Flanking strategy is not just send one guy alone to either die or get behind the forces. The flanker starts on the far side of the map, which requires a somewhat high PS. Now you read the opponent, if he starts to move toward your flanker, your flanker needs to be agile enough to escape fire i.e. barrel roll and boost or move fast enough to avoid arcs, like a 5 straight. Flanking is not a suicide mission. It's to create a tough decision for your opponent and an advantage for you. If that flanker gets behind the enemy squad, it gets an easier life that it might otherwise not have had. Pure Sabaac is almost always the first target priority, whether in a squad, or on his own. So making him a flanker now gives your opponent the decision to turn his back on your entire force to kill Sabaac, or let Sabaac live and do some major damage behind your forces.

What's the difference?

Turning your back on the rest of the enemy squad means you are going to have to kturn,etc. after destroying the flanker, putting you at a disadvantage that next round, and the squad could have a ship like the Upsilon that prefers ships not getting behind him, so while you chase the flanker, it provides a 4 attack primary to get more shots.

Here is a great example from Xwing Junkies. Go for Sabaac and let Redline fire missiles, or go for Redline and let Sabaac rip you apart?

12 hours ago, wurms said:

Flanking strategy is not just send one guy alone to either die or get behind the forces. The flanker starts on the far side of the map, which requires a somewhat high PS. Now you read the opponent, if he starts to move toward your flanker, your flanker needs to be agile enough to escape fire i.e. barrel roll and boost or move fast enough to avoid arcs, like a 5 straight. Flanking is not a suicide mission. It's to create a tough decision for your opponent and an advantage for you. If that flanker gets behind the enemy squad, it gets an easier life that it might otherwise not have had. Pure Sabaac is almost always the first target priority, whether in a squad, or on his own. So making him a flanker now gives your opponent the decision to turn his back on your entire force to kill Sabaac, or let Sabaac live and do some major damage behind your forces.

What's the difference?

Turning your back on the rest of the enemy squad means you are going to have to kturn,etc. after destroying the flanker, putting you at a disadvantage that next round, and the squad could have a ship like the Upsilon that prefers ships not getting behind him, so while you chase the flanker, it provides a 4 attack primary to get more shots.

Here is a great example from Xwing Junkies. Go for Sabaac and let Redline fire missiles, or go for Redline and let Sabaac rip you apart?

This is a great example. Lone Wolf makes Pure Sabacc a bit more tanky, so even if they did face him, he'd hopefully be able to live to fight another day. It also makes him more accurate when no friendlies are near, which is perfect for a flanker. Thanks for sharing! (Although that opening shot didn't appear to do a whole lot, the principles were solid).

Great thread I've learnt so much.

double post, please ignore

15 hours ago, wurms said:

Here is a great example from Xwing Junkies.

That's a very nice example. Beautiful flank by Sabaac. To go with @Parakitor 's 5 points, which are quite useful to think about it:

(1) He is not necessarily a closer, but (2) definitely hypermobile due to AA. Arguably he (3) gets a bonus if the flanking keeps his damage below 2 for the extra dice. He's also (4) relatively cheap at 26 points, so facing him will bring down 75% of the list on you without hindrance. And even (5) maneuver options were better due to the bumpfest in the middle.

On the other hand, Sabaac clearly is the designated flanker.

Now to go with my own points: I argue that the list of Wes/Corran/Biggs can be considered what I called "traditional jousters, swarms or others, that want to fly in formation." because they clearly want to Joust (flying straight at the opponent) and they want to stay in formation to profit from Biggs' extra HP.

I also wrote "I think that these lists that can be outflanked are not seen very often anymore. And the concept of flanking lost its importance along with the decline of these lists. " and I'm rather surprised to see this rebel list, to be honest.

So my TL;DR is that you need to recognize if the list you're flying against is susceptible to flanking. If yes - definitely go for it. If no - what do you do then? How would Redline/Sabaac/2xBlackcrack fly against another very mobile list that does not want to stay in formation and does not want to joust?

i have actually been afraid to put LW on strikers because i just notice from gameplay theyre usually in range 1-2 of my other ships after the initial flank. I really should try it since that could really help Sabaac stay alive. Strikers also have really odd k-turns so its easy for them to swing really wide and face in, probably just out of range2 of friendlies to keep LW. I know i do it alot and end up out of arc for people trying to pin me down and predicted wrong.

The only list i think is not susceptible to flanking is turret spam lists, which Sabaac has issues with to begin with. In that case i'd just dive them and try to cut them off/deploy the blocking strat. Biggest reason i adore 4ship lists is its so easy to decide "This guy blocks now" and not feel like you just gimped yourself.