12 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

Again, in the context of the current game, this ship replaces a very large portion of your squadron investment. That's the purpose. In that context, it's costed fairly by comparison to a large bomber or anti fighter wing. If set up in the way you describe (with Kallus and Flechettes) it is significantly penalized for firepower when engaging ships, and it's large battery armament is more effectively mitigated by enemy defense tokens.

I am not overly committed to any specific point costing of the card. I like it and feel that it may (but I could be wrong) costed low.

I am interested in your idea that it is a replacement for squadrons. While many who dislike squads or simply want to take a different approach may use it as such, I believe it has a greater use. It can serve as an artificial increase to your squadron wing, especially if you are going rhymer/bombers. Imagine being able to use all 134 points on bombing because you know that you have a raider which can take care of the enemies anti-squadron squadrons. You don't have to invest in mauler or rudor. You can simply throw out all of your bombers and have Conqueror take out much of their ability to tie those bombers up. That, IMO, is one of the greatest values of Anti-Squadron raiders.

26 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

Again, in the context of the current game, this ship replaces a very large portion of your squadron investment. That's the purpose. In that context, it's costed fairly by comparison to a large bomber or anti fighter wing. If set up in the way you describe (with Kallus and Flechettes) it is significantly penalized for firepower when engaging ships, and it's large battery armament is more effectively mitigated by enemy defense tokens.

Perhaps the disconnect in our thinking here is that you are looking at this purely as a replacement to a portion of the squadron investment. I don't see it that way, and I don't see any reason for others to necessarily use it that way. This allows a Raider to supplement an already strong fighter wing, while still being able to get work done against ships when needed.

I'm also not sure why you suggest that equiping Kallus and Flechettes (which was actually not 'my' suggestion) in some way inhibits it's ability to engage ships. Both of those upgrades simply make it better against squads. Personally, I use my Raiders with only Ord Experts. They do their jobs against squadrons, can Flotilla hunt, and play a role against other ships too. For 4 points, I would add this pretty much in every Raider build because it hurts NOTHING and gives a MASSIVE benefit for a small investment. For 7 or 8 points, I would have to think more closely on what it is I want my Raider doing. Upgrades should never be auto-include, and at 4 points this is extremely close as it's written.

Think about it this way. You are giving it the Demolisher ability, with a focus on what it can hit. That focus is good, as it somewhat limits the effect. However, Demo costs 10 and there are many people (I am NOT one of them) that think it's broken, too powerful, etc. This is the exact same ability, only limited to squadrons. Dropping the cost that much is too much. Shooting after moving is one of the single most powerful abilities a ship can be given in this game. It warps the way the game is played and MUST be costed in a way that it doesn't become an auto-include. 4 points is pretty much auto-include.

I still like the overall idea though!

What if it limited the ship to making only one attack per round, exhausted or otherwise? Would that be better? I think one major issue with Imperial ships right now is the very high cost on everything. I'd rather decrease power than increase cost.

8 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

What if it limited the ship to making only one attack per round, exhausted or otherwise? Would that be better? I think one major issue with Imperial ships right now is the very high cost on everything. I'd rather decrease power than increase cost.

Now you're talking. This eliminates the same turn double tap and really brings the single turn damage potential down. Suddenly, I have to decide if I prefer to be able to do the move then shoot, or if I want my ship to get to use multiple arcs in a turn. And I have to decide this when building my fleet. I think you are no longer auto include, and the limit of fighters only for an after move attack and only 1 attack per turn makes the 4 points seem MUCH more reasonable. I like it!

25 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

What if it limited the ship to making only one attack per round, exhausted or otherwise? Would that be better? I think one major issue with Imperial ships right now is the very high cost on everything. I'd rather decrease power than increase cost.

This forces the ship into an even smaller niche and therefore is definitely a justification for a low cost.

What about a title or something that allows you to trace LoS through enemy hull lines?

I've always been partial to Nemesis for ISDs.

My suggestions for my favourite ship:

Grappler

Interdictor title - 10 points

On activation, you may choose a single obstacle at range 1-5 and move it to within distance 1 of its current location. It may not overlap ships or other obstacles in its new location.

Harpago

Interdictor title - 2 points

This ship gains Strategic.

1 hour ago, Hedgehogmech said:

My suggestions for my favourite ship:

Grappler

Interdictor title - 10 points

On activation, you may choose a single obstacle at range 1-5 and move it to within distance 1 of its current location. It may not overlap ships or other obstacles in its new location.

Harpago

Interdictor title - 2 points

This ship gains Strategic.

First, gotta pick one ship for each faction. Meaning, that you have to choose between Harpago and Grappler.

Second, if you choose Harpago, then strategic should have a number beside it. (Was thinking relay. Sorry! Thanks cactus man)

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

What about a title or something that allows you to trace LoS through enemy hull lines?

This would involve allowing you to essentially choose to attack any hull zone on the target ship. This would have an immensely negative effect on ship durability. Many players, including myself, already see the Demolisher effect as being intensely negative on the early development of the game. Eliminating the ability to maneuver to present shields just makes the maneuver portion of the game meaningless unless it's to completely avoid all incoming fire.

1 hour ago, ryanabt said:

First, gotta pick one ship for each faction. Meaning, that you have to choose between Harpago and Grappler.

Second, if you choose Harpago, then strategic should have a number beside it.

You're thinking Relay. Strategic moves tokens around.

8 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

You're thinking Relay. Strategic moves tokens around.

Dang I am. Thanks!

Interdictor title

Stellar Web (3 points): You may treat this ship as Large size for the purpose of resolving the effects of upgrade cards.

An Immobilizer 418 that snagged a super star destroyer ought to at least be able to tractor beam an ISD. Some day, it will be useful with other upgrades that reference ship size, too. I guess it also quietly synergizes with Motti, as well, as a commander is an upgrade card.

CR90 Corvette title

Liberator (6 points): When you spend an Evade defense token, you may change your speed by 1. During the Execute Maneuver step, you may spend an Evade token in order to temporarily change your speed by 1 until the end of your current movement.

Unlike other so-called "blockade runners," the Liberator is finally truly untouchable, thanks to Disney-level plot armor. It's constantly getting trapped by the Empire and skating right out again. (Edit: Re-priced Liberator from 4 to 6.)

1 hour ago, Nostromoid said:

Interdictor title

Stellar Web (3 points): You may treat this ship as Large size for the purpose of resolving the effects of upgrade cards.

An Immobilizer 418 that snagged a super star destroyer ought to at least be able to tractor beam an ISD. Some day, it will be useful with other upgrades that reference ship size, too. I guess it also quietly synergizes with Motti, as well, as a commander is an upgrade card.

CR90 Corvette title

Liberator (4 points): When you spend an Evade defense token, you may change your speed by 1. During the Execute Maneuver step, you may spend an Evade token in order to temporarily change your speed by 1 until the end of your current movement.

Unlike other so-called "blockade runners," the Liberator is finally truly untouchable, thanks to Disney-level plot armor. It's constantly getting trapped by the Empire and skating right out again.

You can spend defense tokens without resolving the effect, such as if the opponent rolls blank dice or at closer range. That could be messy. Basically if you don't kill it in one attack, it can immediately escape and never come back. It can jump from speed 2 to speed 4 without discarding any defense tokens.

I'd suggest toning it down just a bit: for each defense token you discard when defending, you may change your speed by one.

This makes it more in line with the other defense token discarding effects such as Vader, Devastator, and Admonition.

7 hours ago, ryanabt said:

First, gotta pick one ship for each faction. Meaning, that you have to choose between Harpago and Grappler.

Second, if you choose Harpago, then strategic should have a number beside it. (Was thinking relay. Sorry! Thanks cactus man)

Grappler is more fun, and someone else has already done a Harpargo, so let's go with that.

7 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

This would involve allowing you to essentially choose to attack any hull zone on the target ship. This would have an immensely negative effect on ship durability. Many players, including myself, already see the Demolisher effect as being intensely negative on the early development of the game. Eliminating the ability to maneuver to present shields just makes the maneuver portion of the game meaningless unless it's to completely avoid all incoming fire.

Yes. I was thinking on shooting hull zones adjacent to the legal target. You know, sometimes it happens. I didn't realize that with the attack rules as they are this change would mean you can shoot through a ship to hit the other side XD

Please forget what I said.

Nebulon-B Frigate Akaga [2]

Your fleet may include a number of non-unique Imperial squadrons equal to this ship's squadron value.

Imperial-Class Star Destroyer Glory [6]

Squadron Command: Unique squadrons activated with this command may reroll one die when attacking.

Some TIE Fighter '95 goodness.

Gozanti- Ordinator -8 points- friendly squads at range 1 cannot become heavy

12 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

Many players, including myself, already see the Demolisher effect as being intensely negative on the early development of the game.

And you want to build another title that gives a more focused version of the same effect? I find the irony quiet funny. (harmless ribbing here, no offense intended) Was bringing Demo into that conversation the thing that finally made you rethink a bit?

3 hours ago, Xindell said:

And you want to build another title that gives a more focused version of the same effect? I find the irony quiet funny. (harmless ribbing here, no offense intended) Was bringing Demo into that conversation the thing that finally made you rethink a bit?

Kind of but not the way you think.

Demolisher and Major Rhymer are very powerful but if you remove them from the previous meta the game swings wildly in favor of Rebel abilities. Outside of these two options and combos that could be achieved with them Imperials are/were on very weak footing.

What I didn't want to do was create an auto-include that instantly restrains Imperial upgrade design even further. That ultimately just harms both factions, because a knock-on effect was that they couldn't really improve Rebel ships either without risking that new upgrades would be used to improve those two existing choices. In Imperial design decisions, you can see how it raised the ship and upgrade costs so players can't take both at the same time as easily. This has further restrained how Imperial lists without those options can be composed because the costs for everything that could improve them are so high.

So if removing the triple tap is what makes this a functional option that doesn't further raise other faction costs, then I'll do it gladly.

So how much longer should I wait before we put the various ship titles up for floor debate and vote?

You've waited long enough-VOTE, VOTE, WE DEMAND A VOTE!

Joking of course-whenever you wish is fine with me

I'd say wait for every ship to have a title, which I believe means just waiting on the transport titles.

Never made a rebel suggestion so here's a weird one.

Sapper - GR-75 7 points

when this ship is destroyed it rolls 4 blue dice against everything (friendly and hostile) within distance 1-2.

effect: a bomb ship to toss into a squadron and ship ball and say bye bye.

I'd make it "when this ship is destroyed, you MAY choose to have it roll 4 dice against all targets within distance 1-2." Otherwise imagine getting alpha-struck early with your full fleet and fighter support surrounding it.