The generic PS1/PS3 TIE/FOs are NOT cost effective enough to warrant their dial and actions. This is without even considering the generic-crushing effect that TLT has had on the meta.

Omega Leader is another story. Comm Relay + Juke is close to auto-include. Juke is really really good.

In my experience, and maybe I haven't played strong TLT players, the 16 point Zeta squadron pilots are great against common (PS2) TLT platforms. They have a high enough HP and AGI combination that TLTs don't melt through them, and their speed, PS, and Barrel Roll makes avoiding shots in the Range 1 hole a pretty reasonable thing to do. I know their jousting value isn't strong, but their matchups are strong. I've regularly had Zetas outfight PS2 B-wings and Y-wings that cost 150% of their points. Against higher PS ships, you can go for a block and take a Target Lock for a later turn, making a turn that would have zero offense into a turn that supports your offense later. Combined with the 2-speed S-loops, it makes them very good at close-quarters fights. Just my experiences, though. How bad are the efficiency numbers? I thought from a Nova episode a few months ago you said they were not great, but not too bad. Has something changed in your calculations?

The generic PS1/PS3 TIE/FOs are NOT cost effective enough to warrant their dial and actions. This is without even considering the generic-crushing effect that TLT has had on the meta.

I've found the S-loop to be quite good on the generics, yet not as powerful on the higher PS ships. I find when doing a fly by against enemy ships, the low PS Tie Fighters (regular) either have to try to bump, K-turn, or just turn out of the way. I find the FO's with the S-loop have an option that lets them still keep people in arc and set them up for next turn. I was quite surprised by it, but find that move good.

The generic PS1/PS3 TIE/FOs are NOT cost effective enough to warrant their dial and actions. This is without even considering the generic-crushing effect that TLT has had on the meta.

I've found the S-loop to be quite good on the generics, yet not as powerful on the higher PS ships. I find when doing a fly by against enemy ships, the low PS Tie Fighters (regular) either have to try to bump, K-turn, or just turn out of the way. I find the FO's with the S-loop have an option that lets them still keep people in arc and set them up for next turn. I was quite surprised by it, but find that move good.

For the same reason I love the PS 1 Starvipers, I love the PS1 FOs. Those 2 S-Loops are murder. Your target flies past you and you generally get a juicy R1 shot with no return fire. Their dial is full of greens, so the stress is no problem. Unlike the Starvipers 3 attack, the FOs are only rolling 2 reds naturally. So how do you get the most out of them?

Cpt. Oicunn+Intimidation+Fleet Officer+Dauntless

3x Epsilon+Weapons Guidance

This list is a great one to practice low PS fighter skills with. Oicunn creates a real threat that forces your opponent to move where you want them to (or get run over... so win/win). Fleet Office gives two of your FOs a Focus action (great for giving an action after they performed a S-loop). Intimidation and Weapons Guidance helps make very red die count for the fleet.

Best list ever? No. It does show off the power of the FOs when paired with a large ship though.

The generic PS1/PS3 TIE/FOs are NOT cost effective enough to warrant their dial and actions. This is without even considering the generic-crushing effect that TLT has had on the meta.

Omega Leader is another story. Comm Relay + Juke is close to auto-include. Juke is really really good.

In my experience, and maybe I haven't played strong TLT players, the 16 point Zeta squadron pilots are great against common (PS2) TLT platforms. They have a high enough HP and AGI combination that TLTs don't melt through them, and their speed, PS, and Barrel Roll makes avoiding shots in the Range 1 hole a pretty reasonable thing to do. I know their jousting value isn't strong, but their matchups are strong. I've regularly had Zetas outfight PS2 B-wings and Y-wings that cost 150% of their points. Against higher PS ships, you can go for a block and take a Target Lock for a later turn, making a turn that would have zero offense into a turn that supports your offense later. Combined with the 2-speed S-loops, it makes them very good at close-quarters fights. Just my experiences, though. How bad are the efficiency numbers? I thought from a Nova episode a few months ago you said they were not great, but not too bad. Has something changed in your calculations?

The PS3's are still a tough sell. Using legacy meta assumptions (i.e. no TLT attacks affecting ship durability), some absolute efficiencies:

• PS1 TIE/FO: 91.9%
• PS3 TIE/FO: 86.1%
• PS2 Y-wing + TLT: 85.0%

The efficiency isn't outright horrible like some other ships (pre-fix TIE Advanced, E-wing, StarViper, etc etc), but it's also not good enough to be considered in any tier 1 list. I expect the 3 AGI durability to go down slightly once I pull in TLT into the meta assumptions, which will better reflect the ship's woes.

If I have the choice between a PS2 TLT turret and a PS3 only with arc, both with about the same cost efficiency, I think you have to take the TLT every time.

Not against other TLTs

If I have the choice between a PS2 TLT turret and a PS3 only with arc, both with about the same cost efficiency, I think you have to take the TLT every time.

I agree with this in a vacuum, but that's not really happening with the TIE/fo. Obviously, TLTs aren't an option for Imperial squads, but more importantly a TLT Y-wing or HWK and a TIE Fighter are about as far apart in how their used as any two ships in the game. If you want, "steady, consistent, long-range damage dealer" in an Imperial squad, you don't take a TIE/fo, and if you want a "cheap, fast, blocker and close-range fighter" you don't take a TLT-Y-wing.

I guess I like the FOs (PS3 especially), because they're cheap enough to be expendable and/or used as blockers, punchy enough that ignoring them will cause you problems, and tough enough that they take a bit of effort to take off the board, and there's nothing else in the Imperial arsenal that really can be described that way.

The TIE/fo has a very obvious place, beyond just aces. It should be noted that X-wing is not just a game of tournaments and min-max builds. Visually and thematically, generic /fo fighters make excellent support for their aces, and by sharing a maneuver dial, they can better keep with an /fo leader for purposes of concentrated fire.

As a non-tourney player, I like to build reasonably effective but thematic lists. With a lack of Ep. VII stuff in general, there's only so much I can do for First Order vs. Resistance battles, partly assuming older models are still in service, but it still satisfies my narrative sensibilities better to have TIE/fos on the table to fight T-70s.

Really guys?

Really? We're gonna settle for Foo Fighter?

I'm so disgusted. For shame.

:walksout:

:slamsdoor:

:comesback:

Foo Shame!

:slamsdooragain:

Annoyed by it being a seperate ship? Okay I will bite, why? Should they just title the new t-70 and Fo fighters?

Yes.

Annoyed by it being a seperate ship? Okay I will bite, why? Should they just title the new t-70 and Fo fighters?

Yes.

The downside of this would be that it limits the ability of future t-65 and t-70 updates. At least with the T-70, it looks different enough that I'm fine with a new model (see also the Hornet to Super Hornet, completely different planes that were named and look somewhat similar). The TIE FO looks very similar, but performs differently enough that I would disagree, but certainly can see the annoyance.

The downside of this would be that it limits the ability of future t-65 and t-70 updates. At least with the T-70, it looks different enough that I'm fine with a new model (see also the Hornet to Super Hornet, completely different planes that were named and look somewhat similar). The TIE FO looks very similar, but performs differently enough that I would disagree, but certainly can see the annoyance.

I don't mind them being packaged with new models. I just mind them being separate ships in gameplay that makes them completely INcompatible with the old models and pilots.

I love the FO-FO's... cause they are Awesome TIE Fighters.

Using legacy meta assumptions (i.e. no TLT attacks affecting ship durability), some absolute efficiencies:

• PS1 TIE/FO: 91.9%
• PS3 TIE/FO: 86.1%
• PS2 Y-wing + TLT: 85.0%

I think a lot of this may be an artifact of narrowing design space and relatively little resolution in the volume knobs FFG can turn.

If you're presented with the design challenge of a ship that explicitly has the same role as the existing TIE fighter, but you don't want to simply reproduce the TIE fighter game element, what do you do? Throwing a shield on it isn't a bad answer, and maybe you take the opportunity to change the dial around and add an S-loop--a new tool the designers of Wave 1 didn't have. Add a new upgrade that's exclusive to the next-generation Force Awakens fighters, and you've got the TIE/fo in a nutshell.

And considered in the absence of other factors, another hit point on a 3 Agility ship probably is worth about 3 points. But if that were really true, we'd see Academy Pilot + Hull Upgrade all over the place, and we don't.

So the TIE/fo's problem is that it shows something like the minimum distinguishable distance from the TIE/ln: they turned a couple of knobs up by the smallest noticeable increment. But if the TIE/fo had come out at 14 points, for an extra shield and some improvements to the dial relative to the TIE/ln, it probably would have been too cheap. So the generic TIE/fo is left in awkward in-between stage, no longer cheap enough to qualify as cheap bulk but not quite good enough to justify its increased cost.

I'm just annoyed that they didn't come up with callsigns for the named pilots. I'd feel a lot better about flying a pilot around with an actual name rather than things like "Omega Leader" or "Omega Ace". Imagine if they had called Mauler Mithel, Backstabber, and Dark Curse Black 2,3, and 4.

I realize the movie wasn't even out yet when they were releasing these and nothing in the new canon has named any of the First Order pilots but I feel like FFG could have just made up some callsigns for them.

I have the same problem with the T-70's only its made even worse by the fact that there were ample named pilots to draw from and just didn't use them.

Using legacy meta assumptions (i.e. no TLT attacks affecting ship durability), some absolute efficiencies:

• PS1 TIE/FO: 91.9%
• PS3 TIE/FO: 86.1%
• PS2 Y-wing + TLT: 85.0%

I think a lot of this may be an artifact of narrowing design space and relatively little resolution in the volume knobs FFG can turn.

If you're presented with the design challenge of a ship that explicitly has the same role as the existing TIE fighter, but you don't want to simply reproduce the TIE fighter game element, what do you do? Throwing a shield on it isn't a bad answer, and maybe you take the opportunity to change the dial around and add an S-loop--a new tool the designers of Wave 1 didn't have. Add a new upgrade that's exclusive to the next-generation Force Awakens fighters, and you've got the TIE/fo in a nutshell.

And considered in the absence of other factors, another hit point on a 3 Agility ship probably is worth about 3 points. But if that were really true, we'd see Academy Pilot + Hull Upgrade all over the place, and we don't.

So the TIE/fo's problem is that it shows something like the minimum distinguishable distance from the TIE/ln: they turned a couple of knobs up by the smallest noticeable increment. But if the TIE/fo had come out at 14 points, for an extra shield and some improvements to the dial relative to the TIE/ln, it probably would have been too cheap. So the generic TIE/fo is left in awkward in-between stage, no longer cheap enough to qualify as cheap bulk but not quite good enough to justify its increased cost.

Minor quibble that the value of an extra hull on any ship (regardless of AGI) is extremely defendant on many factors other just its AGI, but otherwise that's all pretty spot on.

If it were 14.5 points then it would be OK compared to a TIE Fighter. Neither can hit the broad side of a high-AGI barn, but at least they would be at parity with each other. At 14.5 points you could run a 7-TIE Howlrunner swarm with 2 Academies and 4 /FOs, but you can already run Howl/Crackshot + 3 Academies + 3 FOs, and that's not exactly tearing up the meta. It has too many weaknesses.

Unfortunately TLT exists at 6 points and so has made pretty much all generics close to extinct anyway, so even at 14.5 it would be a mute point.

So then isn't the question: "Can I leverage the FOs superior dial to gain more than 1pts advantage".

I'm betting many wave 2 interceptor pilots can.

But what is the ship doing that the Academy tie CAN'T?

It CAN TL. If we ever get a pilot that essentially allows all other Ties to take a LONG RANGE SENSORS "action", both the TAP and the FO are suddenly much better off. How about things that allow you to spend your TL for other things? Then the FO clearly excels where the basic doesn't. Oh look, something new to go in the Tech slot that only they have! Excellent use!

Would that make it worth that extra half to a full point? It's **** close as it is. I don't think it takes too much finessing or much of a boost via the Tech slot before it starts to look a little more attractive.

And what are the implications of the TLT costing 7 instead of 6? Would that have been too much? Feels like it would still see play (since quad TLT isn't taking completely over) but force a decision. Can't remember if you ran those #s MJ but thought you at least mentioned it before.

I'm just annoyed that they didn't come up with callsigns for the named pilots. I'd feel a lot better about flying a pilot around with an actual name rather than things like "Omega Leader" or "Omega Ace". Imagine if they had called Mauler Mithel, Backstabber, and Dark Curse Black 2,3, and 4.

I realize the movie wasn't even out yet when they were releasing these and nothing in the new canon has named any of the First Order pilots but I feel like FFG could have just made up some callsigns for them.

I have the same problem with the T-70's only its made even worse by the fact that there were ample named pilots to draw from and just didn't use them.

You realize that they had YEARS to create names for those various Tie Fighter pilots and such, right? I mean, I'm not even sure how many years their names came. It might even be after RotJ.

I don't understand why people think they gotta be blockers or swarmers.

The First Order sees every unit as a viable military asset that is not just so easily replaceable. Fly the TIE/FOs like TIEs you can easily lose, and you're going to lose them.

Fly them like knife-fighters that are ready to mess up everybody's day.

I kind of dismissed the FO to begin with, the extra shield didn't seem like it would make up for loosing a body out of my swarm, but I wanted to give them a fair shake so I recently swapped out my 6 Academy TIEs for 5 FO-TIEs (had to drop the Engine upgrade on the shuttle too) and I have been simply AMAZED at how much more durable they are. I never would have expected that 1 shield to make so much of a difference but it sure seems to. Despite having 1 fewer ships I can generally win with more ships left on the table than I did with academies.

I am now anxious to try some of the FO named pilots.

Combination of dial (which is sloop + extra green over normal ties) + shield makes them last FAR longer than their statline would suggest

I kind of dismissed the FO to begin with, the extra shield didn't seem like it would make up for loosing a body out of my swarm, but I wanted to give them a fair shake so I recently swapped out my 6 Academy TIEs for 5 FO-TIEs (had to drop the Engine upgrade on the shuttle too) and I have been simply AMAZED at how much more durable they are. I never would have expected that 1 shield to make so much of a difference but it sure seems to. Despite having 1 fewer ships I can generally win with more ships left on the table than I did with academies.

I am now anxious to try some of the FO named pilots.

Same situation for me...and a number of people on these forums. I didn't think much about them until I actually tried them. They don't seem like much on paper, but something just works for them.

Combination of dial (which is sloop + extra green over normal ties) + shield makes them last FAR longer than their statline would suggest

I think the other major impact of the dial is that you tend to keep guns on target a lot more often, so even if you had the same durability is a TIE/ln, you're getting more shots over the course of a turn.

I would rate the ps1 FO generic as pretty close with the Prototype pilot- a decent generic, but not something amazing to build around.

I think Vessery's probably going to like Sienar Test Pilots with the title more as his buddies. Rare to see such good action economy on the generic ships.

And considered in the absence of other factors, another hit point on a 3 Agility ship probably is worth about 3 points. But if that were really true, we'd see Academy Pilot + Hull Upgrade all over the place, and we don't.

Minor quibble that the value of an extra hull on any ship (regardless of AGI) is extremely defendant on many factors other just its AGI, but otherwise that's all pretty spot on.

Oh, for sure. But if someone asked me in the abstract what another hit point should cost, I'd ask what the ship's Agility was. And then I'd say "Well, it depends on a lot of other factors. What's the ship's base cost? What kind of mitigation tech does it have access to? What are its available actions? Firing arc or turret? How much offense can it bring? But, uh, spitballing... on 3 Agility, I'd guess probably about 3 points."

Unfortunately TLT exists at 6 points and so has made pretty much all generics close to extinct anyway, so even at 14.5 it would be a mute point.

And what are the implications of the TLT costing 7 instead of 6? Would that have been too much? Feels like it would still see play (since quad TLT isn't taking completely over) but force a decision. Can't remember if you ran those #s MJ but thought you at least mentioned it before.

I think, in retrospect, the TLT is defined by its effect rather than by its price, if that makes sense. PTL worked this way, as well: in Wave 1, the only way to break out of the action economy was Squad Leader, and that "extra" action had to come from someone. When we got PTL, they essentially defined the value of an extra action with a moderate drawback at 3 points.

And similarly, I don't think TLT is too cheap. I think the game didn't have an offensive-oriented turret upgrade, and the price of getting one turns out to be 6 points. That is, now that we've seen it in the wild for a relatively long time, its cost doesn't appear to be the major constraint: people aren't really trying to cram 4 of them into a list, so increasing its cost to 7 or even 8 wouldn't have made a big difference.

I don't mean that cost isn't a relevant factor. But I don't see many people building lists and thinking "can I afford to squeeze a TLT in here?" There's really no other upgrade that does what TLT does, so instead we see things like "I think I'm going to run a pair of TLT Y-wings. What else fits in this list?" So I don't think the right question is whether the TLT should have cost 5 or 6 or 7, I think it's how the game adapts to the effect of TLT going forward.

Oh look, something new to go in the Tech slot that only they have! Excellent use!

Would that make it worth that extra half to a full point? It's **** close as it is. I don't think it takes too much finessing or much of a boost via the Tech slot before it starts to look a little more attractive.

I think a slight buff via the tech slot would be a good way to implement a subtle fix going forward.