8 minutes ago, RocketPropelledGiraffe said:

Look at it this way then: You get the freshly trained academy pilot team with their unarmed transfer shuttlecraft included with the ISD. If you want the better stuff that can actually do things, like those shiny TIE Fighters, that is extra.

I'm just reminded of the RvB skit....

Church : Well, enough gabbing out of us, let's take this bad boy out for a spin. Go ahead and hop in, Tucker.

Tucker : Me? I can't drive that thing!

Church : You're telling me you're not armor certified?

Tucker : I ca--- I don't even know how to use the ******' sniper rifle! Don't you know how to drive that?

Church : No! Holy crap! Who is running this army?!


There's really no good reason an ISD wouldn't have fighters... Except that FFG either had or had not planned on the power the fighters in armada have and ISDs needed a vulnerability to balance them.

That's just not a good reason to me.

4 hours ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Being facetious, in my experience, never solves anything, only inspires conflict.

This resolves nothing.

As a matter of fact, raising the price of the ISD to force players to take a single type of squadron makes even less sense.

Being facetious is always worthwhile.

Like it or not I just wrote your argument in a blunt style. Suprisingly you didnt like it. Neither did we.

Basic crews come from agency and dont particularly vary.

Engineering firms require qualifications so again no great varience.

Pilots vary greatly depending on equipment. So if you want them as standard take what you are given.

11 hours ago, Ginkapo said:

Ok. An ISD II costs 170pts and comes with 4 Tie Interceptors. These squads cannot be traded for others.

Issue resolved.

You certainly aren't making up for quantity with quality with these sort of posts. Why write when you can trash post with no math. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

1 minute ago, Ginkapo said:

Basic crews come from agency and dont particularly vary.

see

6 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I'm just reminded of the RvB skit....

Church : Well, enough gabbing out of us, let's take this bad boy out for a spin. Go ahead and hop in, Tucker.

Tucker : Me? I can't drive that thing!

Church : You're telling me you're not armor certified?

Tucker : I ca--- I don't even know how to use the ******' sniper rifle! Don't you know how to drive that?

Church : No! Holy crap! Who is running this army?!

There is an obvious level of inherent differences in crew members in the military, especially, I presume, on giant futuristic warships in space that require high levels of specialized training to operate each individual aspect. Gee I hope these generic crewers were all trained to operate comms, navigation, engineering, gunnery, shielding, medical, and still have enough time to train them to fight. Don't be daft.

7 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Engineering firms require qualifications so again no great varience.

Ah yes, I hope these Engineers we trained to fix sub-light engines are good at hyperspace repair, I'd hate to fly into a sun and die...

9 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Pilots vary greatly depending on equipment.

Ah yes, the super government who designs 70% of it's snub fighters with the same...basic...pod.... is going to design them to be so different the pilots couldn't possibly have a base training of all the common ones....


Come on Ginkapo, is there something else here making you so grumpy that you can't make sense?

What? You hire comms guys and expect them to fight? I was assuming you understood why the crews are so large....

Same with engineers, if you hire a plumber to fix your electrics you are a fool.

@Blail Blerg because writing long posts proves nothing. If I can use 4 words why use 200 instead?

6 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Don't be daft .



Come on Ginkapo, is there something else here making you so grumpy that you can't make sense?

You being daft has made me grumpy

I think you just agreed with me mate.

Just now, Darth Sanguis said:

I think you just agreed with me mate.

I dunno if you two are on good terms, but I'm definitely not with him. And I'm taking his posts at full offensive, un-conversational, passive-aggressive face value.

3 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

What? You hire comms guys and expect them to fight? I was assuming you understood why the crews are so large....

Same with engineers, if you hire a plumber to fix your electrics you are a fool.

@Blail Blerg because writing long posts proves nothing. If I can use 4 words why use 200 instead?

Because I'm not trying to prove anything. You're so angry you expect everyone's post to be declaratory and authoritative. My last few posts which YOU decided to respond to have all been requesting information (like asking for the explanation of sensor teams) and providing good backing for my opinion. I've also pointed out the nuances in my opinion on squadrons. So far, in the last few posts, you've simply been condescending and antagonistic, in multiple threads, to multiple people. You're doing that particularly privileged thing of expecting people not to respect you as as a person, but as an authority. Which is gross and toxic.

3 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

You being daft has made me grumpy

I mean, unless you have something to back up how I'm being daft, that... ya know, actually makes sense... I'm just going to revert to saying,

"No, you're a towel!"

5 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

I dunno if you two are on good terms, but I'm definitely not with him. And I'm taking his posts at full offensive, un-conversational, passive-aggressive face value.

Sorry I was addressing him lol

1 minute ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Sorry I was addressing him lol

I know.

I know I'm a towel. =)

Darth at this point I am less concerned about squadrons and more your understanding of the world. Are you young or work in computer tech?

Just now, Ginkapo said:

more your understanding of the world

How do you mean?

1 minute ago, Darth Sanguis said:

How do you mean?

The idea that everyone is capable of everything.

Can someone from a navy explain to Darth here that the crew are a team with complimentary skills rather than every individual being capable of undertaking all tasks please.

Just now, Ginkapo said:

The idea that everyone is capable of everything.

Can someone from a navy explain to Darth here that the crew are a team with complimentary skills rather than every individual being capable of undertaking all tasks please.

Oh, okay, that makes much more sense. Sorry Ginkapo, sometimes I forget text can lack tone.

39 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Gee I hope these generic crewers were all trained to operate comms, navigation, engineering, gunnery, shielding, medical, and still have enough time to train them to fight.

Was all sarcasm.

The point I was trying to make is that no, I don't believe your statement:

40 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Basic crews come from agency and dont particularly vary

There's very obviously many different jobs on board a massive space warship and crew can vary greatly depending on jobs required.


The next two statements were also heavily layered in sarcasm. I'm in an engineering field, I'm fully aware of the multitudes of types of engineers that all cover different aspects of life, the point I was trying to make was to counter your own where you stated:

57 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Engineering firms require qualifications so again no great varience

Though there are qualifications for every type of engineer, the qualifications can vary heavily depending upon the type of engineer.

Well agreed, but the qualification for each specific role tends to always the same.

I mistook your tone, sorry. As you were.

11 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Well agreed, but the qualification for each specific role tends to always the same.

I mistook your tone, sorry. As you were.

I can't speak for crews aboard the navy vessels, even less so for those aboard fictional space vessels that run on future tech, but I can say for Engineering, that, that is not quite accurate. My boss and I just had the discussion today actually about Architects and Architectural engineers both thinking they're top dog but both of their qualifications are so different neither can do any one thing by themselves. It seems architects always need engineering approval and engineering always need to have their things approved by the architects. In my job they can go around like that for months before anything gets done. lol

No worries though, I figured something was amiss lol

To quote the late grate Moff Tarken "This bickering is pointless." Squadrons shiped with the core set they are part of this game and will continue to be. I am not a huge squadron fan, but one of my favorite parts of the game is the initial squadron engagement. I play a gentleman regularly who runs the very heavy Squadron fleets, sometimes I win sometimes I lose. When he wins it's because it played better than me, when I win visa versa. I do think squadrons are in a strong possistion, but so have many other things during the life of this game we love and have a deep passion for, but can we stop the mocking, back bitting, and the belittling comments, and stop acting like a scruffy looking nerf herder and act like the Admirals we are?

5 minutes ago, xero989 said:

To quote the late grate Moff Tarken "This bickering is pointless." Squadrons shiped with the core set they are part of this game and will continue to be. I am not a huge squadron fan, but one of my favorite parts of the game is the initial squadron engagement. I play a gentleman regularly who runs the very heavy Squadron fleets, sometimes I win sometimes I lose. When he wins it's because it played better than me, when I win visa versa. I do think squadrons are in a strong possistion, but so have many other things during the life of this game we love and have a deep passion for, but can we stop the mocking, back bitting, and the belittling comments, and stop acting like a scruffy looking nerf herders and act like the Admirals we are?

We're all good. Just a misinterpretation of tone.

Language is the liquid that we're all dissolved in, great for solving problems, after it creates a problem.

:D

1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Ah yes, the super government who designs 70% of it's snub fighters with the same...basic...pod.... is going to design them to be so different the pilots couldn't possibly have a base training of all the common ones....

Come on Ginkapo, is there something else here making you so grumpy that you can't make sense?

In Legends they often noted the different capabilities of each type of Imperial fighter. Interceptors have incredibly sharp turns and go crazy fast compared to most other options, bombers are slower and clumsier, Defenders are hellbeasts that (depending on your source) are faster than anything else and may or may not have amazing turns, and so on. The cockpit may have a similar layout but that doesn't mean that you can transfer pilots and expect them to know what they're doing. I can barely handle it when I borrow a truck because I'm used to a Buick that's half as tall and much slimmer. I'm helpless if I have to drive a standard transmission. Most Imperial pilots are used to flying as part of a huge swarm of fighters that are pretty mediocre (the TIE fighters real strength is cost-effectiveness). Putting them in an Interceptor and expecting them to handle something much faster with maybe a fourth as many friendly fighters as they're used to just doesn't work without some training and practice. May the Force be with you if the used to have you flying bombers, or if they want to move you over to one. Also the Defender and Advanced were very rare designs that the common pilot wouldn't be trained to fly. They had to earn their way to an Interceptor and then excel at that before they could be tested as a Defender pilot. The Advanced is in a weird place lore-wise but I think it's supposed to be a prototype that was rejected for cost reasons and Vader customized one for himself.

Also I'm aware that there's a small difference in move speed in Armada, but in lore the Interceptor and Defender are both much faster than the basic TIE. I'm just rejecting your suggestion that you would just need "a pilot" as opposed to a pilot trained for the specific fighters on board.

Also to echo what Ginkapo said, the reason you aren't handed a basic compliment of fighters is so you can pick whatever you'd like--which includes "none, just give me more turbolasers" if that's what you want to do. I'm not sure FFG realized how important the fighter screen would be, but I still like the fact that I can choose to gamble on two Raiders being "good enough" if I'm crazy enough to try it. From a lore perspective, I agree that it makes little to no sense for a Star Destroyer to roll in with no fighters. I mean, did they somehow all get shot down with no damage at all to the ships right before this battle? From a game design perspective, I think it's cool that I can decide how few fighters I want to have. And since this is a game, I'm glad they went with the option that allows me more freedom in list building.

Interesting thread; I like all the discussion despite some snark.

I am definitely on the 'I don't really like squadrons' team, but I feel like this game is the best incarnation of Star Wars space combat (possibly space combat in general?) because it strikes a good balance between squadrons, ships, their abstractions, and their interactions.

The only thing I would ever feel like changing is reducing the power of a squadron as its "health points" (whatever that represents) decrease. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense that a squad at the lowest "health point" value is equal in power to itself at full "health point" value. Ships loosely represent this concept with critical hits, and I think that's great. Maybe play a house ruled game where if a squads health is at half (rounded down) reduce their dice pools to half (rounded up) and call it a day. That might be interesting. Maybe excempt uniques from this though.

1 minute ago, GalacticFister said:

Interesting thread; I like all the discussion despite some snark.

I am definitely on the 'I don't really like squadrons' team, but I feel like this game is the best incarnation of Star Wars space combat (possibly space combat in general?) because it strikes a good balance between squadrons, ships, their abstractions, and their interactions.

The only thing I would ever feel like changing is reducing the power of a squadron as its "health points" (whatever that represents) decrease. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense that a squad at the lowest "health point" value is equal in power to itself at full "health point" value. Ships loosely represent this concept with critical hits, and I think that's great. Maybe play a house ruled game where if a squads health is at half (rounded down) reduce their dice pools to half (rounded up) and call it a day. That might be interesting. Maybe excempt uniques from this though.

I had not thought about it that way. Very interesting point

4 minutes ago, Hockeyzombie said:

In Legends they often noted the different capabilities of each type of Imperial fighter. Interceptors have incredibly sharp turns and go crazy fast compared to most other options, bombers are slower and clumsier, Defenders are hellbeasts that (depending on your source) are faster than anything else and may or may not have amazing turns, and so on. The cockpit may have a similar layout but that doesn't mean that you can transfer pilots and expect them to know what they're doing. I can barely handle it when I borrow a truck because I'm used to a Buick that's half as tall and much slimmer. I'm helpless if I have to drive a standard transmission. Most Imperial pilots are used to flying as part of a huge swarm of fighters that are pretty mediocre (the TIE fighters real strength is cost-effectiveness). Putting them in an Interceptor and expecting them to handle something much faster with maybe a fourth as many friendly fighters as they're used to just doesn't work without some training and practice. May the Force be with you if the used to have you flying bombers, or if they want to move you over to one. Also the Defender and Advanced were very rare designs that the common pilot wouldn't be trained to fly. They had to earn their way to an Interceptor and then excel at that before they could be tested as a Defender pilot. The Advanced is in a weird place lore-wise but I think it's supposed to be a prototype that was rejected for cost reasons and Vader customized one for himself.

Also I'm aware that there's a small difference in move speed in Armada, but in lore the Interceptor and Defender are both much faster than the basic TIE. I'm just rejecting your suggestion that you would just need "a pilot" as opposed to a pilot trained for the specific fighters on board.

Also to echo what Ginkapo said, the reason you aren't handed a basic compliment of fighters is so you can pick whatever you'd like--which includes "none, just give me more turbolasers" if that's what you want to do. I'm not sure FFG realized how important the fighter screen would be, but I still like the fact that I can choose to gamble on two Raiders being "good enough" if I'm crazy enough to try it. From a lore perspective, I agree that it makes little to no sense for a Star Destroyer to roll in with no fighters. I mean, did they somehow all get shot down with no damage at all to the ships right before this battle? From a game design perspective, I think it's cool that I can decide how few fighters I want to have. And since this is a game, I'm glad they went with the option that allows me more freedom in list building.

Something something Poe Dameron lol

Yeah, that's a good point, still, seeing as standard ties were pretty much the stable for the empire, it would make sense if you could take "up to" your squad value without extra cost.

Everything here in terms of game changes is all hypothetical. I like to dream of a world where a thematically correct fleet could exist within the confines of the standard rules and not be 500 points... lol A man can dream!