June Article Challenge

As a foreword, I am a competitive Armada player with a very competitive mindset. While this article is very much focused on making competitive use of ships, casual players can benefit just as well from the thought process behind the topic to make games more engaging and to employ ships in a fun, risky manner. Lastly, my way is certainly not the only way, nor do I claim it to be the best way to make effective use of the ships. But it probably is.

Introduction

With this article, I aim to break up some forumite dogma (when multiple users pop into the fleet builds page and repeatedly say, "don't do it this way, do it that way," for the same ships, that's a forum equivalent of dogma) on the non-competitive aspects of two ships, the Assault Pelta (Pelta) and the Interdictor Suppression Refit (ISR). This will be accomplished through the use of Engine Techs (ET) to provide flexibility, survivability, and the element of surprise (AH!). For both ships, the main premise is to use ETs to turn them into offensive ships instead of the defensive/support ships they appear to be designed for. With the addition of engine techs, both ships are better able to use their unique upgrade suites to an offensive effect.

I start with a discussion on the noncompetitive aspects of each, move to a discussion of how ETs overcome those aspects, mull over some "Christmas" tree concepts, and give my conclusion. But before I begin, I'll give some background for those unfamiliar with my escapades and personal experiences with both ships.

The good, the bad, and the ugly: a personal reflection

Most should be familiar with the Command Pelta craze over the past Regionals/Worlds season. I didn't start it, but I did take a Regional by storm with a Christmas tree Command Pelta and rapid launch bays when no one thought RLBs were competitive. Additionally, over the course of Regionals and Worlds, I only lost the Pelta once, and that's because it landed at medium range of 2 ISD-IIs instead of the usual singular ISD... I reference that so that you will keep an open mind towards unconventional tactics while reading.

As far as the assault variant, I have used it in tournaments commanded by Sato with mild success, but it usually dies, and that that was prior to my fling with the Command version. Some of the tactics I used with the command Pelta should translate to the assault variant for survivability purposes.

The interdictor... I haven't played nearly as many matches with it as the Pelta, but man have I been crushed, and man have I poned with it. My first few games were learning how to fly it the hard way—which upgrades work for my play style and which don't, when to charge in and when to hold back, etc... Recently I have had lots of success with a 2+1 and initiative build, mostly against casual players in my local meta. So there you have my "credentials," so to speak.

Dogmatic Discussion

Pelta :

The Pelta as a chassis is actually very comparable to a mini-VSD. The hull zones and arcs are pretty similar in size and shape, and it rocks slightly smaller armaments in each arc. Speed 2, but with better maneuverability. Of course, the upgrade outfit is different, and that will come into play for making good use of the Pelta.

It suffers from no access to Electronic CounterMeasures, and no redundant defense tokens. They can die pretty easily when outmaneuvered, and that is not hard to accomplish with a top speed of 2 and a hull of 5, the same type of problems that VSDs face. They are the veritable cheap-VSD of the rebels. Minus carrier status for the assault variant.

On the offense, their batteries are decent, but they're also not all that impressive. Don't get me wrong, I've finished off quite a few ships with the right rolls from a Pelta double arc. Given their upgrade suite, you need the double arc to have a chance at effective shooting. The assault Pelta does have access to ordnance upgrades, but no form of dice modification, leaving more chance than most are comfortable with. This is what keeps it from being impressive on its own, IMO.

The challenge with the Assault Pelta: achieving a survivable build that also allows it to be effective on the offense. From a lot of the builds and discussions that I've seen, it seems like most people are going the other direction; hang it in the background and use as a support ship that can dish out some damage if need be. Two problems with that: It is easily cornered and finished off if it doesn't have engine techs, and it allows your opponent to focus fire on the ships you are presumably supporting. Use it to present multiple dilemmas to your opponent. Have Nav command/tokens feeding into it so that it can shoot and scoot with an ET maneuver. I've gotten my Pelta behind many enemy ships with that method, and it works.

ISR :

It's really got great stats all around, but the lack of a defensive retrofit upgrade slot combined with speed 2 really holds this ship back. It can't get into position fast enough, it can't leapfrog over ships to get out of bad situations, and it can't stand up to repeated concentrated fire once it gets outmaneuvered (though engineering spam can allow it to last longer than most).

The biggest drawback, however, is the points cost. The base form is almost a quarter of the fleet. While ISR resiliency is only beat by the MC80 Assault cruiser, it hardly can boast the same kind of effective firepower. In a game designed to be won mostly by blowing stuff up, playing the defense only works when you can assure victory by objective points. I compare that style of play to playing mil decks in destiny–It kinda works sometimes, until you get blown up. And you kinda suck at blowing the other guy up.

The challenge with the ISR: finding a point-efficient build that both accommodates an aggressive playstyle and still capitalizes on its specialty support role. Both of these objectives feed into each other, really. It's engineering value and certain experimental upgrades, the two defining aspects of its support role, can give you great latitude for taking aggressive moves with the ISR.

ET phone hooooommmmeeee....

Bad pun. But ETs are the answer to making speed 2 ships playable in a competitive meta.

Flexibility :

The flexibility they offer with maneuvers is something that will give you an advantage over your opponent in most situations. Is it going speed 1? Or an effective speed 3? It could even drop to 0 in the current round then up to an effective speed 3 the next. In my Regionals/Worlds experience, I attribute the majority of my success to this flexibility (about even with Rieekan's ability—think about what it is that has made the Demolisher title so much more effective than it already is...). Whatever move my opponent makes, I can react to it. The only drawback is the requirement for a Nav command when you would rather be using a different command. In a world of Comms Nets, this is easily overcome.

Unpredictability :

The unpredictability of ET maneuvers forces your opponent to either play a defensive game, or to play into your hand. They don't know what you are going to do. If they take the first option, you gain the tactical initiative, and you get to engage on your terms (because you are flexible). If they continue to play offensively and tip their hand (make a commited maneuver before you do), you gain a positioning advantage. When played right, you always wind up with one of these advantages.

How is this different from Flexibility? It's a different mindset for a different goal. Flexibility lets you react to your opponent. Think of it as the actual action you take in response to your opponent. Unpredictability is what causes your opponent to make mistakes when trying to develop a counterplay to your strategy.

Survivability :

In terms of survivability, both advantages of unpredictability give you better chances of winning the game because they let you make the decision on how to engage. And when you get to determine the terms of engagement, you inherently gain a major say in which ships will most likely survive the encounter. That single extra maneuver can whip your tail end out of an opponent's major arc, get you out of black dice range, or land you on that station to recover a crit...

A skilled opponent can mitigate a lot of this survivability with a trailing ship strategy or just really good positioning forcing you to come into their main arcs, but that's just the beauty of the game. While ETs are a powerful upgrade for all the reasons I have thus far listed, there is a counter for them, just as there is a counter for everything else in the game. Despite obstacles like this, I had three separate matches between worlds and Regionals where I drove the Pelta straight across and out of the front arc of an ISD. ETs make ships slippery. ETs let you take bold moves.

Pelta :

Specifically with the Assault Pelta, a double arc can sometimes be hard to achieve, and it's slow speed really doesn't help for getting in range to use those black dice. Engine techs easily addresses both of those. More importantly, given the lack of defensive retrofits, the extra maneuver really helps to ensure that your strongest shielded side is the only arc your opponent can shoot at.

ISR :

The ISR has an easier time of using its full blue dice battery, and it really doesn't need the speed boost to effectively use its experimental retrofit upgrades. What it can do with engine techs, however, is become a scary medium-size flanking ship that is too big to deal with, without your opponent completely diverting firepower from a "main threat" ISD (or whatever you paired it with). ETs make the ISR an offensive ship.

Silver Bells

Soon it'll be Christmas time in the city, and that means Christmas trees. I have found that these ships perform well with all the bells and whistles attached. Granted, fleet build always drives points spending, and a whole suite of upgrades isn't always achievable. Additionally, it presents a huge risk, especially on the fragile Pelta, but there are ways to mitigate risk that are not part of this article (git gud).

Pelta :

First up, the Pelta. It just pairs well with Sato and MC30 scouts. Fleet entrapment is a shoo-in with MC30s. Assault Proton Torpedoes to the max (or external racks if you aren't running Sato). ETs on the Pelta help it keep pace with the flanking theme of MC30s. Raymus grants you that extra token for the fleet command, and Ahsoka Tano on a nearby flotilla lets you take whatever command you want while still having access to whatever token you need. The only question left is wether to take Phoenix Home. As the only ship that can take 2 officers, I believe it to be a wasted opportunity if you don't. To help with survivability, I'd take Lando. And there you have a nice, survivable, prickly, 88 point ship that is a force multiplier with its fleet command.

So why wouldn't you just take another scout for the same price? Concentrate fire commands freed up by Entrapment Formation, that's why (using Raymus/Ahsoka/comms net hijinks, the Pelta can still CF and Nav for ET, and have a Nav token left over for Entrapment formation–it's a headache but it works). But honestly, in that sort of a fleet, a cheap Pelta would probably be best to allow you the points to trick out the MC30s. The tooled up Pelta belongs in a fleet with lots of cheap ships that could benefit from entrapment formation, or... given the latest article on corvettes, with Shields To Max. Imagine 4 Task Force Antilles Corvettes under Sato with APTs and OEs, sharing damage across their shields only to recover it with STM. Throw the rest of points in rogue squadrons to get a pretty solid, ragtag rebel fleet. What is your opponent supposed to target?

ISR :

Now for the ISR. Those who have played games against me know that I like to charge in full steam ahead, take big risks, and fly or die, so to speak. That's really not how the interdictor is supposed to be played, but that's how I like to play it, so that drives my upgrade suite. The interdictor can take a beating. I use its survivability to shove my big 'dictor in an opponent's face.... or more commonly to flank.

Upgrades: Tua is preferable to Damage Control Officer, and ECM is preferable to reinforced blast doors, but any combination works just fine for survivability here, pending your meta. Targeting scramblers is great for going balls to the wall against an opponent–i.e., it doesn't matter if they want to get close, make them be close range so that you can use the targeting scramblers (unless they have black dice ships). And since I like to flank with the ISR, I take G7 to slow them down and keep them in arc, at close range for those scramblers. I usually combine this with an ISD parked in front of the target so that they can't just leapfrog away. If I'm pairing the ISR with an ISD, I'm running Avenger with Overload Pulse on the ISR. Otherwise, I don't really think that the Ion upgrade slot is worth taking on the ISR. Maybe Ion Cannon Batteries with Screed. The offensive retrofit could be Quad Laser Turrets to help with squadron defense, but that's another meta-dependent call.

With all the options I've listed so far, and throwing in the Interdictor Title, that's a hefty 136 points. What makes it better than a decently upgraded ISD? The survivability and fleet support options. When you get proficient with the ISR, ETs allow you to rush an opponent, targeting scramblers makes surviving that much easier, and the other upgrades help to mitigate risks that an ISD would otherwise just have to tank. This ISR would still lose head-to-head against an equally costed ISD, and it can't command squads with quite the same efficiency, but it has a different kind of utility. The fully upgraded ISR is a red herring to whatever other "main threat" is in the list. But it also can't be ignored and left up for a late game finish.

Conclusion :

Both ships have unique abilities that can easily alter the course of a game. Both pose a fun and interesting challenge to both sides of the battlefield. However, both have a very limiting weakness with slow speed and no natural ECM access. That weakness can be easily mitigated with a single upgrade, and piling on some other upgrades can make both ships fun and challenging to play with and against. Have fun with them, and git gud.

So there you have my take on using Engine techs with the Assault Pelta and Interdictor. Use the engine tech maneuvers to arc dodge. Use them to close the distance. Use them aggressively. Use the force.

Great write up. A lot of good information here.

Amazing article, although imo writing for two ships is cheating.

1 hour ago, Madaghmire said:

Amazing article, although imo writing for two ships is cheating.

Shall we get @Drasnighta to provide an interpretation and ruling on the rules? ?

Just now, Parkdaddy said:

Shall we get @Drasnighta to provide an interpretation and ruling on the rules? ?

BiggsIRL is the Appointed Judge for this one, I only have to get involved when its regarding articles he is involved in

What is an ISR?

1 hour ago, Parkdaddy said:

Shall we get @Drasnighta to provide an interpretation and ruling on the rules? ?

Only one rule, Now how many command tokens does the Pelta get from Garm turn 1...... @CaribbeanNinja

3 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Only one rule, Now how many command tokens does the Pelta get from Garm turn 1...... @CaribbeanNinja

I am currently in a Vassal tournament and cannot give an opinion on this.

33 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

What is an ISR?

Interdictor suppression refit

I wonder if anyone uses the command Arquitens.

10 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

I wonder if anyone uses the command Arquitens.

Sure. It can take engine techs.

1 minute ago, Madaghmire said:

Sure. It can take engine techs.

That is actually how I use my arquitens, only the command version for access to ETs, and not really for squads. Jerry with a command Arquitens and Engine techs can do some crazy maneuvers.

I just didn't include it in the article because I was focusing on speed 2 ships. And 2 ships already made it a long article

25 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

I wonder if anyone uses the command Arquitens.

I've been experimenting with a Command Arquitens as a flagship for my Ozzel fleet and you can get some crazy mileage from those Engine Techs and Ozzel. The main issue is it makes the ship much more expensive, so I'm not 100% sold just yet but early experiments have been fun at the very least.