The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

It is very easy for bombers to kill before it can fire it's AS dice. Using the raider as an effective squadron screener takes no small measure of subtlety and luck.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

It only throws two dice and can't deal with defense tokens. So you get into range for a turn, maybe even engage them for a turn, and then it's the next turn and they move away dealing maybe a point of damage for their effort.

Alright, that's a bit unfair, especially the "trash heap" line. Raider-1s can't deal with defense tokens, but with Ordnance Experts each black die has about a 90% chance of a hit, so you're either burning braces on small attacks or you're whittling them down one salvo at a time. For efficiency and ability to lay down damage they are one of the best ships in the game, and certainly one of the lowest opportunity costs for doing so. No, they can't handle bombers on their own, and only Instigator can lock them down, but Instigator is active permanently and Intel doesn't deal with her, so to push through that ship involves killing it. For maximum effectiveness, an escort is required to hold down the victims for the barrage of fire, but that's a minor investment and the fighters don't have to be directed by the Raider. As pocket carriers, yes they lose out to the Gozanti, but unlike the Gozanti, they are potent combat-capable craft. I've had great success using Raiders armed with either Ordnance or Ion Cannon crit upgrades to deal damage well above their cost in synergy with larger, heavier combatants, particularly the Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Are they easy to fly? Certainly not, and they aren't nearly as sturdy as the average Imperial warship either. As Democratus said, to use them effectively requires subtlety and luck, but with the right upgrades, consorts, and battle plan, you don't need a whole lot of the latter, and you can have yourself a nice little package of pain for your opponent.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

Lira Wessex sobs in the corner.

I need to start an Assault Frigate Appreciation Society for my favorite maligned space potato

Good luck with that pyqz. From my rigorous research and fancy university degree*, I've learned that you need at least 3 other members to form a club, and that's lower on the social food chain than a society No four people in the world can actually like that terrible tuber.

*read as 'watching anime while getting my BA.'

assault frigate is so ugly but so good at the same time. I'm all confused with my feelings for it.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

Lira Wessex sobs in the corner.

pfft she's too busy spending her credits from ISD contracts to worry about how people feel about the Raider

I did have a fair bit of success running a VSD, GSD, double Raider list when I was starting off. I would often fly the raiders to get behind less-maneuverable MC80s and hit them from the rear. I've taken out two pickles (on separate occasions) with a pair of Raiders and a smattering of damage from other sources.

Granted, it did take a couple of games for me to understand how to make them useful.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

It only throws two dice and can't deal with defense tokens. So you get into range for a turn, maybe even engage them for a turn, and then it's the next turn and they move away dealing maybe a point of damage for their effort.

Alright, that's a bit unfair, especially the "trash heap" line. Raider-1s can't deal with defense tokens, but with Ordnance Experts each black die has about a 90% chance of a hit, so you're either burning braces on small attacks or you're whittling them down one salvo at a time. For efficiency and ability to lay down damage they are one of the best ships in the game, and certainly one of the lowest opportunity costs for doing so. No, they can't handle bombers on their own, and only Instigator can lock them down, but Instigator is active permanently and Intel doesn't deal with her, so to push through that ship involves killing it. For maximum effectiveness, an escort is required to hold down the victims for the barrage of fire, but that's a minor investment and the fighters don't have to be directed by the Raider. As pocket carriers, yes they lose out to the Gozanti, but unlike the Gozanti, they are potent combat-capable craft. I've had great success using Raiders armed with either Ordnance or Ion Cannon crit upgrades to deal damage well above their cost in synergy with larger, heavier combatants, particularly the Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Are they easy to fly? Certainly not, and they aren't nearly as sturdy as the average Imperial warship either. As Democratus said, to use them effectively requires subtlety and luck, but with the right upgrades, consorts, and battle plan, you don't need a whole lot of the latter, and you can have yourself a nice little package of pain for your opponent.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

It only throws two dice and can't deal with defense tokens. So you get into range for a turn, maybe even engage them for a turn, and then it's the next turn and they move away dealing maybe a point of damage for their effort.

Alright, that's a bit unfair, especially the "trash heap" line. Raider-1s can't deal with defense tokens, but with Ordnance Experts each black die has about a 90% chance of a hit, so you're either burning braces on small attacks or you're whittling them down one salvo at a time. For efficiency and ability to lay down damage they are one of the best ships in the game, and certainly one of the lowest opportunity costs for doing so. No, they can't handle bombers on their own, and only Instigator can lock them down, but Instigator is active permanently and Intel doesn't deal with her, so to push through that ship involves killing it. For maximum effectiveness, an escort is required to hold down the victims for the barrage of fire, but that's a minor investment and the fighters don't have to be directed by the Raider. As pocket carriers, yes they lose out to the Gozanti, but unlike the Gozanti, they are potent combat-capable craft. I've had great success using Raiders armed with either Ordnance or Ion Cannon crit upgrades to deal damage well above their cost in synergy with larger, heavier combatants, particularly the Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Are they easy to fly? Certainly not, and they aren't nearly as sturdy as the average Imperial warship either. As Democratus said, to use them effectively requires subtlety and luck, but with the right upgrades, consorts, and battle plan, you don't need a whole lot of the latter, and you can have yourself a nice little package of pain for your opponent.

The Gozanti are just as combat capable because with the 18 points they save by not being a raider they can carry two tie fighter squadrons which are better than a raider in AA firepower, and they still get attacks of their own. They also get to extend their new two blue dice armament to long range, something a raider can't do.

Of course two TIE squadrons beat out the Raider in damage potential on target, the Raider was never meant to replace a fighter screen and efforts to use it that way are doomed to failure. However, the two TIE units have six health between them and with the disparity of anti-squad vs battery power on squadrons, are far less survivable than the Raider. Their damage is also limited to a maximum of two targets, whereas a Raider can fire into two arcs, which can be a dozen squadrons or more.

I never meant to imply that the Gozanti was not combat-capable, only that the Raider is effective as a ship-to-ship combatant, whereas the Gozanti is not. A single red die forward and single blue to either beam, or a blue in all directions is not exactly intimidating firepower, and is actively laughed at by anything with an evade token. I am going to assume your final comment about two new blue die armament to long range is a reference to the two TIE fighters they have in tow, to which I point out that is not a trait exclusive to the Gozanti but can also be executed by a Raider equipped with Expanded Hangar Bays, and that the Raider, unlike the Gozanti, could dial up its fighters even farther with Flight Controllers, something the Gozanti can't take.

Long story short, the Raider is a small ship with obvious weaknesses, but it also possesses powerful strengths when flown well in concert with a larger plan. I would rate it as the Imperial ship to date, with the arguable exception of the Interdictor, as possessing the highest skill floor, thus creating something of a bad reputation in a fleet of relatively low skill floor ship options.

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

It only throws two dice and can't deal with defense tokens. So you get into range for a turn, maybe even engage them for a turn, and then it's the next turn and they move away dealing maybe a point of damage for their effort.

Alright, that's a bit unfair, especially the "trash heap" line. Raider-1s can't deal with defense tokens, but with Ordnance Experts each black die has about a 90% chance of a hit, so you're either burning braces on small attacks or you're whittling them down one salvo at a time. For efficiency and ability to lay down damage they are one of the best ships in the game, and certainly one of the lowest opportunity costs for doing so. No, they can't handle bombers on their own, and only Instigator can lock them down, but Instigator is active permanently and Intel doesn't deal with her, so to push through that ship involves killing it. For maximum effectiveness, an escort is required to hold down the victims for the barrage of fire, but that's a minor investment and the fighters don't have to be directed by the Raider. As pocket carriers, yes they lose out to the Gozanti, but unlike the Gozanti, they are potent combat-capable craft. I've had great success using Raiders armed with either Ordnance or Ion Cannon crit upgrades to deal damage well above their cost in synergy with larger, heavier combatants, particularly the Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Are they easy to fly? Certainly not, and they aren't nearly as sturdy as the average Imperial warship either. As Democratus said, to use them effectively requires subtlety and luck, but with the right upgrades, consorts, and battle plan, you don't need a whole lot of the latter, and you can have yourself a nice little package of pain for your opponent.

The Gozanti are just as combat capable because with the 18 points they save by not being a raider they can carry two tie fighter squadrons which are better than a raider in AA firepower, and they still get attacks of their own. They also get to extend their new two blue dice armament to long range, something a raider can't do.

Of course two TIE squadrons beat out the Raider in damage potential on target, the Raider was never meant to replace a fighter screen and efforts to use it that way are doomed to failure. However, the two TIE units have six health between them and with the disparity of anti-squad vs battery power on squadrons, are far less survivable than the Raider. Their damage is also limited to a maximum of two targets, whereas a Raider can fire into two arcs, which can be a dozen squadrons or more.

I never meant to imply that the Gozanti was not combat-capable, only that the Raider is effective as a ship-to-ship combatant, whereas the Gozanti is not. A single red die forward and single blue to either beam, or a blue in all directions is not exactly intimidating firepower, and is actively laughed at by anything with an evade token. I am going to assume your final comment about two new blue die armament to long range is a reference to the two TIE fighters they have in tow, to which I point out that is not a trait exclusive to the Gozanti but can also be executed by a Raider equipped with Expanded Hangar Bays, and that the Raider, unlike the Gozanti, could dial up its fighters even farther with Flight Controllers, something the Gozanti can't take.

Long story short, the Raider is a small ship with obvious weaknesses, but it also possesses powerful strengths when flown well in concert with a larger plan. I would rate it as the Imperial ship to date, with the arguable exception of the Interdictor, as possessing the highest skill floor, thus creating something of a bad reputation in a fleet of relatively low skill floor ship options.

Oh the Raider can command fighters too? With expanded hangerbays just to pull even with the ship twenty points cheaper? Oh but they can take even more upgrades? Now you're at the Gladiator price point.

I'm not sure why you're choosing the Raider as your hill to die on, especially in the "what ship do you hate" thread. If you want a Raider Appreciation Station where you can pretend it's some high skill jewel go make a thread about it.

You can hate whatever ship you want, but ship/squadron health is apples/oranges.

Assault Frigate- Ugly, doesn't fit aesthetically (to me at least), ugly, did I mention that the ship ruins the look of the battle because it is ugly?

I love that ship's aesthetic, but I agree the scale looks wrong. I might carve some extra panel lines into one...

The Raider is bad at everything it was designed to, and now the gozanti exists and I never need to fly one of those trash heaps ever again.

It is far from useless at anti squadron play.

It only throws two dice and can't deal with defense tokens. So you get into range for a turn, maybe even engage them for a turn, and then it's the next turn and they move away dealing maybe a point of damage for their effort.

Alright, that's a bit unfair, especially the "trash heap" line. Raider-1s can't deal with defense tokens, but with Ordnance Experts each black die has about a 90% chance of a hit, so you're either burning braces on small attacks or you're whittling them down one salvo at a time. For efficiency and ability to lay down damage they are one of the best ships in the game, and certainly one of the lowest opportunity costs for doing so. No, they can't handle bombers on their own, and only Instigator can lock them down, but Instigator is active permanently and Intel doesn't deal with her, so to push through that ship involves killing it. For maximum effectiveness, an escort is required to hold down the victims for the barrage of fire, but that's a minor investment and the fighters don't have to be directed by the Raider. As pocket carriers, yes they lose out to the Gozanti, but unlike the Gozanti, they are potent combat-capable craft. I've had great success using Raiders armed with either Ordnance or Ion Cannon crit upgrades to deal damage well above their cost in synergy with larger, heavier combatants, particularly the Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Are they easy to fly? Certainly not, and they aren't nearly as sturdy as the average Imperial warship either. As Democratus said, to use them effectively requires subtlety and luck, but with the right upgrades, consorts, and battle plan, you don't need a whole lot of the latter, and you can have yourself a nice little package of pain for your opponent.

The Gozanti are just as combat capable because with the 18 points they save by not being a raider they can carry two tie fighter squadrons which are better than a raider in AA firepower, and they still get attacks of their own. They also get to extend their new two blue dice armament to long range, something a raider can't do.

Of course two TIE squadrons beat out the Raider in damage potential on target, the Raider was never meant to replace a fighter screen and efforts to use it that way are doomed to failure. However, the two TIE units have six health between them and with the disparity of anti-squad vs battery power on squadrons, are far less survivable than the Raider. Their damage is also limited to a maximum of two targets, whereas a Raider can fire into two arcs, which can be a dozen squadrons or more.

I never meant to imply that the Gozanti was not combat-capable, only that the Raider is effective as a ship-to-ship combatant, whereas the Gozanti is not. A single red die forward and single blue to either beam, or a blue in all directions is not exactly intimidating firepower, and is actively laughed at by anything with an evade token. I am going to assume your final comment about two new blue die armament to long range is a reference to the two TIE fighters they have in tow, to which I point out that is not a trait exclusive to the Gozanti but can also be executed by a Raider equipped with Expanded Hangar Bays, and that the Raider, unlike the Gozanti, could dial up its fighters even farther with Flight Controllers, something the Gozanti can't take.

Long story short, the Raider is a small ship with obvious weaknesses, but it also possesses powerful strengths when flown well in concert with a larger plan. I would rate it as the Imperial ship to date, with the arguable exception of the Interdictor, as possessing the highest skill floor, thus creating something of a bad reputation in a fleet of relatively low skill floor ship options.

Lol, the Tie squadrons six health is more than a raider's four. And the Gozanti carries a scatter to the raider's brace. Plus three more health. You can also use the station to heal three per turn instead of the Raider's one. The fact that we're conceding a ship's firepower to a pair of the most basic squadrons in the game should tell you everything.

Oh the Raider can command fighters too? With expanded hangerbays just to pull even with the ship twenty points cheaper? Oh but they can take even more upgrades? Now you're at the Gladiator price point.

I'm not sure why you're choosing the Raider as your hill to die on, especially in the "what ship do you hate" thread. If you want a Raider Appreciation Station where you can pretend it's some high skill jewel go make a thread about it.

First, Raiders have two shields that need to be burned through, so we're back to six, just like the two TIEs. Next, each TIE dies after three hits, whereas you need all six to take a Raider out. Finally, as CarribeanNinja pointed out, comparing the numbers is worthless because they face different dice pools. Let's set this up against a pair of A-wings, as close to a Rebel TIE as we've got right now. Against the Raider the A-wings throw a single black without bomber, so one point of damage per turn max, and an average damage of .75 apiece, meaning the Raider has minimum three, average four turns to live, during which unless you roll horribly/the dice hate you, you will kill both A-wings. Compare that to the TIE fighters, who, again on average, will die one per turn just from direct attack, and have to deal with Counter, and can be one-shot by the A-wings with good rolls. Is a pair of A-wings against a pair of TIEs fair? No, but I think I've better explained why your note about health figures is not the entire picture.

Yes the Raider is a more expensive pocket carrier than the Gozanti. Of course it is, the Gozanti is designed as a light carrier, whereas the Raider simply has that capability. However, the Raider has its niche as a carrier as does the Gozanti. Is it more expensive? Sure. Does it come with other benefits, such as greater speed, and firepower? Also yes.

I'm not dying on the hill of Raider superiority, I'm dying on the hill on giving everything a fair day in the court of public opinion. And maybe that's an even more lost cause, but I still tried. That's my attempt to bring a level discussion for the day.

Funny really.

Its being said a gozanti and two TIE Fighters is better than a raider, but if the two sets were to fight the raider would win everytime.

Blue/Black combo tears through flottilas.

As an aside, if you are using the Raider for AA duties, you need to park where the squadrons come to you, rather than going to them.

Mine is the Gladiator. Specifically, the Demolisher. Like Vykes and Church I follow their opinions, like Church I think the ship is okay on it's own, but Gladiator makes it loathesome.

The reason why is because that combination alone has made VSD and ISD "heavy ship" lists obsolete.

Competitively, a kitted Demolisher is a powerful choice. It is more powerful than any ISD or VSD upgrade combination for effectiveness and use of points. So once you have Demolisher you have two directions: Build up with large ships, or build wide with cheap ones. Since Activations can be seen as more valuable than Hull for lists running Demolisher, the default option is to go wide. And since APTs are the best upgrade card in the game for what they do, better to load up on Black torpedo carriers to play the game ignoring shields and handing criticals to your opponent.

So... I dislike the Gladiator for what it has done to the Imperial list-building meta. Imperial Captains are not standing on the majestic, canonical command decks of Star Destroyers and commanding the destruction of their enemies by a torrent of turbolaser fire. Instead, they're in the crash seat between Screed and Montferrat racing into range to deliver APTs and black dice as close as possible and as often as possible. That is not the Imperial Navy I imagined myself wanting to command, but that is the strongest of the Imperial dynamics right now.

I am experimenting with an Interdictor and 2x VSD-I build right now, for the revenge of Expanded Launcher VSD-1s. Won both trial games so far, lets see how the next iteration goes.

Assault Frigate- Ugly, doesn't fit aesthetically (to me at least), ugly, did I mention that the ship ruins the look of the battle because it is ugly?

I love that ship's aesthetic, but I agree the scale looks wrong. I might carve some extra panel lines into one...

Assault Frigate- Ugly, doesn't fit aesthetically (to me at least), ugly, did I mention that the ship ruins the look of the battle because it is ugly?

I love that ship's aesthetic, but I agree the scale looks wrong. I might carve some extra panel lines into one...

I painted mine to look like an orca, so much better.

...I think I need to see a pic!

Assault Frigate- Ugly, doesn't fit aesthetically (to me at least), ugly, did I mention that the ship ruins the look of the battle because it is ugly?

I love that ship's aesthetic, but I agree the scale looks wrong. I might carve some extra panel lines into one...

I painted mine to look like an orca, so much better.

So the ugliness of the ship makes you wail too?

Funny really.

Its being said a gozanti and two TIE Fighters is better than a raider, but if the two sets were to fight the raider would win everytime.

Blue/Black combo tears through flottilas.

As an aside, if you are using the Raider for AA duties, you need to park where the squadrons come to you, rather than going to them.

Only one time I ever saw a raider make back its points. In dangerous territory it picked up three objectives, blowing itself up on the third. 44 investment, 45 return. What an amazing ship.

My two Ywings have more hull than your ISD.

HA!

any fighter that moves slower hen any capital ship. or any ship faster then an ISD that they out ran in the movies and books.

First of all, it's basically impossible to tell someone else they're wrong for liking or disliking whatever they please in a competitive game (as their criteria and playing skill/style may differ from yours, making it all subjective).

However, I can't see how one person continuing to rant about their inability to use Raiders well over and over is terribly useful. We get it, you don't like Raiders. Several larger tournaments have been won by Imperial fleets using Raiders so clearly at least some people are using them in competitive environments and succeeding. They may not jive with you and that's fine, but continuing to carry on as though your opinion is objective fact and you need to convince the rest of us isn't really what this thread is about. Please just let it drop.