To me the concept of MOV overall should encourage most players to play conservatively. Meaning, take out your opponents easiest and most vulnerable ships. Conserve points by not putting ships in positions which are dicey. Who can do the most while losing the least. I've had much better success simply focusing on counting pts and winning rather than trying to put myself in a position to annihilate my foe.

Indeed, but in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

In other words, in a meta where everyone plays conservatively for the 6-4s and 7-3s the (successful) risk taker that can score a couple of 8-2s or the odd 9-1 is in fantastic position.

In summation, this adds another layer of strategy over and above the game itself.

To me the concept of MOV overall should encourage most players to play conservatively. Meaning, take out your opponents easiest and most vulnerable ships. Conserve points by not putting ships in positions which are dicey. Who can do the most while losing the least. I've had much better success simply focusing on counting pts and winning rather than trying to put myself in a position to annihilate my foe.

Indeed, but in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

In other words, in a meta where everyone plays conservatively for the 6-4s and 7-3s the (successful) risk taker that can score a couple of 8-2s or the odd 9-1 is in fantastic position.

In summation, this adds another layer of strategy over and above the game itself.

Well put. I do find often though that risk taking and or avarice can easily become emotional and that when it turns out to be a 2-8 instead of an 8-2 you must follow with even more risk to recover and be competitive. I often see that those same people often fail to properly attribute a loss to a calculated risk and internalize that concept. This frequently leads to poor evaluation of results. Expecting to win big and then losing big can carry ongoing damage to a gamers psyche.

To me the concept of MOV overall should encourage most players to play conservatively. Meaning, take out your opponents easiest and most vulnerable ships. Conserve points by not putting ships in positions which are dicey. Who can do the most while losing the least. I've had much better success simply focusing on counting pts and winning rather than trying to put myself in a position to annihilate my foe.

Indeed, but in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

In other words, in a meta where everyone plays conservatively for the 6-4s and 7-3s the (successful) risk taker that can score a couple of 8-2s or the odd 9-1 is in fantastic position.

In summation, this adds another layer of strategy over and above the game itself.

But then someone metas the meta that was meta'd by metae and stuff just got real.

I play high risk.

My last tournament was 2x ISD 2's, using Precision Strike, Fire Lanes, and Intel Sweep. These were used to make up for any point loss I may take.

I play high risk.

My last tournament was 2x ISD 2's, using Precision Strike, Fire Lanes, and Intel Sweep. These were used to make up for any point loss I may take.

Interesting. Your style may be high risk but your list screams point fortressing which is a clear low risk (harder to kill) build tactic.

I play high risk.

My last tournament was 2x ISD 2's, using Precision Strike, Fire Lanes, and Intel Sweep. These were used to make up for any point loss I may take.

Interesting. Your style may be high risk but your list screams point fortressing which is a clear low risk (harder to kill) build tactic.

No it's high risk, because losing any 1 ship is devastating to his MOV and he doesn't have any low-cost "throw away" ships to defocus fire.

I bought a third ISD recently to try an insane "Running of the bulls" list with 3 ISDs and Ozzel. Idea is to creep-and-pounce, cinder some ships then run away. LOL can't wait to try it.

I bought a third ISD recently to try an insane "Running of the bulls" list with 3 ISDs and Ozzel. Idea is to creep-and-pounce, cinder some ships then run away. LOL can't wait to try it.

I play high risk.

My last tournament was 2x ISD 2's, using Precision Strike, Fire Lanes, and Intel Sweep. These were used to make up for any point loss I may take.

Interesting. Your style may be high risk but your list screams point fortressing which is a clear low risk (harder to kill) build tactic.

No it's high risk, because losing any 1 ship is devastating to his MOV and he doesn't have any low-cost "throw away" ships to defocus fire.

3xISD with Ozzel might be the one situation where I would advocate one of them being an ISD-1. Then you should easily fit gun teams on the two ISD-2 and you could slap Relentless on the ISD-1, and still have points left over.

Or run it with Motti (398 all in) and have 3 14 hull ISDs.

3xisd with motti and five ties

Fly in

Kill whatever on that pass

Fly out

No losses

Win match

Repeat

3xisd with motti and five ties

Fly in

Kill whatever on that pass

Fly out

No losses

Win match

Repeat

Nope. Doesn't work like that.

Hahah...

Actually it does very much so

What? No it doesn't. This is presuming the enemy fleet is unable or the commander incapable of responding. I agree ISDs are hard nuts to crack with Motti but it is EXACTLY that kind of thinking and arrogance that has continued to be the bane of so many Imperial players in wave 2.

Kill one tie, evade isds, claim victory

Hahah...

Actually it does very much so

While the list is immense once you lose 1 of those ships, you will lose a TON of firepower.

Kill one tie, evade isds, claim victory

Hehe....

One tie is 8 points. A trip isd pass kills way more than 8 points.

And one does not simply "avoid" 3 speed three isds.... Just doesn't happen. Trust me.

It's not arrogance at all. My observations with a dozen games with this list (against varied humans and lists) is that it's a fairly straight forward job to 1) target a ship that gives you a reasonable mov, 2) charge at max speed with all three (including repetitive ramming), 3) kill it, 4) max speed and evasion from damage the rest of the turns

It will give you a win....and depending on your choice of target and tie loss, anywhere from a 6-9 Vic points.

In a tournament setting, winning a match is critical. Even in the 6-8 range. Then, if you face your equal in the last round...then you have to do the math to see what mov you need to win and make your target priority around that.

#2 gets me the most. Charging at speed 3 just does not work as well as it sounds. Playing against more maneuverable lists with small ships that can shrug off your red dice just sounds like a bad day. . .

3xisd with motti and five ties.....

The flaw in this otherwise cunning plan is that from the sides and rear you can get outgunned by a Corvette/Raider and you otherwise don't run all that fast in comparison.

As such the heal nipping "little dogs" will hurt I expect.

Be funny if someone takes 8 Corvettes and you pair up.

"When you have a Junkyard Dog Snapping at your Heels, the best thing to do is turn around and kick it in the Chops..."

- Admiral Geoffrey Tolwyn.

3xisd with motti and five ties

Fly in

Kill whatever on that pass

Fly out

No losses

Win match

Repeat

B-wings say hello.

I play high risk.

My last tournament was 2x ISD 2's, using Precision Strike, Fire Lanes, and Intel Sweep. These were used to make up for any point loss I may take.

Interesting. Your style may be high risk but your list screams point fortressing which is a clear low risk (harder to kill) build tactic.

No it's high risk, because losing any 1 ship is devastating to his MOV and he doesn't have any low-cost "throw away" ships to defocus fire.

Devastating is an understatement. I am also giving activations away with the hope that my Gunnery Teams will make up the difference along with my 5 squadron compliment of Dengar, Mithel, TIE Advanced, Firespray and Rhymer (I am always on the fence of removing Rhymer). The list only really works because of XI7 Turbolasers and Darth Vader. The cheaper ISD is 158 on its own.

How often do you lose an ISD?

3xisd with motti and five ties.....

The flaw in this otherwise cunning plan is that from the sides and rear you can get outgunned by a Corvette/Raider and you otherwise don't run all that fast in comparison.

As such the heal nipping "little dogs" will hurt I expect.

Be funny if someone takes 8 Corvettes and you pair up.

I am sorry but the first line made me laugh so hard hahaha

I have flown the 3 x ISD list and it is not a list that you do a drive by and win with. In most cases you will lose, even with Motti, all you have for defense is hull and shields, you have no way to modify your attacks or you opponents defense and most ships will easily flank you.

Rogue Squadrons and bombers will tear you apart and you cannot turn around and kick the much more agile dogs nipping your heals.

Concept = great

Execution = poor