1. Love the game, been playing over a year now. I have tremendous respect for the developers having dabbled in some game design or rather, design modifications, I know it's difficult to make a game with different factions that are balanced but have their own flavor.

2. No, I'm not trolling, I truly believe this. However, I won't have much time to respond to the posts that follow so I humbly ask for objective arguments (for or against) with humor and sarcasm clearly marked. I'll get back when I can.

3. To my mates reading this: STOP ROLLING YOUR EYES! Hahahaha

4. I'm Imp biased. I play the evil Empire because I like triangles!

There's a disturbance in the force: the developers are Rebel sympathizers! I've found glitches in the Matrix to prove it lol. Yes, Imps have ISDs, Demo and Rhymer but the Rebs have soooo much synergy between ships and upgrades and squadrons … I think the recent threads covering Worlds and the mayhem the ensued prove that point. But allow me to expound.

The most recent FAQ has some interesting developments. Concerning CC, the Inderdictor gets slightly nerfed whilst the Rebs have a major rule errata to their hyperlane raid. The Rebs seem to do one every round now. It's interesting that Pelta fleet buffs and Rieekan zombyism extends beyond their departure from the battlefield but if Motti goes away, so does his effect. Why a double standard?

Ships: how did the Rebel fleet, a ragtag conglomeration of bubbas and bubbaettes end up with 2 large based ships with different but awesome capabilities? That's a game design thing I know. But the average price for ship titles is lower for the Rebs than for the Imps. Additionally, Reb ships have some real advantages. TRC was made for CR90 (or the other way around) whilst Imps have no real equivalent. MC30??? The ship I hat the most. How does a ship with no red dice end up with a turbolaser slot?!?!?! Transports: cheaper and more maneuverable than the Goz to give the Rebs less of a tax to add BCC or Comms Net or just carrier activations. The Pelta provides multiple fleetwide buffs over the whole board whilst the Interdictor has a few tricks but is too expensive to be useful. VSDs are too expensive as are Raiders that usually go pop in one shot (no redirect?!?!). Though more subjective, I'd argue Reb titles are more useful than Imp titles.

Squadrons are off the hook. While the Imps have the market on swarm, relay, counter, and cloak (defective from release) the Rebs corner the market on most everything else. Did you know Rebs have 22 bombers (including aces and elites) whilst Imps only have 8? The Imps have more heavy squadrons than do the Rebs. Why aren't the YTs heavy? They're the space equivalent of a Peterbilt. The Rebs have more rogues with Hera who give any other squad rogue. How did the decimator not receive a bomber keyword? Why has Vader not been changed to include rogue keyword? Why isn't the TIE fighter 6 points? Aren't they supposed to outnumber XW 2:1? Why is a BW ace only 3 more points than a TF ace? Would you rather have a HWK or a jumpmaster? HWK cuz it has counter2. Then Reb aces have synergy and work alone really well whereas Imp aces tend to require a lot of other disparate squads to get one or two tricks to work. I know that last statement is tremendously subjective. So, gotta go to work. Y'all have a great day and tell me if I'm crazy … but in a nice way LOL

Not my experience, at least since CC arrived. If anything we've found Imps to be winning more than the Rebs, and to point re ship costs, even if the Reb ships are cheaper, they're comparatively paper thin and go down quick.

Re squads, while I find Reb squads to be infinitely more interesting to play - largely because of their dual function as bomber and fighter - a concentrated Imp fighter list will make mince of them. Conversely Rhymer is one of the best bomber and bomber enabling squads in the game. Moreover, the Imps squads are comparatively cheaper to make up for their more focused use.

Rebels seem to have more versatile fighters and ships I don't think they have a blatant bias towards rebels but their is evidence it occurs.

30 minutes ago, chr335 said:

Rebels seem to have more versatile fighters and ships I don't think they have a blatant bias towards rebels but their is evidence it occurs.

I agree, it's likely not something that is deliberate. I think it comes from a natural inclination to shun evil and root for the "good guy". Whilst I embrace the competitive format, I always feel a bonus when it's Reb vs Imp.

As to CC: that's a good point though I wish it were true in our current campaign. Two Reb fleets are doing very well and only getting better. Hyperlane raid is winning them lots-o-resource points.

Yes and no. I'm a predominately rebel player, so I have rebel bias.

Flotillas: yes Gozs cost more and are harder to fly, but here have been many times when those forward and side batteries have caused me trouble plenty enough to justify their cost.

Synergies: yeah the rebels have more. Objectively speaking. But the empire has more raw power. Currently the synergies outmatch the raw power, but that should change with the next wave.

The next wave?!?: yes, the rebels are getting more, ramtastic abilities, as if ramming wasn't already bad enough. But that's just the thing, the rebels are already good at ramming, and we've seen that those types of fleets just don't stack up against a lot of builds. It's not like they're introducing a cheap carrier to add to the already powerful squadron game. But the imps are getting exactly that to make their squadron game more viable. I think the next wave will balance it out

I think the imperial fighter synergies are downright evil: anything with mauler, fel, boba fett optional can very quickly grind down enemy formations. Rhymer and bombers have a ridiculous threat range at speed 4 (my favorite gallant haven roaster!). Defenders are the absolute most monstrous superiority fighters in the game. Imps win on fighter speed as well, overall. Ig-88 and Bossk make some excellent assasins!

I agree on flotilla tax, though thats more just a flotilla issue IMO.

Sloan will make eyeballs, squints, amd defenders even more useful: I love taking 4 defenders + 4 ties as a pretty good all rounder even now. It just gets nastier in an avenger fleet!

I wouldn't say Im a rebel master but in my experience I've found the rebels to be much less forgiving than the Imps.

Yes they do have ship synergy but that makes it much harder to get everything to work together to their maximum potential. As a result I think a reb fleet played well can be incredibly powerful. But if the reb player makes a mistake then *POOF*, they've lost a ship and they can say goodbye to some of that synergy and it makes it much harder to win the game.

In my experience (again as a padawan) many of my wins have come from an Imp mistake that I've been able to exploit rather than my reb lists being stronger.

Wait, the Imperials are the "good guys" who are trying to restore order to the universe! :-)

From the movies, the Rebels get more screen time so it's probably easier to come up with things for them.

In all seriousness, I think the cheaper overall cost of Rebel ships allow for more flexibility in fleet building. Also, more Rebel Admirals appear to be more versatile in fleet building.

We shall see if that carrier really is cheap. I'm already not impressed by the shields or tokens or the speed or the engineering. It won't stand in the line so it'll have to stay away from the battle making it vulnerable to TRC90 hunters or XWs with Hera and Biggs. So, you'll have to pay the shuttle tax (15, 30 points) to make this "cheap" carrier work or put it in range of the battle to pop like a Raider. Sloan will likely be the only reason I get this pack … and some of the upgrades.

2 hours ago, WGNF911 said:

It's interesting that Pelta fleet buffs and Rieekan zombyism extends beyond their departure from the battlefield but if Motti goes away, so does his effect. Why a double standard?

Rieeken is an outlier I would say and very powerful. But even so, once Rieekan leaves the board ships die immediately. The same goes for all Rebel commanders. I put the Pelta effect into a different category as it's as if a command ship issues a command to all ships. If it dies the command still exists.

Additionally, Reb ships have some real advantages. TRC was made for CR90 (or the other way around) whilst Imps have no real equivalent.

TRC does work on Imp ships.. I have seen it used well on Kittens

MC30??? The ship I hat the most. How does a ship with no red dice end up with a turbolaser slot?!?!?!

I assume you mean the torpedo version.. because the scout does have red dice

Squadrons are off the hook. While the Imps have the market on swarm, relay, counter, and cloak (defective from release) the Rebs corner the market on most everything else. Did you know Rebs have 22 bombers (including aces and elites) whilst Imps only have 8?

I really feel that Rhymer gives the Empire a great option for bombing that the Rebels do not have. Also, thematically, it seems to me that the Rebels are more bomber focused than the Empire.. I do, however, feel that the Empire should be able to deal with squadrons more effectively if we're being thematic.

Why isn't the TIE fighter 6 points? Aren't they supposed to outnumber XW 2:1?

TIEs are so much cheaper than XWs.. it's not quite 2:1 but still.. and the TIEs, thematically, blew up pretty easily while the XW could take a shot

Why is a BW ace only 3 more points than a TF ace?

Speed 2 is soooooo slow.. and yes I know you can boost it with tricks.. but that takes some doing and skill.. the TIEs come fast out of the box

Would you rather have a HWK or a jumpmaster? HWK cuz it has counter2. Then Reb aces have synergy and work alone really well whereas Imp aces tend to require a lot of other disparate squads to get one or two tricks to work. I know that last statement is tremendously subjective.

It is.. but you have a point.. although I've found that if you take a specialized Rebel squad ball you'd better know how to use it because one mistake and it falls apart

I fly Rebel ships and my feeling is that while cheaper and more maneuverable.. if I make the slightest mistake my whole fleet falls apart. They are fragile and die easily. Imp ships have big hulls and take some doing to bring down. Subjective opinion but that's the way the game plays for me.

The Rebels have Biggs.. and his damage mitigation is a force and makes Rebel squadballs difficult to take down.. but there are Imperial squad combos that I really struggle with. I feel that the game.. for casual play anyway.. and that's important for me.. is still pretty well balanced. I hit the mat with my ships and never feel like I've got a sure win.

These are just my thoughts on game balance and some responses to some things you said that I don't feel the same about. I'm sure that other commenters will point out my naiveté and inexperience and that's fine. This is just how the game plays for me right now.

The synergy overpower is with Rebel squads. I remember I used 4 Tie Int during one squad activation against wedge when playing against an aces build and could kill him because of the Brace, GH, Jan synergy. I even had flight controllers so I was shooing 20 dice total. And every time, it was either brace to two with either Wedges (or Jans brace if I got the accuracy) and then down to one for GH being nearby or no damage on two hits because again, brace to 1 and no damage because of GH. Imperials have nothing that provides so much fighter versatility and survivabilty.

On top of that their ships are stupid cheap. Last night I faced TRC90's, there were 7 total activations. As an imp I can only fit 4-5 decent ships in a list without gutting my power.

Just one counter point here, OP: Hyperlane Raid really needed that boost. It was significantly more difficult to get resources there than Show Of Force.

2 hours ago, Armendark said:

I wouldn't say Im a rebel master but in my experience I've found the rebels to be much less forgiving than the Imps.

Yes they do have ship synergy but that makes it much harder to get everything to work together to their maximum potential. As a result I think a reb fleet played well can be incredibly powerful. But if the reb player makes a mistake then *POOF*, they've lost a ship and they can say goodbye to some of that synergy and it makes it much harder to win the game.

In my experience (again as a padawan) many of my wins have come from an Imp mistake that I've been able to exploit rather than my reb lists being stronger.

THIS ^^^^

At the higher skill cap, rebels bring more options, more tools, and more diversity which makes them a stronger faction IMO.

Imperial playstyle and tactics are cut and dry. Get them in front, obliterate. Imperials need to deploy in an entrapment formation and spring the net, they have a turn or 2 to get big gains before they clumsily try to turn around. Rebels can react easier and are faster. If the rebels can survive the initial onslaught the imperial player won't have much left in the gas tanks to finish them off. Imperial ships may be a tad too pricey. I feel things like Konstantine and tractor beams are to help enable the traps imperials want to set but they all cost points, imperial ships get expensive fast.

Do I think the bias is favored to rebels? No. Do I think the game is being designed true to source material to really capture what a star wars space battle would feel like.... YES.

10 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Just one counter point here, OP: Hyperlane Raid really needed that boost. It was significantly more difficult to get resources there than Show Of Force.

Both objectives require the Imperial player to come to the Rebel player. The key difference is that Show of Force requires the Imperial player to shoot at something other than tbe Rebel ships to gain points. Hyperspace Raid rewards the Rebel player for killing Imperial ships, which they want to do anyway.

6 minutes ago, Valca said:

Both objectives require the Imperial player to come to the Rebel player. The key difference is that Show of Force requires the Imperial player to shoot at something other than tbe Rebel ships to gain points. Hyperspace Raid rewards the Rebel player for killing Imperial ships, which they want to do anyway.

Pre-errata Hyperlane Raid did not require Imperials to do anything but camp in the back in the back corner and not die.

Show of Force requires Imperials only to be in the general vicinity of the stations and spend incidental shots to kill it when they don't have anything better to shoot at, which is very common . I think I've had one SoF game where, once , I as the Empire had to actually choose between shooting the station and shooting a ship. As long as the battle takes place in the general area of the station, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that it will die. 10 hull damage is basically nothing with no defense tokens and no avoidance.

4 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Pre-errata Hyperlane Raid did not require Imperials to do anything but camp in the back in the back corner and not die.

Show of Force requires Imperials only to be in the general vicinity of the stations and spend incidental shots to kill it when they don't have anything better to shoot at, which is very common . I think I've had one SoF game where, once , I as the Empire had to actually choose between shooting the station and shooting a ship. As long as the battle takes place in the general area of the station, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that it will die. 10 hull damage is basically nothing with no defense tokens and no avoidance.

It's still 10 damage that didn't go towards winning the game.

3 minutes ago, Valca said:

It's still 10 damage that didn't go towards winning the game.

How's that? Destroying a station gets you 20 victory points.

My experience was tasking Demo to tap one and a couple of ships then send it on its own to kill the other station which took her away from killing more Rebs. I got the points for the two stations but ultimately lost because I couldn't kill enough of his ships fast enough. Squadrons helped some but they got tied up with XW spam. But I agree, both those special objectives require Imp aggression and Reb patience (trap setting). Hyperlane raid before required rebs to actually raid if the Imp wanted to slow row.

Did I'd I mention how awesome Reb ship shields are? Sure you have the Neb outlier but MC30 and Libs are insane.

1 minute ago, Democratus said:

How's that? Destroying a station gets you 20 victory points.

A minor contribution. It doesn't help remove enemy assets, which is what makes your fleet more survivable in addition to gaining points.

10 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Pre-errata Hyperlane Raid did not require Imperials to do anything but camp in the back in the back corner and not die.

Show of Force requires Imperials only to be in the general vicinity of the stations and spend incidental shots to kill it when they don't have anything better to shoot at, which is very common . I think I've had one SoF game where, once , I as the Empire had to actually choose between shooting the station and shooting a ship. As long as the battle takes place in the general area of the station, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that it will die. 10 hull damage is basically nothing with no defense tokens and no avoidance.

So much agree.. 2 kittens with TRC put about 4-5 damage each on a station each shot from long range.. with Screed they're guaranteed three.. the stations died before anyone got in range and I could do nothing about it.. for the isd an unarmed station is barely a speed bump

2 minutes ago, WGNF911 said:

My experience was tasking Demo to tap one and a couple of ships then send it on its own to kill the other station which took her away from killing more Rebs. I got the points for the two stations but ultimately lost because I couldn't kill enough of his ships fast enough. Squadrons helped some but they got tied up with XW spam. But I agree, both those special objectives require Imp aggression and Reb patience (trap setting). Hyperlane raid before required rebs to actually raid if the Imp wanted to slow row.

Did I'd I mention how awesome Reb ship shields are? Sure you have the Neb outlier but MC30 and Libs are insane.

Double brace is pretty strong as well. That's another difference. Before Tua, Imperials really didn't have defensive retrofits. They just had to rely on their hull advantage. Rebels have defensive retrofits and superior shields, which are generally better than hull points, ramming excepted.

Just now, durandal343 said:

So much agree.. 2 kittens with TRC put about 4-5 damage each on a station each shot from long range.. with Screed they're guaranteed three.. the stations died before anyone got in range and I could do nothing about it.. for the isd an unarmed station is barely a speed bump

Why was the station in range of his Arqs when his Arqs weren't in range of your ships? If you guard those stations with your rebel ships, you give him a choice: shoot the station for resources while getting shot back or ignore the stations and play the game as normal but give up resources.

2 minutes ago, Valca said:

Why was the station in range of his Arqs when his Arqs weren't in range of your ships? If you guard those stations with your rebel ships, you give him a choice: shoot the station for resources while getting shot back or ignore the stations and play the game as normal but give up resources.

I was trying to guard the station.. but the main rebel advantage is maneuverability and adaptability.. when he knows i have to guard the station and where my ships will be it gives him a huge advantage.. i ended up trying to obscure his shots which only delayed the inevitable.. rebels weren't made to defend and stay put.. park an isd near one and see if the rebels can kill it

Ok, back to the original topic…

1 minute ago, WGNF911 said:

Ok, back to the original topic…

Sorry.. that did start as a Rebel vs. Empire thing