I looked at the Regionals data for where I have the lists for the Top 4 fleets. I looked for "Lifeboat" Flotillas, which I defined as a flotilla with no upgrades that require it be near the rest of it's fleet.

1 winnng fleet out of 11 used that tactic. It had Motti in a naked Gozanti. 2 other winners had their admirals in flotillas, but those had Comms Net (and Leia) which requires proximity and suggests they weren't using that tactic.

So, less than 10% used a lifeboat.

For the Top 4 it was 3 in 44. 10 others had admirals in flotillas, but again those had Comms Net or Hangar Bays that suggested they would be keeping them near the fight.

So, 6.8% of the Top 4 finishers in Regionals tried a lifeboat strategy.

Every player that brought a large ship and finished Top 4 had his admiral on the large ship.

Using a lifeboat does not appear to provide a competitive advantage based on the results of these tournaments. You are more than 3 times more likely to win a Regional using a large ship than a lifeboat and more than 6 times more likely to make it to the Top 4.

This is not a problem.

It is not hard to counter tactically.

It is not inconsistent with the rules.

It is not unbalanced.

It is not overpowered.

It is not unprecedented in lore.

If it offends your private head-canon or whatever, nobody is stopping you from house-ruling it o if you can find other people who agree with you.

All of these spurious arguments with continually-shifting goalposts have been addressed by more tolerant people than I. You guys are all paragons of diplomacy and patience.

I on the other hand am in a foul mood and am sick of this **** dominating the forum. This thread has views for the same reason rubberneckers slow down on the freeway: everybody likes to watch a dumpster fire.

Fscking. Stop.

Why do you feel the need to dictate what other people talk about? If you don't like it, beat feet.

There's no need to insult. There's no need to demean. There's no need to curse. There's no need to click on this thread.

You've spoken your peace, now leave.

I'm fine if he keeps going, just needs to stop quoting half a page of text and writing them too to make a 5 sentence point. Sound bites people... They can exist on forums too.

Is there an option to ignore quotes? I want that.

Tbh, I quoted just to quote. Careful about suggestion changes. You might get some change crusaders in here that dictate to you why their opinion on why there doesn't need to be an "Ignore Quote" option is the most viable, despite there being a position available to debate it.

Apply Cr90B with engine tech. Ram life boat......repeat as necessary.

Except the closest things Imps have to that is the Raider and it can't run engine techs.

Do I need to list every variation of ramming for each faction ship to make the point clear? Agreed...the repeat as necessary will use one extra turn for a raider. Take some double arc shots also and you may be able to eliminate the scatter before hand. I have also seen folks phylon/G8 the lifeboat or strategically place g7s to hinder lifeboat placement (I know......rebels do not have an interdictor.....so my point is probably not valid). :/

Apply Cr90B with engine tech. Ram life boat......repeat as necessary.

Except the closest things Imps have to that is the Raider and it can't run engine techs.

Do I need to list every variation of ramming for each faction ship to make the point clear? Agreed...the repeat as necessary will use one extra turn for a raider. Take some double arc shots also and you may be able to eliminate the scatter before hand. I have also seen folks phylon/G8 the lifeboat or strategically place g7s to hinder lifeboat placement (I know......rebels do not have an interdictor.....so my point is probably not valid). :/

Hey man, you provided a valid option and I pointed out that Empire doesn't have that same access. Without that same upgrade access in the Raider, it takes longer to get there, longer to get back, and still depends on landing a double arc, thereby not guarenteeing the kill.

In the end, that's still an example of taking at minimum 3 turns to complete it's mission, 4 if you fail to land the double shot or have bad rolls, which means it's still arguably equal resources that are effectively out of the game for a full 6 turns instead of 2 or 3.

Plus, if folks in your local meta consider lifeboat flotillas OP because they do not know how to deal with them......take advantage of the situation and just start using them until they do figure it out.

Yall motha- need jesus....

C'mon

Plus, if folks in your local meta consider lifeboat flotillas OP because they do not know how to deal with them......take advantage of the situation and just start using them until they do figure it out.

Again, there is no need for dismissive arrogance in a reasonable discussion. This is not a question of being able to deal with them at all. It's a question of points imbalance in choosing to do so.

Plus, if folks in your local meta consider lifeboat flotillas OP because they do not know how to deal with them......take advantage of the situation and just start using them until they do figure it out.

Again, there is no need for dismissive arrogance in a reasonable discussion. This is not a question of being able to deal with them at all. It's a question of points imbalance in choosing to do so.

I'm more of a condescending a**hole who offers unsolicited advice in an insulting manner.

snip

Yeah ISDs are great, but I'm...hmm... concerned? that rebel bomber combinations can make shields evaporate rapidly. It's scary every time I see it happen on the table but there it is...

I keep fluctuating between lists myself. My old favorite is two VSD-IIs with Gunnery Teams and Xi7s, an ISD with the same but also packing Leading shots or SW-7s with ECMs. Motti was the Admiral. Recently I've been trying two VSD-Is with a mix of fighters and two Gozantis with either Jamming fields (for the fighters) or Comms Nets (For the capital ships).

The opponent type I'm facing is usually Yavaris with Flight Commanders and Flight Coordination Teams (moves up into medium range of the fighters, moves those fighters, and then makes them attack twice), two to three GR-75 transports with boosted comms and BCCs (advantages at distance 5), Toryrn Farr is in there to allow a lot of X-Wings to control their dice and B-Wings to re-roll their blue again for accuracy. Sometimes Adar Tallon could be thrown in there to allow a fighter to activate for a third attack if Yavaris is in the picture. The rest are slush points, anything from a Pelta to a CR-90 to an MC-30 in the types I've built as mockup lists.

The last time I proxied this list, it had 3 X-Wings, 4 B-Wings, Jan Ors, Norra Wexley, and Shara Bey. I've also seen permutations with Wegde in there as well, waiting for the counter-attack with Yavaris to double-attack two activated squadrons. Since he's escort I can't try saving him for last except trying to intel away from him, like I've been doing with Shara.

This list cools it on their side of the board, going first or second depending on how much it wants to respond to the threats that challenge it. With that many activations though, it could comfortably sit at second in a Demo rush, since it would use a flotilla to block Demo's approach, then Yavaris pushes fighters closer to it for six attacks out of three fighters if a token is banked. With the stacked BCCs, you think Demolisher could last against 3 nearly certain damage that peels a shield off with each strike before tokens are spent?

Alright, all of the following is to be taken with a grain of salt, since I have yet to conduct rigorous experiments with the full force of a Wave 5/CC enabled bomber wing. I also have no idea what of this you've tried, so I'm throwing it all out there. I like the Victory and ISD-2s for the standoff ship combat range, but I have some ideas from my own experience you might like to try. My first suggestion is trying Raider-1s (pairs work best, but one is ok) loaded with OE, and either Flechette or Assault Proton Torpedoes. I would experiment with a pair of such ships, working in concert with either an ISD-2 or the double Victories as escorts. If you've got FT, use them to cut off the bomber wing with crits left and right. Otherwise, Raiders make great Yavaris and MC30 killers if they can get the drop on it. In my experience, the Rebel will either wheel his bombers to hold off your light ships, leaving the battlewagons to slug it out with the regular ships, which aren't all that impressive in combat power (excepting the MC30 of course, and even that is situational), or the Raiders will slice through the flank like the oversized lawn darts they resemble so closely. If you run Motti, I wouldn't be afraid of ramming Yavaris or an MC30 after the APT crit to finish the job. The Rebels may burn through your shields, but the look when you ignore theirs is priceless.

Second point, which fits into the first and last, I would try to exploit that flotillas have only moderate fighter control. Unupgraded they can only push two squadrons around, four tops with a token, whereas VSDs and ISDs easily outmatch that. If you can arrange the fighter battle so that he can't effectively jump everyone at once, or heavily punish them once they have, I think you might make your opponents think twice about the tactic. FOr example, leap your fighter screen onto some bombers to engage them, then let Jan arrive and pounce on the Rebel traitor with a Raider and perhaps IG-88. Between those two units, you ought to be able to murder her, leaving the rest of their bombers much more vulnerable to your own screen. Another counter here is that Instigator is not affected by Intel. If you can jump the bombers after they move with the Raider such that it survives until the next round, then lead with anti-squadron fire and a wave of attacks from the fighter screen, you might do some considerable damage, and Instigator need only be in danger for about one round. That is not to say this is easy or foolproof, but it's a tactic that has worked on me on occasion.

My final thought is this, have you tried investing in a Defender wing? There are enough fighters on the board here I'm not sure Phantoms will last long enough to be worth it (YMMV), but the 6 hull of a Defender makes it a nasty customer for all but the most ace-heavy of Rebel fighter wings. Col. Jendon works well here, since he can double-tap one of your own squadrons (at the purely nominal expense of his own unimpressive anti-squad armament), and he positively sings with Maarek Steele, whose auto-damage and braces mean he can attract an amount of Rebel attention to be worth his points, whether he ever kills anything or not. I've have to do some fiddling with your listed fleet attributes to see how many are a good number, but I am confident they can help your problem. The only Intel unit is Ors, but the damage output of a Defender wing will quickly have your opponent make hard choices about his tokens, especially if most of the other fighters are generic. A thematic version of this I've yet to run through the wringer would be a couple (literally two or three) Defenders, backed up by swarms of regular TIEs and Interceptors. Use the Defenders' hull and speed advantage to dive into a Rebel fighter wing, and liberally sprinkle the TIEs to take advantage of the new Swarm node you've created. Best of all, Defenders are bombers, so if they chew through the Rebel wings or spot a target of opportunity, they can strike for impressively consistent anti-ship damage. They can't match a B-wing for output, but overall I rate them the better fighter, even after their expense.

What other tricks have you tried? A Rhymerball of Defenders, Tempest Squadron, Strom, Rudor if you're worried about interception, could try burning through the transports from standoff range, aided by the fact the Defenders are more than happy to mix it up with any Rebel unit brave enough to intercept them. One of these days (probably after my new PC is online), I'll get Vassal working and we can try some of these experiments against each other. I regularly face Rebel bomber wings, but rarely do they pack as many transports as you face, so I would be curious how we could learn from each other. I don't think I've solved your flotilla problem, but I think between us and the rest of the forum we can try.

I've actually adapted much of what you've said here. My current list consists of paired ships working towards a goal with a token fighter screen and minimal bid. I chose objectives that give me a fairly good chance of a win if second player and included enough ships to win in both deployment and activation.

The problem with this is that Rebels have a distinct advantage when vying for activations and deployments due not only to the cost of their ships but the way in which their ships function. As you stated, Rebels are more about elusiveness and speed whereas Empire is keyholed into bulk, frontal assault ships as their strength.

In an attempt to beat the rebels at their own game, I decided on 2 Arqs, 2 Raiders, a flotilla (this is [gasp] a lifeboat), and a Demolisher with Valen and a couple of ties. I figure if facing a squadron heavy list I'll repurpose the Raiders as anti-squadron and took a Gladiator 2 to assist (2 dice vs the single dice of the Glad 1's).

http://armadawarlords.hivelabs.solutions/view_list.php?token=72775&key=a15324e913b5063663a32d8734afc9dd

I'm mildly concerned about that fleet's ability to handle heavy fighter screens like Norsehound mentioned. Here's a fleet I scratched together, limits being has to have an ISD, has to be able to handle flotillas, and has to handle Rebel fighter wings.

Imperial-1 class Star Destroyer - 120

- Admiral Motti - 24

- Flight Controllers - 6

- Boosted Comms - 4

- Expanded Hangar Bays - 5

- H9 Turbolasers

2x Raider-1 class Corvettes - 44

- Ordnance Experts - 4

Gozanti-class Cruisers - 23

- Comms Net

Col. Jendon - 20

Major Rhymer - 16

Maarek Stele - 21

4x TIE Defender - 16

Any Objective without tokens, since Strategic is expensive/not otherwise helpful here

Total Points - 399/400

The confident admiral can trade in the Flight Controllers for Flechette Torpedoes on the Raiders if he has faith in his ability to position them to exploit it/his Defenders won't need it. The Gozanti wanders around as token generation for the Star Destroyer and to herd the two officers around after the Defenders. It's middle of the road with four activations, but I'm confident it can swing that in its favor against fleets relying on flotillas for activations with Rhymer giving the Defenders huge range of threat. H9s of course play the same role for the battlewagon.

Turn 1
The Rebel player sends a flotilla carrying Ackbar towards a corner. Due to the value threshold of 18+38 = 56, the Imperial player decides to send a Raider to intercept. The Imperial player is now down a reasonable anti-squadron asset and/or support vessel for his main force. Because lifeboat flotilla isn't overly common, this Raider can reasonable be assumed to be either geared towards pure anti-squadron or something like Overload Pulse to support other ships in the fleet.

Turn 2
Both players continue driving towards said corner.

Turn 3
Rebel player arrive in general vicinity.
Imperial player arrives at blue range, at best.

Turn 4
Rebel player conducts a maneuver.
Imperial player fires. Depending on range, it's either scattered or evaded. For the sake of being generous, let's assume a double arc....which is more easily avoided than landed. On the second volley, flotilla scatters again, discarding the token.

Turn 5
At this point, the Imperial player has now lost the points investment required to go chase the flotilla. Regardless of if the Imperial player can kill the flotilla in this turn or not, there is a significant points imbalance. The Rebel player had access to his Admirals abilities the entire game, whereas the Imperial player did not have access to his dispatched asset for the entire game since the dispatched asset will not be able to return to the battle.

For the sake of argument, let's assume the Imperial player has managed to line up a double arc. Dice willing, target destroyed.

Turn 6
Imperial player executes a maneuver.

That's a reasonable, well rationed example of how this plays out. Given two players of equal skill cap, the Rebel player will always come out mathematically ahead, even if the Admiral is killed in turn 5 or 6 because the asset sent to waste time in a corner has been effectively nullified by delaying the destruction.

Perhaps a better argument is total points invested vs total points affecting the game per turn. Using a Raider 1 as an example (base cost 44) and assuming an overly generous upgrade investment of 12 in order to bring it to the same cost as an Ackbar lifeboat, that's 56/6 or 9.33 points invested per turn.

If you factor in a travel time of two turns for the Raider, that's 18.66 points of the ship that has done nothing but drive straight whereas the lifeboat has directly influenced the battle during that same time.

Because the Raider can feasible engage in turn 3, we will call that a points draw since it is now actively engaged in the battle.

Because of defense token refreshes, the ease of evading a double arc vs being able to land one, it's rational to assume it will take 2 turns to kill the flotilla. We won't count those turns as the Raider is actively engaged.

Since the Admiral and flotilla have now been removed, there is not a points difference in turn 6.

That's still an 18.66 points discrepancy in countering the tactic vs playing the tactic. That's an entire cost of a rebel flotilla, an extra ace for the Imperials, a couple TIE fighter squadrons, or multiple upgrades.

That is imbalance.

I'm mildly concerned about that fleet's ability to handle heavy fighter screens like Norsehound mentioned. Here's a fleet I scratched together, limits being has to have an ISD, has to be able to handle flotillas, and has to handle Rebel fighter wings.

Imperial-1 class Star Destroyer - 120

- Admiral Motti - 24

- Flight Controllers - 6

- Boosted Comms - 4

- Expanded Hangar Bays - 5

- H9 Turbolasers

2x Raider-1 class Corvettes - 44

- Ordnance Experts - 4

Gozanti-class Cruisers - 23

- Comms Net

Col. Jendon - 20

Major Rhymer - 16

Maarek Stele - 21

4x TIE Defender - 16

Any Objective without tokens, since Strategic is expensive/not otherwise helpful here

Total Points - 399/400

The confident admiral can trade in the Flight Controllers for Flechette Torpedoes on the Raiders if he has faith in his ability to position them to exploit it/his Defenders won't need it. The Gozanti wanders around as token generation for the Star Destroyer and to herd the two officers around after the Defenders. It's middle of the road with four activations, but I'm confident it can swing that in its favor against fleets relying on flotillas for activations with Rhymer giving the Defenders huge range of threat. H9s of course play the same role for the battlewagon.

Agreed. I figured the TIEs would tie (pun) up any fighters there were fielded for a critical turn or two. They'd obviously be worthless against an Intel supported bomber squadron, though. Should that be the case, the Demolisher would join the two raiders in anti-squadron operations until which time they are destroyed or the intel ship was killed, allowing the fighter screen to freely engage and stop their advance....if one of the Raiders isn't off chasing something.

Turn 1

The Rebel player sends a flotilla carrying Ackbar towards a corner. Due to the value threshold of 18+38 = 56, the Imperial player decides to send a Raider to intercept. The Imperial player is now down a reasonable anti-squadron asset and/or support vessel for his main force. Because lifeboat flotilla isn't overly common, this Raider can reasonable be assumed to be either geared towards pure anti-squadron or something like Overload Pulse to support other ships in the fleet.

Turn 2

Both players continue driving towards said corner.

Turn 3

Rebel player arrive in general vicinity.

Imperial player arrives at blue range, at best.

Turn 4

Rebel player conducts a maneuver.

Imperial player fires. Depending on range, it's either scattered or evaded. For the sake of being generous, let's assume a double arc....which is more easily avoided than landed. On the second volley, flotilla scatters again, discarding the token.

Turn 5

At this point, the Imperial player has now lost the points investment required to go chase the flotilla. Regardless of if the Imperial player can kill the flotilla in this turn or not, there is a significant points imbalance. The Rebel player had access to his Admirals abilities the entire game, whereas the Imperial player did not have access to his dispatched asset for the entire game since the dispatched asset will not be able to return to the battle.

For the sake of argument, let's assume the Imperial player has managed to line up a double arc. Dice willing, target destroyed.

Turn 6

Imperial player executes a maneuver.

That's a reasonable, well rationed example of how this plays out. Given two players of equal skill cap, the Rebel player will always come out mathematically ahead, even if the Admiral is killed in turn 5 or 6 because the asset sent to waste time in a corner has been effectively nullified by delaying the destruction.

Perhaps a better argument is total points invested vs total points affecting the game per turn. Using a Raider 1 as an example (base cost 44) and assuming an overly generous upgrade investment of 12 in order to bring it to the same cost as an Ackbar lifeboat, that's 56/6 or 9.33 points invested per turn.

If you factor in a travel time of two turns for the Raider, that's 18.66 points of the ship that has done nothing but drive straight whereas the lifeboat has directly influenced the battle during that same time.

Because the Raider can feasible engage in turn 3, we will call that a points draw since it is now actively engaged in the battle.

Because of defense token refreshes, the ease of evading a double arc vs being able to land one, it's rational to assume it will take 2 turns to kill the flotilla. We won't count those turns as the Raider is actively engaged.

Since the Admiral and flotilla have now been removed, there is not a points difference in turn 6.

That's still an 18.66 points discrepancy in countering the tactic vs playing the tactic. That's an entire cost of a rebel flotilla, an extra ace for the Imperials, a couple TIE fighter squadrons, or multiple upgrades.

That is imbalance.

If I was the Rebel player, I would place bright hope on that lifeboat flotilla as well in order to frustrate my opponent even further.

Turn Break Down

If I was the Rebel player, I would place bright hope on that lifeboat flotilla as well in order to frustrate my opponent even further.

With few exceptions, I try to be overly generous while still being able to field a reasonable argument that the imbalance exists. If anything, you just supported my position.

I'm mildly concerned about that fleet's ability to handle heavy fighter screens like Norsehound mentioned. Here's a fleet I scratched together, limits being has to have an ISD, has to be able to handle flotillas, and has to handle Rebel fighter wings.

Imperial-1 class Star Destroyer - 120

- Admiral Motti - 24

- Flight Controllers - 6

- Boosted Comms - 4

- Expanded Hangar Bays - 5

- H9 Turbolasers

2x Raider-1 class Corvettes - 44

- Ordnance Experts - 4

Gozanti-class Cruisers - 23

- Comms Net

Col. Jendon - 20

Major Rhymer - 16

Maarek Stele - 21

4x TIE Defender - 16

Any Objective without tokens, since Strategic is expensive/not otherwise helpful here

Total Points - 399/400

The confident admiral can trade in the Flight Controllers for Flechette Torpedoes on the Raiders if he has faith in his ability to position them to exploit it/his Defenders won't need it. The Gozanti wanders around as token generation for the Star Destroyer and to herd the two officers around after the Defenders. It's middle of the road with four activations, but I'm confident it can swing that in its favor against fleets relying on flotillas for activations with Rhymer giving the Defenders huge range of threat. H9s of course play the same role for the battlewagon.

Agreed. I figured the TIEs would tie (pun) up any fighters there were fielded for a critical turn or two. They'd obviously be worthless against an Intel supported bomber squadron, though. Should that be the case, the Demolisher would join the two raiders in anti-squadron operations until which time they are destroyed or the intel ship was killed, allowing the fighter screen to freely engage and stop their advance....if one of the Raiders isn't off chasing something.

If you encounter a serious fighter wing, I would make a judgment based on the speed of said wing. Against fast groups (blue vs. blue, X-wings and Y-wings with AFFM, E-wings), that plan is basically your only option until the Pelta dies. However, were I facing B-wings, I would accelerate to full speed and try to blast past them, even with AFFM. If the Arqs and Demolisher can bring down the Pelta, you can continue to run away, all the more effectively then.

*Fleet List*

The confident admiral can trade in the Flight Controllers for Flechette Torpedoes on the Raiders if he has faith in his ability to position them to exploit it/his Defenders won't need it. The Gozanti wanders around as token generation for the Star Destroyer and to herd the two officers around after the Defenders. It's middle of the road with four activations, but I'm confident it can swing that in its favor against fleets relying on flotillas for activations with Rhymer giving the Defenders huge range of threat. H9s of course play the same role for the battlewagon.

Agreed. I figured the TIEs would tie (pun) up any fighters there were fielded for a critical turn or two. They'd obviously be worthless against an Intel supported bomber squadron, though. Should that be the case, the Demolisher would join the two raiders in anti-squadron operations until which time they are destroyed or the intel ship was killed, allowing the fighter screen to freely engage and stop their advance....if one of the Raiders isn't off chasing something.

If you encounter a serious fighter wing, I would make a judgment based on the speed of said wing. Against fast groups (blue vs. blue, X-wings and Y-wings with AFFM, E-wings), that plan is basically your only option until the Pelta dies. However, were I facing B-wings, I would accelerate to full speed and try to blast past them, even with AFFM. If the Arqs and Demolisher can bring down the Pelta, you can continue to run away, all the more effectively then.

Agreed. Although it would be a little bit of an annoyance to lose a ship attack on the Demolisher, it's still capable of dealing a significant amount of hate while lending it's support to the anti-squadron efforts....which is why I put Sensor Teams on it, rendering Aces slightly less annoying. One change I might consider is going flechette torps on 1 raider and leaving the other open to flotilla duty/combat action support.

Turn Break Down

If I was the Rebel player, I would place bright hope on that lifeboat flotilla as well in order to frustrate my opponent even further.

With few exceptions, I try to be overly generous while still being able to field a reasonable argument that the imbalance exists. If anything, you just supported my position.

......plus, correct me if I am wrong.....could not Major Derlin stack with the Bright Hope effect?

......and you have not even discussed Minister Tua/ECMs on the Gozanti lifeboat. Have I made the Admirals immortal now?

Ok. I'm bored now. Good night.

Turn 1

The Rebel player sends a flotilla carrying Ackbar towards a corner. Due to the value threshold of 18+38 = 56, the Imperial player decides to send a Raider to intercept. The Imperial player is now down a reasonable anti-squadron asset and/or support vessel for his main force. Because lifeboat flotilla isn't overly common

Wait, I thought we were having this thread because these things are everywhere and breaking the game. If so, then...

this Raider can reasonable be assumed to be either geared towards pure anti-squadron or something like Overload Pulse to support other ships in the fleet.

Found your problem. You've been shown at least 5 different options for drop-in solutions to kill lifeboats that also do other stuff well, and not one of those was send an OP Raider after it.

Once again, you've started a long tirade with a flawed premise that invalidates the whole thing.

Either...

1) This is a huge problem and failing to account for it at list-building is on you,

or

2) This is something that doesn't happen frequently enough to warrant bringing a counter to it, and you have no cause for outrage.

You can't have it both ways.

Turn Break Down

If I was the Rebel player, I would place bright hope on that lifeboat flotilla as well in order to frustrate my opponent even further.

With few exceptions, I try to be overly generous while still being able to field a reasonable argument that the imbalance exists. If anything, you just supported my position.

......plus, correct me if I am wrong.....could not Major Derlin stack with the Bright Hope effect?

......and you have not even discussed Minister Tua/ECMs on the Gozanti lifeboat. I have made the Admirals immortal now?

Again, just fortifying my position that an imbalance exists....in regards to Tua/ECMs....as stated in the OP, for the sake of argument and easiest identification between the two forces, this example is Imperials vs a Rebel who employs the lifeboat tactic.

That said, no you haven't made them immortal but you have managed to continually strengthen my position. I went out of my way to use barebones examples in order to try and move clearly convey my perception of an imbalance, meaning I intentionally didn't include additional upgrade cards or combinations.

I assumed the imbalance would be more clear if I could prove it in it's simplest form. By taking into consideration other upgrades designed specifically to keep the lifeboat alive (which is probably relatively rare as those points would be better spent in the "combat branch" of the fleet) it would have been perceived as skewing the discussion towards a predetermined outcome....which I've already been accused of as it is.

Turn 1

The Rebel player sends a flotilla carrying Ackbar towards a corner. Due to the value threshold of 18+38 = 56, the Imperial player decides to send a Raider to intercept. The Imperial player is now down a reasonable anti-squadron asset and/or support vessel for his main force. Because lifeboat flotilla isn't overly common

Wait, I thought we were having this thread because these things are everywhere and breaking the game. If so, then...

this Raider can reasonable be assumed to be either geared towards pure anti-squadron or something like Overload Pulse to support other ships in the fleet.

Found your problem. You've been shown at least 5 different options for drop-in solutions to kill lifeboats that also do other stuff well, and not one of those was send an OP Raider after it.

Once again, you've started a long tirade with a flawed premise that invalidates the whole thing.

Either...

1) This is a huge problem and failing to account for it at list-building is on you,

or

2) This is something that doesn't happen frequently enough to warrant bringing a counter to it, and you have no cause for outrage.

You can't have it both ways.

Something that is imbalanced does not have to occur every single game, nor does it have to be "game breaking." If you play video games, that is why bug reports ask you if the bug is repeatable and, if it is, how you repeat it.

In regards to what you might assume is an OP Raider, perhaps you should read a little further in that specific post.

I never stated I was outraged. In fact, I've actually stated multiple times that I not only use this tactic in some fleets, I've posted an example of how to make it more viable by placing Admiral Chiraneau in the lifeboat and using Relay to proc Mithel.

Going out on a limb here but perhaps you should get to know me a bit better before you decide you know how I think.

Really this can all be summed up as: this isn't as big a problem if you actually decide to devote resources to stop it, just like everything else in this game. Just cause you'd rather not evote the resources, doesn't mean the rules need to be changed. Until then I'll rock my Gozanti with Jerjerrod and expanded hangar bays flying away from the fight and still contributing squad commands via relay.

Really this can all be summed up as: this isn't as big a problem if you actually decide to devote resources to stop it, just like everything else in this game. Just cause you'd rather not evote the resources, doesn't mean the rules need to be changed. Until then I'll rock my Gozanti with Jerjerrod and expanded hangar bays flying away from the fight and still contributing squad commands via relay.

I never said it was a big problem. I said it was imbalanced. There is a minute, yet important, difference.

So it's not a problem, not a big one anyway, but it's imbalanced.

What does that really mean?

So it's not a problem, not a big one anyway, but it's imbalanced.

What does that really mean?

It means that there is an imbalance in the interaction of flotilla lifeboats that, although not game breaking, decidedly favors those who use it. It's also a good illustration in the flaw of using tournaments as a baseline for how you judge an aspect of a game. Althought there is no doubt that tournament results would reveal something that is truly overpowered, they are not a dependable source of information for finding specific areas of imbalance.

As a side note, I'd also like to point out that in other threads it has become obvious that most of the outspoken people against this discussion are decidedly Rebel players due to the causal observation that they always speak of their rebel fleets and reference facing rebels (a side effect of being most familiar with the faction) when discussing tactics and counter play to the topic of conversation.

Something that is imbalanced does not have to occur every single game

I agree. Fortunately, it's not imbalanced. Again, show evidence that it is, because I just demonstrated why your long post up there is flawed, so you're back to Square 1--Zero Evidence For Claims.

In regards to what you might assume is an OP Raider, perhaps you should read a little further in that specific post.

You said it was an OP Raider, not me. You build your narrative from a solid foundation, then you can make claims on that basis. I run ships that will get to and one-shot lifeboats by turn 3. Both sides have ships that will do this. Why don't you have one in your list?

I never stated I was outraged.

Actions speak louder than words, bro. When you immediately re-start a thread that was just locked, with a pages-long tirade, it's pretty hard to claim level-headedness.

You can say "I'm not outraged" all you want.

You can say "I like flotillas and I'm not advocating for a rules change" all you want.

You can say "I'm not demeaning or insulting anyone" all you want.

But when you turn around and immediately insult established community members, advocate for rules changes to suit your personal preference, and act outraged when virtually everyone else disagrees with you, it's pretty hard to take you seriously.

Going out on a limb here but perhaps you should get to know me a bit better before you decide you know how I think.

And playing this victim card every time you don't have a credible response doesn't help your case. This is the internet, not group counseling.