Hello guys !

So, this thread isn't to discuss upgrades that have a negative synergy between each other, but rather than to discuss the fact that, at a strategic level, upgrades that synergize with one another can actually hamper your fleet or bring completely nothing.

We all want to min/max, but am I the only one to feel that sometimes with Armada min/maxing opens up missed opportunities and big weaknesses in a fleet ?

Example : We all know how many anti-squadron dice Howlrunner + Flight Controllers + Interceptors or even regular TIEs throw, and I think that this is part of the reason why squadronless fleets were a thing during the time of GenCon.

We all know the usual build : Howlrunner + TIE Fighter + TIE Interceptor x 2 + Flight Controllers + Expanded Hangar Bays.

Compared to running a Vanilla 2 x TIE Fighters + TIE Interceptors, that is a premium of 30 points (6 + 5 + 11 +8) and quite literally overkill, and sometimes useless.

So, what at first glance seems like a decent synergy ends up being extremely specialized and redundant. Let's take a VSD for instance with 3 Squadron value to which is assigned a TIE Fighter wing. You could add flight controllers for 6 points for a cheap extra anti-squadron dice (3 total) or you could upgrade to Howlrunner for 8 points for 2 extra anti-squadron dice. Or you could upgrade to Expanded hangar bays and add another 3 blue dice through another TIE Fighter, for 13 points total and you throw in an extra anti-squadron.

In essence, the 3 options add a similar effect for a similar cost, but each provide their own unique twist :

- Flight Controllers is the cheapest

- Howlrunner adds some defense tokens, especially the strong Scatter, at the expense of less damage

- Expanded Hangar adds 3 more squadron hull and an extra anti-ship dice

My point is, have you felt that sometimes combos seemed a lot redundant, and started to look at them as multiple ways to achieve simiar results but each giving their own specifics ?

I know that the example I took is specifically linked to squadrons, but I'm sure there are other ways. Once again, I'm looking at things at a fleet wide perspective and how it integrates to the unknown of not knowing what your opponent will field, not as a ship (or ship+squadron) build.

One note: for all the talk about XI7s, or various upgrades that stop defense tokens in that vein for the turbolaser and ion cannon slots...

I always just prefer taking the Intel Officer. The reason is that I don't have to predict what defense tokens my opponent will have or use effectively. I can just always use him against someone. The only case where it doesn't work is redundant tokens where I also don't get accuracy.

One note: for all the talk about XI7s, or various upgrades that stop defense tokens in that vein for the turbolaser and ion cannon slots...

I always just prefer taking the Intel Officer. The reason is that I don't have to predict what defense tokens my opponent will have or use effectively. I can just always use him against someone. The only case where it doesn't work is redundant tokens where I also don't get accuracy.

Well the only tokens that tend to be redundant are Redirect and Evade. The only ship with multiple Braces is the Neb-B. So Intel Officer can force your opponent to ditch that Brace, and XI7's essentially mean they can't Redirect. I would argue the two taken together only enhance their lethality. Otherwise you fire once, your opponent Braces (if you caused enough damage) and then discards it, and then redirects the damage elsewhere. You fire again, your opponent Redirects and then discards it, but you still haven't gotten through his shields. With the XI7's on top of Intel Officer, you're punching through shields a lot faster. I would argue that those two synergize very well. After all, almost everything (except the Raider?) has a Redirect, and with how common AFs, MC80s, ISDs and VSDs are, you're going to get plenty of mileage out of that XI7.

... After all, almost everything (except the Raider?) has a Redirect, and with how common ....

2 Ships lack Redirects:

- Nebulon-B

- Imperial Raider

2 Ships lack Braces:

- CR90 Corvette

- MC30c Frigate

7 Ships have Redundant Defense Tokens, one of which has Two:

Imperial (Redirect)

Victory (Redirect)

MC80 (Redirect)

Nebulon-B (Brace)

Raider (Evade)

CR90 (Evade)

MC30 (Redirect AND Evade)

To the OP: this is honestly how I felt about Independence vs upgrading to Scuurgs. For 8 points, that's 4 b-wings you could have turned into H6's. Yes, the AS fire is worse, but you don't have to forget how to shoot on that move and you also get the grit/extra hull (which IMO isn't all that bad!)

Since I'm ignoring the enemy squadrons anyways, I don't really need to not be heavy or use that extra blue die most of the time anyways. If my fighters are engaging other fighters, the points sink means I've already missed my primary objective (i.e. face slapping a ship with the H6's bomber-licious dice)

Ive found Heavy Turbo Laser Turrets to fall into this category.

I would often try to combo it in such a way for the defender not to use brace but only redirect instead which makes it easier for a squadron swarm to finish off the ship later. However what ive always found is i'll roll an accuracy and be like well...i guess i'll accuracy brace making my HTTs pointless wishing I had xi7s instead. Or other instances where most the time the ship im hitting either only use brace anyway or the damage is so small they can combo redirect and evade for the same effect.

Its interesting, I agree. Many of the attack focused upgrades actually conflict with each other.

I guess thats why Xi7s and Intel officer are becoming so predictable.

Ive found Heavy Turbo Laser Turrets to fall into this category.

I would often try to combo it in such a way for the defender not to use brace but only redirect instead which makes it easier for a squadron swarm to finish off the ship later. However what ive always found is i'll roll an accuracy and be like well...i guess i'll accuracy brace making my HTTs pointless wishing I had xi7s instead. Or other instances where most the time the ship im hitting either only use brace anyway or the damage is so small they can combo redirect and evade for the same effect.

I made a Ackbar list with 3x AF's , where two of them has XI7 +intel and one has HTT. all has gunnery teams.

HTT has the tendency to force your opponent to use Brace by itself, or another Defence token combo without Brace.

This helps to force him to exhaust/spend specific defence tokens, so they in a follow up attack wont be available to combo with another defence token.

I.e:

In a situation where an opponent gets four hits on a hull zone with zero shields and has one shield left in the next hull zone, and he needs to remove three hits in order to survive.

The XI7 will fall short, as a Brace and Redirect can remove three hits.

While against HTT, Brace and Redirect can only remove two hits.

So while the XI7 is good in many situations, the HTT do also shine when you want to mitigate a Brace combo with other Defence tokens.

Like the Brace, Evade, Redirect. Combo.

Ive found Heavy Turbo Laser Turrets to fall into this category.

I would often try to combo it in such a way for the defender not to use brace but only redirect instead which makes it easier for a squadron swarm to finish off the ship later. However what ive always found is i'll roll an accuracy and be like well...i guess i'll accuracy brace making my HTTs pointless wishing I had xi7s instead. Or other instances where most the time the ship im hitting either only use brace anyway or the damage is so small they can combo redirect and evade for the same effect.

This. HTT's make you not want accuracies... I suppose they pair well with sw-7's? (Sort of?).

More than that, in the odd chance that someone decides to take advanced projectors, xi7's are the hard counter. There is no such defense upgrade vs HTT's that make this a similarly viable option.

Trying to take down AP MC30's with HTT's- an exercise in frustration.