I don't think this dance of viability is the way to go. So, you drop palp, and then nobody has much stock to run Lambda (they'll just Run Upsilon instead, which with some of those pilots and upgrades is going to start happening anyway), people will probably not feel good about a lot of the more fragile imperial ace type ships, so it'll go back to defenders. Which for the longest time were not viable in of themselves. Do we (or rather, does FFG) need to keep doing this dance so specific lists are viable? Ships makes sense for players and them. They want people to use what they buy and if they aren't then that's a perfect opportunity for additional product to help move ships up. There's a very strong argument that Palp himself allowed the viability of Shuttle+Two Aces to become real. You pay a shitload of points for his swiss-army-ness, whereas other upgrades cost you less to get similar dice mod elements in more specified conditions.

I know a lot of the palp haters and viability talkers hate "complexity" and want to just slash-n-burn the whole game for some new edition where we'd have this problem all over again, but honestly, I think this is a thing where more expansion of the game will help. Time and variety is needed, The way to help imperial viability and variety is not to kill palpatine directly, but to present them with more options and strategies which are also viable (again, like cards like Stridan or Hux will probably be doing). If there are less choices, the winning strategies to pick will also get smaller. You need to make the game contain more choices, more combinations to prevent equilibrium and present more intransitivity. Only when you end up not introducing variety because a strategy is very clearly dominant and not intransitive should hard nerfs be applied (I/E, U-Boats strategy is so simple and beats so much more than beats it, it reduces variance)

As an imperial player, I'd agree with the idea we need *more variety*. I've stopped playing Imps for a while because we really only have two competive lists:

1/ Palp + 2

2/ Defenders x2 plus Defender/OML/Ace of choice.

That's pretty much it. There's the option of Deci + Defender but that's not the easiest thing to fly.

What Imps lack is variety.

...

As an imperial player, I'd agree with the idea we need *more variety*. I've stopped playing Imps for a while because we really only have two competive lists:

1/ Palp + 2

2/ Defenders x2 plus Defender/OML/Ace of choice.

That's pretty much it. There's the option of Deci + Defender but that's not the easiest thing to fly.

What Imps lack is variety.

Imperials for the longest time have always lacked variety in the term of the macro sense. They tend to have one highly efficient build then go with it.

Rebels in Wave 5 had 2 different PWT ships and a large ship hunter in the form of corran while imps had an arc dodger in whisper and RAC. Wave 6 (and the cloak nerf) saw whisper replaced with Soontir fel and scum had only one list brobots. When wave 7 came out Rebels and Scum had the TLT Y-wings but Imperials did not because they do not have access to the turret upgrade slot (I think they should FFG).

But yeah Rebels has always been the toolbox faction, they have so many tools it is putting them together that is the tricky part, Imperials have been one build that stands beyond the rest and just with some micro tweaking to make it better. Scum as they are expanding are getting more and more different types of builds they can do stuff that the other two faction can't (like make good use of torpedo secondary weapons).

Come to think of it Imperials have never had much access in upgrade slots. So many of their ships have blank upgrade bar with the exception of EPTs on the higher pilot skills. They also do not have access to two standard upgrade slots, turrets, and illicits. I think this has made the imperials the most bog standard when it comes to builds. They only have one because it is the best one and every Imperial list has to copy it.

^ Point taken, but those lists aren't as good as you think.

Agree that certain ships aren't given their share of credit, but no one needs convinced that the SF is not currently competitive.

I'll agree with you here if only because I haven't taken a SF squad to an event yet. I have been practicing with one quite a bit however and time will tell if that practice has been time well spent.

I appreciate your opinion, as per usual when reading your posts.

It would be great if we could play test the hell out of all of the lists we theorycraft - I think there's an Imperial combo with the Upsilon ex-pac (not necessarily the ship itself) that has not been cracked. Hopefully the SF is in it and hopefully one of us finds it...

I yearn to have the privilege of naming a list!

I've found the secret SF list and will release the list at Kashyyyk

Y'know, I think the SF is actually the first part of FFG pushing to try and give Imperials more list diversity - it's a ship which flies much more like Rebel heavy fighters than most imperial type ships - the problem is much like Rebels with the U-Wing now, nobody figured exactly what the /SF was good for. With [Tech][system][Missile] and the ability to double tap or have 3 dice forward and solid pilot abilities, it's probably good for something, especially either with TIE Mk II or LF. The question is what though? With Synchronizer and FCS it'll probably make an interesting spotter ship, for instance.

While I understand that it might seem someone who doesn't play tournaments anymore might not have an idea of what's going on, I do think I have a nice idea of what's happening. I look at tournament results. I listen to podcasts. I spend too much time on these forums. I used to do tournaments. I have played a lot of game systems. I think I understand quite a bit about this game and how it works.

I'm really not sure how many more times I can say this - Palpatine demonstrably does NOT 'warp' the meta to remotely the same degree as previous instances where FFG decided to step in. NOR is Palpatine by any means an auto-include in Imperial lists, and certainly does not HAVE to be in an Imperial list in order for it to win.

People keep stating these as facts without substantiating them, and it is starting to irk me. Please stop making claims like these unless you are prepared and able to support them, else it is nothing but hyperbole and further weakens the already shaky standpoint of those who want a change to Palpatine.

Tournament results on ListJuggler do not show an overabundance of Palpatine in Imperial lists. My experiences playing regularly on Vassal (arguably a representative sample of the game state worldwide) have not seen me play against a Palpatine list in several months (and only one in the last six), while I meet regular success with my own Imperial list (that does not contain Palpatine or any of the commonly used Defenders).

I will admit that I don't go digging through ListJuggler results like some people do. I did listen to the podcast where the OP referenced as the genesis of this discussion. I believe it was stated that out of the top x (was it 16, 32, or 64?) player cut offs for Worlds, there was only 1 Imperial list that didn't include Palp. I think it's important to note that we should really be looking at those that have made the top cuts at major events instead of just total number of lists. I'd be curious to know the number of non-Palp lists that have made it to Top 16 in the past 6 or so months (all the relevant data such as %'s and all that).

I'm thinking that Palp lists pretty much are all what top players are playing. I admit that it might not be as bad as I think it is.

Deadeye wasn't the build that made them good. It was the Pilot Skill 3 + (salvaged) astromech in conjunction with dead eye that made Torpedo U-boats so good in the game.

Bombers just don't have the upgrade slots to make use of their 4 munition and a bomb slot. FFG really didn't know what was it about munitions that makes them terrible (or what it takes to make them good).

First, you can use Guidance Chip or LRS to affect the die rolls for ordnance. There is also native ability built into Homing Missiles, Proton Torpedoes, and Concussion Missiles. That's enough, really.

You don't need to be able to fire off 4 munitions and a bomb slot to be effective. You really just need Extra Munitions and another missile/torpedo to make it worth it. I say Homing Missile if you can fit the points in. If you go with Quad Bomber lists, you don't usually need more than that. Most of the time you will get each bomber firing off at least 1 ordnance before it dies. That's 4 ordnance at targets. That should destroy a good portion of your opponent's list.

It does not work vs. Dengaroo.

Guidance chip only modifies 1 dice, not the same as getting a focus/target lock as the old U-boat combo. Bombers are terrible and there is no way to build them anywhere near the Dengaroo (let alone the pre-nerfed U-boats). You just can't do anything with them. Homming missiles is 8 points vs the 5-6 points the torpedoes were. Deadeye allows you to target anything in your arc which works better at pilost skill 3 because you can't get blocked as easy as you were at pilot skill 5. Also if they did manage to arc dodge you U-boats had a PWT so it wasn't as big as a problem. This is a fact and no matter how you build TIE bombers it will never work. This is what needs to be fixed with bombers.

• An ept pilot with skill <5
• An ability to reroll their own attack dice when firing missiles
• An ability to attack higher pilot skill ships

Bombers don't have that, as for the shuttle title why would you spend points on Support bombers when you can spend points (and probably already are) on the ultimate support shuttle. Torpedo and missile secondary weapons were never good to begin with. U-boats proved that they can be built up but only in a very specific manner. When that is done it does what missiles and torpedoes should have done in the first place, remove enemy ships, however since it becomes very difficult to defend from such attacks FFG has decided to keep missiles and torpedoes both underpowered and overcosted. And since the TIE Bomber was nothing more than a bunch of open slots for secondary weapons, the TIE Bomber is essentially a point sink. It is not that good in jousting and it has huge holes in which you can easily overload it with upgrades.

*sigh* I guess we can continue to have the exact same arguments where you talk about the same subjects over and over again.

• Guidance Chip does only affect one die roll, but it can also be combined with many other things....such as Proton Torpedoes, Concussion Missiles, and Homing Missiles. If you combine the native affects of the first two with GC, you start to have some averages that are incredibly high. If you include Homing Missiles, it goes through the roof. You get to roll your attacks. Then, you get to re-roll the ones you want. After that, you adjust one of them to a hit. As long as you are using something that has native modifying, you get more than one die roll modified.
• I have never stated that Tie Bombers are as good as pre-nerf U-boats. Also, there is plenty of space between being as good as pre-nerf U-boats and being terrible.
• What are you talking about with Homing Missiles being 8 pts and Torpedoes 5-6? Extra Munitions works for Homing Missiles, too. So, two of them cost 7 pts. Well worth the cost with the native dice modification and the ability to disregard the enemy Evade token.
• Deadeye isn't required to make Tie Bombers work. You can go with LRS. Also, I don't understand why you think PS 3 is the magic number to have Deadeye as you won't get blocked and can still get the Focus off. Are there really that many PS 3-4 ships out there in tournament games that are causing bumps to ruin it for you? If so, then maybe you need to try out the LRS.
• Your point about Bombers getting a re-roll when firing their missiles is called Homing Missiles. Seriously, have you used them before?

The rest of it just goes on a rant where I wonder if you have spent more than a couple games flying Tie Bombers. I've flown Tie Bombers quite a bit and done it before and after the various Tie Bomber fixes. I've ruined people's day in tournaments with 4 Tie Bombers before the fixes. I came close to winning my Store Championship with 4 Tie Bombers. They might take some getting used to, but once you learn them, they are quite effective. You also seem to disregard LRS which is huge to be able to get shots on enemy ships. That combined with native Barrel Roll makes it pretty hard for ships to get by you and not get shot at.

Personally, I think when you are flying against enemy lists that are just 2-3 ships in them, the Tie Bomber list can be pretty brutal. The ability to remove a ship in the first turn can drastically change the game, especially if it can be done in the next turn, too. Yes, there are some hard counters to them, like Dengaroo, but they often do better than one would expect against a lot of lists. I won about 50% of my games vs. Soontir Fel.

I'm not saying that 4 Tie Bombers is a top table list. To be honest, I don't know as I haven't played at tournaments in a long time. I also know Dengaroo really screws with it and it's very popular right now. I am saying that it is not a crap list that is terrible.

...

*sigh* I guess we can continue to have the exact same arguments where you talk about the same subjects over and over again.

• Guidance Chip does only affect one die roll, but it can also be combined with many other things....such as Proton Torpedoes, Concussion Missiles, and Homing Missiles. If you combine the native affects of the first two with GC, you start to have some averages that are incredibly high. If you include Homing Missiles, it goes through the roof. You get to roll your attacks. Then, you get to re-roll the ones you want. After that, you adjust one of them to a hit. As long as you are using something that has native modifying, you get more than one die roll modified.
• I have never stated that Tie Bombers are as good as pre-nerf U-boats. Also, there is plenty of space between being as good as pre-nerf U-boats and being terrible.
• What are you talking about with Homing Missiles being 8 pts and Torpedoes 5-6? Extra Munitions works for Homing Missiles, too. So, two of them cost 7 pts. Well worth the cost with the native dice modification and the ability to disregard the enemy Evade token.
• Deadeye isn't required to make Tie Bombers work. You can go with LRS. Also, I don't understand why you think PS 3 is the magic number to have Deadeye as you won't get blocked and can still get the Focus off. Are there really that many PS 3-4 ships out there in tournament games that are causing bumps to ruin it for you? If so, then maybe you need to try out the LRS.
• Your point about Bombers getting a re-roll when firing their missiles is called Homing Missiles. Seriously, have you used them before?

The rest of it just goes on a rant where I wonder if you have spent more than a couple games flying Tie Bombers. I've flown Tie Bombers quite a bit and done it before and after the various Tie Bomber fixes. I've ruined people's day in tournaments with 4 Tie Bombers before the fixes. I came close to winning my Store Championship with 4 Tie Bombers. They might take some getting used to, but once you learn them, they are quite effective. You also seem to disregard LRS which is huge to be able to get shots on enemy ships. That combined with native Barrel Roll makes it pretty hard for ships to get by you and not get shot at.

Personally, I think when you are flying against enemy lists that are just 2-3 ships in them, the Tie Bomber list can be pretty brutal. The ability to remove a ship in the first turn can drastically change the game, especially if it can be done in the next turn, too. Yes, there are some hard counters to them, like Dengaroo, but they often do better than one would expect against a lot of lists. I won about 50% of my games vs. Soontir Fel.

I'm not saying that 4 Tie Bombers is a top table list. To be honest, I don't know as I haven't played at tournaments in a long time. I also know Dengaroo really screws with it and it's very popular right now. I am saying that it is not a crap list that is terrible.

I keep having to say this. You can arc dodge homing missiles, deadeye plus homing missiles does not reroll all your attack dice. Furthermore the pilots that can take dead eye for the bomber have a pilot skill > 5 which means easily blocked. THe pre-nerf U-boat was the default on how to build a missile platform and U-boats had all the upgrade slots the TIE Bomber does not have, EPTs on their low pilot skill, salvaged astromech, and crew. The only thing the TIE Bomber has is a 2x missile slot and a modification slot but none of the other slots that could let you build them up.

As for homing missiles as the anti TIE Defender weapon why not just put them on a TIE Defender and save yourself the 16+ points? Because if you got a Bomber built just to be anti-defender. Well your 4 bombers with 8 Homing missiles are going to lose their value once those two defenders are off the board. That is assuming you always meet a Defender list.

I wish there was a way to build bombers up to be good, it would also help with the punishers as well. but 2x torpedo slots + 2x missile slots is nothing more than a point sink on a ship.

Despite what is continually claimed, FFG clearly don't agree that Palpatine is such a big, negative effect on the game that he needs changing or removing, and there remains no evidence to support those claims no matter how often they are repeated.

Actually, I think the amount of anti-ace tech we've been seeing lately (Zuckuss, BMST, all the Tractor Beam Shenanigans) looks to me a lot like an admission from FFG that aces have become too durable, and Palpatine is one of the factors that contributes to that.

It's just that FFG hopes they can take with Palpatine the same route they took with PWTs, rather than hard errata.

I keep having to say this. You can arc dodge homing missiles, deadeye plus homing missiles does not reroll all your attack dice. Furthermore the pilots that can take dead eye for the bomber have a pilot skill > 5 which means easily blocked. THe pre-nerf U-boat was the default on how to build a missile platform and U-boats had all the upgrade slots the TIE Bomber does not have, EPTs on their low pilot skill, salvaged astromech, and crew. The only thing the TIE Bomber has is a 2x missile slot and a modification slot but none of the other slots that could let you build them up.

As for homing missiles as the anti TIE Defender weapon why not just put them on a TIE Defender and save yourself the 16+ points? Because if you got a Bomber built just to be anti-defender. Well your 4 bombers with 8 Homing missiles are going to lose their value once those two defenders are off the board. That is assuming you always meet a Defender list.

I wish there was a way to build bombers up to be good, it would also help with the punishers as well. but 2x torpedo slots + 2x missile slots is nothing more than a point sink on a ship.

I always have to keep responding that you don't need Deadeye to be effective with Tie Bombers. You are utterly discounting LRS, which is a fantastic way for any PS ship to get a good TL on someone. Lowly Scimitar pilots at PS 2 can get a TL on turn 1 and then move conservatively to keep someone in arc. If you have one Tie Bomber with LRS and a TL on one ship, it's incredibly hard for that one ship to dodger your arc and get in behind you, even for Soontir Fel. Remember, you aren't supposed to fly your Bombers in formation.

There is also actually flying smartly to get a TL on someone without LRS. As stated, it's not as easy to fly as U-boats, but I never said it was. You can fly well enough and get TL's on people and be effective with them.

I think you misunderstand Homing Missiles. They aren't the anti-Tie Defender ordnance. They are the best ordnance in the game! You constantly talk about not having the modification for the ordnance shot when Homing Missiles has the built in modification! They are good against every ship. They just also have the built in no-Evade token. That's useful against a lot of ships, not just /X7 Defenders.

It seems to me that you are too hung up on using Deadeye to get a shot on someone. If you are forced to use Deadeye, then yes, you don't get the modification for Homing Missiles and you might get bumped and not get that Focus. That's not the only way to use Tie Bombers, though, and that's where you are failing. Does it mean you aren't as good as a U-boat? Yes, yes it does. Does it mean you are bad? Heck no!

^ Point taken, but those lists aren't as good as you think.

Agree that certain ships aren't given their share of credit, but no one needs convinced that the SF is not currently competitive.

I'll agree with you here if only because I haven't taken a SF squad to an event yet. I have been practicing with one quite a bit however and time will tell if that practice has been time well spent.

I appreciate your opinion, as per usual when reading your posts.

It would be great if we could play test the hell out of all of the lists we theorycraft - I think there's an Imperial combo with the Upsilon ex-pac (not necessarily the ship itself) that has not been cracked. Hopefully the SF is in it and hopefully one of us finds it...

I yearn to have the privilege of naming a list!

eh no need to reach that deep

Just take triple dedenders, the delta ryad vess one

And chuck out the delta for FCS backdraft with adapt/VI

Hes a right solid little bugger. Not as durable as the delta but hits far more consistently and is far less predictable AND sets up vess through stuff like countermeasures/manny ability (fcs)

I keep having to say this. You can arc dodge homing missiles, deadeye plus homing missiles does not reroll all your attack dice. Furthermore the pilots that can take dead eye for the bomber have a pilot skill > 5 which means easily blocked. THe pre-nerf U-boat was the default on how to build a missile platform and U-boats had all the upgrade slots the TIE Bomber does not have, EPTs on their low pilot skill, salvaged astromech, and crew. The only thing the TIE Bomber has is a 2x missile slot and a modification slot but none of the other slots that could let you build them up.

As for homing missiles as the anti TIE Defender weapon why not just put them on a TIE Defender and save yourself the 16+ points? Because if you got a Bomber built just to be anti-defender. Well your 4 bombers with 8 Homing missiles are going to lose their value once those two defenders are off the board. That is assuming you always meet a Defender list.

I wish there was a way to build bombers up to be good, it would also help with the punishers as well. but 2x torpedo slots + 2x missile slots is nothing more than a point sink on a ship.

I always have to keep responding that you don't need Deadeye to be effective with Tie Bombers. You are utterly discounting LRS, which is a fantastic way for any PS ship to get a good TL on someone. Lowly Scimitar pilots at PS 2 can get a TL on turn 1 and then move conservatively to keep someone in arc. If you have one Tie Bomber with LRS and a TL on one ship, it's incredibly hard for that one ship to dodger your arc and get in behind you, even for Soontir Fel. Remember, you aren't supposed to fly your Bombers in formation.

There is also actually flying smartly to get a TL on someone without LRS. As stated, it's not as easy to fly as U-boats, but I never said it was. You can fly well enough and get TL's on people and be effective with them.

I think you misunderstand Homing Missiles. They aren't the anti-Tie Defender ordnance. They are the best ordnance in the game! You constantly talk about not having the modification for the ordnance shot when Homing Missiles has the built in modification! They are good against every ship. They just also have the built in no-Evade token. That's useful against a lot of ships, not just /X7 Defenders.

It seems to me that you are too hung up on using Deadeye to get a shot on someone. If you are forced to use Deadeye, then yes, you don't get the modification for Homing Missiles and you might get bumped and not get that Focus. That's not the only way to use Tie Bombers, though, and that's where you are failing. Does it mean you aren't as good as a U-boat? Yes, yes it does. Does it mean you are bad? Heck no!

What dead eye does is allows for you to target ANY ship with your attacks that depend on target lock instead of declaring your attack during the activation phase. You wan't a homing missile lock on Vessery? Too bad Vessery is not in your arc. Omega Leader is inside your arc but yo don't have a target lock on hims. Do you get it now?

Probably not. Oh well, bottom line Secondary Weapon that require target locks are BAD, ships that are overly dependent on those weapons are BAD. K-wings and Y-wings that are loaded up on torpedoes are bad. K-wings and Y-wings that take TLT or BTL A-4 are not. Bombers and Punishers have nothing on them other than awful secondary weapons with no way of building them to be any good. not to mention the more you build up bombers and punishers, The more points you are sinking in.

What dead eye does is allows for you to target ANY ship with your attacks that depend on target lock instead of declaring your attack during the activation phase. You wan't a homing missile lock on Vessery? Too bad Vessery is not in your arc. Omega Leader is inside your arc but yo don't have a target lock on hims. Do you get it now?

Probably not. Oh well, bottom line Secondary Weapon that require target locks are BAD, ships that are overly dependent on those weapons are BAD. K-wings and Y-wings that are loaded up on torpedoes are bad. K-wings and Y-wings that take TLT or BTL A-4 are not. Bombers and Punishers have nothing on them other than awful secondary weapons with no way of building them to be any good. not to mention the more you build up bombers and punishers, The more points you are sinking in.

Oh, I get what Deadeye does, but what I do understand is that not having Deadeye doesn't make Ordnance worthless. You seem to have a binary outlook. It is either the best thing ever or it utterly sucks.

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty. People have used ordnance very effectively to do very well in many major events, but you still want to keep thinking that all ordnance is bad, no matter how much evidence to the contrary you see.

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty.

Of course, both these ships have a pretty easy time acquiring TL due to their PS.

U-boats were the tournament winning lists. As I said U-boats showed what was needed to make torpedo and missile weapons good. Bombers can't copy U-boats. You can try (I did) and you'll die. There is no Do, there is only Do Not, as Do Not Sink Points into TIE Bombers and TIE Punishers.

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty.

Of course, both these ships have a pretty easy time acquiring TL due to their PS.

True, but Marinealver states that all ordnance was terrible in the game, no matter who was using it. I disagreed.

U-boats were the tournament winning lists. As I said U-boats showed what was needed to make torpedo and missile weapons good. Bombers can't copy U-boats. You can try (I did) and you'll die. There is no Do, there is only Do Not, as Do Not Sink Points into TIE Bombers and TIE Punishers.

Once again....U-boats were the best. They were so good they were nerfed. Anything that can't copy pre-nerf U-boats is terrible.

What dead eye does is allows for you to target ANY ship with your attacks that depend on target lock instead of declaring your attack during the activation phase. You wan't a homing missile lock on Vessery? Too bad Vessery is not in your arc. Omega Leader is inside your arc but yo don't have a target lock on hims. Do you get it now?

Probably not. Oh well, bottom line Secondary Weapon that require target locks are BAD, ships that are overly dependent on those weapons are BAD. K-wings and Y-wings that are loaded up on torpedoes are bad. K-wings and Y-wings that take TLT or BTL A-4 are not. Bombers and Punishers have nothing on them other than awful secondary weapons with no way of building them to be any good. not to mention the more you build up bombers and punishers, The more points you are sinking in.

Oh, I get what Deadeye does, but what I do understand is that not having Deadeye doesn't make Ordnance worthless. You seem to have a binary outlook. It is either the best thing ever or it utterly sucks.

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty. People have used ordnance very effectively to do very well in many major events, but you still want to keep thinking that all ordnance is bad, no matter how much evidence to the contrary you see.

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty.

Of course, both these ships have a pretty easy time acquiring TL due to their PS.

True, but Marinealver states that all ordnance was terrible in the game, no matter who was using it. I disagreed.

The fact that largely only those 2 ships use ordnance frequently however, provides aj indication of what's needed for ordnance to be considered worthwile by people:

- Ability to fire ordnance with ease at your chosen target (achieved by having high PS, which allows them to Target Lock after almost everyone else had moved).

-Ability to stack dice mods. Both can get Focus+TL (or equivalent), chips and add their own pilot ability (plus Zuckuss and 4LOM in case of Bossk).

U-boats were able to meet both criteria and were considered worthwile. Bombers are not, so most people don't consider them worthwile.

Bombers with Deadeye and Homing Missiles attack with 4 dice and focus. U-Boats in their final, very competetive version attacked with....4 dice and focus. They took an extra shield if left over, Bombers don't allow for evades. That is basicaly the same offense! The reason that Bombers aren't used at high competition levels much is their weaker frame that allows for lucky early removals (usually not, but the door is open for variance and top level lists don't like variance) and the fact that they don't fit well with Defenders, who are a hair too expensive to work with 2 Bombers + something, or with Palpatine, who wants to support two high value 3 green dice ships. And those are the most proven and strong imperial archetypes at the moment. The weaker frame of the Bomber also means that random green dice walls hurt a lot more since you only might get that one shot if you don't take your target out - even more variance.

I nevertheless had some success with 2 Gamma Vets (one with Deadeye/GC, one with Crackshot/LRS, great setup for creating major threat zones in different ways), a Crackshot TIE, and 31 points of lategame, the Inquisitor being the most successfull.

Why am I saying that? The TIE Bomber has one huge advantage over the old U-Boat, it is a lot cheaper and can be paired with some of the best late game ships availiable. This combination of alpha striking and lategame is unique now that U-Boats are gone (who had some lategame based on their hyperefficient frame). While the Bombers alpha-striking is marginaly weaker in this setup (the TIE and Inquisitor will put out enough damage to at least come close to a 4-dice attack),the late game is much better.

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty.

Of course, both these ships have a pretty easy time acquiring TL due to their PS.

True, but Marinealver states that all ordnance was terrible in the game, no matter who was using it. I disagreed.

The fact that largely only those 2 ships use ordnance frequently however, provides aj indication of what's needed for ordnance to be considered worthwile by people:

- Ability to fire ordnance with ease at your chosen target (achieved by having high PS, which allows them to Target Lock after almost everyone else had moved).

-Ability to stack dice mods. Both can get Focus+TL (or equivalent), chips and add their own pilot ability (plus Zuckuss and 4LOM in case of Bossk).

U-boats were able to meet both criteria and were considered worthwile. Bombers are not, so most people don't consider them worthwile.

I just want to put out there that LRS with Homing Missiles gives you all that for cheaper. You can actually have 4 Tie Bombers with that in a list if you want. The trick is to have half of your Bombers target one ship and then the other two target a different one. This way they can't just have one ship spin off while the other two shoot at you. Most lists are 2-3 ships and even then you sometimes have 1 ship that stays out.

Also, even just one Gamma Vet with LRS, Crackshot, and Homing Missiles costs 27 pts. If you target their nasty ship....like a Soontir Fel or Tie Defender....and it stays out of the fight for a round or two because you have LRS on it....then you are strategically winning.

Personally, I just think people just haven't given the Tie Bomber enough of a chance. It's the case that if it's not broken, they won't fly it. It's not broken (OP), it doesn't mean it's terrible.

A couple of Deathfires did ok in the early Regionals in Europe.

I wouldn't want to run mutliple bombers because they just MELT but for 28 pts you can bring like a mini-Miranda missile/bomb threat that the opponent has to address.

Also, even just one Gamma Vet with LRS, Crackshot, and Homing Missiles costs 27 pts. If you target their nasty ship....like a Soontir Fel or Tie Defender....and it stays out of the fight for a round or two because you have LRS on it....then you are strategically winning.

And a 4 bomber list is loads of fun. I've played a list of 4 Gamma veterans with crackshot and:

1. Homing + LRS

2. Concussion +LRS

3. Plasma torps + EM + GC

4. Proton torps + EM + GC

and it was loads of fun. The LRS guys have focus + inbuilt mod from the missile, the other two have chips with built-in modification (or, in the case of plasma, extra shield damage).

Watching Echo twist and turn trying to avoid two bombers who locked on her while at the same time being careful not to present a target for the other two was very satisfying. Not as much as eradicating a Decimator in one round of shooting, though

Also, I've seen winning lists that use ordnance even in heavy meta. Miranda with Homing Missile can boost that to a 5 die attack and I've seen that be devastating. I've also seen Bossk with Homing Missile and Zuckuss be really nasty.

Of course, both these ships have a pretty easy time acquiring TL due to their PS.

True, but Marinealver states that all ordnance was terrible in the game, no matter who was using it. I disagreed.

The fact that largely only those 2 ships use ordnance frequently however, provides aj indication of what's needed for ordnance to be considered worthwile by people:

- Ability to fire ordnance with ease at your chosen target (achieved by having high PS, which allows them to Target Lock after almost everyone else had moved).

-Ability to stack dice mods. Both can get Focus+TL (or equivalent), chips and add their own pilot ability (plus Zuckuss and 4LOM in case of Bossk).

U-boats were able to meet both criteria and were considered worthwhile. Bombers are not, so most people don't consider them worthwhile.

This is what I have been trying to say but everyone is all focused on the dice modification of homing missiles they forgot about the vector of what if your red target lock token is outside your firing arc? I guess trying to explain multi-variable vectors is difficult when one is used to calculations in only one dimension. And one dimension is easier to make comparisons but it is often an incomplete picture.

And you seem to forget that a slow-moving ship can actually keep something in arc at range 2 or 3 - it's quite a big area. And if more than one bomber has the target locked, the area increases greatly.

The fact that largely only those 2 ships use ordnance frequently however, provides aj indication of what's needed for ordnance to be considered worthwile by people:

- Ability to fire ordnance with ease at your chosen target (achieved by having high PS, which allows them to Target Lock after almost everyone else had moved).

-Ability to stack dice mods. Both can get Focus+TL (or equivalent), chips and add their own pilot ability (plus Zuckuss and 4LOM in case of Bossk).

U-boats were able to meet both criteria and were considered worthwhile. Bombers are not, so most people don't consider them worthwhile.

This is what I have been trying to say but everyone is all focused on the dice modification of homing missiles they forgot about the vector of what if your red target lock token is outside your firing arc? I guess trying to explain multi-variable vectors is difficult when one is used to calculations in only one dimension. And one dimension is easier to make comparisons but it is often an incomplete picture.

I understand that Deadeye is great because you don't have to pick who your target is going to be until you fire at them. I understand that that is better than having to pick a target and keep them in your firing arc. What I'm saying is not being able to do that does not make ordnance a terrible option.

The fact that largely only those 2 ships use ordnance frequently however, provides aj indication of what's needed for ordnance to be considered worthwile by people:

- Ability to fire ordnance with ease at your chosen target (achieved by having high PS, which allows them to Target Lock after almost everyone else had moved).

-Ability to stack dice mods. Both can get Focus+TL (or equivalent), chips and add their own pilot ability (plus Zuckuss and 4LOM in case of Bossk).

U-boats were able to meet both criteria and were considered worthwhile. Bombers are not, so most people don't consider them worthwhile.

This is what I have been trying to say but everyone is all focused on the dice modification of homing missiles they forgot about the vector of what if your red target lock token is outside your firing arc? I guess trying to explain multi-variable vectors is difficult when one is used to calculations in only one dimension. And one dimension is easier to make comparisons but it is often an incomplete picture.

I understand that Deadeye is great because you don't have to pick who your target is going to be until you fire at them. I understand that that is better than having to pick a target and keep them in your firing arc. What I'm saying is not being able to do that does not make ordnance a terrible option.

It does make ordnance worse though, as it's a clear limitation.

Most people seem to think it makes ordnance bad (or rather inflexible) enough that it's not really competitive, and there aren't exactly too many ordnance lists doing well to disprove them.

Having to pre-select your target and then keep it in arc and proper range is hard. Not impossible, but it adds a strong element of difficulty to the list. The reward is that you get a 4 dice attack, with TL (possibly also Focus if no Barrel Roll was needed), where the opponent can't use his evade token (assuming a Bomber with LRS and Homing Missile).

Now consider an x7 Defender. If you manage to speed into range 1 of your opponent you get the same 4 dice with a Focus (but without the can't use Evade perk, although you do get an Evade for yourself).

Even discounting the difference in the ships themselves (the Defender is far superior past the initial pass), the Bomber has a much harder time setting up its attack and only provides a slightly better outcome for it.

This is IMO the issue currently with Ordnance Bombers: they're too hard to set-up for not enough pay-off compared to other competitive ships.