The list had a quirk is that I limited all my upgrade cards to ones with a rebel design on the artwork. Because style reasons and all.

I sometimes do this too.. the x17s are better than heavy turbos however, i just feel that the turbos belong on my star destroyers do to artwork.

Yeah, I'm not an obsessive person or whatever when it comes to that, but it's always bugged me to see Intel Officers on Nebulon Bs But yeah, currently the XI7s are a better generalistic upgrade over the Heavy Turbos.

I'm crunching the numbers very hard to find a sweet spot where HTTs outperform XI7s, but it's no easy feat I'm convinced that they have a niche though ! Maybe rather than going through the shields, it's meant to force damage on a specific hull zone once the shields are gone or severely damaged ?

Here's Hero's great number crunching on HTT vs XI7 : http://lkhero.blogspot.fr/2015/12/armada-htts-vs-xi7s.html

Let's assume that we're shooting at a ship on a hull zone with no shields, a full shield on an adjacent hull zone (let's say 3) and at least 2 Braces and Redirects available, with 6 damage (average roll from a ISD 2's front arc), and let's compare the XI7 vs HTT :

- HTT : The opponent Braces only and will take 3 damage directly to the hull zone or Brace + Redirect, taking 2 damage to the hull zone and 3 damage on the other facing (removing its shields).

- XI7 : The opponent Braces + Redirects, only taking 2 damage to the hull.

- HTT without Brace available : The opponent redirects all and takes 3 damage to the hull and 3 damage to the other shields.

- XI7 without Brace available : The opponent redirects 1 and takes 5 damage to the hull.

So, HTT's outperform XI7s when it comes to dealing with a depleted shield facing and the opponent still has the ability to Brace the damage. So, it's a great counter to ships that rely on ECM for their defense so that they can keep their Brace, much like XI7s is a direct counter now to ships with Advanced Projectors.

In the case where Brace is still available through ECM, HTT deal one extra damage to the hull if targeting an unshielded hull zone if the opponent Braces only, and if he doesn't Brace, it's going to completely brutalize adjacent hull zones.

HTT isn't that bad after all once you crunch the numbers, but it's not to force damage through shields, it's to mitigate the use of Redirects when naked hull zones are defending and the opponent keeps his Brace at the ready through ECM.

If the damage rolled was 8 (I'm discounting the case of without Brace, assuming the target will have ECM) :

- HTT : The opponent Braces only and takes 4 damage to the hull zone, or 4 damage to the hull zone and 3 to the other shield if he redirects.

- XI7 : The opponent Braces down to 4 and redirects 1 to the other shield taking only 3 to the hull.

So, all in all, when it comes to naked hull zones and ships with access to ECM, HTTs are superior to XI7.

Let's take the case where the defending hull zone has 1 shield, still 3 on the other side, Brace is available through ECM with 6 (8 in parenthesis) damage pushed through :

- HTT : The opponent Braces and takes 3 damage, 1 to the shield, 2 to the hull zones (4 damages, 1 and 3), or Braces + Redirects down to 5, taking 1 to the shield, 3 to the adjacent shields, 1 to the hull zone (7, 1, 3 and 3 to the hull)

- XI7 : The opponent Braces + Redirects and takes 3 damage, redirects 1 to the adjacent shield, takes 1 on the defending hull zone and takes 1 to the hull (or 4 damage, redirects 1 to the next shield, takes 1 on the defending shield and 2 to the hull).

So, yeah, as long as the defending hull zone has a single shield remaining, XI7 are better. But when the defending hull zone has no more shields, then HTT are better than XI7s, provided the opponent can use its Brace through ECM.

Finally, when there are no shields to redirect towards, neither XI7 or HTT have an advantage.

The list had a quirk is that I limited all my upgrade cards to ones with a rebel design on the artwork. Because style reasons and all.

I sometimes do this too.. the x17s are better than heavy turbos however, i just feel that the turbos belong on my star destroyers do to artwork.

Yeah, I'm not an obsessive person or whatever when it comes to that, but it's always bugged me to see Intel Officers on Nebulon Bs But yeah, currently the XI7s are a better generalistic upgrade over the Heavy Turbos.

I'm crunching the numbers very hard to find a sweet spot where HTTs outperform XI7s, but it's no easy feat I'm convinced that they have a niche though !

I can think of one situation: firing at a nebulon b mediun to long range. Nebs don't have redirects so x17s are useless.

The list had a quirk is that I limited all my upgrade cards to ones with a rebel design on the artwork. Because style reasons and all.

I sometimes do this too.. the x17s are better than heavy turbos however, i just feel that the turbos belong on my star destroyers do to artwork.

Yeah, I'm not an obsessive person or whatever when it comes to that, but it's always bugged me to see Intel Officers on Nebulon Bs But yeah, currently the XI7s are a better generalistic upgrade over the Heavy Turbos.

I'm crunching the numbers very hard to find a sweet spot where HTTs outperform XI7s, but it's no easy feat I'm convinced that they have a niche though !

I can think of one situation: firing at a nebulon b mediun to long range. Nebs don't have redirects so x17s are useless.

I edited my previous post showing the niche of HTTs !

Finally, when there are no shields to redirect towards, neither XI7 or HTT have an advantage.

Minor point - HTT can have the advantage if your opponent still has an Evade or a Contain token.

If there is a brace and a contain available, for example, with no shields to redirect towards, the HTTs have the advantage, as it either results in more face-down damage, or a Face up card for lesser damage.

Finally, when there are no shields to redirect towards, neither XI7 or HTT have an advantage.

Minor point - HTT can have the advantage if your opponent still has an Evade or a Contain token.

If there is a brace and a contain available, for example, with no shields to redirect towards, the HTTs have the advantage, as it either results in more face-down damage, or a Face up card for lesser damage.

Good point, it's even better with Contain on (I assume that at the ranges we're talking about there won't be many Evade going on due to either being close range or medium range where evade is less useful).

So, yeah, HTT aren't as useless as it appears at the beginning ! It's just that they aren't as awesome against the shields as the XI7.

Issue with getting to the no shield point is getting to the no shield point.

XI7 Turbolasers are a scalpel and HTT's are hammers

Continuing the evolution of my oddball list into a highly competitive list (I can live in hope :-) )I have reached this state. Four activations, adaptable to objectives, well protected and quite hitty. Not an Ackbar or AF in sight...

Test flying her tomorrow.

Mon Mothma Strike Fleet
Faction: Rebel Alliance

Points: 400/400

Commander: Mon Mothma

Assault Objective: Advanced Gunnery
Defense Objective: Hyperspace Assault
Navigation Objective: Dangerous Territory

CR90 Corvette B (39 points)
- SW 7 Ion Batteries ( 5 points)

MC30c Scout Frigate (69 points)
- Foresight ( 8 points)
- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)
- XI7 Turbolasers ( 6 points)

MC80 Assault Cruiser (114 points)
- Raymus Antilles ( 7 points)
- Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points)
- Redundant Shields ( 8 points)
- Heavy Turbolaser Turrets ( 6 points)

[ flagship ] CR90 Corvette B (39 points)
- Mon Mothma ( 30 points)
- Jainas Light ( 2 points)
- Leia Organa ( 3 points)
- SW 7 Ion Batteries ( 5 points)

3 YT-2400s ( 48 points)

Has anyone run Adar Independance, yavaris and Gallants Haven?

I tried putting this together, and gave up when I saw that just Indy, Haven, Yavaris, Garm, and Adar runs you up to 291, leaving 109 points for all of your squadrons, your bid, and any other upgrades--of which you almost certainly want Boosted Comms + ECM on Indy, Raymus or Veteran Captain on Yavaris, and Boosted Comms or ECM on Haven. At that point you have so much invested into amplifying your squadrons that you don't have enough left for the squadrons themselves. This is about the best I've been able to come up with after quite a lot of tinkering:

[ REBEL FLEET (399 points)

1 • MC80 Command Cruiser - Garm Bel Iblis - Adar Tallon - Boosted Comms - Electronic Countermeasures - Independence (160)

2 • Assault Frigate Mark II B - Electronic Countermeasures - Gallant Haven (87)

3 • Nebulon-B Escort Frigate - Veteran Captain - Yavaris (65)

4 • B-wing Squadron (14)

5 • B-wing Squadron (14)

6 • B-wing Squadron (14)

7 • X-wing Squadron (13)

8 • X-wing Squadron (13)

9 • Jan Ors Moldy Crow (19)

http://armada.fabpsb.net/permalink.php?sq=r19c5o9g3d1f19r8d1f10r3o7f9r11r11r11r6r6r24 ]

As you can see, at this point you don't have nearly enough squadrons to make all that investment worth it. I think as squadron lists go, you're going to be looking at no more than two of the three carriers. I don't think you'll see a lot of both Indy and Haven, unless you drop Yavaris, which... I don't know, Yavaris is great, but you might be able to work around not having it.

I know, right? It's like 20-25 points from being an awesome wombo combo.

I know, right? It's like 20-25 points from being an awesome wombo combo.

Actually, I kind of like your list without Yavaris ! The more I play Yavaris, the more I find that there are ways around it, because it requires the squadrons to be static, so you have to place them a turn before in relative close range of a ship, while still keeping the Yavaris in the medium range... It's a bit clunky as far as movement goes, and the only way to ensure Yavaris won't be killed is really to play it face forward to the enemy (hence losing the benefit of its 2 blue AA), because at this kind of range, it will be able to take a beating thanks to its double Brace and 3 shields.

I'm starting to think that it might be more worth it to use the Yavaris mainly defensively with a still fighter/bomber wing, sticking at medium range (aka Wedge + a Bomber, maybe veen dutch/wedge). Positioning them on an interception course where the enemy bombers will be, or position them where you want them to be, then double tap and use their Brace for defense.

Continuing the evolution of my oddball list

Please leave this thread, you dont understand the term oddball! Your list is fairly normal!

I don't know if this counts as oddball, or just a variant of normal, but has anyone encountered an Imperial list focused on achieving space superiority? As in, anti squadron combat? Something like:

Imperial Space Superiority

Author: Maturin

Faction: Galactic Empire

Points: 399/400

Commander: Admiral Motti

Assault Objective: Most Wanted

Defense Objective: Hyperspace Assault

Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)

- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)

- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

[ flagship ] Imperial II-Class Star Destroyer (120 points)

- Admiral Motti ( 24 points)

- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)

- Expanded Hangar Bay ( 5 points)

- Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points)

- Leading Shots ( 4 points)

Raider-I Class Corvette (44 points)

- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)

1 "Howlrunner" ( 16 points)

1 Dengar ( 20 points)

4 TIE Fighter Squadrons ( 32 points)

1 TIE Advanced Squadron ( 12 points)

2 TIE Interceptor Squadrons ( 22 points)

Fleet created with Armada Warlords

With so many squadrons running around this is my attempt to stay ahead of the meta. Killing enemy squadrons quickly means I can achieve point superiority, and then let the fighters peck away while the big ships wreck shop. Deployment advantage means the VSD can be deployed last, where it can contribute despite its sluggishness. Boosted comms keeps it contributing throughout.

I thought about adding Rhymer, but that detracts from the squadron superiority. Dropping the raider would be great for more fighters, but the Raider represents another activation and decent anti-ship and anti-squadron firepower. Is this oddball enough?

Dual MC80 with Raymus Taintive.

Ooooh eeerrrr matron

Continuing the evolution of my oddball list

Please leave this thread, you dont understand the term oddball! Your list is fairly normal!

Not in my meta it's not :-) and I'm pretty certain I understand the term 'oddball' :-)

Dual MC80 with Raymus Taintive.

Ooooh eeerrrr matron

Had a proper look at this, those mc80's are expensive when kitted out so not sure how to build this with some form of attack squadrons!

Help?

I fought against a Reeikan led force of 7 CR90s and 2 Nebulons, most with Engine Techs. Double ram from multiple opponents! I did not last long. I call it the Suicide Bomber list.

@Ginkapo:

perhaps this would work?

Faction: Rebel Alliance
Points: 399/400

Commander: General Dodonna

Assault Objective: Advanced Gunnery
Defense Objective: Fleet Ambush
Navigation Objective: Minefields

MC80 Assault Cruiser (114 points)
- Intel Officer ( 7 points)
- Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points)
- Heavy Turbolaser Turrets ( 6 points)

[ flagship ] MC80 Command Cruiser (106 points)
- General Dodonna ( 20 points)
- Defiance ( 5 points)
- Intel Officer ( 7 points)
- Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points)
- Heavy Turbolaser Turrets ( 6 points)
- SW 7 Ion Batteries ( 5 points)

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Tantive IV ( 3 points)
- Raymus Antilles ( 7 points)

1 Wedge Antilles ( 19 points)
1 Luke Skywalker ( 20 points)
1 "Dutch" Vander ( 16 points)

Could choosing to not run Gunnery Teams or XI7s on VSDs and ISDs be considered oddball in the current meta ?

Pete - I got to something similar, those squadrons are a bit light for my liking, especially when Independance is available as a multiplier!

Could choosing to not run Gunnery Teams or XI7s on VSDs and ISDs be considered oddball in the current meta ?

Could choosing to not run Gunnery Teams or XI7s on VSDs and ISDs be considered oddball in the current meta ?

It seems so. . . I am the only one in my area doing so

Yeah, I'm on your boat with that one. Imperials already suffer from a lack of number of attacks to expend defense tokens that I'd rather go for a double arc shot on a single ship rather than splitting the firepower between multiple ships, especially at closer range.

Another few ideas out there that might be considered oddball in the current meta, this time specifically on the AFMK2 :

1) AFMK2 A with Gallant Haven, ECM, Gunnery Team : Most people in my area play the AFMK2 B variant with Gallant Haven because it will affect more squadrons. But my analysis was : because squadrons want to stay close to the Gallant to benefit from it's title, and the AFMK2 B actually wanting to send squadrons out to do damage at long range, I found that these two upgrades were conflicting with one another. Gunnery team here is to add flexibility and more importantly to allow the ship to fire both it's 2 blue AA dice as well as its side arc when needed. Finally, because squadrons also want to be close to ships to do damage, and the AFMK2 A being a tad more efficient against ships at medium range than it's B counterpart, I felt it was a natural uprgade.

2) AFMK B with Paragon, ECM and Sensor Team : Gunnery Team isn't useful on Paragon because it wants to shoot at the same target twice. So, the idea was to throw the squadrons out first at longer range, plink at the shields, follow up by a side arc, then follow up with the front arc where Sensor Team could be used to fish for the accuracies. After 2 attacks (squadrons and side arc), the opponent is likely to have exhausted a few defense tokens which the Sensor Team could exploit by focusing target on a specific hull zone. In this scenario, rather than aim to block the Brace with a powerful attack, it would aim to block the use of redirects by just drowning the enemy under multiple different attacks. (3 x 1 with the squadrons, and 2 x 3 from the ship).

These builds might not be oddball in general, but in my meta they're considered oddball due to Paragon being on an AFMK2 A and Haven on the B variants all the time.

Could choosing to not run Gunnery Teams or XI7s on VSDs and ISDs be considered oddball in the current meta ?

It seems so. . . I am the only one in my area doing so

Yeah, I'm on your boat with that one. Imperials already suffer from a lack of number of attacks to expend defense tokens that I'd rather go for a double arc shot on a single ship rather than splitting the firepower between multiple ships, especially at closer range.

Another few ideas out there that might be considered oddball in the current meta, this time specifically on the AFMK2 :

1) AFMK2 A with Gallant Haven, ECM, Gunnery Team : Most people in my area play the AFMK2 B variant with Gallant Haven because it will affect more squadrons. But my analysis was : because squadrons want to stay close to the Gallant to benefit from it's title, and the AFMK2 B actually wanting to send squadrons out to do damage at long range, I found that these two upgrades were conflicting with one another. Gunnery team here is to add flexibility and more importantly to allow the ship to fire both it's 2 blue AA dice as well as its side arc when needed. Finally, because squadrons also want to be close to ships to do damage, and the AFMK2 A being a tad more efficient against ships at medium range than it's B counterpart, I felt it was a natural uprgade.

2) AFMK B with Paragon, ECM and Sensor Team : Gunnery Team isn't useful on Paragon because it wants to shoot at the same target twice. So, the idea was to throw the squadrons out first at longer range, plink at the shields, follow up by a side arc, then follow up with the front arc where Sensor Team could be used to fish for the accuracies. After 2 attacks (squadrons and side arc), the opponent is likely to have exhausted a few defense tokens which the Sensor Team could exploit by focusing target on a specific hull zone. In this scenario, rather than aim to block the Brace with a powerful attack, it would aim to block the use of redirects by just drowning the enemy under multiple different attacks. (3 x 1 with the squadrons, and 2 x 3 from the ship).

These builds might not be oddball in general, but in my meta they're considered oddball due to Paragon being on an AFMK2 A and Haven on the B variants all the time.

I haven't run nor seen anyone run the AF2A since halfway through Wave 1, so I'd call anything at all with that ship in it "oddball".

I haven't run nor seen anyone run the AF2A since halfway through Wave 1, so I'd call anything at all with that ship in it "oddball".

Sold ! I'm going to be the hipster of Armada : running stuff that aren't mainstream, and vintage with a huge reliance on Wave 1

I haven't run nor seen anyone run the AF2A since halfway through Wave 1, so I'd call anything at all with that ship in it "oddball".

Sold ! I'm going to be the hipster of Armada : running stuff that aren't mainstream, and vintage with a huge reliance on Wave 1

Good luck! I've been trying to get that ship to work since Wave 2 hit and I just can't get a list put together that wouldn't be better served putting those points elsewhere. I'd love to see what builds you can come up with for it.