For me personally, one of the pieces of the game that really makes the learning curve steep is how activation advantage and initiative work out with each other. This is where trying to teach someone how to play is also difficult- it's a really odd concept that an 18 point rebel transport can be so valuable for nothing other than what is equivalent to a "pass."

Coming from the WotC SWMiniatures game, this was one of the easiest concepts for me. That game made strong use of very similar mechanics, and even had options that specifically played around with it (like characters that gave you even better activation control, and characters - Thrawn! - that gave you greater control over initiative).

Thank you Vergilius for your insight into the background of the world's games. It's actually players like you that I follow and look forward to seeing posts from. Thanks again for the insight.

I really do wish we could have a lot more tactical and strategic discussions on this forum. It would make the game seem much more diverse.

One thing I would advocate is if there is a pinned or bumped thread, to have one post with video links, but the rest of the content to not be video: text and images. I do know some people love videos, and videos are absolutely the best way for certain things, butt hey tend to be long and some people don't learn from videos. On this message board, I think text and images is a better way to do things. You also cant search content of videos from tons of different sites, nor know how in depth someone will talk about a topic. So while the content creator hardly ever sees these as downsides, as consumers, videos tend to be really not always the best. Also, sometimes, you really don't want to watch a video. You don't have the time, you don't want to seem unproductive, you can't use audio where you are.

--

About the whole squadrons thing. No one is saying that squadrons shouldn't be effective. What people gripe about is that squadrons tend to hugely MORE effective than the same value invested in a large ship. Especially against bomber fleets and MSU builds that seek to take advantage of the point cost of such large ships.

--

Third, squadron play and tactics are rarely discussed. And even... rarely enacted in an interesting way. A lot of squadron battles end up being blobs vs blobs, and whoever can remember exactly the specifics of each squadrons can and can't dos. which if you are going for efficiency tend to bog down a player. Honestly, most games that focus on memory don't tend to be fun for the majority of people/. They play until the game requires huge commitments of remembering/memorizing, and they stop.

--

Oh another issue I've seen is that for tactical threads, they tend to stop about 25 posts in. People stop talking, or stop having things to say. Just see the Arquitens and the VSD threads. Yes, they seem to have died, but they're frankly, not popular threads. If we want to see more tactics I think a first community step to try and involve each other more in tactical threads, as opposed to fun-bait threads and speculation and whine threads.

There's pages about Ben. There's one and a quarter page on how to use an Arquitens effectively.

Why? Cuz Ben is funny.

This is a very interesting thread!

Haha... I've written about GenCon 2015 and US Nationals 2016... granted, I must admit, I wrote about things knowing that the meta would change (so wasn't really tipping my hand for the future)... but so people have cited concepts I've talked about (for whatever that's worth).

For those that have played me or seen me play (including Biggs), I will tell you that I play extremely aggressive... trying to the big wins to try to win it all.

Getting back to Worlds 2016, I know JJ and WwpdSteven personally... some points.

1 - I watched the Finals from the front row. Justin admitted afterwards they he shouldn't have committed Gallant Haven first during that fateful turn. Many would agree that was the turning point of the match.

2 - In retrospect, I wonder if JJs slow rolling thunder of Ys can force tempo/engagement, if his opponent decided to just run and play for the 6-5 (I know... it's blah blah, but still a valid tactic if you know you don't matchup). That being said, my aggro tactics would've likely fallen into the Y Cloud. I would have been confused by Justin's Flotilla Cage - it's formation fleet flying that I've never seen!

3 - That being said, Steven told me that Justin's aggressive flying was the correct tactic to counter his TRCs/YTs strategy.

In short, what I'm saying... it's easy to build a list to beat whatever is high on the totem pole at the time (ex: GenCon Special). I think the best advice... try to your style, go to a local tourney (I know people have life commitments etc)... I guarantee you'll learn a lot and be exposed to new ideas.

I suspect that the winner of Worlds 2017 will do something that hasn't been seen before (e.g., look how the Clonisher took the internet by storm). So, hey, why can't it be one of new Commanders in this game... I mean a moisture farmer made history with a one in a million shot, right?

This is a very interesting thread!

Haha... I've written about GenCon 2015 and US Nationals 2016... granted, I must admit, I wrote about things knowing that the meta would change (so wasn't really tipping my hand for the future)... but so people have cited concepts I've talked about (for whatever that's worth).

For those that have played me or seen me play (including Biggs), I will tell you that I play extremely aggressive... trying to the big wins to try to win it all.

Getting back to Worlds 2016, I know JJ and WwpdSteven personally... some points.

1 - I watched the Finals from the front row. Justin admitted afterwards they he shouldn't have committed Gallant Haven first during that fateful turn. Many would agree that was the turning point of the match.

2 - In retrospect, I wonder if JJs slow rolling thunder of Ys can force tempo/engagement, if his opponent decided to just run and play for the 6-5 (I know... it's blah blah, but still a valid tactic if you know you don't matchup). That being said, my aggro tactics would've likely fallen into the Y Cloud. I would have been confused by Justin's Flotilla Cage - it's formation fleet flying that I've never seen!

3 - That being said, Steven told me that Justin's aggressive flying was the correct tactic to counter his TRCs/YTs strategy.

In short, what I'm saying... it's easy to build a list to beat whatever is high on the totem pole at the time (ex: GenCon Special). I think the best advice... try to your style, go to a local tourney (I know people have life commitments etc)... I guarantee you'll learn a lot and be exposed to new ideas.

I suspect that the winner of Worlds 2017 will do something that hasn't been seen before (e.g., look how the Clonisher took the internet by storm). So, hey, why can't it be one of new Commanders in this game... I mean a moisture farmer made history with a one in a million shot, right?

=)

Also, I remember reading your posts. Thank you for your contributions.

Squadrons are the Devils sheep, and Flotillas are their shepherds. End rant.

So that said let's be honest, do you need to bring Squadrons to play well? Yes. About 70 points is the least you will want to bring for at least a fighter screen for defensive moves. And the Ties and X-Wings you get in the box are perfect for that very purpose, so no additional purchases are necessary, all players have them available to them, so use them. Always set aside 70 points for Squadrons. Just a standard rule.

Now let's talk Flotillas, the Devil's Shepard. Are they good? Hell yes! Are they necessary? Hell no! I have seen lists and games that do not utilize them and a well built list won't need them. Can they be useful? Hell yes but you have to have a purpose for them for you to get their points back.

So if you think about it they are not necessary to even be a good player but they can be fantastic if you use them right. A solid addition but not an auto-include to your collection. Sounds like a great new addition, just what a new product needs to be like. Much like an ISD for Imperial players, it's Fantastic but not necessary. You will Want it for your fleet but it is not necessary if you have a different style of play in mind.

Now your experiences may have left you feeling jaded but I don't think you are thinking about outside of your own experience as of yet. Give it time and play with the new toys yourself and if Squadrons are not in your game why not? They have been there the whole time and FFG gave you all you need from day one, no new purchases needed at all.

All hail Biggs.

Joking aside, Bigg's newbie posts on his blog got me through the early stages of the game, and I'd honestly have them pinned to the top of the forum, as I think they are superb.

This is a very interesting thread!

Haha... I've written about GenCon 2015 and US Nationals 2016... granted, I must admit, I wrote about things knowing that the meta would change (so wasn't really tipping my hand for the future)... but so people have cited concepts I've talked about (for whatever that's worth).

For those that have played me or seen me play (including Biggs), I will tell you that I play extremely aggressive... trying to the big wins to try to win it all.

Getting back to Worlds 2016, I know JJ and WwpdSteven personally... some points.

1 - I watched the Finals from the front row. Justin admitted afterwards they he shouldn't have committed Gallant Haven first during that fateful turn. Many would agree that was the turning point of the match.

2 - In retrospect, I wonder if JJs slow rolling thunder of Ys can force tempo/engagement, if his opponent decided to just run and play for the 6-5 (I know... it's blah blah, but still a valid tactic if you know you don't matchup). That being said, my aggro tactics would've likely fallen into the Y Cloud. I would have been confused by Justin's Flotilla Cage - it's formation fleet flying that I've never seen!

3 - That being said, Steven told me that Justin's aggressive flying was the correct tactic to counter his TRCs/YTs strategy.

In short, what I'm saying... it's easy to build a list to beat whatever is high on the totem pole at the time (ex: GenCon Special). I think the best advice... try to your style, go to a local tourney (I know people have life commitments etc)... I guarantee you'll learn a lot and be exposed to new ideas.

I suspect that the winner of Worlds 2017 will do something that hasn't been seen before (e.g., look how the Clonisher took the internet by storm). So, hey, why can't it be one of new Commanders in this game... I mean a moisture farmer made history with a one in a million shot, right?

Ice. I love your posts. Thanks for those insightful posts last summer on the Nationals 2016. I learned a ton from them and they've helped me develop my own sense of aggressive play.

I've stopped using bombers and take nothing but fighters with squadron commands to support them all. Usually comes in at around 100 pnts worth of squadrons and has performed fairly well thus far.

Besides... Who wants to take advice from me... Mr Statistically Abysmal.....

Hehe, I'm surprised you still haven't added that to your signature...

Tactics are harder to talk about than lots of other options. I've been trying to find the time to film another short video on them. Videos aren't for anyone, but they are a great way to talk about moving ships around the table.

After all this thread is based on a video showing a scenario we can all look at and discuss. The ideal might be a game playback with a commentary track. But that would be so long, I doubt I would have the time to watch it. Heck, the videos I've produced come in at 10 minutes and I worry they are too long.

I've stopped using bombers and take nothing but fighters with squadron commands to support them all. Usually comes in at around 100 pnts worth of squadrons and has performed fairly well thus far.

Even without bomber fighters can still plink out reasonable damage. Example; first Worlds with the 8 A-wings slaughtering Glads....

Tactics are harder to talk about than lots of other options. I've been trying to find the time to film another short video on them. Videos aren't for anyone, but they are a great way to talk about moving ships around the table.

After all this thread is based on a video showing a scenario we can all look at and discuss. The ideal might be a game playback with a commentary track. But that would be so long, I doubt I would have the time to watch it. Heck, the videos I've produced come in at 10 minutes and I worry they are too long.

You also make a lot of effort to help the community in text and videos. Thank you.

While you hear me lament about videos, I still love that you make them. Please keep doing what you do.

Also videos >>>> nothing at all.

As a player who is still in his first year of learning this game, the posts I look forward to the most are the battle reports that have log files with them. I struggle the most with object placement and deployment strategies and I like it when the players who post their reports sometimes explain the thoughts behind their plans. It's also great when the opponent also adds their thoughts from the other side of the table. All the top players who post on this board all say it is hard to put to paper their thoughts on different strategies. I understand this with all of the different options available to us with new ships/squads/objectives/admirals...not to mention whether you are going first or second or activation advantage. Just one change to any of this could completely change their train of thought on how the game could be played or how they will attack an opponent. There are a few lists out there that tend to employ the same strategy in every game, but those lists are few and far between.

I think the main problem in discussing tactics comes down to a lack of developed general concepts/doctrines. By that I mean a sense of what you should generally do when you face a generally applicable situation.

For example. In one of the CC games that Beatty mentioned at the top of the thread was one in which I had 4 activations (ISD, Int, 2x flotilla) and was facing 7 activations (6x CR90b + GR75). That's already somewhat general, but can be generalized even further - few activations vs many activations. In such a scenario, the general concept is that you've got a few bigger hitters, and just need to get the little buggers in your sights, before they come around and chew on your flanks. What is generally the sort of thing you should do about that?

Another example: squadron imbalance. If you're facing more squadrons than you can handle with the squadrons you have, what sorts of things can you do to keep them off your back? Do you go fast and unpredictable, so they don't form deadly welcoming parties, or do you B-line it for the carrier?

The more such generally applicable situations can be answered by general doctrines, the more we can actually have a conversation about these things. If everything is gets lost in details of upgrades and special abilities, the less we can actually have good discussions about tactics.

Shmitty is one of the few people to do that sort of thing, and the videos are great. They're a wonderful medium for this sort of thing.

Well Mikeal you were out activated but you found a rhythm that over came that disadvantage and turned it into your own advantage. But yes, being too narrowed view in details can make it impossible to come up with Tactics, but that is why we should focus more on the general concepts and maneuvers first. Many factors change who you should approach your game. Whether you go first or have more activations is just the tip of the iceberg of situations and obstacles you will run into.

That said some concepts are pretty universal. Like fleet composition. How many ships and squadrons should players typically bring? From my experience, which is still limited, I will say 3-4 ships is ideal and you should bring at least 70 points of squadrons. That's just a very basic concept that seems pretty obvious but if you look at the forum for list building you so so many lists that completely break that "rule?". It just seems that simple concepts are not even discussed.

Should we correct that?

Just recorded a new video tonight and may record another tomorrow. Yay for snow days.

Besides... Who wants to take advice from me... Mr Statistically Abysmal.....

So Dras and I are sitting at a table at regionals and another player walks up and wants Dras to explain DTT's to him and how they work... Dras picks up and rolls 3 reds, gets hit/blank/blank... then dras explains that you add a die, rolls a blank, then says you then remove a die... i look over and say "man those are crap rolls"... he picks up the three reds and rolls them again getting blank/blank/blank... i say dras "you need some new dice!"... he says "these arent even my dice!"

Having a plan is nice, because it gives you something to throw out the window by about the 3rd deployment!

Well Mikeal you were out activated but you found a rhythm that over came that disadvantage and turned it into your own advantage. But yes, being too narrowed view in details can make it impossible to come up with Tactics, but that is why we should focus more on the general concepts and maneuvers first. Many factors change who you should approach your game. Whether you go first or have more activations is just the tip of the iceberg of situations and obstacles you will run into.

That rhythm was called Base Defense: Ion Cannons.

But in addition to that, there was the fact that will all those opposing ships attempting to stay out of my ISD's front arc, they divided into two groups. At that stage, my tactic was to wheel out and concentrate on crushing one of those groups, while presenting my ISD's rear as a problematic target for the other group. That seems like a fairly standard thing to do.

But I'm not going to pretend to have a subtle tactical or strategic mind. I tend to play by intuition. Sometimes the intuition works, and sometimes it does not.

That said some concepts are pretty universal. Like fleet composition. How many ships and squadrons should players typically bring? From my experience, which is still limited, I will say 3-4 ships is ideal and you should bring at least 70 points of squadrons. That's just a very basic concept that seems pretty obvious but if you look at the forum for list building you so so many lists that completely break that "rule?". It just seems that simple concepts are not even discussed.

As people have said, the fleet compositions are meta-situational. I think you correctly identified the question of squadrons at the top of your post. However, fleet composition is what most of this forum talks about when it is not complaining about things. So, there's not much value-added in that direction of discussion.

Having a plan is nice, because it gives you something to throw out the window by about the 3rd deployment!

Like the Art of a War teaches you can't be stubborn and follow a ridged plan, you have to flow and adapt to the battle. So you're right about not having a solid plan. But if you understand your ship's abilities and upgrades and their strength against you opponent's ships you start to see what it is you need to do. Two concepts come to mind. The first is from the Art of War, "When one does not know one's self he is bond to lose every battle, when one knows one's own strength he is bond to win some battles but when one knows their enemies strengths and weaknesses they can win every battle." So studying the strengths and weaknesses of all the ships does absolutely help.

The second comes from a movie quote and to paraphrase it it basically says when you are at the poker table and you can not spot the mark you are the mark. Basically saying if you can't read the table and see how you will be attacked and are blind to the direction your opponent wants you to go you have already lost.

These two concepts are advance ones that I strive to achieve in every game I learn, but I have yet to master it at all as of yet. But I am learning from every game I play and watch.

This may seem like a rambling word salad or it may sound idealistic but it is the end goal for all master strategists. I may never reach that level but hey, I have to try.

Well Mikeal you were out activated but you found a rhythm that over came that disadvantage and turned it into your own advantage. But yes, being too narrowed view in details can make it impossible to come up with Tactics, but that is why we should focus more on the general concepts and maneuvers first. Many factors change who you should approach your game. Whether you go first or have more activations is just the tip of the iceberg of situations and obstacles you will run into.

That rhythm was called Base Defense: Ion Cannons.

But in addition to that, there was the fact that will all those opposing ships attempting to stay out of my ISD's front arc, they divided into two groups. At that stage, my tactic was to wheel out and concentrate on crushing one of those groups, while presenting my ISD's rear as a problematic target for the other group. That seems like a fairly standard thing to do.

But I'm not going to pretend to have a subtle tactical or strategic mind. I tend to play by intuition. Sometimes the intuition works, and sometimes it does not.

That said some concepts are pretty universal. Like fleet composition. How many ships and squadrons should players typically bring? From my experience, which is still limited, I will say 3-4 ships is ideal and you should bring at least 70 points of squadrons. That's just a very basic concept that seems pretty obvious but if you look at the forum for list building you so so many lists that completely break that "rule?". It just seems that simple concepts are not even discussed.

As people have said, the fleet compositions are meta-situational. I think you correctly identified the question of squadrons at the top of your post. However, fleet composition is what most of this forum talks about when it is not complaining about things. So, there's not much value-added in that direction of discussion.

But yes, Base Ion Cannons are brutal and I still think they are meant to be tough encouraging players to attack non-base targets until their fleet is strong enough..

But I'm not going to pretend to have a subtle tactical or strategic mind. I tend to play by intuition. Sometimes the intuition works, and sometimes it does not.

Fair enough. But don't lie, you have good instincts.

I do alright, in most part because I've been playing this game since it came out. I have a rack of tournament medals, but those were mostly from the days when there were four-person ad hoc tournaments back in 2015, and I beat up on baby seals.

But yes, Base Ion Cannons are brutal and I still think they are meant to be tough encouraging players to attack non-base targets until their fleet is strong enough..

Yes, indeed. We made some rookie mistakes going straight for eachother's jugulars in the first round. It was probably wise for my minion to largely steer clear of your fleet (and the ion cannons), while your Grand Admiral made the mistake of running right into the meat grinder.

But, as to tactics...

I think if we identify some sets of general conditions, then maybe it is possible to develop a tactical doctrime. The trouble is: if someone broadcasts their doctrine, by discussing it on the forum, or putting it in a video, then their cat's out the bag to the extent that the community is made up of capable learners.

Squadrons are the Devils sheep, and Flotillas are their shepherds. End rant.

Ok, I hope you don't feel insulted but I'm going to use this post to explain my position further. On Squadrons, the Devil's Sheep. No where in the rules or presentation of the game does it suggest that the game can be played well without Squadrons. In fact the Base Box comes with more Squadrons than you need and the Ties and X-Wings are still fantastic staples and you honestly don't Need to buy anymore Squadrons ever. The new Squadrons do bring you new ways to play but they are not necessary to play a good game. Howlrunner and Luke are still some of the best pilots in the game.

So that said let's be honest, do you need to bring Squadrons to play well? Yes. About 70 points is the least you will want to bring for at least a fighter screen for defensive moves. And the Ties and X-Wings you get in the box are perfect for that very purpose, so no additional purchases are necessary, all players have them available to them, so use them. Always set aside 70 points for Squadrons. Just a standard rule.

Now let's talk Flotillas, the Devil's Shepard. Are they good? Hell yes! Are they necessary? Hell no! I have seen lists and games that do not utilize them and a well built list won't need them. Can they be useful? Hell yes but you have to have a purpose for them for you to get their points back.

So if you think about it they are not necessary to even be a good player but they can be fantastic if you use them right. A solid addition but not an auto-include to your collection. Sounds like a great new addition, just what a new product needs to be like. Much like an ISD for Imperial players, it's Fantastic but not necessary. You will Want it for your fleet but it is not necessary if you have a different style of play in mind.

Now your experiences may have left you feeling jaded but I don't think you are thinking about outside of your own experience as of yet. Give it time and play with the new toys yourself and if Squadrons are not in your game why not? They have been there the whole time and FFG gave you all you need from day one, no new purchases needed at all.

Purchase? I get three of everything Imperial, and two of most Rebel stuff. Yep, I'm crazy....lol.

You misunderstand me. I like squadrons. Love Interceptors. The meta change took me by surprise, but that happens. I'm already compensating and adapting. Flotillas I do think are a bit OP, but can be handled once properly understood. Just a matter of bringing the correct hammer.

The post was made tongue in cheek....hehe.

That said some concepts are pretty universal. Like fleet composition. How many ships and squadrons should players typically bring? From my experience, which is still limited, I will say 3-4 ships is ideal and you should bring at least 70 points of squadrons. That's just a very basic concept that seems pretty obvious but if you look at the forum for list building you so so many lists that completely break that "rule?". It just seems that simple concepts are not even discussed.

Should we correct that?

I would posit that right now, 4 ships is almost a minimum with 5 and 6 ship lists pushing the activation advantage. As for squadron alottment, when talking about a minimum I find myself changing how I discuss lists. Generally if you decide to go the less is more approach, actual fighter stands mean more than points. In prior waves this meant 4 fighter stands minimum, and as a rebel player that meant 4 A-Wings. Nowadays, FFG answered my prayers and I can take 6 Z95s for cheaper.

As to the concept of tactics articles, below were two topics I started looking very in depth at Defiance and Fighters. They are pretty comprehensive including tips on maneuvers and actual battel strategy. Both were pretty well received (they are very dated now) but didn't really generate a lot of discussion. I'm curious now if these are the type of articles people want?

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/199019-tips-on-how-to-counter-the-fireball-with-minimum-squadrons/

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/199164-in-defence-of-defiance-%E2%80%93-hitting-the-opponent-with-%E2%80%9Cbig-d%E2%80%9D/