Is everyone just flying one MC-80 and no other ships? I flew a double MC-80 and AFII list and rolled in a tournament. Not losing a ship and scoring 28/30 points and no not every game was perfectly set up for me. Plus you don't want an MC-80 to be fast, it's not an ISD where you want to get in and get close, you want to stay away. By turn three you should have stripped shields and possibly landed at least one hit. MC-80's have a purpose in the game just like every other ship. It is meant to hit hard, to put it in a list that doesn't have a build around it's strengths it will struggle just as an ISD would in a list that doesn't help it's strengths.

An MC-80 with XI-7's will put a hurting on just about anything other than maybe a Raider and Neb, but as long as you don't roll awful, Raiders should be popped in one shot assuming you get A focus to target the brace.

Finally, if you bring Ackbar and pair the MC-80 with an AF or another MC-80 you don't need a concentrate fire every time, which means you can spam engineering and drop a 6 engineering value on one turn and completely change the game.

Say what you will, but the MC-80 is by far not Terribad. It has by far outplayed my ISD's and outlasted them in multiple games.

My version, entirely based on limited experience.

Place satellite as second player.

By third turn land mc80 on satellite.

Ram whoever thought it was a good idea to block you.

Prevent them shooting any of your other ship whilst mc80 with raymus/taintive spams engineering commands.

Its a suprisingly effective blocker. Sure there is an american football analogy in here somewhere.

Nebulons and corvettes are the rebels best gunners, they are just a bit fragile.

The Firepower is there, just you are expected to be double arcing as much as possible with Rebels, other than the Gladiator most Imp ship's promote one strong arc (even better for them they - Namely the VSD/ISD get to have gunnery teams.) And the Glad has really good arc's and Demolisher lets you double arc pretty easily as well.

The way I see it, you either use this ship as a Tank and double arc things or as a Carrier if you wish to have something more beefy than a Whale. Being one of the few Rebels in my area I still find MC80 puts the fear in to Imp's.

As a Carrier it wants to have Adar Talon on board, and for squadrons you almost always want Luke, Keyan and a HWK. Potentially pair with Yavaris for a moving triple tapping Luke or Keyan.

I'm really thankful for the OP for bringing up the discussion as this is a question I have myself.

One thing I do appreciate the mc80 (other than titles)- it's a whole lot easier to stick something in that broadside than it is to get a ship in the front arc of an ISD. If I think about the number of times I get to fire the broadside on an '80 vs how many times I can shoot my front arc at all on an impstar (barring the odd player who just flies straight into the teeth) I think it comes out much closer at least in a direct comparison of the large based ships.

However, in terms of large vs medium vs small, I do think smalls and mediums just have their inherent advantages for the experienced player in terms of activation, deployment, and multiple-attack efficiency that really discourage the high-point value ships from seeing competitive use (outside of a "keep away" list).

I'm going to chime in here with something I think we're all assuming but needs to be put on the table in so many words: the MC80 is a single purpose ship in combat. I play Imperial mostly, and Rebel against a single opponent I'm trying to get in the game (she wants me handicapped until she wins), and I will back up the previous comments: when I see an 80 on the field, I do have to do a double take and usually reassess my combat plans to deal with it, regardless of how many Imperials or the bulk of Rhymerball I have on the field. I've seen moderate success (i.e. I've been beaten with soundly) with Ackbar (no Rieekan or Garm in my meta so I won't comment on them) and Dodonna. (Mothma is obviously of little help.) The issue, as noted above, is that it can't be compared to either the Imperial or the Assault Frigate safely I think. Both ships have inherent flexibility within a single build; both can be kitted as carriers and be lethal direct combatants in the same match, relying on a combination of stats and tactics. By contrast, for the MC80, I've both had and seen the best results with optimized ships doing exactly one thing. My first game with the 80 I tried to make Independence both a carrier and a brawler and ended up wasting both attempts to do things, whereas that's a comfortable niche for an I-1 (battleship-carrier). Independence and B-wings is nasty and eats smaller ships for lunch, but relies on Indy being able to spam Squadron Command, so you can't plan to have her brawl as more than supporting ship. Take the Command Cruiser and Boosted Comms for example. Home One and Defiance are both flagship cards, by which I mean you bring that 80 and a bunch of smaller ships to fill in activations around it and the 80 is built to weather the fire that slips through her screen. Without Gunnery Teams I don't think taking Ackbar specifically for an 80 is a good idea, but if the ship is the center of a Corvette swarm that does make good use of him, it can be quite useful. Don't bother trying to skate around a battle, get in the middle where your durability lets you do what an Assault Frigate shouldn't. When you build an 80, you have to understand how to slot it in its niche in the fleet and optimize it ruthlessly for that and NOTHING ELSE. Against some lists an 80 just won't cut it, but I have seen (and flown) successful 80 engagements where it crossed an Imperial's T (including against I-1s at point blank range) and was the ship that flew away. In my mind it typifies the Rebel-Imperial dynamic of complex ship strategy and synergy vs complex fighter strategy and synergy. I think as the game progresses, both at the tournament level and with new Waves, the 80 won't be relegated to the scrap heap but will continue to evolve as a Rebel tank and brawler or long range carrier of choice. We shall see who is borne out by events though.

However, in terms of large vs medium vs small, I do think smalls and mediums just have their inherent advantages for the experienced player in terms of activation, deployment, and multiple-attack efficiency that really discourage the high-point value ships from seeing competitive use (outside of a "keep away" list).

This, for me, is the key point I keep circling around trying to get the MC80 to work.

For anyone saying "double arc things" (again, AF2A is more effective on a point for point basis also, without even discussing the truly superior rebel double-arc gunship which is the MC30), the counter argument is how? It's not big ships that worry me with the MC80. It's how you stop Demolisher (or just a normal glad with engine techs) or an MC30 from rolling up into your front arc where it double arcs you and you don't double arc it back.

It's smaller, faster, and the other player should have activation advantage if they aren't running a similarly huge ship. In terms of equal skill, I've never had problems locking down the MC80 with smaller, faster brawlers, and mine is often locked down by players I can outmaneuver with my faster ships because it simply doesn't have options. A CR90 rolling into the front arc at speed 4 is not really "counterable", as even with engine techs, the MC80 has to move in broad, predictable arcs and you know where it will be several turns before it gets there if you are familiar with how ships can maneuver.

This is back to my core point where I think maneuver is the real issue. Can you build a fleet that forces that kind of ship out of your front arc? As those guys will 100% win the punching match vs. the MC80 given their superior maneuverability in the hands of equally skilled players, because you'd have to be a fool to come at them from the side when you can dictate the terms of the engagement.

And for those having success with the MC80: how often do you play 5+ ship lists where the opponent knows to ram you from the front with a small ship? That (e.g. a demolisher rush list like McCann or Clontroper play) is really the unsolvable problem I have run into with the MC80, followed by similarly obnoxious rebel lists with Mon Mothma or Rieekan.

Edit: Also, Snipafist, in my defense, I have been a proponent of the Raider since it was released because the cheapest method to get additional activations in any fleet is always valuable. If anything dims my love of the raider, it will be flotillas allowing this to happen even more cheaply.

I've found Garm, MC80 with engine techs, is not so bad.

Those tokes you get in turn 1 and 5, helps keeping the speed up. And when you start out with a Navigate on the first command dial, means you have three turns of speed 3, with a potential 90 degree turns, in each move.

One thing I've noticed, is that people flying ISD's, some times have to make one Navigate command in one turn to accelerate from speed 2 to speed 3, and in the following turn, they regret having speed 3, as they don't have a navigate command to slow down again.

So from a "Certain point of view" Engine techs allows one to slow back down to speed 2 for free, with out the need for a navigate command dial or token.

However, in terms of large vs medium vs small, I do think smalls and mediums just have their inherent advantages for the experienced player in terms of activation, deployment, and multiple-attack efficiency that really discourage the high-point value ships from seeing competitive use (outside of a "keep away" list).

This, for me, is the key point I keep circling around trying to get the MC80 to work.

For anyone saying "double arc things" (again, AF2A is more effective on a point for point basis also, without even discussing the truly superior rebel double-arc gunship which is the MC30), the counter argument is how? It's not big ships that worry me with the MC80. It's how you stop Demolisher (or just a normal glad with engine techs) or an MC30 from rolling up into your front arc where it double arcs you and you don't double arc it back.

It's smaller, faster, and the other player should have activation advantage if they aren't running a similarly huge ship. In terms of equal skill, I've never had problems locking down the MC80 with smaller, faster brawlers, and mine is often locked down by players I can outmaneuver with my faster ships because it simply doesn't have options. A CR90 rolling into the front arc at speed 4 is not really "counterable", as even with engine techs, the MC80 has to move in broad, predictable arcs and you know where it will be several turns before it gets there if you are familiar with how ships can maneuver.

This is back to my core point where I think maneuver is the real issue. Can you build a fleet that forces that kind of ship out of your front arc? As those guys will 100% win the punching match vs. the MC80 given their superior maneuverability in the hands of equally skilled players, because you'd have to be a fool to come at them from the side when you can dictate the terms of the engagement.

And for those having success with the MC80: how often do you play 5+ ship lists where the opponent knows to ram you from the front with a small ship? That (e.g. a demolisher rush list like McCann or Clontroper play) is really the unsolvable problem I have run into with the MC80, followed by similarly obnoxious rebel lists with Mon Mothma or Rieekan.

It sounds like your issues focus on beating a certain kind of list, a list I not-so-fondly refer to as Target Saturation, as opposed to using the 80 generally. With consistent Nav commands, it's as agile or more so (with the exceptions of the Raider or another Navved ship) than anything else at its speed. For dealing with ramming blockers, I have two suggestions, one I've used and one that's on my test slate. The known solution is an Indy (no, I know you don't activate the Indy text this time) with B-wings (that's four blue and four black, five each if EHB over BC) and blast it out of your way. It's one hell of a ship that can just eat that kind of punishment, and you should be on your way shortly. The other, as yet untested option, is a hypothetical build I plan to run, a single 80, optimized for battle, and a pair of 30s, optimized to beat the living bejeezus out of whatever they care to. Any ship attempting to blitz the 80 has a very specific area to occupy, so make all due efforts to bracket that zone with one or both 30s and obliterate that hapless cruise missile. This fleet obviously has other drawbacks, and I freely admit is untested. It is however the same solution as any 80 fleet has to be: Figure out what the 80 will do, optimize it, then optimize everything else to help it do that. In this case it's a close quarters damage fleet, so any ship trying to play chicken with the 80 is also playing chicken with the 30s, which I would leave in relatively close formation. What say you to that?

For anyone saying "double arc things" (again, AF2A is more effective on a point for point basis also, without even discussing the truly superior rebel double-arc gunship which is the MC30), the counter argument is how? It's not big ships that worry me with the MC80. It's how you stop Demolisher (or just a normal glad with engine techs) or an MC30 from rolling up into your front arc where it double arcs you and you don't double arc it back.

It's smaller, faster, and the other player should have activation advantage if they aren't running a similarly huge ship. In terms of equal skill, I've never had problems locking down the MC80 with smaller, faster brawlers, and mine is often locked down by players I can outmaneuver with my faster ships because it simply doesn't have options. A CR90 rolling into the front arc at speed 4 is not really "counterable", as even with engine techs, the MC80 has to move in broad, predictable arcs and you know where it will be several turns before it gets there if you are familiar with how ships can maneuver.

This is back to my core point where I think maneuver is the real issue. Can you build a fleet that forces that kind of ship out of your front arc? As those guys will 100% win the punching match vs. the MC80 given their superior maneuverability in the hands of equally skilled players, because you'd have to be a fool to come at them from the side when you can dictate the terms of the engagement.

And for those having success with the MC80: how often do you play 5+ ship lists where the opponent knows to ram you from the front with a small ship? That (e.g. a demolisher rush list like McCann or Clontroper play) is really the unsolvable problem I have run into with the MC80, followed by similarly obnoxious rebel lists with Mon Mothma or Rieekan.

Again, that's where pickets come in - CR90s are the cheapest options, but you can do it with an MC30c or AFII as well. Squadrons can act as a minefield in a spot you don't want someone to go. You need a fleet that protects your weak points, by putting fire down on something that wants to sneak out into your bad arcs.

Also again, this is where Deployment comes in. Deployment advantage is absolutely vital to an MC80, being able to put it in a spot where your opponent will have a difficult spot sneaking something into the front arc is a very important part of the pre-Round 1 setup.

I actually developed my MC80 based list as a hard counter to a Clonisher list that one of my regular opponents loved to play. It pretty much worked - he doesn't run that list anymore.

Edit: I also think the argument of "it takes more skill to use" is BS. We heard that same argument about the Neb B, or about the TIE Advanced in X-Wing before it got patched.

You mean the ship that I won a tournament with? Oh sure there were only 5 of them but I still had stiff competition yet it did its job.

This is a game of skill. I have seen VSD's do good things, I have seen MC80's do good things. It is skill not just stats that matter.

(again, AF2A is more effective on a point for point basis also, without even discussing the truly superior rebel double-arc gunship which is the MC30)

This is the design feature that ultimately drove me to the SW90B swarm. Smaller ships tend to be more efficient in terms of damage output. The trade-off is the ability to get those shots off. The MC80, if it comes under fire, is significantly more likely to last a few rounds to get multiple of those side arcs off than a CR90.

So, comparing say 3 SW90B's to an MC80 with a few upgrades: the corvettes hit dramatically harder, along several fringe benefits like activations and deployments. Say the three corvettes average 12 damage/turn, and the MC80 only 8 (both arbitrary). The downside is, you're likely to lose a corvette per turn, which means after only 1 turn the corvettes are down to similar firepower to the MC80; after 2, they're lower.

I haven't played X-wing at all, but I understand that there was/is an archetype over there based on exploiting this concept with two very defensive YT-1300's.

Note this is just an illustration--the exact calculus depends on far more than just dice averages (arcing, upgrades, admiral, opponent, commands, etc), which is why there isn't one objectively best build out there.

I'd like to just throw in that I feel a Mothma Admonition has the staying power of an MC80 under equal firepower. Except Admo can book it and maneuver wherever and whenever it wants and the MC80 can't. It's stuck engaged for the game or until it dies.

The trade-off of course, is Admo has one type of play available to it and the MC80 has some versatility.

And for those having success with the MC80: how often do you play 5+ ship lists where the opponent knows to ram you from the front with a small ship? That (e.g. a demolisher rush list like McCann or Clontroper play) is really the unsolvable problem I have run into with the MC80, followed by similarly obnoxious rebel lists with Mon Mothma or Rieekan.

See the thing with the MC80 is that you can make quite remarkable manouvering in the first few turns before the ship settles into spamming its key dial. This gives a quite large amount of control. It also requires very few upgrades which means you can outactivate your opponents if that is your game. The Demolisher is not cheap as it requires a whole host of upgrades. You could ask a similar question, how do you who play Demolisher cope with lists who outbid you? Both ships generally come alongside a set gameplan, disrupt it and you can win. Dont have a gameplan and you will lose.

I find it amusing the belief that you MUST have engine techs with the MC80. Why? For those zero turns when you use a navigate dial? 45 degree turn if you move at speed 2 anyway, all you are doing is turning the arc and not trying to catch anyone. The only essential upgrades should be a title and potentially Lando. Beyond that the ship is good to run and be potent.

Edit: I also think the argument of "it takes more skill to use" is BS. We heard that same argument about the Neb B, or about the TIE Advanced in X-Wing before it got patched.

You mean the ship that I won a tournament with? Oh sure there were only 5 of them but I still had stiff competition yet it did its job.

This is a game of skill. I have seen VSD's do good things, I have seen MC80's do good things. It is skill not just stats that matter.

Skill and a bit of luck with those red dice...those darn red dice.

So it seems that one of the big issues is how do you stop smaller ships. A lot of that has to do with placement. I feel like an argument that the MC-80 is bad just isn't viable. Armada is a rock paper scissors type game. If you bring Rock and I bring Paper likely I have an advantage, and when you place rock right under paper I will probably win. Same goes with Armada and fast ships. If you know that you will have trouble reeling in fast ships then sure you'll be at a disadvantage, but if you line up in a way that limits your options then that;s on you, not the MC-80

No no no way.

I've bitten the dust against 2 mc80s. They're really good when handled well. First they need their upgrades to fix those issues. Ecm and engine techs are basically required. For firepower you can actually take any of these: enhanced armament gives you more fire at long range. X17 Intel agent for more accurate firepower. Then you want them to get into blue range. Defiance makes activation order problems. From there you are able to one shot even a AF if you get 2 accuracies. Really. I suggest leading shots btw. Garm is good for ensuring constant conc fire tokens and squadron tokens. Mix the 2 with a moderate not maxed squadron force and they're just frikkin deadly.

Planning with the MC80 is key. It has an advantage over the VSD and that is its maneuverability. At speed 2 you can get upwards of 3 clicks (with a navigate, heck you could get 4 clicks with Nav Teams though you need Raymus for that) and so if you plan your activations properly as well as your speed and movement you can dodge some pesky situations.

Any ship can be effective in the right hands and given the right situation.

The MC80 is by no means an auto include. B/c as you stated with the opening post it suffers from all those problems. However, even with it's issues it fills a support roll like Butter on warm toast. Another advantage of the 80 is being able to deny space with that large side arc. Where the AF has the advantage with speed, and the option to take gunnery teams it fills the role of being more aggressive and getting there to put out the pain. The MC80 is the opposite in it's role (lack of speed, lack of gunnery team) it naturally wants or should support. So sure the enemy will know where that MC80 is going to be but as player controlling the MC80 "I dare you to step on my yard" so to speak. Tie the MC80 with a good support of fighters B-wings, Y-wings and did I mention B-wings, it's a deterrent for most ships trying to rush in to it to ram or block.

But I think one thing we have to realize is that no matter what fleet or ship you have it comes down to the dice. This game is like chess. Ships need to be positioned to take advantage of openings and opportunities. However, unlike chess the dice determine if your piece will actually remove another piece from the game or not. I have seen ISD's whiff at Med/Close range I have seen an MC80 roll perfectly with double damage and crits all over the place. Just as I have seen a lone X-wing take down a ISD on round six.

Edit: I also think the argument of "it takes more skill to use" is BS. We heard that same argument about the Neb B, or about the TIE Advanced in X-Wing before it got patched.

You mean the ship that I won a tournament with? Oh sure there were only 5 of them but I still had stiff competition yet it did its job.

This is a game of skill. I have seen VSD's do good things, I have seen MC80's do good things. It is skill not just stats that matter.

Skill and a bit of luck with those red dice...those darn red dice.

Last tourny, one guy threw a magnificent Ackbar 6x dice salvo from his AF2 against my MC80.

3x Blanks and 3x Accuracy

Edit: I also think the argument of "it takes more skill to use" is BS. We heard that same argument about the Neb B, or about the TIE Advanced in X-Wing before it got patched.

You mean the ship that I won a tournament with? Oh sure there were only 5 of them but I still had stiff competition yet it did its job.

This is a game of skill. I have seen VSD's do good things, I have seen MC80's do good things. It is skill not just stats that matter.

Skill and a bit of luck with those red dice...those darn red dice.

Last tourny, one guy threw a magnificent Ackbar 6x dice salvo from his AF2 against my MC80.

3x Blanks and 3x Accuracy

I have had it happen. . . it is not fun at all.

I think it got buried in my effort posts, so quick sound-byte time.

Leading Shots.

Leading Shots.

Leading Shots.

I can't say it enough - that's the big thing that makes the MC80 better than an AFII - you can reroll those fickle Red dice! Everyone wants to talk about Turbolasers and Intel Officers, but it's Leading Shots that turns a MC80 reliably deadly.

I think it got buried in my effort posts, so quick sound-byte time.

Leading Shots.

Leading Shots.

Leading Shots.

I can't say it enough - that's the big thing that makes the MC80 better than an AFII - you can reroll those fickle Red dice! Everyone wants to talk about Turbolasers and Intel Officers, but it's Leading Shots that turns a MC80 reliably deadly.

I won't take them without LS anymore. Say what you want about "mandatory" upgrades on the MC80--ECM, Engine Techs, a title... everything else is secondary to LS for me. <4% of the cost of the ship to guarantee this ****...

Last tourny, one guy threw a magnificent Ackbar 6x dice salvo from his AF2 against my MC80.

3x Blanks and 3x Accuracy

... doesn't happen? I don't get a lot of shots with that thing, they'd **** well better all count.

I do like like to run the m80 command carrier with expanded hangers pushing 5 bombers with gallant haven running fighters and screening. It's a build that tries it's best to stay at medium range. I haven't perfected running it yet, but I'm having fun trying.

P.S. If you go to 600pts and really boost the squads this build starts to shine

I see this game played in cycles. Players gravitate towards a particular fleet build and then when the meta-game list come along that defeats that archetype everything moves on. Right now the flavour of the month is Demolisher and MC30's, in a few months we'll have moved towards another archetype build that causes these lists distress and so on.

At the heart of it a ship is a sum of factors: Its' speed, maneuverability, shields/hull, defense tokens and command values and a fleet is the synergy of all the ships and squadrons in a fleet. Individually the MC80 has strengths and weaknesses, in calling it slow, lacking in firepower and weak you have only looked at a small part of the overall picture. You are not looking at the upgrades, commands and possible tactics fully.

The MC80 has a good squadron value and a fairly good list of upgrade icons available to it, so it can be given a role that works.

So for me the question isn't if the ship is good or bad, rather it is does the fleet build move forwards in the meta-game and does that ship work in that fleet? The answer here is very much dependent on what is happening in your metagame at that time. When you write off a ship you write off fleet choices that would use that ship, right now the 4-5 ship fleet with Demolisher or MC30's is the king of the hill. Is the solution going to include an MC80 or VSD? If it does and you never try, because "Conventional Wisdom dictates that the MC80 is a pile of Bantha Poodo" then your meta will stagnate on a very narrow range of options.

Disagree.

In our play group of 8 or so we have had consistent 1st places with MC80 lists. Not to mention top 3. Two store champs wins with MC80 (one list x2 MC80), a recent x2 MC80 win in a small Winter Kit tourney, and buckets of wins in other events over the prior months.

-REFER to Post No.66 for details of the prior statment-

I don't fly Reb, I'm Imp, but i respect the **** out of the MC80 and what others have done with it.

Rebuttal

1) It's Slow, maybe...but far more manouverable and not comparable to VSD in any way.

2) It's arcs are weak?

3) It's not Motti strong...but it's strong

4) MC80 players say...it's all about synergy

Speed 2 is not good for a ship. We've all learned this lesson once with the VSD, and in the case of the MC80, it's not any better. Yes, you get one more click at speed 2 in the first segment of the maneuver tool, but that's the sum total of the difference

That "sum total of difference" is huge.

Without it, it would be garbage. The lack of Click on the VSD speed 2 is why most people think it is garbage. With 1 Yaw @ 1, 1 Yaw @ 2, with a Navigate command you can swing 90 degrees by adding in a click. This is a huge amount of manoeuvrability. Far superior to the VSD. Speaking of the VSD there is no comparison to be made.

1) It's Yaw is different.

2) It's Arcs are different.

3) It's base is different

4) Shields, slots, upgrades

The MC80 will have a much easier time staying on target because of how generous the sidearcs are and the way it flys. The MC80 can slide sideways and stay on a good incepct course without Nav Commands. This gives it a lot of options to CF, Repair etc...The VSD if poistioned poorly will never get into the fight due to a) its bad Yaw b) its small base

which you trade back by having a base so large that even a blind admiral can reliably ram you.

Without the Large Base it would not hit a lot of shots. It needs this for the reach. It's why comparing a Medium ship to a Large isn't the right comparision.

Ramming is also predictable therefore just as easily counterplayed. Good MC80 players punish this.

1) Interlocking arcs with other ships. Simply put fly together and cover each other, focus the same target. This is never not a good plan because killing one ship quick is better than spreading out damage (generally)

2) Definance/Concentrate Fire, x2 Black, x2 Red, x1 Blue, Xi7 is punishing for small ships

2) It's arcs are weak?

The inability to take gunnery teams on the ship means that you can never maximize the side arcs. If you are facing lots of ships, you would want to fly this like an assault frigate and circle strafe to roll out maximum firepower. However, if you are not facing a lot of ships, you are probably facing a lot of squadrons, which means they can all safely park in your side arc because now you have to choose to shoot them OR shoot at ships, not both (unlike an ISD with gun teams, which can leverage both the formidable anti-squadron firepower and attack ships out of the front arc).

Anti-squadron is the true weakness, it is the best use for Gunnery Team, but MC80 but it is also the best equiped ship to tank bombers due to it's Defensive Slots/Natural Shields. Most have started running Assault Cruiser for AP. They start spamming Eningeeing/Raymus the turn they get by bombed.

Since they want to use Definance they don't mind taking these hits. Then they a) go for the carrier b) use squadrons of their own to pin the squads

Make a choice. Kill the Carrier or Fight the Squads. If they have 134 points of Squads then picking up that many points is just as good as killing a ship.

The absolutely puny front arc means that double arcing things doesn't do much (in fact, you are literally only 2 dice better than an AF2A double arcing something for more than 20% of the points cost more), and the width of the ship and front arc means that fast ships can consistently park only in the front arc and take the same front arc dice as thrown by a CR90... without TRC.

Defiance procs off each shot so Double Tapping is very much worth it. It can actually be 4 dice better off than AF2A, MC80 players want to get this shot off. And you have a lot of options with the dice since all MC80s want Leading Shots getting rerolls on your Reds is great. Or just add Black/CF Black. Or add Black/Leading Shots blue.

The MC80 sports tons of blue dice, but unlike the CR90B or Raider II, it doesn't have the speed to consistently engage at medium range. Being a slow ship, this means that fast opponents are going to get up close and personal (in your front arc, if possible), so that you are now in a blue vs. black matchup that favors them. Fast ships will stay at long range, meaning your effective firepower is only your reds. The blues are often either underwhelming (in close) or underutilized (long range), and this again ties back to the maneuvering issue that the ship faces.

* I previously discussed the Close Range counter plan. You will vaporise ships in the side arc. The only way they can stay close is in the front.

* Medium range is hard to get into without ET but then again a lot of MC80's opt out of trying because long Range is where they rule. They plink at approaching fast ships and go ham up close. But then again my MC80 players tell me they land medium shots consistently

* Long Range is where it rules. Defiance a Blue Dice for Leading shots, Roll 7 Red. Most of the MC80 lists are running Assault Cruisers for reasons of Demolisher/Squadrons. Most are choosing Ackbar.

3) It's not Motti strong...but it's strong

Hull > Shields in a meta where XI7s, bomber swarms, and ACMs/APTs are a thing. Yes, it has two redirects, but the reality is that MC80s often die with shields left against me. With bombers, you tend to exhaust the tokens by just plinking away with many small attacks. With XI7s, redirect doesn't work. With APTs to drill or ACMs to just much all the shields with splash damage (especially backed up with some tactical rams), you are passing damage straight through to the hull. The punch line ends up being that while one would expect the ship to be very durable, it's often vulnerable to coordinated alpha strikes because you drill through a single side with either many many small attacks to overwhelm the tokens or offensive upgrades that ignore the tokens, and then you have a 120+ point ship that isn't any tougher than a VSD1.

This is straightup wrong. Lets assume Intel Officer. A VSD has to use brace on the first Demo push. It redirects because it has to. Then it dies next turn. An MC80AS redirects the first barrage to the rear/front. In the next turn arc it can brace/redirect, then the next hit it redirects. Very much alive. This is the most spike damage that can be dealt out in the game. The AS is capable of surviving it. If the Demo has APT and not Expanded you will take massive damage for sure, but what Ship won't?

All of these 'Paper Scenarios' assume the Demo is going to pull of a perfect attack 100% of the time, all of the time, without you doing anything about it.

The MC80AS passes the Demo Triple Tap Test (as in it can survive it). Only a Motti ISD II can say the same.

Against any other reasonable ship and not the all in Demo push you have garunteed Brace due to ECM. And you have the option of AP against bombers/black dice.

Add in Raymus + Engeering for when you think you need it and you have a tanky ship. Redirecting shields with 4-6 Engineering is massive. 8 damage is pretty reasonable expectation from an ISD II. So you use your guaranteed Brace and don't Redirect due to Xi7. Then it's your turn you move 4 and Repair 1. It is perfectly survivable.

All of these comparisons to the VSD are rubbish.

4: It's all about synergy!

MC80 players say it's all about synergy. Here are some winning lists:

* Garm/x2 MC80/some ship i forget, Store Champ

* Reeikan/MC80 Command Cruiser (Home One)/MC30/Salvation, Keyan/Luke/Dutch/Wedge/heroes, Store Champ

* Ackbar/x2 MC AS /Cr90, Winter Kit

* Ackbar/MC80 AS, 4 CR90

It could be Home One on Ackbar and Defiance on the other both focusing one ship for 14 Xi7 dice. Or MC80 commanding Zombie Bombers with Home One procs on an Expanded Launcher MC30. Or Garms timed MC80 push to destroy a Carrier with 134 points of bombers or CR90 swarms whittling down ships whilst the MC80 runs distraction.

The MC80 is a ship that lends itself to a synergistic fleet. It has some weak spots that only other units can support. Through Fleet Construction/Flying these issues are at worst negligible and at best bait.

Your comparions on the MC80 stats, especially when compairing to the VSD are flat out wrong.

-forgive me if they format is crap, this was way longer than i expected it to be-