I find the rebel squadron design tack in this game to be a bit iffy but perhaps the new keywords will help them with more generic support for them. The rhymer ball is so efficient compared to the rebel options..

I also think that clicking the fighter bases when they have to get pretty close together is a pain in the ass and i'm not sure how I would do it better though.

Rhymerballs arent any more efficient. Like all things dark side it's just easier. Yavaris is the Rebel equivalent. Where Rhymer gives you persistence, Yavaris gives you burst. It is easy to line up? No. Does it do a hell of a lot more damage than a Rhymerball when you do it right? Absolutely.

Now in the fighter fight, the Imperials have long had the upper hand, with Yavaris being just about the only way to remotely keep up with Howl and Flight Controllers and Mauler and Fel and...sorry my PTSD is kicking in from all the blue dice and auto damage. Give me a second. OK, where was I? Ah yes. Ass loads of Imperial damage. The main problem for Rebels has always been weathering that initial storm. They have the speed to almost always alpha strike, so even if you have Yavaris, you have to live long enough to attack bad. Rieekan has always helped this to a degree.

I feel like making the observation that, for all the fighter-killing advantages of the Wave 1 Imperial squadrons, all of it fell by the wayside for two reasons: 3-hull fragility on your primary fighters, and the fact that they can't hurt capital ships as well as nearly every Rebel fighter can.

It's why we've seen Rhymerballs ascend over TIE Swarms after wave 2 shook out and better Imperial fighters became available. Why take Howlrunner when Aggressors and Firesprays don't have swarm? There is literally no reason to start buying up generic TIE Fighters and interceptors to take to the fight because once you've killed any amount of enemy fighters, they become inefficient means to attack capital ships and become easy points for the enemy to casually swat aside with their blue dice (I know, because I was in that very tournament with that TIE Swarm list a few months back and realized how much it wasn't going to work against capital ships).

If you do take TIE Fighters and TIE Interceptors right now, I feel that they're going to be a part of an ace fighter ball. Mithel will be favored over Howlrunner because not many aces have Swarm, and Fel is still going to have some use as long as Vader or a couple of lone generics (Or Black Squadron!) are in place.

That's just it, Truthiness...

When you analyse what is said by a few people - the problem isn't Squadrons themselves... its the indecision that is being blamed on the Squadrons.

Squadrons can be quick and simple to use... But for those who are prone to analysis paralysis, and even overthinking - they can be a drag on the time limit...

But the exact same can be said of Ships in their Maneuver phase, as well... Its not a problem that is unique to Squadrons, I believe - and I do firmly reiterate that I believe in blaming the squadrons, you're doing both yourself, your opponent, and the game itself a disservice...

When things are going to time - I don't blame Squadrons... I blame myself... Because I've spent a lot of time with squadrons, and with ships. I should be able to pick them up and place them quickly - I should be working out in my head during my opponents move my game plan... I should be moving my gameplan forward, pressing my enemy...

Hell, if I give my opponent too much time to think (there is certainly an amount of time for courtesy's sake, but if I'm agonizing over moves, he has time to run multiple scenarios in his head, and that's a disservice to my own play!), then its my own fault....

So yes, I do believe that with practice, and with familiarity (two recurrent themes, that have been emphasised by Blair and by the MandoMoose), you can improve...

Will some people ever be comfortable with Squadrons? Probably Not.

Will some people ever like squadrons? Hell Arse No.

And that's Cool.

I just like blame settling where I believe its deserved, I guess.

And The squadrons did have a potential to really, really slow down Games in development... So they were capped. And probably rightly so. But that's a solution, as far as the designers are concerned - and I'm happy to explore what I can do to keep that.

I'm half tempted to start gluing QR code badges to the fighters so I can toggle/HP them digitally. Especially if you end up in a big furball, AND you're trying to be careful about picking up/putting back fighters, I agree this can really get bogged down severely.

Now, I love fighters, and star wars fleet battles without fighters is like trying to quantify force sensitivity through symbiotic microscopic organisms. But MAN, the fighter bases are some of the poorest designed/manufactured components of the game ESPECIALLY given how the fighter mechanics are so dependent on positioning minutiae. I tried sanding the bases of a few of my fighters and using silicone lubricant on the dials, and it kinda works, kinda doesn't.

I suppose there's nothing stopping me from printing out a paper roster and doing things ye olde 80's/early 90's board game style, but this has to be my number one gripe about the game.

That's just it, Truthiness...

When you analyse what is said by a few people - the problem isn't Squadrons themselves... its the indecision that is being blamed on the Squadrons.

Squadrons can be quick and simple to use... But for those who are prone to analysis paralysis, and even overthinking - they can be a drag on the time limit...

But the exact same can be said of Ships in their Maneuver phase, as well... Its not a problem that is unique to Squadrons, I believe - and I do firmly reiterate that I believe in blaming the squadrons, you're doing both yourself, your opponent, and the game itself a disservice...

When things are going to time - I don't blame Squadrons... I blame myself... Because I've spent a lot of time with squadrons, and with ships. I should be able to pick them up and place them quickly - I should be working out in my head during my opponents move my game plan... I should be moving my gameplan forward, pressing my enemy...

Hell, if I give my opponent too much time to think (there is certainly an amount of time for courtesy's sake, but if I'm agonizing over moves, he has time to run multiple scenarios in his head, and that's a disservice to my own play!), then its my own fault....

So yes, I do believe that with practice, and with familiarity (two recurrent themes, that have been emphasised by Blair and by the MandoMoose), you can improve...

Will some people ever be comfortable with Squadrons? Probably Not.

Will some people ever like squadrons? Hell Arse No.

And that's Cool.

I just like blame settling where I believe its deserved, I guess.

And The squadrons did have a potential to really, really slow down Games in development... So they were capped. And probably rightly so. But that's a solution, as far as the designers are concerned - and I'm happy to explore what I can do to keep that.

As Armada Jim says "Practice, Practice, Practice, and more Practice."

For those of you who are worried about losing positioning of squadrons when picking them up to adjust damage or activation, just slip a quarter under the squadron before you pick it up. Quarters fit perfectly underneath and give you a precise marker to place them back over.

I'm half tempted to start gluing QR code badges to the fighters so I can toggle/HP them digitally. Especially if you end up in a big furball, AND you're trying to be careful about picking up/putting back fighters, I agree this can really get bogged down severely.

Now, I love fighters, and star wars fleet battles without fighters is like trying to quantify force sensitivity through symbiotic microscopic organisms. But MAN, the fighter bases are some of the poorest designed/manufactured components of the game ESPECIALLY given how the fighter mechanics are so dependent on positioning minutiae. I tried sanding the bases of a few of my fighters and using silicone lubricant on the dials, and it kinda works, kinda doesn't.

I suppose there's nothing stopping me from printing out a paper roster and doing things ye olde 80's/early 90's board game style, but this has to be my number one gripe about the game.

After worlds I'll try to brainstorm and prototype something that will make managing squads without ever needing to pick them up. It is very useful to look at and quickly see the HP of a squad on the table so that can't be lost. Looking them up, even on an app, would be a pain. I can't quickly come up with anything that wouldn't require modding every squad stand, which for my crazy collection would take 2 years.

My main gaming bud removed the activation sliders and uses tokens set next to any squad he activates. Less work and no picking up squads, but it does add more bits to the table. It's also hard to track a giant wad of 10+ squads with tokens.

For those of you who are worried about losing positioning of squadrons when picking them up to adjust damage or activation, just slip a quarter under the squadron before you pick it up. Quarters fit perfectly underneath and give you a precise marker to place them back over.

I currently use these gadgets. They work well, but it does take some time.

I'm half tempted to start gluing QR code badges to the fighters so I can toggle/HP them digitally. Especially if you end up in a big furball, AND you're trying to be careful about picking up/putting back fighters, I agree this can really get bogged down severely.

Sounds like an idea. Also, wireless tiny LCD-tags would be nice. Anyone has any experience or suggestions about products or so?

An orange horse shoe shaped token that would go around the squads neck could work a little better than placing a token next to the squad on the table.

I haven't tried it yet, but I bet putting the cardboard disks on a pencil and making the hole a bit bigger would make them easier to rotate the damage marker.. And maybe putting a tiny bit of cardboard that stick over the edge slightly would make it easier to rotate them without moving them so much. Or maybe even just a hot glue ball dab on the edge of the cardboard?

I'll try it with a guinea pig tie.

I'll comment that FFG has spoiled us with a whole array of squadrons to play with! After Wave 5 drops, my wallet is hopeful that we won't need to be clamoring for Wave 6 in June. If you've never played with 10X, 10Y, 10A or whatever (not saying to go out and buy it) but there are so many builds... Admirals... we shouldn't get bored for awhile! I would rather have problems than a stale meta.

If I recall correctly, the GenCon Special had more infamy on the interwebs than squadron domination right now. pt106 has shown that all-ship builds can win big (he has two Regionals in the current season to his credit). As someone who has run 10 Tie Bombers without air superiority squadrons (won a store championship with it in Wave 2) and who has run 5x Glad + 2x Raiders. There's a lot of things that you can play with, do reasonably well, and have FUN with.

As for the squadron game... I call it the "Game Within the Game" (it's kinda of a puzzle to me). I suck at Vassal so maybe Biggs or Mags can make Vassal brain teasers for peeps to solve?

I bring quarters... more importantly, just talk to your opponent what you intend to do (e.g., I'm gonna move this squadron to engage these things,you agree?... or I'm gonna keep these guys out of close range, etc, you agree?). This way you don't have arguments over placement when things go back to their positions. And if someone disagrees after we had previously agreed on something... really, in your leisure time you choose to cheat, be angry instead of having fun playing?

Just talk to your opponent. I love winning for sure but I am thankful for all the great peeps I've met in person. The whole point of tabletop gaming is to interact with people and unwind!

If funny when you try to explain to people that alt art cards and dice are worth potentially hundreds of dollars. Haha... but I guess it's hard to believe that diamonds are worth so much as well...

^This. I'm always discussing fine parts of ship/squadron placement with my opponent so there can't be any argument later. It's also a great way to steam off the tension between you two so you won't become sour even if you lose due bad dicerolls or if you're eliminated from the tournament.

So seriously, talk to your opponent

An orange horse shoe shaped token that would go around the squads neck could work a little better than placing a token next to the squad on the table.

Heh, that was my first thought when I started the game but I just couldn't get over tarnishing the look of my squads on the table with some goofy ring, especially after spending countless hours painting those suckers!

^This. I'm always discussing fine parts of ship/squadron placement with my opponent so there can't be any argument later. It's also a great way to steam off the tension between you two so you won't become sour even if you lose due bad dicerolls or if you're eliminated from the tournament.

So seriously, talk to your opponent

I have had enough of middle aged/retired men who should really know better being less than friendly, not social, abrasive or expectant that someone else/someone younger should be the first to initiate that they understand social etiquette to have much faith that people understand this about social interaction.

But yes, I totally agree.

I think the move to have multiple unique squadrons is a good move. It opens up possibilities of all squadron models becoming viable since there really is no option behind squadrons other than how many to take. Being able to upgrade a squadron to Biggs or Wedge can take the game to a whole new level.

The game still has a tall ship focus and I have seen games where someone wins the squadron match but loses all the big ships. I still think there could have been more done with squadrons (docking and launching from capital ships, hyperspace capabilities so they don't have to start next to a capital ship, ect). But it is far better than Wave 1 squadronless meta.

I think the move to have multiple unique squadrons is a good move. It opens up possibilities of all squadron models becoming viable since there really is no option behind squadrons other than how many to take. Being able to upgrade a squadron to Biggs or Wedge can take the game to a whole new level.

The game still has a tall ship focus and I have seen games where someone wins the squadron match but loses all the big ships. I still think there could have been more done with squadrons (docking and launching from capital ships, hyperspace capabilities so they don't have to start next to a capital ship, ect). But it is far better than Wave 1 squadronless meta.

This appears to be coming with Wave 5 and 'Rapid (Launch or Something)' in the Pelta article. I'm looking forward to being able to launch B-wings out of a Quantum Storm flotilla that has just boosted up on your flank on Round 1 or 2.

There definitely seems to be a strong push toward getting squadrons into combat faster, between this and the Fighter Assault objective and FCT. I really like it: makes it much harder to just charge through then with Demolisher or MC30's and ignore the squadron game altogether. The earlier those B-wings and TIE bombers get into combat, the harder it is for the black dice rush fleets.

But I like my black dice rush fleet being able to ignore squadrons Ard.

I like mine being able to do it.

I just don't like other people's being able to.

We proxied some corellian conflict squadrons last night and I think they are actually going to bring a lot more balance to the squadron and wider game.

Ran Biggs, Shara, Ten Numb and some Xwings and I thought there were definitely some promising signs that rebels are going to have punchy, resilient squadrons that are going to simply be too tough for a typical rhymer setup to be able to negate easily. Hopefully this will mean Imps need to bring more anti squad and spend more of the game in the squadron war rather than settling down to bomb the ships.

And this is before wave 5 mixes it up even more. I think (maybe perversely) that this may mean we see less maximum bomber fleets winning big, which might open the door for less squadron builds to become more acceptable again.

...I think they are actually going to bring a lot more balance to the squadron and wider game.

Be careful what you wish for.

In Star Wars 'bringing balance' can mean 'killing younglings en masse'.

...I think they are actually going to bring a lot more balance to the squadron and wider game.

Be careful what you wish for.

In Star Wars 'bringing balance' can mean 'killing younglings en masse'.

And in doing so, can make you an Absolute Paragon in the eyes of a Fledgling Empire....

...I think they are actually going to bring a lot more balance to the squadron and wider game.

Be careful what you wish for.

In Star Wars 'bringing balance' can mean 'killing younglings en masse'.

Won't somebody think of the younglings?!!!

...I think they are actually going to bring a lot more balance to the squadron and wider game.

Be careful what you wish for.

In Star Wars 'bringing balance' can mean 'killing younglings en masse'.

And in doing so, can make you an Absolute Paragon in the eyes of a Fledgling Empire....

Quite so! And in the interest of becoming an Absolute Paragon in the eyes of the Empire, let's discuss that balance in the squadron game:

In the core set, the Rebels had the bombers and the Empire had the space superiority fighters.

In the meta as it emerged after Wave I, the Empire seemed to become more dominant as it came to bombers, because bombers are cheap and Rhymer is the Absolute Paragon in the eyes of the Imperial Navy. I know there are such things as masses of Y-wings, but I haven't really seen them. R&Vs made the squadron game more interesting, because bombers could escape the engagement lock-down with intel, and Rogue meant that some bombers (Firesprays) could operate without a command vessel. But it didn't upend the basic structure (imbalance) that the Empire bombs, and Rebels try to prevent that. Wave III's introduction of the Bomber Command Center has only made bombers more valuable, which seems to deepen that imbalance.

As a Rhymerballer, I'm not that unhappy with the imbalance, but it does seem counter-intuitive compared to ANH/RotJ, where the big even of both movies is about a big Imperial thing being taken out by a Rebel bombing run, whereas in ESB, Imperial bomber action is limited to the carpet bombing of some asteroids, to the dismay of a space slug.

to the dismay of a space slug.

Maybe the Slug Liked it. I mean, did anyone actually ask it?

to the dismay of a space slug.

Maybe the Slug Liked it. I mean, did anyone actually ask it?

That's a very deep question.