Doh! Forgot about Slicer Tools. Yeah, ignore that one. I was just trying to think of things that are "ion-y" without duplicating other effects but sadly totally forgot about Slicer Tools, as I haven't played with or against it yet.

5 hours ago, GammonLord said:

Maybe an Admiral who is Squadron specific? We have ones that manipulate ship dice, speed, yaw, survivability but not their ability to muck about with squadrons.

Sato.

3 minutes ago, xerpo said:

Sato.

I think he means one that affects squadrons specifically, similar to the effects Crabbok mentioned, where all squadrons activated by commands gain an additional anti-ship or -squadron die.

Imperials could use a Squadron-centric Commander that doesn't make Rhymer toooo good. Maybe something that says "Squadrons at distance 1 of enemy ships gain a single reroll each attack".

2 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I think he means one that affects squadrons specifically, similar to the effects Crabbok mentioned, where all squadrons activated by commands gain an additional anti-ship or -squadron die.

Well, true Sato does not affect squadrons themselves, but he becomes completely useless if you run out of them and becomes exponentialy threatening for each squadron you add to your fleet.

8 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I think he means one that affects squadrons specifically, similar to the effects Crabbok mentioned, where all squadrons activated by commands gain an additional anti-ship or -squadron die.

Brutal brutal min-maxing of ALL squadrons by multiplicative effects since squadrons are the best tools against everything is a HORRIBLE IDEA . This is just asking to make squadrons evenmore the most effective tools against everything. Just take 134 squadrons: get extra ship dice, get extra anti-squadron dice. You tell me. What's the counter to that? I'll give you hint. Nothing.

Mine is only a boost to Tie squadrons in their UNINTENDED role to mitigate their specialization problem.

2 minutes ago, xerpo said:

Well, true Sato does not affect squadrons themselves, but he becomes completely useless if you run out of them and becomes exponentialy threatening for each squadron you add to your fleet.

I know, but think of it this way:

Ackbar is essentially a modified Enhanced Armaments for all broadsides, Motti is a modified RBD, Sato could be a twisted Jonus, what about an Admiral who was an enhanced Flight Controllers*?

*This is probably OP, I'm just pointing out that all admirals (as expected given their role) inevitably affect ships, no matter how round about the path they use to get there.

2 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Brutal brutal min-maxing of ALL squadrons by multiplicative effects since squadrons are the best tools against everything is a HORRIBLE IDEA . This is just asking to make squadrons evenmore the most effective tools against everything. Just take 134 squadrons: get extra ship dice, get extra anti-squadron dice. You tell me. What's the counter to that? I'll give you hint. Nothing.

Mine is only a boost to Tie squadrons in their UNINTENDED role to mitigate their specialization problem.

I know. I was thinking something like 'All squads with Bomber gain 1 blue anti-squadron die, and all squads without Bomber gain 1 blue anti-ship die.' I hadn't thought of how to implement it, nor of the cost, I was just spit-balling to make a point.

29 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I know, but think of it this way:

Ackbar is essentially a modified Enhanced Armaments for all broadsides, Motti is a modified RBD, Sato could be a twisted Jonus, what about an Admiral who was an enhanced Flight Controllers*?

*This is probably OP, I'm just pointing out that all admirals (as expected given their role) inevitably affect ships, no matter how round about the path they use to get there.

I know. I was thinking something like 'All squads with Bomber gain 1 blue anti-squadron die, and all squads without Bomber gain 1 blue anti-ship die.' I hadn't thought of how to implement it, nor of the cost, I was just spit-balling to make a point.

Sorry, I came across strong. But really, this type of global effect is really not good. Squadrons are still the most efficient damage platforms and dice rerollers in the game. By a long long shot already. Really.

Like even the tie buff idea I had might not be a great idea in the end, and mine is 6 points, for one ship's commanded squadrons, getting a reroll in the unintended role. its to address a specific problem.

Squadrons are the most cost efficient and effective platforms of reroll-able damage to everything in the game. Literally everything. There is nothing that squadrons are not good against.

4 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Sorry, I came across strong. But really, this type of global effect is really not good. Squadrons are still the most efficient damage platforms and dice rerollers in the game. By a long long shot already. Really.

Like even the tie buff idea I had might not be a great idea in the end, and mine is 6 points, for one ship's commanded squadrons, getting a reroll in the unintended role. its to address a specific problem.

Squadrons are the most cost efficient and effective platforms of reroll-able damage to everything in the game. Literally everything. There is nothing that squadrons are not good against.

It's OK, I can imagine the desire to make such a point. B-Wings with even more buffs are the stuff of nightmares. . .

It does indeed seem that squadrons are getting a lot of bonuses through various means in the game, and while I haven't experienced the worst of it, I have heard stories. . . rumors. . . whispers of Y-Wing swarms and over 4 B-Wings in a Yavaris fleet. . . .

And yet, in spite of all that, an Admiral who was say, 40 points (in order to make him undesirable for most fleets and to punish the person who took him) that provided 1 blue die that could not be modified to a squad's weaker or less-used battery would be interesting to see, especially if upgrades came out boosting a ships flak abilities, as discussed above. It would cause the squads to be more powerful, yes (TIE fighters with 2 blue anti-ship die are pretty scary for their cost), but assuming that the aforementioned upgrades also came into existence, then you'd have 3 hull ships going against 3 blue (or, heavens forbid, 2 blue and a red) dice of flak.

I am not condoning it as such, merely commenting that as a hypothetical concept, it would be interesting to imagine. . . much like how it would be interesting - but ultimately pointless - to discuss how the world would currently be if the Confederate States of America won the Civil War right after the first battle of Bull Run.

5 hours ago, Crabbok said:

What about squadron upgrades? 5 points to give a single squadron an extra black anti-squadron die? 8 points to give it an anti-ship die? Only 1 upgrade per squadron?

10 points to give it a scatter? Something like that could be insane. Would have to limit some of them to non-unique only, or vice versa.

How would you track individual squadrons though? You can't, outside of unique squads, and they're already powerful enough.

If you want squadron upgrades, play X-Wing.

8 point Ion Cannon modification that adds a blue AA.

Offensive Retrofit: Point Defense Augmentation.

While you are attacking a squadron, each (critical hit) icon adds one damage to the damage total.

7 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

Offensive Retrofit: Point Defense Augmentation.

While you are attacking a squadron, each (critical hit) icon adds one damage to the damage total.

Raiders don't need to do 4 damage to squadrons. 6 if unique.

15 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

Raiders don't need to do 4 damage to squadrons. 6 if unique.

Raiders are currently one of the most fragile ships in the game and can be dropped in as few as three hits from a B-Wing (assuming all three hits are ACC+Hit/Crit). If costed appropriately, this would radically improve anti-squadron power across the board and allow ships to have a solid fighting chance vs massed squadrons.

22 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

Raiders are currently one of the most fragile ships in the game and can be dropped in as few as three hits from a B-Wing (assuming all three hits are ACC+Hit/Crit). If costed appropriately, this would radically improve anti-squadron power across the board and allow ships to have a solid fighting chance vs massed squadrons.

But then 3/4 hull squadrons would get demolished.

46 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

But then 3/4 hull squadrons would get demolished.

More importantly, hull 4+ squadrons can't hang out around big ships without impunity.

Interceptors and TIE Fighters and even Z-95s already avoid getting closer to enemy ships. That's not going to change.

What this does is make it so that even hull 5-6 unique squadrons now have to plan to approach their targets, be they enemy ships or squadrons. Getting near big ships and dedicated anti squadron ships is now ACTUALLY DANGEROUS. And that's why squadrons have been dominating every major event. There's no threat to squadrons aside from other squadrons. If you don't fear enemy squadrons (because you've locked everything down or because you can simply kill the enemy squads in a round of shooting), then you have nothing to fear from ships.

This changes that equation significantly.

4 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Brutal brutal min-maxing of ALL squadrons by multiplicative effects since squadrons are the best tools against everything is a HORRIBLE IDEA . This is just asking to make squadrons evenmore the most effective tools against everything. Just take 134 squadrons: get extra ship dice, get extra anti-squadron dice. You tell me. What's the counter to that? I'll give you hint. Nothing.

Mine is only a boost to Tie squadrons in their UNINTENDED role to mitigate their specialization problem.

Aye, I did mean a dedicated buff outside of Sato who uses, rather than buffs, squadrons, but I agree a bit with Blail and other posters to a certain degree - there'd need to be an effective counter upgrade to balance a squadron specific admiral.

4 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

More importantly, hull 4+ squadrons can't hang out around big ships without impunity.

Interceptors and TIE Fighters and even Z-95s already avoid getting closer to enemy ships. That's not going to change.

What this does is make it so that even hull 5-6 unique squadrons now have to plan to approach their targets, be they enemy ships or squadrons. Getting near big ships and dedicated anti squadron ships is now ACTUALLY DANGEROUS.

I'm on board through here. I would love a way for ships to build to meaningfully, directly threaten squadrons. When I played XvT long ago, charging a capital ship was super duper dangerous. I want it to feel that way in Armada too, at least some of the time.

Caution: snark ahead.

4 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

Quote

And that's why squadrons have been dominating every major event.

Do they, though? Cause... They don't.

They dominate some . They show up at most . But "every" is a little strong, given that 2 or 3 Regionals were won by squadronless fleets, and even more were won with just a squadron screen... Which, I think, is a pretty good place for the game to be in.

Quote

There's no threat to squadrons aside from other squadrons.

And getting tabled.

Quote

If you don't fear enemy squadrons (because you've locked everything down or because you can simply kill the enemy squads in a round of shooting), then you have nothing to fear from ships.

If you're facing a carrier fleet, sure. I'm not honestly sure what you're trying to get at here, sorry.

In the talk of squadron-boosting commanders, I have to say I think they're a bad Pandora's box. Sato is the first commander to directly interact with squadrons, but crucially he doesn't buff them. He buffs ships on the condition of having squadrons. That's the way to go, I think. No need for the squadron game to be better than it already is. Every commander already has all the reason in the world to bring squadrons. No further synergy needed.

2 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

Caution: snark ahead.

For whatever reason, it doesn't want to let me quote one of your later bits, specifically the part about you not understanding what I was referencing.

If it helps, I was specifically referencing about how Squadrons can be used to completely lock down enemy squads or kill enemy squads before they can retaliate, leaving ships defenseless. I think the change would make it much more difficult to "just" attack a ship when the Squadrons are mopped up. A good defensive screen would leave Squadrons unable to safely push forward even if the defensive screen was obliterated.

Squadron Hunter

Slot: Ship Captain

Cost: 10

Ability: You can delay one of your attacks after you moved, if you target squadrons by the delayed attack.

5 hours ago, Darth Veggie said:

Squadron Hunter

Slot: Ship Captain

Cost: 10

Ability: You can delay one of your attacks after you moved, if you target squadrons by the delayed attack.

No. Demolisher is enough of a hated card for giving a ship move-after shooting. Even opening the Pandora's box any ship taking post-move anti-squad shots is too much.

1 hour ago, Church14 said:

No. Demolisher is enough of a hated card for giving a ship move-after shooting. Even opening the Pandora's box any ship taking post-move anti-squad shots is too much.

That already exists. It's called Rapid Launch Bays with Flight Commander. It's amazing. Lots of ships can take it.

19 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

How would you track individual squadrons though? You can't, outside of unique squads, and they're already powerful enough.

If you want squadron upgrades, play X-Wing.

Good point about tracking them - might have to limit squadron upgrades to unique squadrons only - OR give them a token. Squadrons have places for tokens so it'd be fairly easy to do.

But I've been on that whole "X-Wing is for squadrons" bandwagon for years and finally given up. They are here to stay and further squadron-centric upgrades are almost certain to come.

Now I WOULD like to see rebels get some type of anti-squadron option similar to the Raider. Perhaps a ship with Two blue anti squadron dice, and a TITLE that grants it a THIRD blue anti squadron die.... this way you restrict it to only one... and also give something on par with the raider, but having much better range.

14 minutes ago, Crabbok said:

Good point about tracking them - might have to limit squadron upgrades to unique squadrons only - OR give them a token. Squadrons have places for tokens so it'd be fairly easy to do.

But I've been on that whole "X-Wing is for squadrons" bandwagon for years and finally given up. They are here to stay and further squadron-centric upgrades are almost certain to come.

Now I WOULD like to see rebels get some type of anti-squadron option similar to the Raider. Perhaps a ship with Two blue anti squadron dice, and a TITLE that grants it a THIRD blue anti squadron die.... this way you restrict it to only one... and also give something on par with the raider, but having much better range.

Not sure why you couldn't rule it that ANY upgrade for a non-unique squadron MUST be purchased for all copies of that squadron. So the 8 Xwings represented by a single card must all be upgraded the same way.

I am not sure if I like the idea of buying upgrades for squadrons. I think I would rather see more CC style unique (veteran?) squads. Even if Obsidian squadron is released as a veteran TIE fighter with the same stats as Black.

though I will support anything that results in some Ywings with counter and at least one unique Ywing with Strategic or Relay