Want to post the list? Need to look.

Not really. Flown correctly in far ranges, they can usually out-activation larger ships and their big arcs. (Preferably with first player, 14 bid is good)

2 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

I don't know man, I wouldn't hold my breath... I really still think this is the intended function of flotillas, and they already do it admirably; why do we need another mechanic to do the same thing?

And a whole extra activation for 3 points + officer slot is a pretty big deal. Kind of a no-brainer in some cases. Keep in mind that this would trivialize certain aspects of list building, because it's not the same thing as just adding activations. It's adding non-mandatory activations. One of the big drawbacks of high-activation fleets is their vulnerability to losing activation advantage to forking: if I have six actual activations in my fleet and four are under immediate existential threat, I can't save at least two of them. This obviates that weakness of actual high ship-count fleets.

I think people just need to get over the distaste for "wasted" points spent on flotillas. If you need activations in your fleet, you're going to have to accept the need to down-convert some ships to smaller ones, whether that's ISD -> VSD + Raider, or CR90A -> 2*GR-75. Otherwise, just figure out how to tactically mitigate activation disadvantage. It's not easy, but at that point you're consciously accepting a weakness in one dimension of your build (activation count) in exchange for a strength in another (ship survivability, coolness, whatever), and it's on you to figure out how to leverage your fleet's strengths while mitigating its weaknesses.

Disagree: The main problem is that large ship fleets and multiple large ship fleets have TWO meta weaknesses that can't be partially mitigated in list building, to MSU and to mass squadron.

And a reminder that loading up on enough squadrons to beat a dedicated 134 bomber list with tons of squadron helping upgrades neuters your list against squadron light lists.

At some point you start to notice you're losing considerable ship firepower, again neutering your list against other threats.

Also, I've been playing with VSDs, honestly, this is gonna be an unpopular opinion, but they still are really not that great. Not enough firepower in the right places, rarely get to fire main arc, even with Jerjerrod and DTT.

1 minute ago, Blail Blerg said:

Disagree: The main problem is that large ship fleets and multiple large ship fleets have TWO meta weaknesses that can't be partially mitigated in list building, to MSU and to mass squadron.

And a reminder that loading up on enough squadrons to beat a dedicated 134 bomber list with tons of squadron helping upgrades neuters your list against squadron light lists.

At some point you start to notice you're losing considerable ship firepower, again neutering your list against other threats.

I know you're in a frustrating meta, but you've got to understand how much this sounds like "I can't be good against everything so please nerf everything I don't like facing." These are the challenges of list building in an environment where several different dimensions can produce strong lists, man. I myself got beaten by Rieekan aces the other day, but I'm not calling for a nerf, I'm looking for even better ways to counter them back without losing my own effectiveness. It's always going to be a give and take, and the whole challenge of the game is finding ways to leverage your strengths to mitigate the other guy's strengths.

8 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Disagree: The main problem is that large ship fleets and multiple large ship fleets have TWO meta weaknesses that can't be partially mitigated in list building, to MSU and to mass squadron.

And a reminder that loading up on enough squadrons to beat a dedicated 134 bomber list with tons of squadron helping upgrades neuters your list against squadron light lists.

I disagree. Imp large ships struggle, not Rebel. 3 regionals have been won by an Ackbar80 loaded to the gills with extra activations for support.

I think the bigger issue is the quality of Imp commanders is much lower than the Rebels, and thus, limiting the amount of competitive lists.

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

I disagree. Imp large ships struggle, not Rebel. 3 regionals have been won by an Ackbar80 loaded to the gills with extra activations for support.

I think the bigger issue is the quality of Imp commanders is much lower than the Rebels, and thus, limiting the amount of competitive lists.

This, I'm starting to get behind. I've been trying to play more Imp games recently, and there's just not much that I'm finding inspiring out there on the admirals front...

I really think Jerry is an Imperial Commander's new hope.

That being said though, he still kind of pales in comparison to some of the Rebel leadership.

We need a Thrawn to turn back the tide.

I want to use Tarkin, but I find Comms Net is better. Cheaper and I get an activation, plus I don't need to worry about using my tokens before the next round.

Konstantine is mitigated by using Nav commands, which should already be used in the first place. And no cheap, well round medium ships.

I don't like Ozzel. I like JJ.

Tagge is straight up bad.

Vader wants big batteries, which means ISD and sometimes Arqs. It's a fine concept, but doesn't make me excited.

Screed, Motti and JJ are my go to, and seem to be the same for a lot of people. I bet the data would match too, with Vader, Screed, Motti and JJ being the top played commanders and placing higher too.

On the whole, I agree with your analysis.

5 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

This, I'm starting to get behind. I've been trying to play more Imp games recently, and there's just not much that I'm finding inspiring out there on the admirals front...

I can't say I disagree. We currently have two basically-awful Imperial commanders (Konstantine and Tagge) and two "second tier" commanders (Tarkin and Vader) that are harder to get cost-effective use from at 400 points. It shrinks the field down pretty strongly. The remaining commanders are useful but their effects aren't as flashy as someone like Rieekan. Motti is the easy example: strong but boring effect. He doesn't really have the same flash as Mon Mothma or Rieekan, for example.

17 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

I disagree. Imp large ships struggle, not Rebel. 3 regionals have been won by an Ackbar80 loaded to the gills with extra activations for support.

Large ships are fine. (except the Liberty)

6 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

I can't say I disagree. We currently have two basically-awful Imperial commanders (Konstantine and Tagge) and two "second tier" commanders (Tarkin and Vader) that are harder to get cost-effective use from at 400 points. It shrinks the field down pretty strongly.

I would say that is fair. Tagge and Konstantine are pretty awful. The Rebel bottom feeders are Garm and Sato, who at least seem to have more potential.

Stop bad-mouthing Vader. He's the best. Top notch. The other admirals are losers.

On a more serious note Vader IS excellent, even at 400 points, but he can be tricky. Many more options at 500. Same as with Tarkin really.

Jerry, however, is super cheap and shaping out to be really good. Ozzel is cool too. Screed is effective, but boring. Motti too. So fing dull.

Konstantine too niche. Tagge is trash.

34 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

I know you're in a frustrating meta, but you've got to understand how much this sounds like "I can't be good against everything so please nerf everything I don't like facing." These are the challenges of list building in an environment where several different dimensions can produce strong lists, man. I myself got beaten by Rieekan aces the other day, but I'm not calling for a nerf, I'm looking for even better ways to counter them back without losing my own effectiveness. It's always going to be a give and take, and the whole challenge of the game is finding ways to leverage your strengths to mitigate the other guy's strengths.

Please. The strengths here are obvious and easy to use. As opposed to the strengths of large ships which are very dice dependent. Also if you followed xwing math wing you'd recall that highly modified dice and the ability to remove relevant shots against you are high marks of mathematical value. And I have called for both buff stuff and nerfs.

In any case, if my meta is "difficult" doesn't that also imply that we are also pushing the tip of efficiency? Which means that's the best baseline for evaluating strength.

Also as of now the counters to rieekan aces have been completely rebuffed in testing and argument. 7 ship msu is likely to lose ships in the trade due to higher requirements of control. Ram fleet loses value in the same suicidal way. AA fleets of imperials are gimped beyond effective normal competition by their squadrons being specialized. So if you want to take that tact, it would be nice to see how bomber fleets have any inherent weaknesses at all. As opposed to the two strongly inherent weaknesses of large ship and multiple large ship fleets.

Also bear in mind many of the large ship fleets were squadron bomber pushers. And also that the data is likely not correct as it says 20% for ackbar mc80 when you've said it's a dominant section of the winners. Check that data?

4 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

On a more serious note Vader IS excellent, even at 400 points, but he can be tricky. Many more options at 500. Same as with Tarkin really.

I actually don't meaningfully disagree with that. I've run Vader and Tarkin at 400 and done well with both but the huge price tags on them make it tough to create as well-rounded of a fleet as I'd like. I always come away feeling like I've made something that can win most of the time at casual game night but probably wouldn't rise to the top of a tournament due to more bad match-ups than I'm comfortable with. I don't tend to feel the same way at 500 points where Vader and Tarkin's higher points costs are proportionally less of the fleet, though.

Tagge is so unused, I still don't know how to pronounce his name.

8 minutes ago, WuFame said:

Tagge is so unused, I still don't know how to pronounce his name.

I've always thought it was pronounced "tag" but I've heard some people pronounce it "taggee."

When the Arquitens came out I figured he'd be useful for running Turbolaser Reroute Arquitens, which give him more control over being able to use his own ability through some double-spends on the evades. In reality it worked okay but not great. He's still inferior to other choices for a similar fleet (like Vader or Jerry or maybe Ozzel) but at least his usefulness has been upgraded from "Anne Frank's drum set" in wave 4 to "burger you found on top of a dumpster" in wave 5.

1 minute ago, Snipafist said:

I've always thought it was pronounced "tag" but I've heard some people pronounce it "taggee."

When the Arquitens came out I figured he'd be useful for running Turbolaser Reroute Arquitens, which give him more control over being able to use his own ability through some double-spends on the evades. In reality it worked okay but not great. He's still inferior to other choices for a similar fleet (like Vader or Jerry or maybe Ozzel) but at least his usefulness has been upgraded from "Anne Frank's drum set" in wave 4 to "burger you found on top of a dumpster" in wave 5.

The only time I've said his name out loud I said "taj ee" and people looked at me like I was nuts. So I just don't say his name out loud anymore.

Basically what you said is what I've found. Everytime I think he'll be good, it just feels like someone else is better.

I took him in a CC campaign. Planetary Ion Cannons are very popular for base defense and he really doesn't care about the crit effect. He was good for that one niche, but in any non base assault games his ability was largely trash.

38 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

In any case, if my meta is "difficult" doesn't that also imply that we are also pushing the tip of efficiency? Which means that's the best baseline for evaluating strength.

No. It means that there's a significant skill disparity in your meta. I don't know how to say it any more nicely than that.

Just now, Ardaedhel said:

No. It means that there's a significant skill disparity in your meta. I don't know how to say it any more nicely than that.

I unliked and reliked your post 10 times just so you know how much I would like this if I could.

Also be ready for Blail to accuse you of being a bully and/or condescending. There's a reason most people don't reply to him any more...

1 hour ago, shmitty said:

Large ships are fine. (except the Liberty)

	All	Top 4
Large Ships	52%	49%
ISD	65%	75%
Home One	22%	20%
Liberty	19%	11%

ISDs say "Booyah"

27 minutes ago, WuFame said:

The only time I've said his name out loud I said "taj ee" and people looked at me like I was nuts. So I just don't say his name out loud anymore.

Basically what you said is what I've found. Everytime I think he'll be good, it just feels like someone else is better.

Sounds like its time for me to use him in tournament fleets (As I was split between him, Konstantine and Tarkin for a next tourney)

4 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

I unliked and reliked your post 10 times just so you know how much I would like this if I could.

Also be ready for Blail to accuse you of being a bully and/or condescending. There's a reason most people don't reply to him any more...

I'm sincerely not trying to be mean, rally a backlash against Blail, or tell him he's bad or something. He avoided squadron play for like 3 waves; logically speaking, you're going to be behind in that aspect of the game when compared to someone who has put in the time to learn it. And now it's suddenly a major consideration in the meta. It doesn't make him a bad person, but it does make it hard to have a meaningful conversation without tactical-level gameplay details to discuss.

Come on...the ISD is an amazing ship. Yes, there are some tradeoffs, but I'd rather have fewer activations than no ISD.

2 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

Come on...the ISD is an amazing ship. Yes, there are some tradeoffs, but I'd rather have fewer activations than no ISD.

I've been having a lot of fun with ISD1's of late. The best part is, if you're frugal with your points, you can still fit in some pretty nice meat into the list with two of them.

3 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

I'm sincerely not trying to be mean, rally a backlash against Blail, or tell him he's bad or something. He avoided squadron play for like 3 waves; logically speaking, you're going to be behind in that aspect of the game when compared to someone who has put in the time to learn it. And now it's suddenly a major consideration in the meta. It doesn't make him a bad person, but it does make it hard to have a meaningful conversation without tactical-level gameplay details to discuss.

Lol thanks. I'm really noting a there's a big group here who wants to make insults and poke fun at me.

I did play a lot of Gladiators cuz they were my favorite, but I did also play squadrons during that time too. Its not as if I haven't played them and don't have my giant collection of skulls from playing squadrons anyway.