1 hour ago, homedrone said:

I'm in the camp that this isn't really broken, but if your testing, maybe try making flotillas activate in the Squad phase instead? Focuses the fix on the problem unit more maybe.

What happens when FFG releases another ship that is low cost and allows for high activation? The issue is not about flotillas, it's that any low cost ship (such as flotillas) allows you to spam them in high numbers to gain an activation advantage.

I'd say wait till that happens then?

If they were to make a rule change to "fix" flotillas now, then they would be acknowledging a problem with them, namely the activation advantage. If they then went and made a new ship that brought all the problems they just fixed.. that would be dumb wouldn't it? It would be just as dumb as making a ship that is 350 points, 500 hull and 20 red dice each zone. Both would be unlikely to happen I think.

So I would deal with it when it happened, but not worry about it happening until then.

39 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

What happens when FFG releases another ship that is low cost and allows for high activation? The issue is not about flotillas, it's that any low cost ship (such as flotillas) allows you to spam them in high numbers to gain an activation advantage.

You mean like some sort of ship that's going to allow ramming? Something designed to work in pairs or so? WHAT A CRAZY IDEA THAT WON'T HAPPEN AT ALL!

57 minutes ago, homedrone said:

At least, that was the idea of my suggestion. Flotillas don't give you any activation advantage, and they don't let you move squads early. But they are cheap, and they will work with relay and do have AS ability and BCC.. etc. So they are still useful.

No, holding BCC only doesn't make them still useful. Their benefit is that they do all that and count as an activation. To quote FFG themselves from the Rebel transport article (bolded emphasis mine):

"As an added benefit, the addition of three transports provides you a means of control over the flow of battle. Since you and your opponent exchange activations each round, you can use the extra activations that your transports provide you to maneuver them along the edge of the battle early in the round, forcing your opponent to move his larger ships within range of your unactivated Defiance or a whole swarm of CR90 Corellian Corvettes to which Admiral Ackbar has added two red dice each."

There we go! They advertised forcing people to move in! They expected this AND advertised it as such!

My description of Flotillas there was under the rule I was suggesting. Not how they are now. The rule I was suggesting would only exist if FFG felt there was a problem with them and changed their mind on what they were to do.

But, my suggestion wasn't just targeting cheap activations specifically, so if the cheap activations is all you are concerned with, I guess it won't help you.

House Rule all you want. It's your game but the data doesn't support the Flotillas being over powered at all. But again, House Rule all you want, it's your game. I just won't touch that rule and laugh at anyone trying to force me to follow it. And I only bring one Flotilla at a time.

The issue is activation order is there to keep kitted out large ships in check. If all you ever want to fly is the two ship fleet you won't see the problem but seriously if you take away activation order say good bye to all balance. Large ships full of upgrades will dominate every game. Keep playing that rule and see for yourself. It is an integral part of most well designed miniature games.

Here's the deal, if FFG came out with an upgrade to give players a pass that would be fair and in the frame work of the rules structure. You pay to get that activation. But changing fully the rules to benefit Large Fully Upgraded ships when they are nearly kept in check by the activations is seriously over reacting. And Flotillas were created to help kitted out large ships against MSU lists so saying they harm large ship lists seems like people are missing the point.

40 minutes ago, Beatty said:

House Rule all you want. It's your game but the data doesn't support the Flotillas being over powered at all. But again, House Rule all you want, it's your game. I just won't touch that rule and laugh at anyone trying to force me to follow it. And I only bring one Flotilla at a time.

The issue is activation order is there to keep kitted out large ships in check. If all you ever want to fly is the two ship fleet you won't see the problem but seriously if you take away activation order say good bye to all balance. Large ships full of upgrades will dominate every game. Keep playing that rule and see for yourself. It is an integral part of most well designed miniature games.

1 hour ago, Beatty said:

Here's the deal, if FFG came out with an upgrade to give players a pass that would be fair and in the frame work of the rules structure. You pay to get that activation. But changing fully the rules to benefit Large Fully Upgraded ships when they are nearly kept in check by the activations is seriously over reacting. And Flotillas were created to help kitted out large ships against MSU lists so saying they harm large ship lists seems like people are missing the point.

Well in my battle report, I play with two essentially fully upgraded ISDs. There was nothing imbalanced about the game with the passing rule we implemented.

Feel free to present your own actual game play examples on how this rule change makes large ships too powerful.

1 hour ago, Beatty said:

House Rule all you want. It's your game but the data doesn't support the Flotillas being over powered at all. But again, House Rule all you want, it's your game. I just won't touch that rule and laugh at anyone trying to force me to follow it. And I only bring one Flotilla at a time.

Schmitty's data clearly demonstrates that in competitive play Flotillas are drastically overpowered for the cost, with massive increases to the number of activations per fleet and huge reductions to the cost per activation of both ships and squadrons. The winning European Continental champion prior to wave 5 releasing was a list of 7-8 flotillas plus squadrons, and that was before the advent of Relay further reduced the need to approach combat range.

5 hours ago, homedrone said:

I'm in the camp that this isn't really broken, but if your testing, maybe try making flotillas activate in the Squad phase instead? Focuses the fix on the problem unit more maybe.

That's an interesting idea. So the flotilla, if using a squadron command, would basically give it a pseudo-rogue ability. Would you have to activate flotillas before squadrons or could you choose any sequence? For example, 2 squadrons, flotilla, 2 squadrons, etc. In another thread, someone mentioned changing victory conditions so that flotillas wouldn't count towards your ship total.

I'm still on the fence on the flotilla OP thing. As an Imp player having gone against A LOT of 18 point BCCs and almost always being out-activated, I can see how there is a subtle OP to flotillas.

1 hour ago, thecactusman17 said:

Schmitty's data clearly demonstrates that in competitive play Flotillas are drastically overpowered for the cost, with massive increases to the number of activations per fleet and huge reductions to the cost per activation of both ships and squadrons. The winning European Continental champion prior to wave 5 releasing was a list of 7-8 flotillas plus squadrons, and that was before the advent of Relay further reduced the need to approach combat range.

No, his data showed that the number of activations increased. It says nothing about them being overpowered for their cost, he didn't analyze that. Furthermore, wave 2 had a weighted average (if i'm doing my math right.... @shmitty?) of 3.68 activations per fleet. Now, we're at an average of 4.49 (again, if I'm doing it right). That's a 1 ship difference, not a massive increase. Even ignoring my math, the result of flotillas was that 2 and 3 ship fleets were shoved out an airlock faster than Lando in the front arc of an ISD. How is that bad, that 2 ship fleets aren't competitive anymore?

And why is a reduction in the cost per activation a bad thing, though? Like, if I can do more and have more stuff on the table, how is that a downside? "These newfangled kids today with their cheaper activations, etc etc? Back in my day we had to push squadrons through a VSD, and we liked it! It turned like a drunken cow, and that was the way the game WAS PLAYED." We're in a different spot now, you can't just keep hoping the game stays as it was, that's not healthy for players.

I'm not hoping the game stays in a new spot.

What I am pointing out is that nearly every major tournament winner had flotillas in their fleets since the launch of wave 3. The ability to delay activation while simultaneously managing fleet support has made them even more auto-include than the previous auto-=include options, because the value they provide is far and away superior to anything aside from your other auto-includes (Demolisher, Admonition, Yavaris, certain squadron combos).

12 minutes ago, geek19 said:

No, his data showed that the number of activations increased. It says nothing about them being overpowered for their cost, he didn't analyze that. Furthermore, wave 2 had a weighted average (if i'm doing my math right.... @shmitty?) of 3.68 activations per fleet. Now, we're at an average of 4.49 (again, if I'm doing it right). That's a 1 ship difference, not a massive increase. Even ignoring my math, the result of flotillas was that 2 and 3 ship fleets were shoved out an airlock faster than Lando in the front arc of an ISD. How is that bad, that 2 ship fleets aren't competitive anymore?

And why is a reduction in the cost per activation a bad thing, though? Like, if I can do more and have more stuff on the table, how is that a downside? "These newfangled kids today with their cheaper activations, etc etc? Back in my day we had to push squadrons through a VSD, and we liked it! It turned like a drunken cow, and that was the way the game WAS PLAYED." We're in a different spot now, you can't just keep hoping the game stays as it was, that's not healthy for players.

I do appreciate your input, and you have interesting points, but I feel that maybe I am somewhat misunderstood. I am not saying the game is broken, but that the game is getting stale due to flotillas being an auto-include, as myself and others have said. We are saying this rule change should make more things viable, and flotillas just become good instead of necessary and are used for their intended implementation: fleet support instead of activation soak. The proposed rule change some feel would improve Armada by making a greater variety of lists competitively viable. I am interested in trying it more to see how it goes.

14 minutes ago, Caldias said:

I do appreciate your input, and you have interesting points, but I feel that maybe I am somewhat misunderstood. I am not saying the game is broken, but that the game is getting stale due to flotillas being an auto-include, as myself and others have said. We are saying this rule change should make more things viable, and flotillas just become good instead of necessary and are used for their intended implementation: fleet support instead of activation soak. The proposed rule change some feel would improve Armada by making a greater variety of lists competitively viable. I am interested in trying it more to see how it goes.

If that's the case, go for it, but I don't think the game is stale. Our meta (and that's what all the arguments come down to) doesn't have that same problem with staleness or 4 flotillas versus 3 flotillas or some such on each side, and that's why I don't think the game needs a change in its complete everything, as this rule does. Because it does change EVERYTHING about the game. To put it in a jerkier quote from Office Space, "Why should I change, he's the one who sucks!" (not that i'm saying you guys suck, nor do your opinions, but the quote's basic essence applies, I feel. My meta is fine, why do I have to change?). I thought based on the Regionals results and @shmitty's data that a lot of fleet types ARE viable. Yes, flotillas are everywhere, but it's not JUST the Top 4 with them, @thecactusman17. The GR75 is in 87% of Rebel fleets.... which is what FFG wanted. Again, quoting THAT article: "So how many Rebel transports do you want in your fleet? You will almost certainly benefit from one to three." Which, they're in there. Everyone takes them, as it seems based on that article (and I don't have anything else from FFG to go on!) that they wanted it that way. 71% of the Imperial field takes Gozantis, which means A LOT of people are using them.

What the flotilla argument in my mind is boiling down to is several complaints (and please tell me if I'm wrong, everyone)

1) Everyone takes flotillas - my counter argument is as i stated above, it looks like that's how they were designed.

2) Flotillas wait out activations - again, my counter argument is that FFG designed them as such in both the linked Rebel article (several posts above i put the quote) and the Imperial one "Will you field multiple flotillas and activate them early in order to draw out your opponent's larger ships?"

3) It's not easy to kill flotillas at long range - Yup, i'll agree with this, snarky discussions about "just use H9s" aside. That scatter token can be a pain in the butt, and I can understand the want for "flotillas dont count as ships when checking for tabling." I can understand that. This feeds into my point 4 though.

4) Some people have taken to scattering their flotillas across the map - Yes, people CAN do this, and deny me the ability to kill the flotilla halfway across the map. But it's 18 points, there's other ships I can kill. By doing this, you deny your opponent the 10-1 win. That seems from a lot of what's been seen (new objectives, new ships/squadrons/Commanders) to be the direction FFG is going. They don't WANT (and this could be my opinion, I'm willing to hear differently) 10-1s across the board from people.* If they gave the flotillas Scatter tokens, they clearly want them to be able to dodge damage, especially at the harder to hit Red range, thus leaving more points on the table and making the ACTUAL kills more important.

5) People are using Relay from halfway across the map - Yes this is how Relay was designed. Here's my question back though: they spent 18-72 points on flotillas and 15 or 30 points on Relay squadrons. That's 100 points of support that's CONTRIBUTING to killing your stuff, but at most you're getting 2 squadrons a turn. What's stopping you from taking out the Relay? The 2 Escort squadrons they have protecting it? So they spent (let's say Imperials) on 3 Gozantis, 1 Lambda, and 2 Advanced 108 points. That all CONTRIBUTES to you killing stuff, but it doesn't give you solid wins (especially if you have that Lambda attacking things. It's a better Y-wing for 5 more points, there). Why are you (general you, not the specific here) not taking more squadrons? What's stopping you from pushing 4 squadrons from your MC80 top of turn 2 and jumping the Advanced and Lambda with Biggs and 3 X-wing friends? Then following it up later with 2 YT-2400s or 2 more X-wings or something?**

There's a lot of overlap in a lot of these, as we all go back and forth across the forums every day with all these, but a lot of my pushback is that the OP seems (in my mind!) to be saying "well, this is what I and people I've talked to want to do, so we're going to test it out and then FFG can read and implement it." That may not be his intent, but it's how it's coming across to me. And as I know I don't know what's going through the FFG designer's minds (repeated emails and restraining order aside, a yuk yuk yuk), that to me smacks of the wrong opinion and way to go about doing things. I can acknowledge the idea behind it, but I don't think it's the right idea. If FFG released all these flotillas and units, maybe what's actually needed is something different. Something that sparked from a comment shmitty made the other day, and why I put those asterisks there.

*The first asterisk is me just wondering if I'm right or not, which involves (if that's possible to analyze?) the final scores of the winners. This isn't really important to the current flotilla discussion, but I'm pretty sure I'm right, so I'd like to know if I am or not, just because I'm a pain in the butt like that. Ignoring this request is perfectly viable.

**The SECOND asterisk is where I'm actually wondering. Shmitty had in the data that the number of squadrons hadn't significantly increased, but the points spent on them did slightly. With Sloan being the soft nerf to ace squadrons and Leia being 38 points herself, it seems like FFG is both pushing more "regular" squadrons and using more squadrons (why not use Leia to push squadrons out a Yavaris when you CAN?). Is there any way to split the squadron data down into more data points than those 40 point windows? Is there a way to get it in 10-20 point chunks? 81 and 120 points are VASTLY different squadron groups in essence, I feel. Looking at the top 4 data, ~70% had 80+ points of squads. Jan and 3 X-wings is 58 points. 6 TIEs is 48, 4 YT-2400s is 64. My theory is that the old groups aren't enough anymore, and you need to bring more squadron power than previously thought in order to keep up. 134 points of squadrons is a problem for you... if you didn't bring ~80 points of squadrons to fight it. 4 YT-2400s isn't going to do a lot against that, but 6 could impact that more than you'd think. Shmitty had said he brings about 90 points of squadrons in his lists, and they just start wailing on things. Maybe that's the answer.

So that long-winded aside taking forever, if Relay is a problem with a mess of squadrons, why aren't you bringing more squadrons to kill his? Let's say him and his Relay flotillas and X squadrons are fighting you, your flotillas, and your X squadrons as well. You win the war when you send in your squadrons to engage him AND use your flotillas to throw AA dice at his squads, increasing your damage into them faster than they can put damage into you. If he wants to put a bunch of Advanced with his Lambda, cool! Flak the heck out of them all, then engage him with a mess of dudes. But if you bring X/2, not X, well of course he's going to win the squadron war and you're going to get shot then.

We've all seen the several discussions that "Star Wars needs squadrons in it, use them in your fleets" but is Star Wars (beyond New Hope, yes) 3 squadrons of X-wings fighting 2 squadrons of TIEs? Or is Star Wars dozens of squadrons of Interceptors flinging dice at Rebel squads as they fight over Endor? Is it the Battle of Scarif where you have a squillion TIEs coming out of the shield thing to fight off the several squadrons of X-wings AND Y-wings that were brought to blow it to heck and back? My answer to your (again, general you!) argument of "Relay stinks and i hate fighting them" is a less snarky version of "so bring more squadrons and kill his Relay." And I don't mean that in the "this will fix everyone" way, but why aren't more people bringing around 80 points of fighters? I mean, as I'm writing up my bomber article for Cannot Get Your Ship Out, I keep looking at fighting a group of 6 TIE Defenders. How the heck do you beat that, except with a significant squadron investment of your own? And if you say "no one will bring that ever" the Quasar is coming. That's TERRIFYING for the Rebels to fight. What the heck do you do against that, other than bring your own squadrons to beat it?

What if 64 points of squadrons just isn't what we thought it to be anymore, and you need to bring more because that's how FFG wants the game?

And quick aside, I'm not actually mad or angry at anyone on the thread, I just think about the game all the time. No offense is intended towards anyone mentioned or talked about, it's just I have very strong opinions on the game. If I said something offensive (it's late here and I should be sleeping!) please let me know and I'll clarify/edit it before this turns into a rage spiral. I feel like just writing my opinions out is reaching a more productive way of declaring them, and something may get lost in translation from brain to mouth. I feel like we're STARTING to get somewhere with this whole discussion (days after we started), and I don't want to lose any ground in a rage because of one thing I mistakenly wasn't clear on.

And here we are again.

Guys really? The OP started a thread about posting results of such games for those that are interested in trying it, and you are so offended by the suggestion that you have to spam it full of this stuff?

Its a pretty simple premise - if you are interested, play a game with the pass rule, and post how it went.

Just now, ovinomanc3r said:

And here we are again.

You're just mad I didn't ask you to be the Blue guy. Or the bald girl, haha.

2 hours ago, geek19 said:

5) People are using Relay from halfway across the map - Yes this is how Relay was designed. Here's my question back though: they spent 18-72 points on flotillas and 15 or 30 points on Relay squadrons. That's 100 points of support that's CONTRIBUTING to killing your stuff, but at most you're getting 2 squadrons a turn. What's stopping you from taking out the Relay? The 2 Escort squadrons they have protecting it? So they spent (let's say Imperials) on 3 Gozantis, 1 Lambda, and 2 Advanced 108 points. That all CONTRIBUTES to you killing stuff, but it doesn't give you solid wins (especially if you have that Lambda attacking things. It's a better Y-wing for 5 more points, there). Why are you (general you, not the specific here) not taking more squadrons? What's stopping you from pushing 4 squadrons from your MC80 top of turn 2 and jumping the Advanced and Lambda with Biggs and 3 X-wing friends? Then following it up later with 2 YT-2400s or 2 more X-wings or something?**

Point costs and general need for firepower stops you from running MC80s with Ackbar AND 6 heavy squadrons. At that point you're not using Ackbar on more than 1 ship and you're sorely lacking in flotillas for activation. Simple.

2 hours ago, geek19 said:

**The SECOND asterisk is where I'm actually wondering. Shmitty had in the data that the number of squadrons hadn't significantly increased, but the points spent on them did slightly. With Sloan being the soft nerf to ace squadrons and Leia being 38 points herself, it seems like FFG is both pushing more "regular" squadrons and using more squadrons (why not use Leia to push squadrons out a Yavaris when you CAN?). Is there any way to split the squadron data down into more data points than those 40 point windows? Is there a way to get it in 10-20 point chunks? 81 and 120 points are VASTLY different squadron groups in essence, I feel. Looking at the top 4 data, ~70% had 80+ points of squads. Jan and 3 X-wings is 58 points. 6 TIEs is 48, 4 YT-2400s is 64. My theory is that the old groups aren't enough anymore, and you need to bring more squadron power than previously thought in order to keep up. 134 points of squadrons is a problem for you... if you didn't bring ~80 points of squadrons to fight it. 4 YT-2400s isn't going to do a lot against that, but 6 could impact that more than you'd think. Shmitty had said he brings about 90 points of squadrons in his lists, and they just start wailing on things. Maybe that's the answer.

This is my biggest issue with your thoughts: Just because we might have to now play 90 pts of squadrons and 36-50 points in flotillas doesn't mean that's healthy for the game. In the above example you made, 90 points of squadrons, 36+ points of flotillas and their upgrades, I have about 250 points left for 3 "actual" fighting ships including their upgrades. That's POOR: You can't even fit 2 VSD and a Demolisher in there.

I'll show you what that meta looks like: ITS CRAP. Vic Vic Demo Goz Goz -> middling 3 ships of firepower, horribly outgunned vs any sort of heavy firepower list. 5 low cost squadrons barely survives 100 ish points of squadrons, has a hard time vs 134 mass bombers. Not only that but you get this horrific rock paper scissors meta again of: Will I die to mass squadrons? Will I die to MSU? Will I die to Ackbar MC80s? Mass squadrons dies to.. nothing (you just end up in a point scoring fight vs other squadorn balls, you don't auto lose). MSU dies to poor flying. Ackbar dies to squadrons. Finally, its EFFING BORING.

I'll tell you this: 90 points of squadrons and 50 points of flotillas isn't really the answer. Yes, you'll win more games (6yt24s is quite nice for a delay tactics vs 134 bombers), but really all of that is simply to survive against the common meta lists.

2 hours ago, geek19 said:

We've all seen the several discussions that "Star Wars needs squadrons in it, use them in your fleets" but is Star Wars (beyond New Hope, yes) 3 squadrons of X-wings fighting 2 squadrons of TIEs? Or is Star Wars dozens of squadrons of Interceptors flinging dice at Rebel squads as they fight over Endor? Is it the Battle of Scarif where you have a squillion TIEs coming out of the shield thing to fight off the several squadrons of X-wings AND Y-wings that were brought to blow it to heck and back? My answer to your (again, general you!) argument of "Relay stinks and i hate fighting them" is a less snarky version of "so bring more squadrons and kill his Relay." And I don't mean that in the "this will fix everyone" way, but why aren't more people bringing around 80 points of fighters? I mean, as I'm writing up my bomber article for Cannot Get Your Ship Out, I keep looking at fighting a group of 6 TIE Defenders. How the heck do you beat that, except with a significant squadron investment of your own? And if you say "no one will bring that ever" the Quasar is coming. That's TERRIFYING for the Rebels to fight. What the heck do you do against that, other than bring your own squadrons to beat it?

What if 64 points of squadrons just isn't what we thought it to be anymore, and you need to bring more because that's how FFG wants the game?

I absolutely hate this type of answer. Its irritating to have to keep dealing with the subjective opinion "i told you so" of what Star Wars battles mean in your perception of absolute truth. Star Wars battles are ALSO about giant Star Destroyers and a big massive fleet of capital ships engaging at Endor and two star destroyers vs 8 or so ships of the line at Scarif. Its nice how that was conveniently forgotten about. There can literally be no argument made for or against this point based on data or logic beyond "I told you so". Let's not forget that movies are also made to be movies before one complains about not seeing that many shots fired from large ships.

Also one way to beat those 6 defenders is to run a paltry force of squadrons to delay them and beefier ships that don't really care about a few bomber dice. Kill off or get away from 2 or so defenders, and 4 bomber dice isn't really scary. Comparably, one Yavaris activation of Bwings is throwing 12 bomber dice at you. This is rock paper scissors meta at its finest. Edsel-Blerg back from the dead.

The main reason is this: Not everyone really wants to run 90-134 points of squadrons. That's not our cup of fun.

Would this game be better with a new rule if everyone was forced to play between 130-134 points of squadrons? ... no.

--

Another additional thought: while you can easily build 90 pts of squadrons from things you have, a lot of good lists take one kind of thing also for mental ease, thats why you see 8 Awings, 6Yt24s. Which I honestly do think are great. BUT, for thse of us who don't like squadrons, don't want more squadrons, don't ahve room to store another 2-5 EXTRA squadron packs of various types (say 2 total rogues and 2 of each of just ONE faction?? thats 6 squadrons packs, 3 more than I bought for rebels. ) I really don't want to pay another $60 USD just to frigging play armada dude.

30 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Point costs and general need for firepower stops you from running MC80s with Ackbar AND 6 heavy squadrons. At that point you're not using Ackbar on more than 1 ship and you're sorely lacking in flotillas for activation. Simple.

Dangerous statement, you know I ALWAYS have a list

Here comes the B's OOM
Author: Ginkapo

Faction: Rebel Alliance
Points: 396/400

Commander: Admiral Ackbar

[ flagship ] MC80 Command Cruiser (106 points)
- Admiral Ackbar ( 38 points)
- Toryn Farr ( 7 points)
- Fighter Coordination Team ( 3 points)
= 154 total ship cost

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Jainas Light ( 2 points)
- Turbolaser Reroute Circuits ( 7 points)
= 53 total ship cost

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Turbolaser Reroute Circuits ( 7 points)
= 51 total ship cost

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Turbolaser Reroute Circuits ( 7 points)
= 51 total ship cost

4 B-Wing Squadrons ( 56 points)
1 HWK-290 ( 12 points)
1 Jan Ors ( 19 points)

27 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Dangerous statement, you know I ALWAYS have a list

Here comes the B's OOM
Author: Ginkapo

Faction: Rebel Alliance
Points: 396/400

Commander: Admiral Ackbar

[ flagship ] MC80 Command Cruiser (106 points)
- Admiral Ackbar ( 38 points)
- Toryn Farr ( 7 points)
- Fighter Coordination Team ( 3 points)
= 154 total ship cost

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Jainas Light ( 2 points)
- Turbolaser Reroute Circuits ( 7 points)
= 53 total ship cost

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Turbolaser Reroute Circuits ( 7 points)
= 51 total ship cost

CR90 Corvette A (44 points)
- Turbolaser Reroute Circuits ( 7 points)
= 51 total ship cost

4 B-Wing Squadrons ( 56 points)
1 HWK-290 ( 12 points)
1 Jan Ors ( 19 points)

Actually I have something nearly exactly like this too. It's good! Also based off that one guy who was running ackbar with these ships.

This is again the 4 activation thing which I haven't been able to make work against anything with 5 activations. Especially not vs the 134 bombers yavaris pelts and 3 transports.

I did try a variation with 2 CRs and 2 flotillas but it was only ok.

If it weren't for the issue of having to always play vs 5 activations and not knowing how to play with less and also playing against mass squadrons every other game the list with 3 CRs is so much nicer.

Im noting you also don't have defiance or ECM. I would think that I've seen easily enough games where I really needed to brace. Or at least advanced projectors to delay my squadron based demise. You can also easily lose a cr90 within one ships worth of activation of squadrons. They are expendable but you're already down in the activations and from there you can be severely controlled 3 vs 5

Deploy in the middle facing inwards. First turn, nav dial and hard yaw sideways.

Activations dont help to close on an enemy, they help on first engagement.

Bwings prevent anyone blocking the mc80 with a small ship.

Defiance is overated. Arguably could drop Toryn for RBD.

How do you think this would handle the Pelta/Yavaris/Flotilla 134pt ball, Blail?

Empire : 389pts

Gladiator : IO : OE : ET : ECM : Demolisher

Raider II : Sensor team : SW-7 Ion

Raider II : Sensor team : SW-7 Ion

Raider I : OE : Flechette Torp : Agent Kallus

Raider I : OE : Flechette Torp

Raider I : Admiral Screed

6 activations, player one with that bid? 2 FT to shut down the ball, 2 Raiders that can pop Flots, and a Demo than can pop the Pelta/Yavaris.

12 hours ago, geek19 said:

You mean like some sort of ship that's going to allow ramming? Something designed to work in pairs or so? WHAT A CRAZY IDEA THAT WON'T HAPPEN AT ALL!

I know, hence my comment that the issue is not flotillas but low cost ships.

Everyone feeling the pain of having to take flotillas will feel the same way about hammerheads.