So, we are all familiar with the functional ship classes like jousters, arc-dodgers, etc. I think we should also look at ship design in a different way: its role within the game. To wit:

Gladiators: Ships that do well in a 100/6 deathmatch. Action economy, good attack, good defense, etc. The Defender, Fang, K-Wings, et. al.

Thematic: Ships that die in the arena, but do very well as Epic and Mission ships: X-Wings, B-Wings, TIE Bombers, Scyks.

Support: Ships that designed to help other ships: Lambda (with Palp), GR-75, HWK, et. al.

Thoughts?

i thought support ships were already a thing, could you explain what you mean by gladiators, they seem like jousters, Lt. Colzet is definitely a thematic ship, but b wings are jousters (they lost the title to Defenders but it's what they do best)

Ships are allready arbitrarily sorted in stupid ways... Why add more to that?

Thematic as a name doesn't make sense with that description you gave, and I'm pretty sure Support is already a term people use.

Ships can be arbitrarily sorted in a variety of ways, along a multitude of dimensions. Some classification makes sense, but few ships fit into any one classification of any of the different possible systems at all.

Not even this classification would work:

• A-Wing type ships: All the A-Wings
• TIE Defender type ships: All the TIE Defenders
• X-Wing type 65 ships: All T-65 X-Wings
• etc.

...but this would still lump ships together that can have wildly different roles (x7 Delta vs. /D Rexler, or Biggs vs. Wedge).

So, yeah, go ahead and make your classification. Maybe some of it will catch on. But I agree with DarthEnderX, "thematic" isn't really a name that'll work.

I think that everyone should take any sort of classification with a grain of salt. Call ships what you want, classify them how you want. It is interesting to see that someome has classified ships differently from their role in 100/6.

Anyways, on with the semantics.

Support ships have been a thing for a long time. They just tend not to do so well when they don't have many ships to support.

Now if you are trying to classify ships you should remember that some may fit into multiple categories and it may be that these multi-category ships are really what make up your new categories. To me these are how you'd class and define several types:

• Jousters = High damage output for cost and expected survivability under direct return fire.
• Arc-Dodgers = Ships that function best by using abilities to avoid being shot at to begin with.
• Tanks = Ships that generally do a good job surviving multiple attacks. This can be due to high hp, great agility, damage negation methods, or likely a combination of many of these.
• Support = Ships whose main purpose seem to be boosting other ships so they perform better. Some may only boost a single ship but the better ones can boost multiple ships which is also why they usually perform better in epic than in standard formats.

Looking at DM's classifications I'd say a Gladiator is probably a combination of Jouster with either Dodger and/or Tank. Although I guess I don't like it his Thematic ships are probably what I'd call Multi-purpose ships which may not rank all that high in any one of those categories but depending on how they are fielded could make up for it.

IMO, a ship clasification should evoke the kind of role it performs on a squadron, so Poe(BB8,PTL,VT) is more like and arc-dodger while Poe(VI,R2D2,AT) is more of a jouster.

Not that I think one can necessarily force a slang, but I'm surprised more ships or pilots (or even players) aren't referred to with classic Ace slang.

Steamrollers are jouster types, direct forward assaults with concentrated fire.

Bushwackers are arc-dodge types, you come at the enemy from the side or behind and eschew a direct assault.

Snipers are alpha strike lists. Rather than fuss around with getting out of the way like an arc-dodger, you just dump everything into the ideal attack before the enemy can respond.

Pluggers are tanks, you avoid or resist enemy fire while they tire themselves out or sneak in a counterattack.

Support obviously would be it's own style not really referenced since support ships rarely do their own shooting.

3 hours ago, mad mandolorian said:

i thought support ships were already a thing, could you explain what you mean by gladiators, they seem like jousters, Lt. Colzet is definitely a thematic ship, but b wings are jousters (they lost the title to Defenders but it's what they do best)

Gladiators do just fine in the head-to-head deathmatch. They could be jousters the survive by killing first, or arc-dodgers that survive by not getting killed first. If the ship does well in 100/6, it is a gladiator. It current parlance, they would be the top-tier meta.

3 hours ago, Icelom said:

Ships are allready arbitrarily sorted in stupid ways... Why add more to that?

You will never become a bacteriologist.

2 hours ago, DarthEnderX said:

Thematic as a name doesn't make sense with that description you gave, and I'm pretty sure Support is already a term people use.

Well, Epic was already taken, multi-role sounds military, and generic sounds boring. Thematic ships are solid ships that are not gladiators, but do well in larger battles, missions, and roleplaying-type scenarios.

And yes, I mean the same as always by support.

1 hour ago, UnitOmega said:

Not that I think one can necessarily force a slang, but I'm surprised more ships or pilots (or even players) aren't referred to with classic Ace slang.

Steamrollers are jouster types, direct forward assaults with concentrated fire.

Bushwackers are arc-dodge types, you come at the enemy from the side or behind and eschew a direct assault.

Snipers are alpha strike lists. Rather than fuss around with getting out of the way like an arc-dodger, you just dump everything into the ideal attack before the enemy can respond.

Pluggers are tanks, you avoid or resist enemy fire while they tire themselves out or sneak in a counterattack.

Support obviously would be it's own style not really referenced since support ships rarely do their own shooting.

My categories were meant to classify ships based on what I might call "storytelling potential." If a ship type doesn't do well in 100/6, it does not mean it's broken, it means it is not a Gladiator, and must belong to one of the other classes.

2 hours ago, Darth Tam said:

I think that everyone should take any sort of classification with a grain of salt. Call ships what you want, classify them how you want. It is interesting to see that someome has classified ships differently from their role in 100/6.

Yay, someone understands me!!

Why does this thread exist?

2 hours ago, StevenO said:

Now if you are trying to classify ships you should remember that some may fit into multiple categories and it may be that these multi-category ships are really what make up your new categories. To me these are how you'd class and define several types:

• Jousters = High damage output for cost and expected survivability under direct return fire.
• Arc-Dodgers = Ships that function best by using abilities to avoid being shot at to begin with.
• Tanks = Ships that generally do a good job surviving multiple attacks. This can be due to high hp, great agility, damage negation methods, or likely a combination of many of these.
• Support = Ships whose main purpose seem to be boosting other ships so they perform better. Some may only boost a single ship but the better ones can boost multiple ships which is also why they usually perform better in epic than in standard formats.

Looking at DM's classifications I'd say a Gladiator is probably a combination of Jouster with either Dodger and/or Tank. Although I guess I don't like it his Thematic ships are probably what I'd call Multi-purpose ships which may not rank all that high in any one of those categories but depending on how they are fielded could make up for it.

Other than Support, all of the other categories would be re-divided based on the specific ship at hand.

For example, the TIE Defender is a jouster that is a Gladiator. OTOH, the X-Wing is a jouster that is Thematic.

Soontir Fel is an arc-dodger who is a gladiator. Most of the other Squints are thematic.

The JM5K is a tank who is a gladiator. The Decimator is a tank that is Thematic (or maybe even Support).

And you are spot-on for my idea of Thematic--if fielded with an appropriate Theme (whether that is a mission, a non-standard play format, or Epic), these are ships that are not "broken," they are just not Gladiators.

10 minutes ago, tortugatron said:

Why does this thread exist?

To waste precious moments of your existence in this world.

I WIN!!!!!!!