Does it seem to most that you're seeing a lot more of the very good stuff (defenders, named characters etc) and little of the basic stuff (tie's, bombers, interceptors) ?
and is it just because they are new or is it a genuine shift toward using elites often?

I think they missed a trick not putting some limitation on number of named squadrons.
Some kind of 'tech level' might have been nice as well so you can't just have absolutely the top of the line stuff all the time.

The last 4+ games I don't think I've seen anything other than top of the line stuff

I think it's mostly people want to explore the new stuff and all the new aces from Corellian Conflict. The more expensive squadrons let you command more total points of squadrons for your squadron muscle so I think people enjoy exploring the "I spent a lot on squadrons but not so much on carriers" sub-archetype. I have however seen plenty of "old stuff" - X-Wings, Y-Wings, TIE Fighters, TIE Interceptors, TIE Bombers, A-Wings, etc. were all at Adepticon.

Rieekan "ace hole" fleets like to run a lot of unique stuff but that's Rieekan for you.

Wait for the tie fighter spam coming with the next wave....

still see plenty of generics though at the moment. Biggs wouldn't be who he is without a butt load of his x wing buddy's.

17 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

Rieekan " ace hole " fleets like to run a lot of unique stuff but that's Rieekan for you.

This needs to be the official name for a Rieekan ace list!

I like the idea, might try it in our casual games.

Something like you must have a certain ratio of the wave one stuff before taking defenders or other more limited things

The basic fighter design was one of the biggest turn-offs for me on this game when it launched. IMHO all squadrons should have had one defense token to represent the ships defensive capabilities. evade (which could have re-rolled a single attack from another squadron) and scatter could have been for squadrons with high agility like TIE Fighters and TIE Interceptors. Ships with more shielding could have had brace tokens. All you would have to do is just drop the number of hit points for some squadrons and it would have been balanced. Also cloak should have been a defensive token.

Do you swarm brah?

4 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

The basic fighter design was one of the biggest turn-offs for me on this game when it launched. IMHO all squadrons should have had one defense token to represent the ships defensive capabilities. evade (which could have re-rolled a single attack from another squadron) and scatter could have been for squadrons with high agility like TIE Fighters and TIE Interceptors. Ships with more shielding could have had brace tokens. All you would have to do is just drop the number of hit points for some squadrons and it would have been balanced. Also cloak should have been a defensive token.

It also means being able to uniquely identify each and every fighter squadron and equate them with their own squadron card and set of tokens...

Oh, you have 8 Basic TIE fighter Squadrons? I hope you have 8 TIE Fighter Cards over there...

What do you mean "No Room on the Table?"

... That's the price you Pay, man.

I do agree aces are a bit more common than they used to be, probably because people realized that you pay a very small price for usually very good effects. The tokens alone are usually worth it.

IMO, the problem is that a lot of aces (not all of them) are too low priced.

Yeah I think so too. It's like 5 or 6 points for a generally very nice ability, and defence tokens on top.

And Rhymer.. I really hate his ability. It's way too powerful for the measly cost

Love to see others playing uniques. Seeing how they play them. Sucks trying to sink them in battle though. I do see people flying more uniques but not only, mixed in with generics to fluff up those squad numbers.

1 hour ago, stuuk said:

And Rhymer.. I really hate his ability. It's way too powerful for the measly cost

Biggs... Jan and Nora... easily balance out good old Ryhmer

I really like Biggs with 1300s. Speed 2 really isn't that bad guys, especially with AFFM and Biggs' ability to shuffle damage distance 1 backwards. Effectively, for purposes of tanking, 1300s are base speed 3 when they are paired with Biggs.

10 minutes ago, Benji1980 said:

Biggs... Jan and Nora... easily balance out good old Ryhmer

Maybe so but then it's this cycle of everyone trying to take the 'right' characters to kill the other guys characters.
It's more that I just don't get why Rhymer helps everyone else, or has no downside, for the 6 points why would you not want the cruise missiles..?

2 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

It also means being able to uniquely identify each and every fighter squadron and equate them with their own squadron card and set of tokens...

Oh, you have 8 Basic TIE fighter Squadrons? I hope you have 8 TIE Fighter Cards over there...

What do you mean "No Room on the Table?"

... That's the price you Pay, man.

8 tokens is fine as long as it isn't more than 1 token per generic squadron. You could make ways to track those tokens. But yeah there is enough token clutter in all FFG games.

The reason everyone is using the new squadrons is a combination of "because they are trying new ideas" and "because the new squadrons are really good at filling gaps in the squadron game on both sides."

And both are good reasons. I'm seeing much more diverse squadron combinations now, which are less dependant on bringing multiple copies of a single squadron. When is the past tone you saw a fireball comprised entirely of Rhymer and multiple Firesprays.

5 hours ago, mcworrell said:

This needs to be the official name for a Rieekan ace list!

It is!

Personally with the new Imperial commander coming in wave 6, i think generics will become more common. Who wants to pay big points for an ace when a generic tire fighter with Sloane can strip your braces/scatters quickly?

1 hour ago, idiewell said:

Personally with the new Imperial commander coming in wave 6, i think generics will become more common. Who wants to pay big points for an ace when a generic tire fighter with Sloane can strip your braces/scatters quickly?

True, the downside is though that those generic ties die to a stiff fart in the wind.

High activation ships with bring back cheaper swarms, like Quasar Fire and possibly a future Venator. With Howlrunner, the standard Tie Fighter has much more anti-fighter power then the Tie Defender, are better against aces (more attacks to burn tokens and more accuracy) and less overkill (weaker attacks, but more of them). Plus more deployment power.

Currently it's just convenient to have your squadron power concentrated in fewer fighters with few activations required.

For rebels, everything has its own niche and finds its way onto the table.

1 hour ago, Brikhause said:

True, the downside is though that those generic ties die to a stiff fart in the wind.

Very true, but with generics you can throw a LOT of them at ace squadrons and ships. Besides, that's the trade-off for using sloane. If they were too powerful a lot of players (including myself) would scream OP, OP!

9 hours ago, mcworrell said:

This needs to be the official name for a Rieekan ace list!

I prefer Rieekan arses personally.

Capital ships still don't have good responses against fighters, and a single activation can grant a capital ship a large amount of multiple attacks against a single target to soften it up. The Pelta's only made rebel squadron play stronger, and the ARQ really hasn't challenged that much. If anything the squadron/MSU game is about to get interesting with the HH's and the Quasar Fire with Sloane about to appear on the scene.

Yes, capital ships really cannot defend themselves against fighters at the moment.
Maybe against TIEs or other hit-3 units, but tie bombers are so resilient they can ignore AAA and just continue to bomb.
Though, I'm not sure thats a bad thing. Squadrons are the other half of the game.

But it is a problem when that half of the game completely overshadows the other, ie big gunship play. MSUs and Fighters are supreme, leaving big ships in the cold, except as carriers.