Fleet Summary Page (399 of 400 pts) Faction: The Empire Commander: Admiral Ozzel (20 pts)

Flagship: (137 pts) Imperial II-class Star Destroyer (120 pts)Electronic Counter Measures (7 pts) XI7 Turbolasers (6 pts) Leading Shots (4 pts)

Fleet Ship 1: (121 pts) Imperial I-class Star Destroyer (110 pts) Intel Officer (7 pts) Ordnance Experts (4 pts)

Fleet Ship 2: (121 pts) Imperial I-class Star Destroyer (110 pts) Intel Officer (7 pts) Ordnance Experts (4 pts)

Objectives: Advanced Gunnery , Fire Lanes , Minefields

I like the idea but some bomber heavy fleets will be tricky to deal with. Not much you can do about it as designing three ISDs for fighter defence is inefficient.

The fast slash strategy of going past/through the enemy getting a kill or two on the way and relying on your large hull to avoid loosing a ship on the battle pass is probably best. Ozzel is ideal for this but if you plot nav commands with a banked nav token you can get some of the benefits of him and therefore benefit from another admiral. Motti springs to mind for extra bulk but I like the Idea of the new Admiral Konstantine when he comes out. Konstantine and a single Tractor beam could help disrupt enemy formations and pin victims in place or speed up an MC30 to speed 4 so it overshoots.

I like this list. I may drop Leading shots to upgrade admiral though.

As far as objectives go: I may chose Contested Outpost instead of fire lanes, so fire lanes tokens don't mess with your navigation and intel sweep instead of minefields (extra 75 points are nice and can mitigate a loss of ISD)

I already see X and Y-Wings flashing past the ISDs and starting their bombing run on their rear shields...

I like this list. I may drop Leading shots to upgrade admiral though.As far as objectives go: I may chose Contested Outpost instead of fire lanes, so fire lanes tokens don't mess with your navigation and intel sweep instead of minefields (extra 75 points are nice and can mitigate a loss of ISD)

I was originally thinking this too about the commander, but the ability to hold back/pounce whenever I need to could be even better than motti, as damage mitigation is almost always preferred to just some extra bulk. I'm glad you like it though pt, your input matters a lot to me, as that 2 ISD1 3 Raider list of yours is one of my favorite of all time.

As far as everyone giving me a heads up about bombers, yes, thank you, I am aware that bombers would pose a problem for this list... Whenever I post a squadron less fleet that's the only critiques people give me, but I am already aware of this fact lol. Maybe I should post a disclaimer with all of my squadron less fleets now...

I was originally thinking this too about the commander, but the ability to hold back/pounce whenever I need to could be even better than motti, as damage mitigation is almost always preferred to just some extra bulk. I'm glad you like it though pt, your input matters a lot to me, as that 2 ISD1 3 Raider list of yours is one of my favorite of all time.

As far as everyone giving me a heads up about bombers, yes, thank you, I am aware that bombers would pose a problem for this list... Whenever I post a squadron less fleet that's the only critiques people give me, but I am already aware of this fact lol. Maybe I should post a disclaimer with all of my squadron less fleets now...

Thanks! I agree about the ability to change speed rapidly, however it's likely that you won't need it more than once per game so the same can be achieved by storing nav token from nav command that you decided to not execute (and if you're nav spamming there should be be enough of them)

And extra 3 hull means potential extra activation of an ISD, which is a big advantage by itself. Also I may replace ECM with Gunnery team on ISD2 (as your list is an aggro fleet by definition and Gunnery helps a lot for area denial as well as AS)

I was originally thinking this too about the commander, but the ability to hold back/pounce whenever I need to could be even better than motti, as damage mitigation is almost always preferred to just some extra bulk. I'm glad you like it though pt, your input matters a lot to me, as that 2 ISD1 3 Raider list of yours is one of my favorite of all time.As far as everyone giving me a heads up about bombers, yes, thank you, I am aware that bombers would pose a problem for this list... Whenever I post a squadron less fleet that's the only critiques people give me, but I am already aware of this fact lol. Maybe I should post a disclaimer with all of my squadron less fleets now...

Thanks! I agree about the ability to change speed rapidly, however it's likely that you won't need it more than once per game so the same can be achieved by storing nav token from nav command that you decided to not execute (and if you're nav spamming there should be be enough of them)And extra 3 hull means potential extra activation of an ISD, which is a big advantage by itself. Also I may replace ECM with Gunnery team on ISD2 (as your list is an aggro fleet by definition and Gunnery helps a lot for area denial as well as AS)

I like the way the ISD2 is set up, having ECM ensures my brace will always be available to my flagship. And a lack of GT allows me to put AG on my only ISD with XI7 on it. Fire lanes is there because I get more points per round, but CO would be an even easier objective to play around. And ya I probably should go with Intel sweep. It's my typical go to blue objective, but in this instance I had been thinking that if I could cut the board in half, it greatly minimizes the amount of area that my opponent could try and escape my front arcs to

I like the way the ISD2 is set up, having ECM ensures my brace will always be available to my flagship. And a lack of GT allows me to put AG on my only ISD with XI7 on it. Fire lanes is there because I get more points per round, but CO would be an even easier objective to play around. And ya I probably should go with Intel sweep. It's my typical go to blue objective, but in this instance I had been thinking that if I could cut the board in half, it greatly minimizes the amount of area that my opponent could try and escape my front arcs to

I think that in the current meta you're more likely to receive a lot of small attacks, so the value of ECM is less. It'll change Wave3 though.

As far as Minefields go, i'll take a mine (or asteroid) every time to escape ISD front arc.

I asked on another thread how three ISDs could work, and i reckon this is it

Think Motti for the win though? And all three as ISD 1s? Could slip a few Ties in to take the Bomber heat off for a while

I like the way the ISD2 is set up, having ECM ensures my brace will always be available to my flagship. And a lack of GT allows me to put AG on my only ISD with XI7 on it. Fire lanes is there because I get more points per round, but CO would be an even easier objective to play around. And ya I probably should go with Intel sweep. It's my typical go to blue objective, but in this instance I had been thinking that if I could cut the board in half, it greatly minimizes the amount of area that my opponent could try and escape my front arcs to

I think that in the current meta you're more likely to receive a lot of small attacks, so the value of ECM is less. It'll change Wave3 though.As far as Minefields go, i'll take a mine (or asteroid) every time to escape ISD front arc.

That might be your meta, but mine is flush with Ackbar and his fistfuls of red dice...

That might be your meta, but mine is flush with Ackbar and his fistfuls of red dice...

I see. In this case it makes sense, I agree.

Ran this list today against a buddy of mine and had a blast with it. I'll write up an AAR (with pictures) this weekend.

Question...why OE instead of Leading Shots? OE limits you to just black dice, where as Leading Shots could affect the entire pool of dice?

Leading Shots only effects the front arc of an ISD1 where as Ord Ex helps out the flanks as well