I think with Fighter Ambush you need Boosted Comms and flying out of the gate. The objective prevents any planning and reaction from your opponent, so you need to utilize that on turn 1. Rhymer makes the best use from this because you don't need a squad command to get Tie/B in position. Just position so you are unobstructed and fire away.

I see this objective being used most effectively on an ISD I going speed 3 with FC, Boosted Comms and Expanded Hanger with Rhymer. Throw in some BCC and you're good to go.

Here's the Catch 22 I'm seeing with Fighter Ambush:

1) You're going to be at a deployment disadvantage with ships. That's near guaranteed because your opponent isn't picking it if they themselves don't have a respectable squadron contingent. They use their own squadrons to force your ships out and then deploy their own ships to gain the positioning advantage. You might be able to deploy your own fleet in a way that you can adapt and survive, but it certainly isn't going to give the second player an advantage.

2) Your fighters either need to be close enough to enemy ships to strike early and effectively, or you've given up the primary advantage of Fighter Ambush. The problem with being in range to strike? You're the second player, and that means the first player can strike your squadrons before you can even do anything. You might have Boosted Comms and Flight Commanders to take advantage of the forward deployment, but there is nothing you can do to stop the first player from making the first activation of the game a commanded alpha strike of your forward positioned squadrons.

Can you avoid these pitfalls? Sure, but the best you can really manage is an equal playing field, one in which you are the second player. This is absolutely a devastating objective if your opponent is squadron light or squadronless. However, the odds of it getting picked in that case is low. The odds of you running into another squadron heavy list is significant.

Here's the Catch 22 I'm seeing with Fighter Ambush:

1) You're going to be at a deployment disadvantage with ships. That's near guaranteed because your opponent isn't picking it if they themselves don't have a respectable squadron contingent. They use their own squadrons to force your ships out and then deploy their own ships to gain the positioning advantage. You might be able to deploy your own fleet in a way that you can adapt and survive, but it certainly isn't going to give the second player an advantage.

2) Your fighters either need to be close enough to enemy ships to strike early and effectively, or you've given up the primary advantage of Fighter Ambush. The problem with being in range to strike? You're the second player, and that means the first player can strike your squadrons before you can even do anything. You might have Boosted Comms and Flight Commanders to take advantage of the forward deployment, but there is nothing you can do to stop the first player from making the first activation of the game a commanded alpha strike of your forward positioned squadrons.

You don't need to put your obstacles within range of your opponents squads...It seems like everyone is hating on this because your opponent can get to your squads first, when you have the option of where obstacles and your squads go. And on top of that, the alpha strike everyone is so scared of needs to kill your squads before Intel comes in and frees them up. Try to kill as many Tie/B with 3 X-Wings in one round. Plus, can those X-Wings even get in range of your bombers?

You may be at a disadvantage with deployments, but that's why Boosted Comms and FC are vital to getting this to work. Speed 2 or 3 ISD with both upgrades can cover a lot of board. Sure, they know where your ISD is. But they don't know where your squads will be. Speed 4 bombers are ridiculous at getting in position, and Rhymer extends the threat range.

I feel a lot of people are seeing this as the "I must alpha strike at all costs" objective. I disagree. You get your bombers beyond range 2 of your ships. You get that extra range so your ships can start out faster without fear your outrun your squads or land on them when you fly (we have all placed squads in front of your speed 2 Vic/Neb...). And even if you place all your ships first, why does it matter? Were you going to surprise your opponent with some crazy Independence B-Wing sling shot into Yavaris double tap?

Carriers are predictable. You have squad commands coming. You fly so your squads stay in range. It might hurt to lose your main arc shot at your opponent because they out-deployed you, but in the end your main damage output comes from your squads, not your ships. Take the deployment disadvantage but make up for it by reaping the victory tokens by getting your squads in position to deal the most damage, and prevent your opponent from getting them by flying fast and out of range of their bombers. Make your opponent over extend their squads so they lose the activation, or force them to build a screen to prevent your bombers from attacking.

In the end, we can go back and forth on how this objective can be used correctly or how it is bad because you deployed your squads right in front of your opponent. There is no data on this objective. We are simply talking theory. Wait for this to shake itself out and we will see how good or bad it is.

Well said. I definitely need to try it out personally. WE NEEDZ MOAR DATA!

We need more articles to theory craft some more. How will Tie/D play into Fighter Ambush? Speed 5 will get you places.

I feel like Fighter Ambush would favor an all Rogue squad screen that is faster than your opponent's squads. Like Ghost+2xAwing+YT2400s. Deploy outside of the 1st player's strike range. They can't alpha at you. At end of turn, move the rogues in and try to get some unanswered shots at the activated squadrons.

One turn of unanswered squad strikes coukd flip a game. Though I could be full of it as I haven't proxied the new objectives yet.

Those you've picked aren't all fast enough. As an Imperial player, you either need Speed 5, or a guaranteed FCT plus Speed 4. Otherwise my Speed 4/5 lets me pick and choose whether you alpha strike the squadrons or not. A bit harder with the ships, but I can guarantee whether or not my fighters get to dive on yours or not more easily than you can do the return. Not a perfect guarantee, I've been out-thought before, but it's much harder for Rebels.

Here's the Catch 22 I'm seeing with Fighter Ambush:

1) You're going to be at a deployment disadvantage with ships. That's near guaranteed because your opponent isn't picking it if they themselves don't have a respectable squadron contingent. They use their own squadrons to force your ships out and then deploy their own ships to gain the positioning advantage. You might be able to deploy your own fleet in a way that you can adapt and survive, but it certainly isn't going to give the second player an advantage.

2) Your fighters either need to be close enough to enemy ships to strike early and effectively, or you've given up the primary advantage of Fighter Ambush. The problem with being in range to strike? You're the second player, and that means the first player can strike your squadrons before you can even do anything. You might have Boosted Comms and Flight Commanders to take advantage of the forward deployment, but there is nothing you can do to stop the first player from making the first activation of the game a commanded alpha strike of your forward positioned squadrons.

You don't need to put your obstacles within range of your opponents squads...It seems like everyone is hating on this because your opponent can get to your squads first, when you have the option of where obstacles and your squads go. And on top of that, the alpha strike everyone is so scared of needs to kill your squads before Intel comes in and frees them up. Try to kill as many Tie/B with 3 X-Wings in one round. Plus, can those X-Wings even get in range of your bombers?

You may be at a disadvantage with deployments, but that's why Boosted Comms and FC are vital to getting this to work. Speed 2 or 3 ISD with both upgrades can cover a lot of board. Sure, they know where your ISD is. But they don't know where your squads will be. Speed 4 bombers are ridiculous at getting in position, and Rhymer extends the threat range.

I feel a lot of people are seeing this as the "I must alpha strike at all costs" objective. I disagree. You get your bombers beyond range 2 of your ships. You get that extra range so your ships can start out faster without fear your outrun your squads or land on them when you fly (we have all placed squads in front of your speed 2 Vic/Neb...). And even if you place all your ships first, why does it matter? Were you going to surprise your opponent with some crazy Independence B-Wing sling shot into Yavaris double tap?

Carriers are predictable. You have squad commands coming. You fly so your squads stay in range. It might hurt to lose your main arc shot at your opponent because they out-deployed you, but in the end your main damage output comes from your squads, not your ships. Take the deployment disadvantage but make up for it by reaping the victory tokens by getting your squads in position to deal the most damage, and prevent your opponent from getting them by flying fast and out of range of their bombers. Make your opponent over extend their squads so they lose the activation, or force them to build a screen to prevent your bombers from attacking.

In the end, we can go back and forth on how this objective can be used correctly or how it is bad because you deployed your squads right in front of your opponent. There is no data on this objective. We are simply talking theory. Wait for this to shake itself out and we will see how good or bad it is.

Some notes about the above and my fleet (that first). I'm pretty sure this fleet is near optimal to beat a Fighter Ambush fleet. It's got a rock-hard core (Interdictor), lightning fast and lethal flankers (Gladiators, plural), and a lethal squadron wing that can bring the pain to selected enemy units (aces, Intel, etc.) The squadron component is as small as it is to not overtax the the squadron capabilities of this fleet, and instead got points sunk into more powerful individual units instead of more units. I imagine this is an edge case most won't have to worry about. I've seen precious few low-squadron builds, Imperials especially, that opted for an "Aces High" lineup like mine (may be my meta, but the principle I believe stands).

Deployment disadvantage is real, but it's not just the ships. Using my squadrons to drag out his ships are why the Gladiators were lined up on his weak flank, but as some have pointed out, to avoid the alpha strike of 1stP's squadrons requires non-trivial distance. Estimations based on his realizations of whether the Gladiators would be after jumping past him leads me to believe squadrons far enough back to dodge TIEs are also far enough back maneuverable ships like Raiders and Gladiators can dodge them. Imperials, Interdictors, and Victories can't (near as easily anyway), but if I'm bringing Imperial class ships, I'm not planning to charge you if it means bulldozing B-wings. (I'm only making that mistake once.) I also had a reasonable idea about the squadrons as I placed my ships, since the obstacles were already on the field.

Final point I will make is that most Rebel squadron heavy fleets don't like having to race forward to catch their charges. Obviously MC30s, TRCR90s, etc. don't mind sprinting, but carriers on the Rebel side tend to be Nebs (too easy to end up with an exposed flank), Liberties (expensive and see previous), or Assault Frigates and Home One MC80s (prefer broadsides, which doesn't mesh with covering the gap well). If I were a Rebel player, I would tend towards builds able to absorb some damage (see Biggs, high HP), or just use the ability to preposition slower squadrons forward, like a poor man's Hyperspace Assault without the ship. As an Imperial (my normal hat), I don't imagine myself using this without either TIE Defenders (Speed 5, Hull 6), or Rhymer, to give the bombers good standoff reach. The only other use (non-partisan) that has occurred to me is placing the squadrons farther off to the side than I can normally reach with flying, but still within reach of carrier commands. That requires experiments, especially in fleets who are willing to spend precious points on Flight Commanders, Engine Techs, FCTs (not sure this actually necessary), etc. As I think of more, I'll post it here.

From a purely objective point of view (no pun intended) your game is an outlier because made a fleet to counter it. From both your descriptions, it sounds like the objective was picked before fleets were made so you knew what to prepare for. Anyone can build a fleet to counter an objective and then say the objective is bad. But that's not how tournament play works. You build a fleet for your own objectives, not to counter your opponents.

I'm not trying to be condescending and saying you wasted your time. I also think your opponent deployed wrong. These things happen, but should be noted.

I plan on running Fighter Ambush in my list because I know the capabilities of squads. I love them. I hope the stigma continues that Fighter Ambush is weak because it means my opponent will pick it during tournaments and I can surprise them with an alpha strike and score some VPs.

Rebel carrier fleets appear to slow role into combat because they have no other option. B-Wings move at speed 2. Fighter Ambush means I can position them 2 turns ahead of where they normally would be, and now my opponent has to react to that, instead of using fast moving squads to put pressure on where my B-Wings can be positions without be tied down. I would love to have speed 4 B-Wings that doesn't rely on Independence. Just like I want Vic I to move speed 3 so I can get to close range and APT and squad command my bombers. Hard and fast is the way to go. Moving slowly gets you killed.

Close, but not quite. Both fleets were built before this objective was picked. As a matter of fact, (filthy casuals playing, I know), Fighter Ambush and the other two objectives that I discarded were picked after my Rebel opponent had seen my fleet's variation that day, and he was aware of the concept from the prior match (similar but without the Aces High squadron setup). I'm sure Fighter Ambush handled competently can be as devastating an objective as Hyperspace Assault or Advanced Gunnery. However, being aware of builds that can handle it, whether intentional or not (my fleet was built with this playstyle but not this exact threat in mind), is a critical part of pre-game planning. One day when Vassal finally works on my machine, we can slug it out and see once and for all who's the better admiral. In the meantime, I don't think Fighter Ambush is worthless (I think Rhymer plus carriers could work very well), just that the weaknesses identified by this forum are correct and need to be borne in mind. I'm more likely to take this objective than say Solar Corona, which I don't understand, more or less at all. Let's see what more battles reply with.

Solar Corona is Superior Positions, but without victory tokens and the first player likely having a harder time generating accuracy.

So, because my theorycrafting is still in Wave 3/4 mode, what sort of fleet actually wants that? Why would I trade Superior Positions victory points for certain angles blocking some Acc results?

So, because my theorycrafting is still in Wave 3/4 mode, what sort of fleet actually wants that? Why would I trade Superior Positions victory points for certain angles blocking some Acc results?

The Acc is removed before any dice modification, so it will be effective vs TRC90s losing a red Acc so there is 2 damage saved, same for Arquiten TRC swarm. It can help keep your Brace active, which directly prevents damage, but also means your opponent may try to reroll into an Acc which also decreases damage by at least 1. If Solar Corona becomes mainstream, it means your opponent takes Sensor Teams, H9, or Home One to give an Acc, which reduces the initial incoming damage from the pool, but also means your opponent is taking these upgrades over XI7 or GT, and it taking Home One instead of Defiance.

I consider this more of a "defense" objecive for you, since it prevents damage and your opponent can't use it against you so long as you keep the sun out of your main arcs. It is the objective your opponent reluctantly picks, instead of taking Advanced Gunnery or Planetary Ion Cannon.

I think any fleet that relies on ECM will like this objective. Also, any fleet with low hull that needs to use all of its defense tokens will benefit (Glad, flotillas, AF, CR90, MC30). Also good if you don't want to chase objective tokens, and just need a solid deployment advantage that doesn't rely on bombers as your main source of damage.

So, because my theorycrafting is still in Wave 3/4 mode, what sort of fleet actually wants that? Why would I trade Superior Positions victory points for certain angles blocking some Acc results?

Any ships that really do not like having particular defense tokens locked down are going to dig it. In particular, I'd give the nod to flotillas (who like having that Scatter free), Assault Frigate grab bag ships (Assault Frigates, Gladiators) that want to keep their defense token usage "best of" rather than "2 of the less useful choices," and potentially even the Braces on larger ships, although anything that's hunting a big ship usually has some means of either messing with defense tokens or wasn't counting on Accuracy results anyways.

OVERALL, I feel its not so much a reduction of Accuracy...

Its an overall reduction of firepower.

You are immediately penalising anyone who is throwing Red or blue dice at you, as long as you've Deployed and maneuvered correctly...

Because that die is discarded. Its gone from the pool. its not like it was flipped to a blank and you can now flip it back. Its gone.

Fighter ambush would be pretty awesome (and possibly OP) if all 2nd player squadrons gained Rogue for the first round.

How are people interpreting how sensor net works?

Specifically what happens after you collect a token?

My ship collects a token, I get 15 points then a token gets moved by me because my ship collected a token?

Does it have to be the token I picked up that gets moved? Or can it be any token?

Think of it this way:

The Sensor Beacons you are scanning are Ticklish...

So you scan it, you get the points for it... But it Squirms away giggling - and to represent the fact its *away* from you, your opponent is doing the moving....

So you have to chase it down, or try to intercept it, if you want to scan it again.

I'm now imagining the ships as sightseeing vehicles trying to chase down some wildlife that elusively wriggles and runs away, for the photos!!

Anyone else feeling that planetary ion cannon was a missed opportunity? IMO, the 3 objective tokens just behave like a different, blue version of mines, not enough feel to a real cannon. Maybe they could have designated second player’s edge as the cannon’s edge(planetside) and cannon being able to fire up to a certain range(s), then use only one objective token that the second player may move after certain phases. This would simulate the targeting of the ion cannon as it follows enemy ships. Make it unable to fire consecutive turns.

But not a bad objective by any means. After all second player can place objective tokens more freely than mines.

I'm wondering if the new objective sets could reward VSD-ISD play. The best new set I can figure is Station Assault, Contested Outpost.... and minefields. Go for an underbid, pick second, and park in your corner of the map. Should work as long as they don't have an interdictor, I guess?

Anyone else feeling that planetary ion cannon was a missed opportunity? IMO, the 3 objective tokens just behave like a different, blue version of mines, not enough feel to a real cannon. Maybe they could have designated second player’s edge as the cannon’s edge(planetside) and cannon being able to fire up to a certain range(s), then use only one objective token that the second player may move after certain phases. This would simulate the targeting of the ion cannon as it follows enemy ships. Make it unable to fire consecutive turns.

But not a bad objective by any means. After all second player can place objective tokens more freely than mines.

No, it looks quite good as a default yellow objective. It's a solid thwack that messes with ships AND can short out defense tokens before anyone takes an activation. That's potentially extremely powerful. I can imagine it's only got limited coverage and hence the tokens. But distance 1-3 is HUGE from any given token if you measure it out.

Anyone else feeling that planetary ion cannon was a missed opportunity? IMO, the 3 objective tokens just behave like a different, blue version of mines, not enough feel to a real cannon. Maybe they could have designated second player’s edge as the cannon’s edge(planetside) and cannon being able to fire up to a certain range(s), then use only one objective token that the second player may move after certain phases. This would simulate the targeting of the ion cannon as it follows enemy ships. Make it unable to fire consecutive turns.

But not a bad objective by any means. After all second player can place objective tokens more freely than mines.

No, it looks quite good as a default yellow objective. It's a solid thwack that messes with ships AND can short out defense tokens before anyone takes an activation. That's potentially extremely powerful. I can imagine it's only got limited coverage and hence the tokens. But distance 1-3 is HUGE from any given token if you measure it out.

I agree. Incidentally if it'll see a lot of play we'll see more Tagge to counter def token shutdown.

Red Objective Thoughts.

Targeting Beacons: I see this important in two ways. 1) adds rerolls in a post float enviroment where several lists have sacrificed it to garentee accs.. 2) Close off a portion of the play area similar to minefields.

Close-range intel scan: Wants to be in a heavy acc. generating list but there are no strong companion objectives (in blue or yellow) for said list. The interesting idea with this objective is you get it in the off chance you make "super accurate" rolls.

Blockade run: Likes a lot of ships for victory point generation. The odd thing is imps may pick it up for the powerful board change forcing ships into their powerful front arcs.

Station Assault: The taget saturation objective. Are you going to let your openent to gain 80 free points? Will you waste attacks on the station? These are just a sample of what this objective puts you through.

Blockade Run seems really weird to me. I think the intention is for the 2nd player to run directly to 1st players deployment zone and sit there. After all, you can't run off the board so you have to slow down and turn.

But what is to stop the 1st player from sitting 1 or 2 strong front arc ships in the deployment zone at speed 0 for 3 turns? Not only does your opponent come to you, but you do not have to worry about your opponent flying past you and not being able to turn around.

I think this is going to be the least seen objective. It favors an MSU list so you can rack up a lot of points since each of your ships generates 20 VP at the end of the game. But a single xmas ISD is really scary to fly into, since you can't go wide around it. My standard Rebel bomber list has a Liberty in it and I would love to pick this objective as 1st player.

Any other thoughts on this? I guess you can play it as 2nd player with 2 ISDs+Motti and just sweep the board as you move along but you only net 40 points if both survive until round 6 and will likely be exposing their rear arc to your opponent by then.

Blockade Run seems really weird to me. I think the intention is for the 2nd player to run directly to 1st players deployment zone and sit there. After all, you can't run off the board so you have to slow down and turn.

But what is to stop the 1st player from sitting 1 or 2 strong front arc ships in the deployment zone at speed 0 for 3 turns? Not only does your opponent come to you, but you do not have to worry about your opponent flying past you and not being able to turn around.

I think this is going to be the least seen objective. It favors an MSU list so you can rack up a lot of points since each of your ships generates 20 VP at the end of the game. But a single xmas ISD is really scary to fly into, since you can't go wide around it. My standard Rebel bomber list has a Liberty in it and I would love to pick this objective as 1st player.

Any other thoughts on this? I guess you can play it as 2nd player with 2 ISDs+Motti and just sweep the board as you move along but you only net 40 points if both survive until round 6 and will likely be exposing their rear arc to your opponent by then.

ISDs as first player Linebackers could be fun but I wouldn't like to sit and wait for several turns as you then need to accelerate to intercept. The enemy could hang back around the half way line then see where the ISDs are going and accelerate in the other direction and aim to reach the enemy DZ on turn 6.

Lots of rogue capable fighters could be really useful in tracking down the 2nd player MSUs. Firesprays or YT2400s can chase down CR90s and kill them over 2-3 turns and you can't leapfrog into their rear arcs like you can with an ISD.

So fighter ambush and reeking aces........the pain is going to be immense, games won and lost in round one........it smells.

This is going to be hard to counter, especially with Biggs, 134 points of impossible (ish) to destroy rebel bombers that can effectively be placed in round one striking distance of any of your ships. Chances are you will be loosing a key peice of your fleet and give away a pile of points before we get to round 2

For those talking about overextended squadrons in Fighter Ambush, remember that Relay is coming...

For those talking about overextended squadrons in Fighter Ambush, remember that Relay is coming...

And Ghost.