It's probably on par with X-Wing players needing to pay $15 each for Z-95s.

$25.99 CAD at my Local.

Priced it when I picked up my last Gladiator.

Which, for the record, was $46.99 CAD

Christ, I think that's what I paid for my third MC80

I paid like 36 CAD for my fifth glad. If I had to pay your prices my collection would only be stupid and not staggeringly stupid.

I'll be shooting for 4 or 5 of each flotilla which should run around 26 CAD per blister. Probably buy 2 of each at a time supplies permitting.

Edit: the rapidly rising Canadian dollar gives me hope they may even approach 22 each

I'm really excited for this.

Calgary's Regional is the last regional in the World.... On the 30th of July... (Yes, we share the date with Good Games in Sydney, Australia, but your 30th is before our 30th!)

These might be out and legal for that, which would be mind blowing and meta destroying...

First of all, very excited for these. I thought they'd change things up, and they certainly look likely to do so. Right price, great upgrades. All grand.

Secondly (and this might have already been mentioned, so apologies if that's the case), I'm interested to see how these perform, not just in a squadron support role, but in an anti-squadron role. Plenty of possibilities with those offensive retrofit slots, a lot cheaper than a Raider, and could sit in the shadow of an ISD preventing enemy bombers from slipping round to attack the rear hull.

Can't wait to play with these.

Anyone up for whack-a-mole?

Just read this and have to say that I'm a little disappointed there isn't a weapons team slot. Flight Controllers would have been my goto choice on flotillas. I can still hope my rebels have one I guess

Still plenty of time for them to sweaten the pot with more stuff...

Just read this and have to say that I'm a little disappointed there isn't a weapons team slot. Flight Controllers would have been my goto choice on flotillas. I can still hope my rebels have one I guess

See, and at 23 pts im shocked they gave then an off retrofit slot

Yeah. does this break Escort?

Yeah. does this break Escort?

I dont think so, please share more of your process?

Jamming: affects your own squadrons too? Looks like it

Most definitely. The caution it directly in the article.

I agree, the card affects both sides...but what I don't understand is why they make such a big deal about skilfully maneuvering to get the enemy within the jamming field while keeping friendly squads out.

"Is attacking or defending" means that in the picture, using the Imperial squads to attack the two X-wings will also be obstructed. It doesn't just affect the attackers. What am I missing?

Yeah. does this break Escort?

I dont think so, please share more of your process?

Sorry i mean, does the Jamming Field not obstructing/not-engaging someone during combat also break requirements to attack escorts?

That entirely depends on what mikemcmann and I were arguing above.

To completely Clarify:

IF you believe that the 2pt Card causes Obstructions within the set Jamming Range, All the Time, then effectively, for 2 points, you have an Intel Bubble that is so big it might as well encompass an entire engagement, all the time... It would remove the requirement to attack escorts, in fact, it would nullify the requirement to attack squadrons entirely, and let you engage ships... It would also completely nullify Howlrunner and Mauler Mithel in their uses.

However, if you - like me - believe the intent of this card is just to reduce Squadron-to-Squadron attacks by 1 Die... Then no. No it does not override anything else.

I didn't think so either.

But I think that these keywords are becoming confusing. Obstructed, Engaged, HEavy etc. Start to become hard to avoid making it possible to think certain things will happen.

I would have preferred to simply say, when they attack a squadron in the field, they remove 1 die.

heheh.... I never argue intent

I may believe it, but the text and rules are best to go by unless otherwise ruled. Because...ya know..reasons

That entirely depends on what mikemcmann and I were arguing above.

To completely Clarify:

Sorry i mean, does the Jamming Field not obstructing/not-engaging someone during combat also break requirements to attack escorts?

IF you believe that the 2pt Card causes Obstructions within the set Jamming Range, All the Time, then effectively, for 2 points, you have an Intel Bubble that is so big it might as well encompass an entire engagement, all the time... It would remove the requirement to attack escorts, in fact, it would nullify the requirement to attack squadrons entirely, and let you engage ships... It would also completely nullify Howlrunner and Mauler Mithel in their uses.

However, if you - like me - believe the intent of this card is just to reduce Squadron-to-Squadron attacks by 1 Die... Then no. No it does not override anything else.

Definitely the correct interpretation. It mentions specifically attacks between squadrons only, so anything else is not touched.

This isn't even an intent question. It's RAW based on the card.

General Tagge = a way to survive Demo triple tap?

Let it come into range round 2 by maneuvering suggestively lol!, burn(lose to Intel Officer) your brace, get your brace back start of round 3, same again, but should be alive, rather than dead!

I think my dream of replacing the CR90 in my list with two flotillas is mostly dead. Oddly enough, it's not because of the flotillas in my list. Instead, it's the worry of the slicer teams in other lists that are making me lean heavily toward wing commanders on my carriers. Those extra 12 points really muck up my plans. I might instead just get more upgrades and go Independence, Yavaris, and Transport.

General Tagge = a way to survive Demo triple tap?

Let it come into range round 2 by maneuvering suggestively lol!, burn(lose to Intel Officer) your brace, get your brace back start of round 3, same again, but should be alive, rather than dead!

Certainly a possibility. Although a bit late to the party on that, Clon pointed it out either here or in the Demo thread, although props for clearly coming up with it on your own. I personally needed it pointed out to me.

General Tagge = a way to survive Demo triple tap?

Let it come into range round 2 by maneuvering suggestively lol!, burn(lose to Intel Officer) your brace, get your brace back start of round 3, same again, but should be alive, rather than dead!

Certainly a possibility. Although a bit late to the party on that, Clon pointed it out either here or in the Demo thread, although props for clearly coming up with it on your own. I personally needed it pointed out to me.

Ah I must have missed it.

I figured with some aggressive maneuvering you could either bait an attack or force one, certainly would be interesting to try out.

Thoughts in no particular order, all on new things we've learned:

Maneuver charts look very reasonable. I can actually see Ozzel's stock going up a little bit here as these are ships that certainly don't mind going from 3 to 1 and Screed has little interest in running himself. You can even put Montferrat on a speed 3 Gozanti (preferably one designed to be disruptive with the Slicer Tools) if you like!

Offensive Retrofit slot is amazing. The obvious choice here is between Expanded Hangar Bays and Boosted Comms (for the Gozanti Cruisers), but should we see enough small ships regularly enough it could be fun to try running a bunch of Tractor Beams (spoilers: this probably won't be reliable enough to be worthwhile).

At first I was skeptical of the Assault Carriers, but I agree with earlier comments that for 28 points, getting an activation and the possibility of an easy Concentrate Fire for 2 red dice isn't that bad if you'd just like to sprinkle in a bit of long-ranged harassment. I think the generic Gozanti Cruisers will be the default, but the Assault Carriers might be worth tinkering with.

For only 2 points Vector initially looks very promising. My general feeling is:

• TIE Fighters = generally do fine at speed 4. Speed 5 is nice, but I don't view it as essential.
• TIE Advanced = generally hanging out with the TIE character aces, so could be useful with Soontir Fel (although has zero synergy with TIE Interceptors)
• Firesprays = could be useful for getting the jump on someone turn 2 due to the extra speed, but not really worth building around as I wouldn't expect to use it more than once, maybe twice.
• Aggressors = I find the difference between speed 3 and 4 can be fairly dramatic when it comes to the squadron-on-squadron minigame so could be quite helpful here. My main problem is I... don't generally use Aggressors.
• Bossk = Bossk's a fan of this. Unfortunately his YV-666 "Dumptruck of Doom" buddies would have LOVED the speed bump but they can't benefit from it.
• Jumpmasters = given they're generally escorting TIE Bombers and/or Firesprays, maybe. You might need a speed 5 Jumpmaster+TIE Advanced to heavy/soak the enemy squadrons.

So basically it seems to have the most potential with Firesprays and the Intel apparatus built around them, but Firesprays are Rogues... so it's somewhat uncertain. The question becomes how useful that would be and how much to build around it. Seems most useful likely with Boosted Comms as you're otherwise throwing squadrons beyond your ability to keep commanding them (...safely). Alternatively, just use it for TIEs as a little extra push and go for raw numbers with Expanded Hangar Bay.

Wow. It's a hefty 7 points on a fragile little suicide ship (minimum Gozanti points of 30), mind you, but wow. This could make for some major meta changes. In particular this seems most problematic for carriers (turning off squadron commands) and Gladiators with Engine Techs who were relying on that extra oomph. Also inconvenienced are other small black dice ships who regularly Navigate (MC30s, Raiders) and single-role Nebulon-B upgrades (Salvation wants to Concentrate Fire as much as it can). I guess time will tell if the generally one-use nature of this upgrade is worth it but it's definitely something I think we're all going to be watching closely. Given that I expect the "no guns here" GR75 to be in the mid-to-high teens in points, they may actually be the most effective recipients of this upgrade.

Ah, so this is for a particularly annoying Slicer Tools Gozanti under Tagge or Motti. Gotcha. Definite synergy with the Avenger title, especially given YOU get to choose which defense tokens gets exhausted. I want to note that this is potentially a GREAT title to use against enemy black dice ships (...why are Imperials getting the anti-Demolisher toys?) by positioning your flotilla near the landing zone of the enemy black dice ship (that wants to go first)

Tagge is basically sort of like Motti (in that he improves your defenses) who is more charitably inclined towards your smaller than your larger ships but still offers your larger ships something they want. Getting good use out of him would require an aggressive playstyle that sees your ships taking serious fire on turn 2 and then potentially again up through turn 4. I find this fits the bill right now primarily for Gladiators, Raiders, and ISDs (sorry VSDs). The synergy with the more aggressively-oriented flotillas is also pretty obvious (bring back those Scatters!). I can see a definite use for an ISD with Turbolaser Reroute Circuits and Needa to ENSURE Tagge does something for it by just burning through that Evade on turns 2 and 4 should Tagge otherwise be on course to not assist that ISD.

As has already been noted, this is some definite anti-clonisher tech right here, disrupting the expected turn 2 initial punch backed up by an Intel Officer.

For the rules-record I think this doesn't do anything to affect Escort, because it seems to me that this doesn't trigger until you make an attack at which point effects like Escort have already triggered. I guess we'll see, though. The wording is odd, but I guess they didn't want the obstructed penalty piling up IN ADDITION to a -1 dice effect.

One question I have is should the card be read as:
While a squadron at distance 1-2 is (attacking) or (defending against a squadron)...

OR
While a squadron at distance 1-2 is (attacking or defending) against a squadron...

Because interpretation 1 means that bombers would roll 1 less dice against the flotilla (or other targets), which could be huge. Interpretation 2 makes it clear it only cares about squadron-on-squadron violence.

Anyways, the intent seems to be to use this in one of two ways:

1. The flotilla commands squadrons to attack enemy squadrons and then moves in close to debuff the enemy squadrons before they can attack back. It can later on move away if necessary. You can combine this with a Gallant Haven for supreme annoyance but this seems to be putting a lot of eggs into the "hey let's get our ships super close to angry enemy squadrons" basket.
2. The flotilla follows after an Intel bomber blob to decrease the damage done back to them by angry enemy squadrons. This approach is far worse if my interpretation 1 is correct, as you'd be risking seriously debuffing your bombers actual bombing runs.

Debuffing Counter values by 1 is potentially extremely strong. The effect also seems strongest against swarms of weaker fighters (like standard TIEs) when engaging fewer stronger defenders (like character aces). Obviously it would be preferable to keep out of your own jamming fields if possible and therefore Intel seems key. I'm not sure how much we'll see this used, honestly, due to the hassle of making it not bite you in the arse.

For the rules-record I think this doesn't do anything to affect Escort, because it seems to me that this doesn't trigger until you make an attack at which point effects like Escort have already triggered. I guess we'll see, though. The wording is odd, but I guess they didn't want the obstructed penalty piling up IN ADDITION to a -1 dice effect.

One question I have is should the card be read as:

While a squadron at distance 1-2 is (attacking) or (defending against a squadron)...

OR

While a squadron at distance 1-2 is (attacking or defending) against a squadron...

Because interpretation 1 means that bombers would roll 1 less dice against the flotilla (or other targets), which could be huge. Interpretation 2 makes it clear it only cares about squadron-on-squadron violence.

Anyways, the intent seems to be to use this in one of two ways:

1. The flotilla commands squadrons to attack enemy squadrons and then moves in close to debuff the enemy squadrons before they can attack back. It can later on move away if necessary. You can combine this with a Gallant Haven for supreme annoyance but this seems to be putting a lot of eggs into the "hey let's get our ships super close to angry enemy squadrons" basket.
2. The flotilla follows after an Intel bomber blob to decrease the damage done back to them by angry enemy squadrons. This approach is far worse if my interpretation 1 is correct, as you'd be risking seriously debuffing your bombers actual bombing runs.

Debuffing Counter values by 1 is potentially extremely strong. The effect also seems strongest against swarms of weaker fighters (like standard TIEs) when engaging fewer stronger defenders (like character aces). Obviously it would be preferable to keep out of your own jamming fields if possible and therefore Intel seems key. I'm not sure how much we'll see this used, honestly, due to the hassle of making it not bite you in the arse.

It's either interpretation 2 or someone needs to teach them how to write. If they wanted interpretation one, there should be a comma after the word "attacking".

Also, as per usual, your analysis on the rest is excellent.

Agent Kalkus works with Quad Laser Turrets? Could be a great combo dealing with Rebel Ace's.

Agent Kalkus works with Quad Laser Turrets? Could be a great combo dealing with Rebel Ace's.

It would work, but relies on them attacking you.

I like Kallus more with the Raider title that lets you attack a squadron 2x.

Agent Kalkus works with Quad Laser Turrets? Could be a great combo dealing with Rebel Ace's.

It would work, but relies on them attacking you.

I like Kallus more with the Raider title that lets you attack a squadron 2x.

I just figured it would be a potent combo especially if you only take a token screen, I faced an Imperial running 2 ISD's with these, and I had Rebels for a rare change, sadly they have to attack at close range.

The issue with placing him on Impetuous Raider is, Rebel Aces can kill one with significant ease, you would need to screen the Raider to keep it alive.