Here's my pure VSD build:

Faction: Galactic Empire

Points: 399/400

Commander: Admiral Motti

Assault Objective: Precision Strike
Defense Objective: Contested Outpost
Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)
- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)
- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

[ flagship ] Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Admiral Motti ( 24 points)
- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

1 Dengar ( 20 points)
2 TIE Advanced Squadrons ( 24 points)
4 TIE Bomber Squadrons ( 36 points)
1 IG-88 ( 21 points)
1 "Mauler" Mithel ( 15 points)
1 Major Rhymer ( 16 points)

You can counter the lack of maneuverability by planning ahead and deploying toward a corner. Depending on opponent deployment, I typically deploy my flagship closest to the short board edge pointing straight across the table, the middle VSD can be pointed straight ahead or more diagonally, and the last can either be at a sharper angle across the table or parallel to the long board edge if you're worried about your opponent flanking quickly. The Bombers can be thrown forward against slower ships, or used to protect the flanks and rear against faster ships. The biggest trick is analyzing your opponent's fleet for greatest threat, and deciding where to place your fastest asset (the squadrons). It has a very strong anti-squadron capability, five Bombers and most of the anti-fighter squadrons throw black dice against ships (Mauler is the only one who doesn't).

The biggest risk this fleet faces is someone who thinks they won't be able to take it and plays for the draw, but you can get up to speed two and with Boosted Comms/Rhymer, that is a LONG threat range. Kill a Corvette and you get a 6-4.

Slightly arrogant. I like being right and I dislike people making assessments without even really trying out everything. I have argued so much over just Facebook on the VSD but many from the UK group seem to think that the VSD is a write off. Bah

Must be Meta-Dopes... slaves really, and stupid in general.

Happy most of us ain't like dats!

Some are. Some don't like to experiment. It is a huge issue in the US actually. When many people in teh US get into a game they don't take the time to test things out and so you see net lists. This is especially so in card games and table top games.

Due to this, when people do conduct a test they don't put much into that test, usually letting 1-2 games decide their overriding opinions, other information be damned.

Honestly it saddens me when people do that. They range from decent to good players but the truly great players test, test, test, test, and test again which is something that they can become if they just change their attitudes.

Slightly arrogant. I like being right and I dislike people making assessments without even really trying out everything. I have argued so much over just Facebook on the VSD but many from the UK group seem to think that the VSD is a write off. Bah

...

I did have a nice post typed out for you, but I really shouldn't get into another argument around here, especially with you, and over such a trivial thing. You keep patting yourself on the head, and I will leave you to it.

No fun argument for me today? Sad Panda.

I pat myself on my back because I am willing to test. I have made Nebulon fleets work, I have a strong list in DtO, I have tested many variations of different builds and lists. More than all of that though, I have not let myself fall into a mindset that prevents me from considering all the options. Not just want I want those options to be but what they can be.

It is a mentality. Do you look at the problem or the Solution? I look at the solution.

Slightly arrogant. I like being right and I dislike people making assessments without even really trying out everything. I have argued so much over just Facebook on the VSD but many from the UK group seem to think that the VSD is a write off. Bah

Must be Meta-Dopes... slaves really, and stupid in general.

Happy most of us ain't like dats!

Some are. Some don't like to experiment. It is a huge issue in the US actually. When many people in teh US get into a game they don't take the time to test things out and so you see net lists. This is especially so in card games and table top games.

Due to this, when people do conduct a test they don't put much into that test, usually letting 1-2 games decide their overriding opinions, other information be damned.

Honestly it saddens me when people do that. They range from decent to good players but the truly great players test, test, test, test, and test again which is something that they can become if they just change their attitudes.

The bad stuff you cover in your reply is kind of a Merica thing too... now.

Slightly arrogant. I like being right and I dislike people making assessments without even really trying out everything. I have argued so much over just Facebook on the VSD but many from the UK group seem to think that the VSD is a write off. Bah

Must be Meta-Dopes... slaves really, and stupid in general.

Happy most of us ain't like dats!

Some are. Some don't like to experiment. It is a huge issue in the US actually. When many people in teh US get into a game they don't take the time to test things out and so you see net lists. This is especially so in card games and table top games.

Due to this, when people do conduct a test they don't put much into that test, usually letting 1-2 games decide their overriding opinions, other information be damned.

Honestly it saddens me when people do that. They range from decent to good players but the truly great players test, test, test, test, and test again which is something that they can become if they just change their attitudes.

The bad stuff you cover in your reply is kind of a Merica thing too... now.

Tis true. We are no longer leaders in innovative ways of doing things.

One has to break a few eggs to create an omelet. You cant just will the omelet into existence.

Slightly arrogant. I like being right and I dislike people making assessments without even really trying out everything. I have argued so much over just Facebook on the VSD but many from the UK group seem to think that the VSD is a write off. Bah

...

I did have a nice post typed out for you, but I really shouldn't get into another argument around here, especially with you, and over such a trivial thing. You keep patting yourself on the head, and I will leave you to it.

No fun argument for me today? Sad Panda.

I pat myself on my back because I am willing to test. I have made Nebulon fleets work, I have a strong list in DtO, I have tested many variations of different builds and lists. More than all of that though, I have not let myself fall into a mindset that prevents me from considering all the options. Not just want I want those options to be but what they can be.

It is a mentality. Do you look at the problem or the Solution? I look at the solution.

More arrogance? say it isn't so...

If you check my post history, I am usually one of the people ahead of the curve, to imply I didn't test VSD's before deciding they were weak comparatively in Wave 2, I dunno? they can fill a niche roll, can it be done better? pretty much.

At the start of Wave 2, we were seeing Ackbar HomeOne GT and X-17 TL, which effectively negated the VSD's defense tokens, and thus VSD's practically vanished from the meta, Imperial commanders worked on countering Ackbar HomeOne GT and X-17 fleets, and so Ackbar in turn practically vanished from the meta, thus allowing a resurgence of the VSD, because people had got used to not seeing them, and the perception was they were poor ships, thus allowing the re-surging VSD's to punish commanders who underestimated them.

At no point did the VSD stop being a poor ship, it still is a poor ship, but you can compensate for its weaknesses to some degree, but it requires effort, and a willing opponent, and that is sometimes more than Imperial commanders are willing to embrace, why risk it? you can build a much more powerful fleet without them inherent weaknesses that have to be overcome to get the most from a VSD.

It has nothing at all to do with testing, implying myself and most others who played all of wave one with VSD's are basically netlisters with little to no understanding of how the game works, is pretty offensive.

I built a fleet and added 2 VSD's, I also added Vader and Slaved Turrets, which made them one trick ponys, fortunately for me, my opponent had build a Neb fleet, and because he hadn't seen them for so long, he basically flew his Nebs straight at my VSD's, well lucky me, because that allowed them to (with Conc Fire) throw 5 dice each at long range, they dealt a lot of damage out, but they both died. That was pretty much a perfect scenario for the build, but there are many many ways that could have been a disaster for me, my opponent usually takes fleets of either CR90's and MC30's or MC80's/ AF or pure AF, any of which would have allowed him to easily navigate past the front arcs of my VSD's, and once you are past the front arc of a VSD it is pretty much useless, it is never EVER getting out of range, or maneuvering to bring its front arc back into play.

So carry on patting yourself on the head, carry on calling us all netlisters, but I know, and anyone who has read what I just typed out knows, VSD's are not your best choice of ships as an Imperial commander.

But they can be the best ship under certain circumstances.

Well two VSDs with Vader and Slaved Turrets is kind of a terrible list. . .

What else did you have? Were you relying on those two ships to get your work done?

Oh Eastern, I am not saying anything about you. You are choosing to take it as such. I made a general statement about known things.

So if the VSD is a poor ship, how do you explain the recent results in regionals Eastern? Your mindset says it is poor you even say so. That is the limiter you have placed on yourself.

No ship is poor. Each has its own style. Learn to use each and you will be a better Commander.

No ship is poor. Each has its own style. Learn to use each and you will be a better Commander.

Nah, decided the assault frigate is generally terrible, does nothing well, only everything average....

Neb spam or mc30 spam for me. Now those are great ships!

No ship is poor. Each has its own style. Learn to use each and you will be a better Commander.

Nah, decided the assault frigate is generally terrible, does nothing well, only everything average....

Neb spam or mc30 spam for me. Now those are great ships!

I like the Neb Spam. With the Liberty coming out they will be fun!

Let's be honest, if the VSD did not need very specialised list building for it to be effective, followed by on point deployment, we would not be discussing ways on how to make it viable. For those of us who invested in buying more than just the core set amount of them, you would like to find a way to make your toys viable instead of sitting pretty on a shelf.

I know the feeling from WHFB, it isn't nice buying dust catchers.

But on the other side I have a game lined up against a MC80 based carrier fleet. I am planning to try out the slaved turret VSDs backed up by an ISD. We will see how that pans out.

The Nebulon-B Needa a specialized list to make it work? Demolisher needs a list built around it to make the absolute most out of it, the MC80 needs to be built around, the Assault Frigate. . . Wait. . . . Every ship needs consideration when being taken if you want to use it to the best value.

Well two VSDs with Vader and Slaved Turrets is kind of a terrible list. . .

What else did you have? Were you relying on those two ships to get your work done?

List is posted in the thread, its quoted at the top of page 3.

Ironically, I enjoyed the extra hitting power at range, and the extra backbone it gave my fleet, and I posted something nice about VSD's as an olive branch, that however does not detract from the fact is has a large number of easily exploitable weak points, and needs attention other ships do not really need to get the most out of it.

I had quite happily posted something nice, and left the thread alone, apart from answering questions about the fleet build. But I don't like Lyraeus generalizations about people who dislike VSD's, so here we are again, on the merry-go-round.

So just so we are absolutely clear.

I played all of year one running VSD's, I know what they are good at, and what they are not good at.

My opinion, and it is my opinion :

I dislike the lack of speed, the lack of maneuverability.

I dislike having rebel ships move out of a VSD's front arc, and it not have any chance of getting away or its front arc back into range.

I dislike that it is virtually impossible to get all dice from a VSD's front arc into play.

I really dislike that you can place squadrons touching the front of its base, and it can never ever move far enough, for them not to be placed back touching the front of its base.

I dislike you have to play defensively or you get danced around, or pick objectives that force your opponent to be some where, or you can spend the game doing nothing, as they lack the speed to get into the action.

I dislike the vulnerability it suffers when things take it's brace token, as it lacks the speed to get in and out of danger quickly, and there are many ways to remove its brace token, yes gladiators and raiders can have there tokens removed as well, but they are more than quick enough to be not eating the best dice for a few rounds of enemy ships.

Now you can like them, I really do not care, it's all down to a persons choice at the end of the day, but please do not insult me or imply I do not know how to play the game, because I personally feel the VSD is poor, it has real drawbacks, yes you can to a degree overcome them, but it is still poor. I really wish it was not, but with the advent of waves three and four, I cannot see myself running a VSD again, and that is a shame.

I certainly hope you weren't take anything I was saying personally, because it definitely wasn't about you.

And you make a very good point about its vulnerabilities. It has a lot of them, and you have to have a very specific role or build in mind for them to be effective. But I would posit that so do Raiders and Gladiators. I think the difference is that Gladiators are still the best at their given role in waves one and two, and Raiders have only existed in the one wave so they didn't find themselves replaced by anything. Victories did. They were the gunship for Imperials in wave one, with the most hull and the most dice. Not a single ship could go toe-to-toe with it. Then the ISD dropped with more dice, more hull, more squadrons, more speed and more maneuverability. The ISD became the Imperial gunship. The VSD lost the role it had held for the better part of a year.

But still, match the VSD up against any of its Rebel counterparts, and it can still go toe-to-toe with most of them. Heck, the biggest ship in the Rebel fleet has the same hull, same number of primary arc dice, same command, same engineering, one variant has the same squadron rating, same max speed. . .the only advantages the MC80 has over the VSD is one extra click of maneuver at speed two, better shields, and better upgrade options, for thirty-three more points.

The VSD is still a great ship, but its role has changed.

But they can be the best ship under certain circumstances.

Oh Eastern, I am not saying anything about you. You are choosing to take it as such. I made a general statement about known things.

So if the VSD is a poor ship, how do you explain the recent results in regionals Eastern? Your mindset says it is poor you even say so. That is the limiter you have placed on yourself.

No ship is poor. Each has its own style. Learn to use each and you will be a better Commander.

Stuff

So aside from trying to pick fights, would you mind sharing a VSD centric list I could try out? Lets be productive here.

I certainly hope you weren't take anything I was saying personally, because it definitely wasn't about you.

And you make a very good point about its vulnerabilities. It has a lot of them, and you have to have a very specific role or build in mind for them to be effective. But I would posit that so do Raiders and Gladiators. I think the difference is that Gladiators are still the best at their given role in waves one and two, and Raiders have only existed in the one wave so they didn't find themselves replaced by anything. Victories did. They were the gunship for Imperials in wave one, with the most hull and the most dice. Not a single ship could go toe-to-toe with it. Then the ISD dropped with more dice, more hull, more squadrons, more speed and more maneuverability. The ISD became the Imperial gunship. The VSD lost the role it had held for the better part of a year.

But still, match the VSD up against any of its Rebel counterparts, and it can still go toe-to-toe with most of them. Heck, the biggest ship in the Rebel fleet has the same hull, same number of primary arc dice, same command, same engineering, one variant has the same squadron rating, same max speed. . .the only advantages the MC80 has over the VSD is one extra click of maneuver at speed two, better shields, and better upgrade options, for thirty-three more points.

The VSD is still a great ship, but its role has changed.

Not at all, sorry if I gave that impression.

I blame the guys playing Rebels during wave one, never in my life have I been so frustrated before, sure it was a monster front on, but the people I played against, used that speed and maneuverability of rebel ships to just dance around them, coloured my opinions of the VSD, which I fully admit to.

At the end of the day, my views on this matter should not affect anyone elses choices, people should play and learn for themselves, and form their own opinions. Lyraeus statements I felt required a response, hence this mess.

Someone asks for help building a VSD centric fleet I will gladly help them do so, not spend my time explaining why I feel they should use something else. I do not feel the need for everyone else to share my views, nor force them on others.

Stuff

So aside from trying to pick fights, would you mind sharing a VSD centric list I could try out? Lets be productive here.

Again, I think the VSD1 is awesome at controlling squads. To me fleets containing VSDs are more effective when they are squad-centric. I've loved playing 3xVSD1s with Tarkin. I gave two of them Boosted Comms (because that's all I own) and rolled out max squads with them.

Tarkin gives them decent options and allows you to control 12 squads a turn. Not to shabby. When you start thinking of squads as little maneuverable upgrade cards, you get the idea of how powerful they can be.

With wave 3 I'm excited about flotilla options. I've rolled 2xVSD1 plus 2 Gozantis on vassal to good effect, although for my bombers I though BCC was going to make a much bigger impact than it has so far. The really big impact is having the extra activation. That is very nice. And with Tarkin, the little things can still push 3 squads to either deal with enemy squads or bomb ships.

I have been extremely happy with my configurations against everything except the DeMSU list. That is a tough nut to crack. I'm getting much better at dealing with it, but it still has so many advantages.

And that's the thing I don't get about facing VSDs. Their lack of maneuverability and their slowness are pretty blatant. I've had more maneuverable lists try to go head-to-head multiple times, which I just don't understand.

It's also my gripe against the core set. Either the Rebel player is going to fly into the VSD front arc and die, or zip past the VSD and kill it (or spend an inordinate amount of time circling around and not killing it).

As to VSD-centric lists, here's a repost of my second place list at the Cambridge Regional:

Faction: Galactic Empire

Points: 399/400

Commander: Admiral Motti

Assault Objective: Precision Strike
Defense Objective: Contested Outpost
Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)
- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)
- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

[ flagship ] Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Admiral Motti ( 24 points)
- Boosted Comms ( 4 points)

1 Dengar ( 20 points)
2 TIE Advanced Squadrons ( 24 points)
4 TIE Bomber Squadrons ( 36 points)
1 IG-88 ( 21 points)
1 "Mauler" Mithel ( 15 points)
1 Major Rhymer ( 16 points)

It relies heavily on a slow-roll against most fleets with the bombers flying out at range. The anti-squadron contingent has a strong alpha strike and can pick apart Rieekan and Imperial Aces effectively. The biggest thing is to be careful with deployment and early maneuvering. Your ships are so painfully slow and clunky. Do a quick analysis of your opponent's list, and determine the most dangerous component. If it's a swarm, try to keep as many ships in front of you for as long as possible, and be ready to have your bombers cover the flanks and rear of your ships. If you corner deploy at an angle, kill any ships trying to make a run down the board edge, and maneuver in an oblique, you can maximize table coverage with your front arcs and increase the distance they have to travel to get around your flank. If your opponent has an obviously powerful ship, keep that one in front of you so you can hammer them with fire and your bombers.

With Motti, I only lost two ships across three games, and even losing two ships in a single game isn't a serious defeat. You're out 160pts or so, and I would hope that you've also given your opponent a thrashing, so finishing with a 5-5 or even a 6-4 isn't overly difficult.

Stuff

So aside from trying to pick fights, would you mind sharing a VSD centric list I could try out? Lets be productive here.

Sure. Let's go up to wave 3.

List

That is a nice composition you have there. I am familiar with the corner slow roll, its one of my favorite ways to manoeuvre those wedges. With the squadrons would you prefer to engage the enemy or be engaged upon with the space superiority contingent? Presuming it's IG 88, Mauler and the TIE advanced units/ possibly even Dengar thrown in if the bombers look relatively safe. I like to get the first hit in with my CAP to cut their DPS if they also rely on space superiority squadrons.

List

Squadrons light, I like it. But I will just swap out the firesprays for TIEs, more bodies means more time before bombers get me. I presume this is a VASSAL list since it has wave 3 units. I'll go check with my circle to see if they are cool with proxy units. I should have CR90's that can be used for that.

Also I'll have to swap out the Gladiators for something else. People are still sensitive about it, Rebel centric group mind you.

List

That is a nice composition you have there. I am familiar with the corner slow roll, its one of my favorite ways to manoeuvre those wedges. With the squadrons would you prefer to engage the enemy or be engaged upon with the space superiority contingent? Presuming it's IG 88, Mauler and the TIE advanced units/ possibly even Dengar thrown in if the bombers look relatively safe. I like to get the first hit in with my CAP to cut their DPS if they also rely on space superiority squadrons.

List

Squadrons light, I like it. But I will just swap out the firesprays for TIEs, more bodies means more time before bombers get me. I presume this is a VASSAL list since it has wave 3 units. I'll go check with my circle to see if they are cool with proxy units. I should have CR90's that can be used for that.

Also I'll have to swap out the Gladiators for something else. People are still sensitive about it, Rebel centric group mind you.

No, not a Vassal list. This is something I will be playing when wave 3 drops.