Shots (397 points)
• Any title(s) on the Raider(s) (392-396 points)
• Swapping one Raider I with Ordnance Experts to a Raider II with Overload Pulse (396 points)
• Any of the ISD titles (including Devastator) (391-398 points)
• Xi7s on the ISD (394 points)
• Needa + TRCs on the ISD (397 points)
• Chiraneau on the ISD (for selectively nibbling at squadrons with your TIEs?) (398 points)
• A generic Jumpaster (for seven squadrons, and selectively nibbling at squadrons with your TIEs?) (400 points)
• Swapping a TIE for Dengar (for selectively nibbling at squadrons with your TIEs? ... and so on, and so forth...) (400 points)
• APTs on up to two ships (three if you drop Leading Shots) (398-399 points)
• Quad Laser Turrets on two ships if you're still worried about squadron bombers (398 points)
• Two tractor beams (though having only one medium-large base ship limits your options) (400 points)
• Upgrading Admiral Ozzel to Motti, Screed, Vader, or even Tarkin if you drop Leading Shots (392, 394, 400, and 398 points, respectively)
• [And probably 20-30 more, but you get the point--in this game, 12 points can buy a ton of stuff]

Regardless of whether you opt for big initiative bid or more goodies, I find that careful deployment is incredibly valuable for the ISD, maybe more so than for any other ship given its large base, more complicated speed choices ("Do I start at 3? Slow-walk at 1? Start at 2 and adapt? Where am I going? Where's everyone else going? Will I clear that huge rock? Who's even driving this thing? Oh look, the edge of the universe..."), and the fact that everything shoots at it all the time. When out-positioned/out-activated, all the potential issues you identified are magnified, so "stacking the deck" with an above-average numbers of ships and/or squadrons has helped me. The fact that the ISD II has extended range and ECMs is a big boon, too.

If you went with the less durable (and more range-dependent) ISD I, the base list could hold 10 TIEs with a 13 point initiative bid, meaning you could take any of the above upgrades/combos, plus Expanded Launchers on the Demolisher, or a whole host of upgrades to the squadron core. Even Tarkin is in play if you drop something like Leading Shots (with four ships to benefit, this is tempting), and you can add Relentless to Tarkin if you want the ISD to be more responsive (397 and 400 points, respectively).

I definitely agree the problems with the ISD (high cost, deployment/activation difficulties, etc) are more difficult to work around the more ISDs you add to the ledger. If you really skimp (and I mean reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally skimp), you can get two naked ISD IIs with a naked Raider I and Ozzel with twelve TIEs (400 points exactly), which offers some deployment advantages and... um, not much else. Go with a more realistic build that capitalizes on the fact that the ISD IIs are, you know, ISD IIs, and it tops out at three ships and eight TIEs with Ozzel (396) or Motti (400). Not exactly the sort of stuff that dreams are made of. Take the dangerous Demolisher instead, and you're topping out at three ships and five TIEs (without Raider support), four TIEs if you go with Motti or Screed rather than Ozzel. You could always drop the Raider/Glad to get more squadrons in, but then you're committing to deploying an ISD first, which kind of defeats the point... With three ISD builds there's virtually nothing else left to deploy, so... problem solved, I guess?

Personally, I'm enjoying the ISD (new challenges and all) far more than the VSD (and no, this isn't a "knock-the-VSD" comment, I just personally like the ISD's speed and upgrade composition more, plus its thematic feel on the table, etc.), so I'm purposefully building the rest of my fleet around the ISD in a way that tries to balance out its limitations, especially in deployment and activation choices. Now if I could only figure out what to do with squid-head...

Ok Bail, do you win your games normally? If not, then what are you doing wrong? Are you playing too spread out? Are you attacking the wrong ships and thus letting the opponents dictate engagements?

Let's figure that out first before we start the condemnation of a fine ship.

While I agree it's far too early to pronounce a ship unfit for service (even non-Yavaris/Salvation Nebs seem to be having something of a resurgence), I don't think that's what the OP was doing. I read the OP as identifying issues--primarily the sheer expense, which leads to difficulty getting deployment/activation advantages, maneuvering a base of that size, etc--that are real issues for the ISD. Not insurmountable issues, for sure, but new issues (since we haven't had a ship this large or fast or focus-able or expensive before). Asking for feedback from the broader community on how to address these new issues seems like a profitable forum discussion to me.

Just my two cents, as someone who's found so many of these forum discussions extremely valuable, even on topics that I thought I was pretty well-versed in.

Still reading through.

First of all, you're awesome. Thank you.

8 ties. Good idea. That was my problem. I was trying to shoe horn in more expensive squads all the time. It makes sense now!

Yeah, raiders atm also arent my cup of tea. I'm not good enough at being exact in the weak arcs at close range. Also... they kinda pop too fast for my liking. (I wasn't a swarm player in xwing either).

Yeah sorry guys if it sounds whiny. I'm not trying to be. As Rythbryt said, I'm just trying to show objectively why I'm having trouble with the ship and seeing if anyone has thoughts to fix my mindset.

Just even the whole take 8 ties has already opened up whole new advantages already.

I don't tend to be super refined or eloquent on forum talk sorry. Its mostly my rambling and raving outlet during the day.

I have a very high winrate in this game and in xwing, but that's cuz I try and think about how to play the game as best as I can.

So, sometimes even though I win, I know easily that my opponent made a really dumb mistake (even if they aren't aware of it), such as being deploy countered. So in those cases, I feel like I would not have won against an opponent who knows the game as well as I do or better.

That guy is the one I want to be able to beat. To be able to at times even take games off players who are supposedly "better" than myself or invested more experience into the game.

* * *

8 ties. Good idea. That was my problem. I was trying to shoe horn in more expensive squads all the time. It makes sense now!

Yeah, raiders atm also arent my cup of tea. I'm not good enough at being exact in the weak arcs at close range. Also... they kinda pop too fast for my liking. (I wasn't a swarm player in xwing either).

Realistic concerns with the Raiders, especially in a post-Ackbar/Home One era. Their redeeming quality is they're fast buggers with good nav charts, which means if you're intentional about keeping them out of long-range of an MC-80 or AFII (or at least out of their side arcs), you can usually do it with proper planning. Motti helps them too, ironically, especially if they're up against a single AFII (three accuracies needed to lock down your brace and two evades, which means you're either always cancelling a die, or the AFII is only doing damage on 2-3 dice (since he'd need three accuracies), and you can usually survive a single barrage of 2-3 damage dice, especially with Motti. Being in long-range of two AFIIs/MC-80s is generally bad, bad, bad, though... for any ship, not just Raiders.

In the alternative, dropping the two raiders for a somewhat sturdier GSD would buy some extra points (more TIES! or upgrading TIEs to Bombers! Or Rhymer!). With 88 points from the two Raiders, you could also fit a VSD I with boosted comms to act as a carrier, with some points left over, or even a VSD II with Gunnery Teams if you bite into the initiative bid a bit, both of which would still give you a third ship and something sturdier than Raiders (at the cost of an activation and some speed).

Either I'm missing something with Rebels, some combo of skill or dice or I just understand my friend to well, and he understands me. Becouse as I mentioned, my experience has been utterly counter to what some Rebel players are saying.

Im honestly wondering just what kind of lists The Rebels are encountering for what feels to me like such lopsided victory.

I'll admit that my two ISD 2 list always takes ecm, gunnery team and xi-7 turbolasers as standard. To run them without those three upgrades to me is giving you opponent a free ship kill.

That being said I also never chase. I always move to head off the Rebels to block there movement. Between the massive base of the ISD and the MC80 (even medium bases to an extent) I cage them in and fire away. It's not a strategy I like to be honest, but if I don't control the movement their broad sides will be the death of my ISDs.

My phone hates me.

Either I'm missing something with Rebels, some combo of skill or dice or I just understand my friend to well, and he understands me. Becouse as I mentioned, my experience has been utterly counter to what some Rebel players are saying.

Im honestly wondering just what kind of lists The Rebels are encountering for what feels to me like such lopsided victory.

I'll admit that my two ISD 2 list always takes ecm, gunnery team and xi-7 turbolasers as standard. To run them without those three upgrades to me is giving you opponent a free ship kill.

That being said I also never chase. I always move to head off the Rebels to block there movement. Between the massive base of the ISD and the MC80 (even medium bases to an extent) I cage them in and fire away. It's not a strategy I like to be honest, but if I don't control the movement their broad sides will be the death of my ISDs.

My phone hates me.

I think a smart AF player will deploy his AFs center facing forward... so that you have literally no idea which way he will turn left or right. And then make is his turns close to the board edges, so that it will take severe maneuvering on your ISDs to try and even get close to blocking. Imagine trying to block someone in the corner, within your deployment zone turning. While you're starting facing forward. Its near... impossible?

I'm a little worried with MC80s having higher shields and access to a support team. With Ackbar, Mc80 broadsides fire the same amount of dice (and with more red dice), and have a higher ability for self-repair. The only thing the lack is gunnery team, but it's not like an attacking ISD gains a second attack on the same ship with a gunnery team either.

So my worry is that a self-healing eternal MC80 can hold off the supposedly monsterous Imperial star Destroyer simply by spamming engineering and let Ackbar and the passive gunners (with any passive turbolasers) do the work for him, along with the rest of the fleet.

And the answer came down from the heavens.. . . Use XI7 Turbolasers

love to, now direct me to where i can buy them with Imperial ships.

love to, now direct me to where i can buy them with Imperial ships.

That must be the price you pay.