Basically all Ackbar is usually doing is let you double arc with your side arc only - most rebel ships have pretty basic front guns, for 38 points which is a pretty big premium.

The outlier is the assault frigate, which can do it with gunnery teams - effectively double double arcing.

Imperials have a couple of potential responses -

- Obvious one - deny the gunnery teams multiple targets in the kill zone

- The kitted out ISD 2 is the queen of the battlefield at the moment, but you will need two clean assault frigate kills to get its points back. This suggests outplaying the rebels in positioning and manoeuvring. If it can go one on one it should win easily especially if Vader is in charge.

- multi ISD 1s with minimal upgrades - can attack from different directions to avoid the gunnery teams, and again, in a one on one fight will smash an AF. Probably need a good bid to secure first player.

- Good old engine tech demolisher, if it can get a good approach vector. If it gets caught out it will get one shot.

- A decent fighter complement is a big help. I recommend firesprays - they can go after weak shield arcs by themselves and are very dangerous to wounded ships

at first I didn't think Ackbar was Op and I Pull about a 50% Win ratio against him but after a while I realized how EASY it was to Beat non Ackbar Rebels with me pulling around a 80% win ratio (and maybe higher) against anything without Ackbar, and I'm talking. 9-1 or 10-0 wins here and every time I look over and there isn't Ackbar I am very confident I can win. The exception to this is Swarm Lists and a Well made Mothma list.

So after this realization I started doing some thinking and this is what I thought of...

Ackbar isn't powerful because of his firepower increase, he is powerful because of the THREAT Range increase.

The reason Imperials were so powerful wave 1 (mostly demolisher) was that there was a zone around them that if a enemy ship entered, it died (or at least was suverly hurt) and rebel ships didn't have the "shock" firepower like that(except B-wings). Instead they had to wear Imps down using attrition and focused firepower.

In wave 2 imps still have that But now rebels have that in the form of Ackbar (and mc30s) so now imperial players have to avoid the "Killzones" and wear down ackbar except UNlike the Imperial killzones which generally encompasses ~100° of the ships total Arc at CLOSE RANGE

Ackbar Has a Killzone that Encompasses 200°+ of the ships arc at LONG RANGE.

This HUGE threat range is what makes him Powerful and perhaps Overpowered

And unlike wave 1 rebels which had to learn to run away and stay out of close range (not that tough except against demolisher), imperials have to either outmaneuver the rebels (and I'm not talking gain an advantage outmanuver, I'm talking DOMINATE the game outmanuver) or close the gap to close range were Instead of being Greatly outmatched they have about EQUAL firepower and it becomes a game of who rolls better, which is accented by the Imps lack of ECM and Home Ones Garrenteed Accuracy(I.e. ISD-1 vs mc80, long range 3 dice vs 5 dice, med range 5 dice vs 8 dice, close range 8 vs 8. Or VSD-1 vs mk2 long 3 dice vs 5, Med 3 dice vs 6, and close 6 vs 6) this makes the ISD 2 the only ship that can beat Ackbar in a gunfight but at a cost of being the MOST EXPENSIVE SHIP in the game making it not economical against Ackbar mk2s so yea...

Anyway time for bed I may add .ore tomorrow

Just watched this bat rep where Mon Mothma rebels decimated imperials...

Just look at the positioning and you can see why the Imp lost, Akbar wasn't even needed.

Good play trumps any general combo, don't hate on the Akbar, learn to play better.

Well, yeah, Mon-Mothma is the best admiral in the game for that many ships needing that many evade tokens. If the Empire had her Raiders would actually be viable and dangerous, since now Expanded Launcher Raider-Is can actually use their defense tokens when they're ready to throw up that much firepower.

But Ackbar gunlines?

I'm skeptical about this idea of "finding the right angle of approach", because unless there's a way to knock clicks off the movement chart, savvy rebel players are going to deploy in such a way that they can react to what you're doing. They'd even look at your list and figure out how to respond with what ship you played on the board and where. You can deploy on a leading edge facing inward, and depending on their deployment either stay in line formation and turn only near the other edge of the board, or turn into the board to intercept your long flank. Or they could split and catch any ship trying to head them off in the crossfire of an assault frigate and MC80 at close range.... still with more red dice than an Imperial-II and with free accuracy.

The only time I can be sure I'd lock down an enemy ship in their forward arc is by Hyperspace assault. And any ackbar player looking at my list and seeing a kitted GSD/VSD-I with that objective is going to pick something else.

at first I didn't think Ackbar was Op and I Pull about a 50% Win ratio against him but after a while I realized how EASY it was to Beat non Ackbar Rebels with me pulling around a 80% win ratio (and maybe higher) against anything without Ackbar, and I'm talking. 9-1 or 10-0 wins here and every time I look over and there isn't Ackbar I am very confident I can win. The exception to this is Swarm Lists and a Well made Mothma list.

So after this realization I started doing some thinking and this is what I thought of...

Ackbar isn't powerful because of his firepower increase, he is powerful because of the THREAT Range increase.

The reason Imperials were so powerful wave 1 (mostly demolisher) was that there was a zone around them that if a enemy ship entered, it died (or at least was suverly hurt) and rebel ships didn't have the "shock" firepower like that(except B-wings). Instead they had to wear Imps down using attrition and focused firepower.

In wave 2 imps still have that But now rebels have that in the form of Ackbar (and mc30s) so now imperial players have to avoid the "Killzones" and wear down ackbar except UNlike the Imperial killzones which generally encompasses ~100° of the ships total Arc at CLOSE RANGE

Ackbar Has a Killzone that Encompasses 200°+ of the ships arc at LONG RANGE.

This HUGE threat range is what makes him Powerful and perhaps Overpowered

And unlike wave 1 rebels which had to learn to run away and stay out of close range (not that tough except against demolisher), imperials have to either outmaneuver the rebels (and I'm not talking gain an advantage outmanuver, I'm talking DOMINATE the game outmanuver) or close the gap to close range were Instead of being Greatly outmatched they have about EQUAL firepower and it becomes a game of who rolls better, which is accented by the Imps lack of ECM and Home Ones Garrenteed Accuracy(I.e. ISD-1 vs mc80, long range 3 dice vs 5 dice, med range 5 dice vs 8 dice, close range 8 vs 8. Or VSD-1 vs mk2 long 3 dice vs 5, Med 3 dice vs 6, and close 6 vs 6) this makes the ISD 2 the only ship that can beat Ackbar in a gunfight but at a cost of being the MOST EXPENSIVE SHIP in the game making it not economical against Ackbar mk2s so yea...

Anyway time for bed I may add .ore tomorrow

(Imperial arrogance engaged!)

You shouldn't be sending an ISD1 up against an MC80 by itself. All the advantages lie with the MC80. Use an ISD2, or 2 x ISD1s at max speed for that job

As an Imperial if Home One is on the field I feel a bit happier because it gives me a target I can fly straight at. Rebels are more dangerous to me when they are fighting dispersed and there is no obvious concentration for me to charge at. Multi TLCR90s, assault frigates and MC30s all sliding down multiple sides at high speed broadsiding all the way is much harder to deal with for me because I cant turn my ISD quick enough to keep them in arc, and they aren't worth the points to kill them anyway.

Whereas an MC80 is slow enough that it can't escape, it represents enough points to be worth committing an ISD to take it out, and if any rebel ships hang around to help it out they are just another target for my gunnery teams.

Stating that imps had these awesome killzones in wave 1 and that rebs had to find a way to deal with it but stating the reverse is OP is ridicules.

To clarify even further on my previous post; just because it doesn't take immense amount of skill to run Ackbar doesn't mean he's this OP crazy Admiral.

U dont say? Requiring a superior tactic or skill to beat a basic approach is practically one of the indications for something that has been oddly balanced (to avoid the OP term, I really dont see him as OP or broken)..

Stating that imps had these awesome killzones in wave 1 and that rebs had to find a way to deal with it but stating the reverse is OP is ridicules.

Read again carefully as he lined out the difference in those kill zones. Imps are having a threatening front kill zone at close range, while ackbar rebells have a side arc long range kill zone. The difference should be obvious.

To clarify even further on my previous post; just because it doesn't take immense amount of skill to run Ackbar doesn't mean he's this OP crazy Admiral.

U dont say? Requiring a superior tactic or skill to beat a basic approach is practically one of the indications for something that has been oddly balanced (to avoid the OP term, I really dont see him as OP or broken)..

I don't understand the logical conclusion there. Beginners might not know the ins and outs but they're not stupid. Ackbar lends himself to a very simple strategy; broadside attacks whilst keeping your opponent at a distance. Something a beginner could understand. As an advanced player who understands tactics and strategies and the minute details of the game, the onus is on you to show them how to finesse the game. If you're playing into his hands, fighting in situations that aren't beneficial for you or making good trades, then that's not Ackbar's fault! It just suggests that tactics you thought would work, didn't, or need to be modified.

Also there seems to be some weird cognitive dissonance with how wave 1 panned out. Rebels won Worlds. It's not about the list. Sure, Imperials had the simpler, easier to understand strategy which dominated local metas, however the fact that Rebels won worlds shows that if you think outside the box, even "OPness!" can be defeated (and pretty **** soundly. Pretty sure he went 10 - 0).

I admit there's not going to be many top tier lists. With only two waves released, there's bound to be a few lists that fare a lot better than others regardless of the person playing it (on average). We'll just have to wait for more waves to be released for variation to increase. I think the spotlight is just on Ackbar right now because he's involved in some of the more popular tier 1 lists out there.

I was always under the impression that Ackbar only provided his benefit to ships other than his own, guess I was mistaken!

Stating that imps had these awesome killzones in wave 1 and that rebs had to find a way to deal with it but stating the reverse is OP is ridicules.

Being a primarily Rebel player in Wave 1, Imperials weren't OP by all means. Like you said, they had awesome (back then) killzones as well as a pretty good ship for flushing out fast rebel ships in the form of the Demolisher. The learning curve for Imperials was easy in the early few games, while the Rebel learning curve was a lot harder early on. But when the Rebel player managed to properly understand the positioning needed against Imperials and understand each of his ship's comfort zones, they would definitely dictate the engagement while Imperial players had to become extremely sneaky to prevent being circled by Rebels. That's what I noticed in my gaming groups at least : If Rebels played their ships in the wrong way, they would get obliterated (even with Assault Frigates) and the game was usually decided in deployment.

Right now, it's pretty much the reverse like you said. Which means that Imperial players need to avoid the killzones through proper flying or playing for the objectives. I think the trick with Ackbar is to just leave him the initiative. Not only you force him to play with his objectives, but you know the general direction of where his fleet is headed based on the first ship he places, and you can also make sure to deny him 1 shot on the second turn by sneakily staying out of range then play catch up. Finally, you can ensure to have your objectives on the board.

Deployment and board control are key elements in defeating Ackbar. Choosing a good objective is key here and being player 2 is an advantage against him.

Objectives I have started choosing for just such a scenario are:

Adv. Gunnery as no one will pick that whether I am flying my Imps or my rebels.

Fleet Ambush, setting up your fleet with one third to half separated from the other can be very bad for Ackbar.

and my personal favorite, Minefields. A well laid out Minefield can totally dictate both set-up and movement in your favor. Having to choose to move through a minefield or onto the Empire forward arcs is no choice at all. Plus my squadrons can lay ambushes by moving through the field, so the Ackbar player must send his squadrons (usually limited in number) against mine or face 4-8 black dice squadrons in the rear/side, depending on the list I am flying.

Another point of note is that the Rebels actually have a much harder admiral to defeat in the form of Mon Mothma. Set up correctly she can be a nightmare to take down. She is also a nightmare for an Ackbar list to beat as done right she can almost completely negate all that Ackbar brings to the table and have her ships inflict massive damage on Ackbars.

That last game I played, I had Ackbar with Home One and two AF2 + 6 A-wings

My opponent had Vader with Avenger as ISD2 + one more ISD2, a Glad + 4 Tie fighters.

Due to poor deployment on my opponents part, I had most of my 400 point fleet up against piecemeal no more than 200 points of his fleet at any given time during the 5 turn game. Most of the time he had only one ship engaged with the three of mine.

So despite I tabled him rather roughly, My MC80 Home One had six damaged cards when the game ended.

If my opponent had concentrated his deployment and had both of his ISD's closer together in support of each other, their total output would have fore sure taken down Home One with Ackbar by the third or fourth turn.

That could have turned the battle around for my opponents advantage.

And please mind my ships had more upgrades than his, so for me Ackbar is not an Auto win, he helps.

But deployment, who activates first, the initial moves and which sequenze the command dial's commands is set, is just as important if not more, for who will get the upper hand and win the game.

Oh yay, this topic again! No, Ackbar is not overpowered. He's not even that particularly hard to beat. I play Rebels using Garm and Mon Mothma. I will never touch Ackbar because I see him as overpriced. A well flown fleet does more with double arcs. All he does is allow you to fly is an easy, and frankly lazy, way. It also makes you very predicable. I've never have a particular problem against him. Boxing remains the best way to take him on. Set a ship out wide and come at the prow. Most Ackbar fleets have minimal squadron cover, so a healthy bomber wing makes life easy, especially with those Boosted Comms.

If you want an easy counter, take a Fireball or a Rhymerball. You out range the supposed range king by a mile, especially if you throw in Boosted Comms.

No one forces you to fly a conga line with Ackbar, in fact there are time shouldn't do that for the reasons you outlined. Also, double arcing is NOT always better Ackbar'd AF IIB's with gunnery team prove this. I also don't think you can make generalized statements about squadrons. I've got an Ackbar list with health fighter cover. Let try to avoid generalizations, K?

The thread generalizes Ackbar as OP, and you're telling me to avoid generalizations? I never at any point said anything about congolines. I simply said it makes for a predictable flight pattern. The better Ackbar lists do indeed avoid the congolines, but their choice of movement tends to be obvious.

You are indeed correct about gunnery teams, but only if your opponent gives you two ships in the same arc. Thats not to say that's not going to ever happen. It is avoidable, though, in such a way that you could conceivability make the gunnery teams worthless. I've pulled it off a couple times.

As for your healthy squadron wing, good for you (no sarcasm intended). I feel that's needed in the age of the Fireball. You are doing it, however, at the cost of maximizing Ackbar or forgoing significant upgrades. I've watched HERO go from 2 AFIIs and Home One to dropping an AFII for a CR90 to get that fighter cover. I've seen four AFIIs become only three. Something has to give to get that healthy fighter wing. I've seen others drop ECMs, which would give me a heart attack nowadays.

To clarify even further on my previous post; just because it doesn't take immense amount of skill to run Ackbar doesn't mean he's this OP crazy Admiral.

U dont say? Requiring a superior tactic or skill to beat a basic approach is practically one of the indications for something that has been oddly balanced (to avoid the OP term, I really dont see him as OP or broken)..

I don't understand the logical conclusion there. Beginners might not know the ins and outs but they're not stupid. Ackbar lends himself to a very simple strategy; broadside attacks whilst keeping your opponent at a distance. Something a beginner could understand. As an advanced player who understands tactics and strategies and the minute details of the game, the onus is on you to show them how to finesse the game. If you're playing into his hands, fighting in situations that aren't beneficial for you or making good trades, then that's not Ackbar's fault! It just suggests that tactics you thought would work, didn't, or need to be modified.

Also there seems to be some weird cognitive dissonance with how wave 1 panned out. Rebels won Worlds. It's not about the list. Sure, Imperials had the simpler, easier to understand strategy which dominated local metas, however the fact that Rebels won worlds shows that if you think outside the box, even "OPness!" can be defeated (and pretty **** soundly. Pretty sure he went 10 - 0).

The conclusion is quite simple, if you need a complex tactic to beat an easy one then the balance is at odds. That does of cause not mean that there are no ways to beat ackbar. About the onus that is on me or any other "advanced player"sure that might be a point if playing against beginners. But balancing should be valued in matches of more or less equal experienced players. Same goes with the argument of who won worlds, as for me it is my own gaming experience and local meta that matters.

Stating that imps had these awesome killzones in wave 1 and that rebs had to find a way to deal with it but stating the reverse is OP is ridicules.

He's not stating it's the reverse. The opposite, he's stating explicitly that the situation is actually entirely different.

The thing about W1 Empire was that your kill threat zones were very clearly defined. You generally had to avoid engaging at close range and the Imperial that was greatly reduced.

The Akbar problem is that Akbar extends the threat for several Rebel ships to the maximum. So unlike Imperial ships that started middling and got more powerful as they got closer, Akbar ships start very powerful and get yet more powerful the closer the enemy ship approaches.

Further, the Rebel ship design favors the Rebels starting at extreme distance and getting further away. So Rebels are designed to stay at maximum that level throughout the engagement. Imperial ships are punished if they don't close rapidly, but have no mechanism for doing so. Further, they seriously risk overshooting their target if there are any mistakes made while maneuvering. On a Rebel ship, this places the Rebel on the weaker side of the Imperial ship. When Imperials overshoot, they often end up back in the most powerful enemy arc.

People suggest hitting mc80 and af2 ships from the back and front, but their maneuver options and desire for staying at extreme range with plenty of room to maneuver make this tactic unreliable, especially when also trying to keep the forward arc on target. It is certainly next to impossible to do so without exposing ships to side arcs on approach.

Stating that imps had these awesome killzones in wave 1 and that rebs had to find a way to deal with it but stating the reverse is OP is ridicules.

Being a primarily Rebel player in Wave 1, Imperials weren't OP by all means. Like you said, they had awesome (back then) killzones as well as a pretty good ship for flushing out fast rebel ships in the form of the Demolisher. The learning curve for Imperials was easy in the early few games, while the Rebel learning curve was a lot harder early on. But when the Rebel player managed to properly understand the positioning needed against Imperials and understand each of his ship's comfort zones, they would definitely dictate the engagement while Imperial players had to become extremely sneaky to prevent being circled by Rebels. That's what I noticed in my gaming groups at least : If Rebels played their ships in the wrong way, they would get obliterated (even with Assault Frigates) and the game was usually decided in deployment.

Right now, it's pretty much the reverse like you said. Which means that Imperial players need to avoid the killzones through proper flying or playing for the objectives. I think the trick with Ackbar is to just leave him the initiative. Not only you force him to play with his objectives, but you know the general direction of where his fleet is headed based on the first ship he places, and you can also make sure to deny him 1 shot on the second turn by sneakily staying out of range then play catch up. Finally, you can ensure to have your objectives on the board.

That was my point exactly

Oh right, then I guess I read it 180° around

When I have my favorite list archetype this is how I can see the Ackbar builds I make responding to deployment:

This of course is regardless of special scenario considerations or terrain, but I think the only one that would change things is Minefields. Even then the initiative holder (Ackbar) can choose his opponent to go first, thus holding deployment response and the objective in exchange for not shooting first. All the Empire needs to do is assure they knock out a ship with that opening salvo. Easy huh? especially since every rebel ship will be carrying ECM while only one of yours is?

Stating that imps had these awesome killzones in wave 1 and that rebs had to find a way to deal with it but stating the reverse is OP is ridicules.

He's not stating it's the reverse. The opposite, he's stating explicitly that the situation is actually entirely different.

The thing about W1 Empire was that your kill threat zones were very clearly defined. You generally had to avoid engaging at close range and the Imperial that was greatly reduced.

The Akbar problem is that Akbar extends the threat for several Rebel ships to the maximum. So unlike Imperial ships that started middling and got more powerful as they got closer, Akbar ships start very powerful and get yet more powerful the closer the enemy ship approaches.

Further, the Rebel ship design favors the Rebels starting at extreme distance and getting further away. So Rebels are designed to stay at maximum that level throughout the engagement. Imperial ships are punished if they don't close rapidly, but have no mechanism for doing so. Further, they seriously risk overshooting their target if there are any mistakes made while maneuvering. On a Rebel ship, this places the Rebel on the weaker side of the Imperial ship. When Imperials overshoot, they often end up back in the most powerful enemy arc.

People suggest hitting mc80 and af2 ships from the back and front, but their maneuver options and desire for staying at extreme range with plenty of room to maneuver make this tactic unreliable, especially when also trying to keep the forward arc on target. It is certainly next to impossible to do so without exposing ships to side arcs on approach.

First, Rhymer and/or Firesprays can easily and reliably out range Ackbar. Adding Boosted Comms makes it hilarious.

Second, since you seemed determined to not use squadrons, go watch clonetroper5 play against an Ackbar list with his Raider swarm. He does exactly what you say is "unreliable" on a consistent basis. He's using what 4 of what is supposed to be a horrible ship (plus Demolisher) with only two squadrons. Ackbar is just fine. There are plenty of ways to beat him, but this thread seems to want to dismiss them all. If you just want to whine, that's fine. I'll be on my way and continue having zero problems against him. Heck, if you can please convince more of the community to use nothing but Ackbar, it would help me out.

When I have my favorite list archetype this is how I can see the Ackbar builds I make responding to deployment:

This of course is regardless of special scenario considerations or terrain, but I think the only one that would change things is Minefields. Even then the initiative holder (Ackbar) can choose his opponent to go first, thus holding deployment response and the objective in exchange for not shooting first. All the Empire needs to do is assure they knock out a ship with that opening salvo. Easy huh? especially since every rebel ship will be carrying ECM while only one of yours is?

Interesting visuals there ! How about a mix between the 2 deployment options, with the ISD towards the Green area burning at speed 3 and the VSDs more towards the center of the table ? That way, if Ackbar burns forward, he'll take the ISD, and if he swivels towards the center, he'll take the VSDs, with the ISD always catching up.

To clarify even further on my previous post; just because it doesn't take immense amount of skill to run Ackbar doesn't mean he's this OP crazy Admiral.

U dont say? Requiring a superior tactic or skill to beat a basic approach is practically one of the indications for something that has been oddly balanced (to avoid the OP term, I really dont see him as OP or broken)..

I don't understand the logical conclusion there. Beginners might not know the ins and outs but they're not stupid. Ackbar lends himself to a very simple strategy; broadside attacks whilst keeping your opponent at a distance. Something a beginner could understand. As an advanced player who understands tactics and strategies and the minute details of the game, the onus is on you to show them how to finesse the game. If you're playing into his hands, fighting in situations that aren't beneficial for you or making good trades, then that's not Ackbar's fault! It just suggests that tactics you thought would work, didn't, or need to be modified.

Also there seems to be some weird cognitive dissonance with how wave 1 panned out. Rebels won Worlds. It's not about the list. Sure, Imperials had the simpler, easier to understand strategy which dominated local metas, however the fact that Rebels won worlds shows that if you think outside the box, even "OPness!" can be defeated (and pretty **** soundly. Pretty sure he went 10 - 0).

The conclusion is quite simple, if you need a complex tactic to beat an easy one then the balance is at odds. That does of cause not mean that there are no ways to beat ackbar. About the onus that is on me or any other "advanced player"sure that might be a point if playing against beginners. But balancing should be valued in matches of more or less equal experienced players. Same goes with the argument of who won worlds, as for me it is my own gaming experience and local meta that matters.

This may be where our difference of opinion lies. A strategy doesn't need to be complex to be powerful or effective. "complex" strategies as you put it, tend to evolve from considering the variables involved and finding a solution. In any war simulation you're going to need to account for what other people do. Ackbar, while powerful, if you don't consider how I might counter it can easily be defeated. Learning to adapt is a vital skill in Star wars Armada.

I disagree that balancing should come to mean that the win rate is 50% for players of equal experience (or roughly). Different players of equal skill levels will have entirely different types of games. Two beginners will not understand the game as two experienced players would, and so to consider balancing for the two beginners isn't logical, or effective method of balancing.

Starwars Armada is inherently asymmetrical in design (it's not chess). Rebels have different tools at their disposal which lend themselves to different tactics and strategies than Imperials. The main balancing factor is in ensuring that there are still many viable strategies for playing against Ackbar, which there is. He naturally is good against certain strategies, as is Mothma, Screed, Vader, Motti, etc.

In conclusion ackbar is not OP

Oh yay, this topic again! No, Ackbar is not overpowered. He's not even that particularly hard to beat. I play Rebels using Garm and Mon Mothma. I will never touch Ackbar because I see him as overpriced. A well flown fleet does more with double arcs. All he does is allow you to fly is an easy, and frankly lazy, way. It also makes you very predicable. I've never have a particular problem against him. Boxing remains the best way to take him on. Set a ship out wide and come at the prow. Most Ackbar fleets have minimal squadron cover, so a healthy bomber wing makes life easy, especially with those Boosted Comms.

If you want an easy counter, take a Fireball or a Rhymerball. You out range the supposed range king by a mile, especially if you throw in Boosted Comms.

No one forces you to fly a conga line with Ackbar, in fact there are time shouldn't do that for the reasons you outlined. Also, double arcing is NOT always better Ackbar'd AF IIB's with gunnery team prove this. I also don't think you can make generalized statements about squadrons. I've got an Ackbar list with health fighter cover. Let try to avoid generalizations, K?

The thread generalizes Ackbar as OP, and you're telling me to avoid generalizations? I never at any point said anything about congolines. I simply said it makes for a predictable flight pattern. The better Ackbar lists do indeed avoid the congolines, but their choice of movement tends to be obvious.

You are indeed correct about gunnery teams, but only if your opponent gives you two ships in the same arc. Thats not to say that's not going to ever happen. It is avoidable, though, in such a way that you could conceivability make the gunnery teams worthless. I've pulled it off a couple times.

As for your healthy squadron wing, good for you (no sarcasm intended). I feel that's needed in the age of the Fireball. You are doing it, however, at the cost of maximizing Ackbar or forgoing significant upgrades. I've watched HERO go from 2 AFIIs and Home One to dropping an AFII for a CR90 to get that fighter cover. I've seen four AFIIs become only three. Something has to give to get that healthy fighter wing. I've seen others drop ECMs, which would give me a heart attack nowadays.

"Maximizing Ackbar" in list building alone is questionable. You are right, you are going to have to give in one area to gain in another. But look at it this way: on gunnery team'd AFII's you could take Enhanced Armament's. Assuming you have 3 AFII's, that's 30 points. Ackbar gives each double the bonus of EA at less than double the cost. So, looked at this way, the minimum amount of ships that need to be deployed to make Ackbar worthwhile is 2. I think we can assume 3 to 4 will be standard, and at that level he is worth it. In my case, yes I have decided to go to 3 AFIIB's and an enhanced fighter wing This was done, yes at the expense of either an MC80 or another AFII. By not deploying in a conga line, I make it harder for my opponent to stay out of the side arcs of most my ships, and I enhance my chances on getting a return on gunnery team. Gunnery team also gives me opportunities to use by anti-squadron out the side without sacrificing a anti-ship shot out the side.

I agree that ECM is a critical upgrade at this point since, Advanced Projectors is effective a dead upgrade against the ubiquitous XI-7's.

"Maximizing Ackbar" in list building alone is questionable. You are right, you are going to have to give in one area to gain in another. But look at it this way: on gunnery team'd AFII's you could take Enhanced Armament's. Assuming you have 3 AFII's, that's 30 points. Ackbar gives each double the bonus of EA at less than double the cost. So, looked at this way, the minimum amount of ships that need to be deployed to make Ackbar worthwhile is 2. I think we can assume 3 to 4 will be standard, and at that level he is worth it. In my case, yes I have decided to go to 3 AFIIB's and an enhanced fighter wing This was done, yes at the expense of either an MC80 or another AFII. By not deploying in a conga line, I make it harder for my opponent to stay out of the side arcs of most my ships, and I enhance my chances on getting a return on gunnery team. Gunnery team also gives me opportunities to use by anti-squadron out the side without sacrificing a anti-ship shot out the side.

I agree that ECM is a critical upgrade at this point since, Advanced Projectors is effective a dead upgrade against the ubiquitous XI-7's.

Sounds like a good solid list. Let me back track a little bit to say that Ackbar is not bad by any stretch. He's just not overpowered, which is the main point I'm trying to make. I like your list, but it's not any better close in at medium range than it is at long range, which means most Imperial ships can slug it out if they can get in close enough. I'll mention clontroper5 again because his Raider swarm excels at jumping into medium and close range. Can you beat it? I'm sure you could if you play well. Do you have an unfair advantage? Not at all.