A Glad with fct and fc can also trigger mauler for a double tap, it's meeeaaan

Actually the little caveat on FCT is that the squadron has to be "unengaged".

wait, so intel doesn't help here? Since ships are still "engaged" even though they can move.

A Glad with fct and fc can also trigger mauler for a double tap, it's meeeaaan

Actually the little caveat on FCT is that the squadron has to be "unengaged".

wait, so intel doesn't help here? Since ships are still "engaged" even though they can move.

It Depends... FCT alone, no.

In Conjunction with Flight Commander, yes.

The main reason is:

- With FCT alone, you activate your ship. You use your Squadron Command. Mauler Moves into Range and becomes Engaged with said Squadron command, does his damage... And now, is "Engaged" at the end of the Ship's Maneuver (which is after resolving its squadron command), and thus, cannot do an FCT move, even if there is Intel around.

- With FCT and Flight Commander, you activate your Ship. You elect to delay the Squadron Command until after the Ship's Maneuver. You Maneuver your ship. You find that both your Squadron Command and your FCT move have the same timing now (after maneuver), and you elect the Order for them to be in... You choose FCT First, and with it, you move Mauler into Engagement Range... This Triggers Maulers Ability to do damage. then, you activate Mauler with the Delayed Squadron Command... Now, if you have Intel, he moves again, and does his damage again.

Flight Coordination Teams, alone, are only half the answer.

A Glad with fct and fc can also trigger mauler for a double tap, it's meeeaaan

Actually the little caveat on FCT is that the squadron has to be "unengaged".

wait, so intel doesn't help here? Since ships are still "engaged" even though they can move.

It Depends... FCT alone, no.

In Conjunction with Flight Commander, yes.

The main reason is:

- With FCT alone, you activate your ship. You use your Squadron Command. Mauler Moves into Range and becomes Engaged with said Squadron command, does his damage... And now, is "Engaged" at the end of the Ship's Maneuver (which is after resolving its squadron command), and thus, cannot do an FCT move, even if there is Intel around.

- With FCT and Flight Commander, you activate your Ship. You elect to delay the Squadron Command until after the Ship's Maneuver. You Maneuver your ship. You find that both your Squadron Command and your FCT move have the same timing now (after maneuver), and you elect the Order for them to be in... You choose FCT First, and with it, you move Mauler into Engagement Range... This Triggers Maulers Ability to do damage. then, you activate Mauler with the Delayed Squadron Command... Now, if you have Intel, he moves again, and does his damage again.

Flight Coordination Teams, alone, are only half the answer.

hmmm to think of it, I think I did it correctly after all. But it's good to know that engaged squadrons, even with the help of intel, can't have free moves.

Very negative Snipa, you appear to have a closed mind.

Uk nationals was won by glad carriers

Then chalk me up as closed-minded too.

That IGG list is one of those lists that results from tunnel vision on the current meta rather than the larger game. Of course it will do well against most squadron lists, but where is your ship killing power? Unenhanced black dice do not a balanced list make.

It's like taking a bunch of Nebulons because your meta relies heavily on XI7.

Snipa is saying, glads will never be good carriers. He isnt saying that my list is bad in particular.

It's like taking a bunch of Nebulons because your meta relies heavily on XI7.

Hey, that was one of my greatest successes back in the day!

Snipa is saying, glads will never be good carriers. He isnt saying that my list is bad in particular.

Actually I am saying both. Gladiators are at the moment not good dedicated carriers (and I can't see what would meaningfully change that) and your list is particularly bad for the reasons I already gave. It has a small bid with 3 short-ranged ships that seem designed primarily to push your anti-squadron squadrons around. I can see that it's quite likely to win the squadron mini-game through sheer over-investment of resources but it has no tools to leverage the victory in that field towards winning the real game (as the skies are clear but you have no bombers to take advantage of that game state). It has no resources devoted towards actually getting your ships' short-ranged batteries delivered against enemy ships, which is extremely problematic with a low bid and only 3 activations.

Very negative Snipa, you appear to have a closed mind.

Uk nationals was won by glad carriers

Given I'm frequently the guy making a case for VSDs (which are widely panned) and Raiders (which thankfully at this point are condemned only by a vocal minority; back in wave 2 I was among a small minority in advocating for the Raider, as you may recall) I feel the "closed mind" accusation is unwarranted. I'm always looking to find the good in various options and I don't like coming to the "not good" conclusion; I much prefer the "perhaps not widely good but good in specific builds" conclusion (example: YT-1300s aren't all-around good but they're great Escorts for a fleet like JJ's Worlds-winning fleet or as escorts for B-Wings) or "good, but not in that kind of role/with that kind of upgrade suite" conclusion (like the discussion we're having here).

Gladiators aren't good dedicated carriers for the exact same reason Liberty MC80s, CR90s, MC30s, Nebulon-B Support Refits, and Raiders aren't good dedicated carriers - they're just not designed to be effective in that role; while you can gear any of those ships to be better carriers than they are inherently, the end result doesn't justify the sacrifices you need to make: namely the upgrade slots filled and points you invested in taking something from "bad" to "okay" at being a carrier could've been spent more effectively towards making the ship better at what it's already good at. If having a carrier around is a big priority, then it's better to invest in ships that are better at being carriers to support your Gladiator(s) - Gozantis, VSDs, or ISD-Is (with the full carrier setup). Those are all fine choices and then none of your ships are working against their own design.

I'm curious about the claim that the UK Nationals were won by a fleet with 1 or more carrier Gladiators but I have found no links to the results or fleets used. In particular I'm curious if waves 3 and 4 were allowed, given it was August 13th. Waves 3 and 4 released at nearly that exact time (August 11th) in the US and I'm wondering if they were available in the UK. At the very least, the new waves would be nearly untested in that environment. If the claims are true, I'm particularly curious as to what other lists were present in the UK Nationals that would make such a configuration feasible.

And again, if anyone out there is feeling "that dang Snipafist is just a big jerk and doesn't see how AWESOMESAUCE carrier Gladiators are" then please channel your feelings towards getting top 4 at a Regional tournament with carrier Gladiators. We can discuss this all day long but the proof is in the pudding.

Snipa is saying, glads will never be good carriers. He isnt saying that my list is bad in particular.

Actually I am saying both. Gladiators are at the moment not good dedicated carriers (and I can't see what would meaningfully change that) and your list is particularly bad for the reasons I already gave. It has a small bid with 3 short-ranged ships that seem designed primarily to push your anti-squadron squadrons around. I can see that it's quite likely to win the squadron mini-game through sheer over-investment of resources but it has no tools to leverage the victory in that field towards winning the real game (as the skies are clear but you have no bombers to take advantage of that game state). It has no resources devoted towards actually getting your ships' short-ranged batteries delivered against enemy ships, which is extremely problematic with a low bid and only 3 activations.

Very negative Snipa, you appear to have a closed mind.

Uk nationals was won by glad carriers

Given I'm frequently the guy making a case for VSDs (which are widely panned) and Raiders (which thankfully at this point are condemned only by a vocal minority; back in wave 2 I was among a small minority in advocating for the Raider, as you may recall) I feel the "closed mind" accusation is unwarranted. I'm always looking to find the good in various options and I don't like coming to the "not good" conclusion; I much prefer the "perhaps not widely good but good in specific builds" conclusion (example: YT-1300s aren't all-around good but they're great Escorts for a fleet like JJ's Worlds-winning fleet or as escorts for B-Wings) or "good, but not in that kind of role/with that kind of upgrade suite" conclusion (like the discussion we're having here).

Gladiators aren't good dedicated carriers for the exact same reason Liberty MC80s, CR90s, MC30s, Nebulon-B Support Refits, and Raiders aren't good dedicated carriers - they're just not designed to be effective in that role; while you can gear any of those ships to be better carriers than they are inherently, the end result doesn't justify the sacrifices you need to make: namely the upgrade slots filled and points you invested in taking something from "bad" to "okay" at being a carrier could've been spent more effectively towards making the ship better at what it's already good at. If having a carrier around is a big priority, then it's better to invest in ships that are better at being carriers to support your Gladiator(s) - Gozantis, VSDs, or ISD-Is (with the full carrier setup). Those are all fine choices and then none of your ships are working against their own design.

I'm curious about the claim that the UK Nationals were won by a fleet with 1 or more carrier Gladiators but I have found no links to the results or fleets used. In particular I'm curious if waves 3 and 4 were allowed, given it was August 13th. Waves 3 and 4 released at nearly that exact time (August 11th) in the US and I'm wondering if they were available in the UK. At the very least, the new waves would be nearly untested in that environment. If the claims are true, I'm particularly curious as to what other lists were present in the UK Nationals that would make such a configuration feasible.

And again, if anyone out there is feeling "that dang Snipafist is just a big jerk and doesn't see how AWESOMESAUCE carrier Gladiators are" then please channel your feelings towards getting top 4 at a Regional tournament with carrier Gladiators. We can discuss this all day long but the proof is in the pudding.

I can confirm UK nationals were won by a glad carrier list, it was wave two only at the time. Thinking back ( I only got see the final wrapping up) I'm sure he used three Glads with engine techs and lots of tie bombers.Meta was very mixed ( I played against an mc30 and light fighter, imp heavy bomber, imp light fighter with ids, glad and friends, one I can't Remember). As I understand it the winner basicly owned everyone he played, I'm thinking the other finalist was a ISD, demo, type heavy bomber ( may be wrong ). Turnout was ok, around 50-60 I think. As I understand it, this was a list the winner had been perfecting for a long time and he's was a bit of a demon with it.

Thanks for your assistance, Jondavies. I'd be very curious to see the specifics of the fleet list, if only for a bit of consideration from the very different meta we had in wave 2. A hybrid clontroper5-style fleet with some squadron components sounds intriguing if a bit... I guess the term that comes to mind is "confused," but it sounds like the commander did well by it at the very least.

Snipa is saying, glads will never be good carriers. He isnt saying that my list is bad in particular.

Well out of the three Star Destroyers Gladiators are the most expensive for the Squadron point value. But all the I-class Star Destroyers are cheaper than the II-class star destroyers for point value. GSD1 is just a little below the middle of the spectrum which is not bad.

Always thought gladiators are criminally underused as carriers.

Well Gladiators tend to be the more expensive carriers as far as Star Destroyers go. What is surprising is how expensive Raiders and MC30s are. Well at least the Raider has the double anti-squadron dice but the Shrimp has abandoned the squadron game all together.

Well it fits with the theme of each faction. Imperial ships are mostly large jack of all trades that can handle several different parts of fleet operations, while Rebel ships frequently are more specialized towards attack (Liberty, MC30), defense (MC80, Assault Frigate), and fleet support (Rebel Transports, Nebulon-B).

Always thought gladiators are criminally underused as carriers.

Well Gladiators tend to be the more expensive carriers as far as Star Destroyers go. What is surprising is how expensive Raiders and MC30s are. Well at least the Raider has the double anti-squadron dice but the Shrimp has abandoned the squadron game all together.

Well it fits with the theme of each faction. Imperial ships are mostly large jack of all trades that can handle several different parts of fleet operations, while Rebel ships frequently are more specialized towards attack (Liberty, MC30), defense (MC80, Assault Frigate), and fleet support (Rebel Transports, Nebulon-B).

Well also the squadron values for Imperial ships don't vary from refit like Rebel ships do. So for Imperials taking the cheaper fleet point ships benefits squadrons where as for several ships for the Rebels taking the higher fleet point cost retrofit benefits the squadron game with an extra squadron command.

Always thought gladiators are criminally underused as carriers.

Well Gladiators tend to be the more expensive carriers as far as Star Destroyers go. What is surprising is how expensive Raiders and MC30s are. Well at least the Raider has the double anti-squadron dice but the Shrimp has abandoned the squadron game all together.

Well it fits with the theme of each faction. Imperial ships are mostly large jack of all trades that can handle several different parts of fleet operations, while Rebel ships frequently are more specialized towards attack (Liberty, MC30), defense (MC80, Assault Frigate), and fleet support (Rebel Transports, Nebulon-B).

Well also the squadron values for Imperial ships don't vary from refit like Rebel ships do. So for Imperials taking the cheaper fleet point ships benefits squadrons where as for several ships for the Rebels taking the higher fleet point cost retrofit benefits the squadron game with an extra squadron command.

Actually it's a little odd to me how the cheaper Assault Frigates and HMC80s are the better squadron commanders. The only case where the more expensive variant is better with squadrons is the Nebulon-B.

A Glad with fct and fc can also trigger mauler for a double tap, it's meeeaaan

Actually the little caveat on FCT is that the squadron has to be "unengaged".

wait, so intel doesn't help here? Since ships are still "engaged" even though they can move.

It Depends... FCT alone, no.

In Conjunction with Flight Commander, yes.

The main reason is:

- With FCT alone, you activate your ship. You use your Squadron Command. Mauler Moves into Range and becomes Engaged with said Squadron command, does his damage... And now, is "Engaged" at the end of the Ship's Maneuver (which is after resolving its squadron command), and thus, cannot do an FCT move, even if there is Intel around.

- With FCT and Flight Commander, you activate your Ship. You elect to delay the Squadron Command until after the Ship's Maneuver. You Maneuver your ship. You find that both your Squadron Command and your FCT move have the same timing now (after maneuver), and you elect the Order for them to be in... You choose FCT First, and with it, you move Mauler into Engagement Range... This Triggers Maulers Ability to do damage. then, you activate Mauler with the Delayed Squadron Command... Now, if you have Intel, he moves again, and does his damage again.

Flight Coordination Teams, alone, are only half the answer.

This should also include that you need to have a ship with Intel in the mix, a Jump master and Mauler should be the only two ships this ship controls.

I think this could be a good rough starting point....I think the ideal is to go first, strip the enemy of all he loves, then smash him with area damage.

Alternatively we could make the bid bigger by throwing out 1 advanced and putting in black squadron.

I feel a need....a need....for screed....
Author: GottMituns205

Faction: Galactic Empire
Points: 392/400

Commander: Admiral Screed

Assault Objective: Opening Salvo
Defense Objective: Hyperspace Assault
Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

[ flagship ] Interdictor-class Suppression Refit (90 points)
- Admiral Screed ( 26 points)
- Interdictor ( 3 points)
- Overload Pulse ( 8 points)
- Targeting Scrambler ( 5 points)
- G-8 Experiemental Projector ( 8 points)
= 140 total ship cost

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer (56 points)
- Flight Commander ( 3 points)
- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)
- Fighter Coordination Team ( 3 points)
= 66 total ship cost

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer (56 points)
- Demolisher ( 10 points)
- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)
- Engine Techs ( 8 points)
- Assault Proton Torpedoes ( 5 points)
= 83 total ship cost

Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 points)
- Suppressor ( 4 points)
- Expanded Hangar Bay ( 5 points)
= 32 total ship cost

1 "Mauler" Mithel ( 15 points)
1 Dengar ( 20 points)
3 TIE Advanced Squadrons ( 36 points)

Snipa is saying, glads will never be good carriers. He isnt saying that my list is bad in particular.

Actually I am saying both. Gladiators are at the moment not good dedicated carriers (and I can't see what would meaningfully change that) and your list is particularly bad for the reasons I already gave. It has a small bid with 3 short-ranged ships that seem designed primarily to push your anti-squadron squadrons around. I can see that it's quite likely to win the squadron mini-game through sheer over-investment of resources but it has no tools to leverage the victory in that field towards winning the real game (as the skies are clear but you have no bombers to take advantage of that game state). It has no resources devoted towards actually getting your ships' short-ranged batteries delivered against enemy ships, which is extremely problematic with a low bid and only 3 activations.

Very negative Snipa, you appear to have a closed mind.

Uk nationals was won by glad carriers

Given I'm frequently the guy making a case for VSDs (which are widely panned) and Raiders (which thankfully at this point are condemned only by a vocal minority; back in wave 2 I was among a small minority in advocating for the Raider, as you may recall) I feel the "closed mind" accusation is unwarranted. I'm always looking to find the good in various options and I don't like coming to the "not good" conclusion; I much prefer the "perhaps not widely good but good in specific builds" conclusion (example: YT-1300s aren't all-around good but they're great Escorts for a fleet like JJ's Worlds-winning fleet or as escorts for B-Wings) or "good, but not in that kind of role/with that kind of upgrade suite" conclusion (like the discussion we're having here).

Gladiators aren't good dedicated carriers for the exact same reason Liberty MC80s, CR90s, MC30s, Nebulon-B Support Refits, and Raiders aren't good dedicated carriers - they're just not designed to be effective in that role; while you can gear any of those ships to be better carriers than they are inherently, the end result doesn't justify the sacrifices you need to make: namely the upgrade slots filled and points you invested in taking something from "bad" to "okay" at being a carrier could've been spent more effectively towards making the ship better at what it's already good at. If having a carrier around is a big priority, then it's better to invest in ships that are better at being carriers to support your Gladiator(s) - Gozantis, VSDs, or ISD-Is (with the full carrier setup). Those are all fine choices and then none of your ships are working against their own design.

I'm curious about the claim that the UK Nationals were won by a fleet with 1 or more carrier Gladiators but I have found no links to the results or fleets used. In particular I'm curious if waves 3 and 4 were allowed, given it was August 13th. Waves 3 and 4 released at nearly that exact time (August 11th) in the US and I'm wondering if they were available in the UK. At the very least, the new waves would be nearly untested in that environment. If the claims are true, I'm particularly curious as to what other lists were present in the UK Nationals that would make such a configuration feasible.

And again, if anyone out there is feeling "that dang Snipafist is just a big jerk and doesn't see how AWESOMESAUCE carrier Gladiators are" then please channel your feelings towards getting top 4 at a Regional tournament with carrier Gladiators. We can discuss this all day long but the proof is in the pudding.

I would argue top four at a regional is not a proof one way or another. I don't believe my win is due to my fleet or my skills being vastly superior than my opponents. You need a lot of things to just go your way that day to place high, and whether you do or don't is not supremely indicative of a fleets viability.

Always thought gladiators are criminally underused as carriers.

Well Gladiators tend to be the more expensive carriers as far as Star Destroyers go. What is surprising is how expensive Raiders and MC30s are. Well at least the Raider has the double anti-squadron dice but the Shrimp has abandoned the squadron game all together.

Well it fits with the theme of each faction. Imperial ships are mostly large jack of all trades that can handle several different parts of fleet operations, while Rebel ships frequently are more specialized towards attack (Liberty, MC30), defense (MC80, Assault Frigate), and fleet support (Rebel Transports, Nebulon-B).

Well also the squadron values for Imperial ships don't vary from refit like Rebel ships do. So for Imperials taking the cheaper fleet point ships benefits squadrons where as for several ships for the Rebels taking the higher fleet point cost retrofit benefits the squadron game with an extra squadron command.

Actually it's a little odd to me how the cheaper Assault Frigates and HMC80s are the better squadron commanders. The only case where the more expensive variant is better with squadrons is the Nebulon-B.

Just because they cost less per squadron command doesn't make them better. But the H1MC80 and the Assault Mk2 are examples on how Rebel squadron values widely vary. For the AF-Mk2 the more expensive retrofit gains a squadron command and usually (again the AF-Mk 2 is the exception) have higher volleys. Where as for the H1MC80 and the AFmk2 the cheaper retrofit has a higher squadron value than the more expensive retrofit.

However Rebels don't adopt the same standards where class-I is cheaper than class-II. For Rebels Type-A is usually more expensive than Type-B.

Just because they cost less per squadron command doesn't make them better. But the H1MC80 and the Assault Mk2 are examples on how Rebel squadron values widely vary. For the AF-Mk2 the more expensive retrofit gains a squadron command and usually (again the AF-Mk 2 is the exception) have higher volleys. Where as for the H1MC80 the cheaper command has a higher squadron value than the more expensive assault retrofit.

Actually the more expensive Assault Frigate loses a squadron command, but it does gain dice in the front and rear and better flak:

I would argue top four at a regional is not a proof one way or another. I don't believe my win is due to my fleet or my skills being vastly superior than my opponents. You need a lot of things to just go your way that day to place high, and whether you do or don't is not supremely indicative of a fleets viability.

I mean it would obviously be preferable to have a consistent record of success to really establish a trend*, but I'll happily settle for "top 4 at a Regional" as something that's not necessarily statistically valid but a good enough goal for most people.

*As you are correct that a number of variables can give you a good showing at a 3- or 4-round event, only some of which are your particular fleet build.

Just because they cost less per squadron command doesn't make them better. But the H1MC80 and the Assault Mk2 are examples on how Rebel squadron values widely vary. For the AF-Mk2 the more expensive retrofit gains a squadron command and usually (again the AF-Mk 2 is the exception) have higher volleys. Where as for the H1MC80 the cheaper command has a higher squadron value than the more expensive assault retrofit.

Actually the more expensive Assault Frigate loses a squadron command, but it does gain dice in the front and rear and better flak:

That's right, I forgot that type-A > type-B when it comes to retrofits unlike the Imperial standard class-I < class-II.