After quite a bit of testing on my side, I wanted to throw my hat into the ring with a a few thoughts on wave 3/4/5 and how things are going to evolve going forward.

Namely, testing wave 3/4 and now tinkering with wave 5, I have noticed the following trends (and tried to play against them, only to find that in the end, you have to play into them because the math is too overwhelming):

• Accuracy is scarce, and the ships that can find it consistently while still having enough dice to do something with it are large and expensive, or are the MC30 with H9s.
• Flotillas are exceptionally cheap and efficient, so both pushing squadrons and using them for durable activation delay has become a dominant tactic.
• The squadron game in general is now mandatory, as you need at least a fighter screen, but the synergy with other strong elements means more is usually better.
• New objectives are incredibly punishing for low activation fleets in many cases, as if you don't have such a low bid you are all but certain of going first, you can lose the game before deployment assuming both players are skilled.

In short, what we see is this for strong lists:

• Multiple flotillas, so that enemy ships which cannot consistently generate accuracy have a hard time killing them and enemy ships which can are points inefficient while firing at flotillas (excepting perhaps the MC30 w/H9s).
• Very large squadron complements, because flotillas are exceptionally efficient squadron pushers.
• Limited combat ships (crowded out by the other components of fleet building, so your optimal number becomes 2-3).

I think Worlds bore out this trend well (the only list in the top-4 that semi-bucked this trend was Steve's TRC Cracken list, which was it's own sort of pseudo-flotilla spam by leveraging the power of the TRCvette and mass squadrons). This trend is also incredibly punishing for Imperials, as the reality is that the Rebels have better flotillas from an efficiency standpoint and better small/medium ships in a flotilla meta.

So here are some testable predictions for wave 5:

• Most tournament winning lists will sport 2-3 flotillas.
• The only large ship that will see any play which can place well is the original MC80 (all the other ships suffer from the opponent being able to stall until they activate, then flying out of their front arc and denying the opportunity to shoot); a possible exception here is a single large ship and 4+ flotilla fleet (basically consolidating 2 combat ships into 1 combat ship and another flotilla), but I'm not certain about that yet.
• >100 points of squadrons will essentially become mandatory, and no squadrons will become impossible given the frequency of heavy bomber lists.
• Neither the Pelta nor the Arquitens will materially change the game state, as neither does anything to address the core drivers of the meta, though the Arquitens may help Imperials make better lists that fit the current archetype.

I would suggest that we'll essentially see wave 3/4's meta reinforced, and more so, that to truly change it, FFG will either need to introduce some things in wave 6 that are very disruptive to the survival of flotillas OR they will need to introduce an IA-style activation delay rule so large ships can more reliably land their shots.

So let me throw this out to the peanut gallery and see what you guys think, as this is just where my head is at, and I've been wrong before / could be wrong again.

and no squadrons will become impossible given the frequency of heavy bomber lists.

I dotn see how you came to this conclusion? A rise in squadrons, gives rise to viability of fighter heavy lists, so where does the idea of a saturation of heavy bomber come from?

Several comments:

• The only large ship that will see any play which can place well is the original MC80 (all the other ships suffer from the opponent being able to stall until they activate, then flying out of their front arc and denying the opportunity to shoot); a possible exception here is a single large ship and 4+ flotilla fleet (basically consolidating 2 combat ships into 1 combat ship and another flotilla), but I'm not certain about that yet.

I don't see that for several reasons: being able to activate first doesn't mean that the ship will be able to escape that front arc (clever positioning can prevent that).

You're missing ISD1 supercarrier aspect, as I can see people bringing ISD1 just for that alpha strike ability.

• >100 points of squadrons will essentially become mandatory, and no squadrons will become impossible given the frequency of heavy bomber lists.

Also we need to see how Flechettes will change squadron game balance.

I'm getting similar vibes. Squadrons have become king and it sure feels like half of your list will be points related to pushing them around and the other half will be super points efficient ships because you really don't want to live with only 2 ships plus flotillas.

I'm not digging it. But I think we're forced to adapt to it or get used to "having a bad day" (say that like the ski instructor on South Park).

That being said, I sure hope they lay off the squadron buffs the next wave or two. I want to see cases where that big ship and one or two supports can really keep the fighter game in check.

The only buff squadrons got vis a vis squadronless fleets is Norra Wexley. Everything else is just different options. By herself she's very significant though, and might be enough to put the last nail in the coffin of 0 squad lists. I don't think the token fighter screen is made totally unviable by any of the new stuff though.

The one thing I'm really not a fan of is the use of totally naked flotillas put in the fleet purely to help delay. Having a ship that does literally nothing except help you take advantage of the game's activation rules leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

The only buff squadrons got vis a vis squadronless fleets is Norra Wexley. Everything else is just different options. By herself she's very significant though, and might be enough to put the last nail in the coffin of 0 squad lists. I don't think the token fighter screen is made totally unviable by any of the new stuff though.

The one thing I'm really not a fan of is the use of totally naked flotillas put in the fleet purely to help delay. Having a ship that does literally nothing except help you take advantage of the game's activation rules leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

That's why all my base gozantis cost at least 25- minimum it will have coms net on it

Me and my friend always play 500 point games. Perhaps there should be another increase to the standard points games are played with now all these new options are on the table? Bigger point games lessens the impact of having to include flotillas.

After quite a bit of testing on my side, I wanted to throw my hat into the ring with a a few thoughts on wave 3/4/5 and how things are going to evolve going forward.

Namely, testing wave 3/4 and now tinkering with wave 5, I have noticed the following trends (and tried to play against them, only to find that in the end, you have to play into them because the math is too overwhelming):

• Accuracy is scarce, and the ships that can find it consistently while still having enough dice to do something with it are large and expensive, or are the MC30 with H9s.
• Flotillas are exceptionally cheap and efficient, so both pushing squadrons and using them for durable activation delay has become a dominant tactic.
• The squadron game in general is now mandatory, as you need at least a fighter screen, but the synergy with other strong elements means more is usually better.
• New objectives are incredibly punishing for low activation fleets in many cases, as if you don't have such a low bid you are all but certain of going first, you can lose the game before deployment assuming both players are skilled.

In short, what we see is this for strong lists:

• Multiple flotillas, so that enemy ships which cannot consistently generate accuracy have a hard time killing them and enemy ships which can are points inefficient while firing at flotillas (excepting perhaps the MC30 w/H9s).
• Very large squadron complements, because flotillas are exceptionally efficient squadron pushers.
• Limited combat ships (crowded out by the other components of fleet building, so your optimal number becomes 2-3).

I think Worlds bore out this trend well (the only list in the top-4 that semi-bucked this trend was Steve's TRC Cracken list, which was it's own sort of pseudo-flotilla spam by leveraging the power of the TRCvette and mass squadrons). This trend is also incredibly punishing for Imperials, as the reality is that the Rebels have better flotillas from an efficiency standpoint and better small/medium ships in a flotilla meta.

So here are some testable predictions for wave 5:

• Most tournament winning lists will sport 2-3 flotillas.
• The only large ship that will see any play which can place well is the original MC80 (all the other ships suffer from the opponent being able to stall until they activate, then flying out of their front arc and denying the opportunity to shoot); a possible exception here is a single large ship and 4+ flotilla fleet (basically consolidating 2 combat ships into 1 combat ship and another flotilla), but I'm not certain about that yet.
• >100 points of squadrons will essentially become mandatory, and no squadrons will become impossible given the frequency of heavy bomber lists.
• Neither the Pelta nor the Arquitens will materially change the game state, as neither does anything to address the core drivers of the meta, though the Arquitens may help Imperials make better lists that fit the current archetype.

I would suggest that we'll essentially see wave 3/4's meta reinforced, and more so, that to truly change it, FFG will either need to introduce some things in wave 6 that are very disruptive to the survival of flotillas OR they will need to introduce an IA-style activation delay rule so large ships can more reliably land their shots.

So let me throw this out to the peanut gallery and see what you guys think, as this is just where my head is at, and I've been wrong before / could be wrong again.

Preface: My meta is relatively small and idiosyncratic, but we do end up encountering the trends of the general meta in our ramblings.

I have to disagree with basically all of your conclusions. Two or three flotillas are not a requirement, but they are a byproduct of a system that favors having higher activations. As you point out, squadrons are efficient squadron pushers and cheap activations, but that doesn't make them a requirement. I've seen lists of swarms of small ships that achieve the same effect, a la Clonisher, but with all combat-capable warships and without squadrons. I would hesitate to associate all of that with flotillas, since that seems a bit oversimplifying.

Your second conclusion, that the MC80 is the only viable large ship I can't quite understand. I assume this has to do with Home One allowing Accuracy results to flotilla hunters. However, your stated reason for why the other Large ships, all front arc battlewagons, don't work assumes a. that the victim has activations relative to the battleship that it can do that, and b. that the victim can outfly the attacker both still apply to the MC80 as a battleship, leaving its only functions as squadron carrier, which as you point out flotillas are more efficient at, or as Home One, which is an awful lot of points to hunt 20-30 pt gnats that generally can't shoot back effectively. I personally have flown a double ISD triple Gozanti fleet without squadrons such that I pinned my opponent's heavy warships (a pair of assault frigates and two CR90s) in front of the Star Destroyers. For reference we had equal activations and he had initiative. Because his fighter screen was essentially six Y-wings, it took two turns of back and forth bombardment for him to take down one of the ISDs, half my firepower, in exchange for over half of his (AF2, CR90 dead, the other CR90 out of the battle, last AF2 square in front of the other undamaged ISD).

I firmly believe that you can fight into all but the heaviest bomber fleets with heavy battleships of your own, particularly Imperial-class Star Destroyers, because you can far more easily and far more quickly degrade the firepower of your opponent with these heavy warships than they can return the favor. Larges are still viable, their requirements for fleetbuilding and flying are simply very stringent and you need to use them in multiple capacities to fully make the points worth it (carriers and battleships when possible. The I-1 is superb in this role, especially for fighter screens.)

Your third conclusion relies on the first, and again I think falls down, ESPECIALLY in light of Wave 5. S5/H6 Defenders mean Imperials have exceptionally durable superfighters that can tear through generics and destroy Intel squadrons keeping bomber wings moving forward, while E-wings let the Rebels snipe Intel to the same effect. (See what I did there?) Both of these squadron wings, especially the Es can be done with three or four units, a far cry from squadron-heavy all the time. I would further hold that arranging a fleet such that you are investing other points into pushing squadrons than the squadron commands you get natively in the heavy warships, especially with Large ships like the original MC80 and Imperial-class Star Destroyers actually weakens the fleet except in edge cases where you need the extra commands to effectively herd all your squadrons around, and could have been just as easily spent on ship upgrades to destroy the enemy ships. While I haven't experimented with it yet, I further expect Flechette Torpedoes to continue this trend for the Imperials, and while I do not think it will allow Raiders to annihilate bomber wings, I do think that it give the time and space required for fleets to play around the enemy, especially fast battleship fleets.

And while they do not directly contradict above, the Pelta and Arquitens I both expect to have a fairly good showing in the post-Wave 5 meta. A Pelta equipped with AFFM makes every Rebel squadron unspeakably fast, especially the much-maligned B-wings. If anything, the Pelta's promise to improve the ability of Rebel squadron combat through speed means that bomber-heavy forces are even more likely on that side of the table, while the Pelta, no ISD, is still not a combatant to blithely ignore. The Arquitens I expect a fairly warm Imperial welcome for, given how the ship opens up long-range combat options for that faction, and provides, for its price point, an activation that is also an efficient dice thrower, with decent survivability to boot. While neither might directly overcome the fighter/flotilla spam by themselves, I would not write either off as insignificant yet.

I understand why you came to all of your conclusions, and they are all generally logical. I just happen to disagree with a handful of your premises that change the conclusions. I would describe what you have laid out as the direction of the meta, not the meta itself, and something I expect to see evolve as the Regionals season moves forwards to Nationals and Worlds, and as Wave 6 is announced (soon I hope). A worthy discussion to have, all in all.