Took some time to tweak my gunline fleet, accounting for the FAQ and some performance tweaks from store championships. @PT106

++ Standard (Imperial Navy) [395pts] ++

+ Gozanti-class Flotilla +

Gozanti-class Cruisers [25pts]: Comms Net

Gozanti-class Cruisers [25pts]: Comms Net

+ Imperial Star Destroyer +

Imperial I-class Star Destroyer [120pts]: Ordnance Experts, XI7 Turbolasers

Imperial I-class Star Destroyer [144pts]: Ordnance Experts, XI7 Turbolasers, •Admiral Motti

+ Raider Corvette +

Raider I-class Corvette [51pts]: Flechette Torpedoes, Ordnance Experts

+ Squadrons +

TIE Fighter [13pts]: •Valen Rudor

TIE Interceptor [17pts]: •Ciena Ree

+ Objectives +

Assault Objective: Advanced Gunnery

Defense Objective: Planetary Ion Cannon

Navigation Objective: Solar Corona

++ Total: [395pts] ++

Did you play this against a heavy bomber fleet? How did it go? It's my conjecture that Ciena/Valen seems like it is going to lose a bit of it's efficacy (as will all scatter ace small screen) in wave 6 and without adapting a means of responding to the threat I didn't know how you planned to deal with them.

Quick thought, have you ever considered swapping out Motti (24) and the 3 x Ordnance Experts (12) = 36 for Vader = (36)?

While you loose the additional hull points you gain re-roll for all ship dice, not just the close range dice. Not sure the trade off is worth it but was curious if the thought ever crossed your mind?

3 minutes ago, SgtDurandal said:

Quick thought, have you ever considered swapping out Motti (24) and the 3 x Ordnance Experts (12) = 36 for Vader = (36)?

While you loose the additional hull points you gain re-roll for all ship dice, not just the close range dice. Not sure the trade off is worth it but was curious if the thought ever crossed your mind?

I would say it won't be worth it as hull is pretty important here. For Vader I would go with putting him on RBD equipped ISD or command Arquittens to maximize the chance of survival otherwise Vader ships would be attacked and killed first and evenryone else ends up being less threatening.

1 hour ago, BrobaFett said:

Did you play this against a heavy bomber fleet? How did it go? It's my conjecture that Ciena/Valen seems like it is going to lose a bit of it's efficacy (as will all scatter ace small screen) in wave 6 and without adapting a means of responding to the threat I didn't know how you planned to deal with them.

That's my thought as well. I would say that this is true only against Sloane fleets, so the combo may still be good for the points (or would need to be updated with a different ace set/extra squadron/less squadrons), but this is going to be a meta call.

18 minutes ago, PT106 said:

That's my thought as well. I would say that this is true only against Sloane fleets, so the combo may still be good for the points (or would need to be updated with a different ace set/extra squadron/less squadrons), but this is going to be a meta call.

I think the quasar in general will change things because it gives a crazy boost to imperial alpha strikes with an effective flight controller platform. Sloane or not, it has been incredibly common in games I've played. It also remains to be seen if hammerhead/oe/flechettes becomes a thing as well. That's a more nuanced change, but one hammerhead could potentially shut down an entire small ace cap like this.

3 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

I think the quasar in general will change things because it gives a crazy boost to imperial alpha strikes with an effective flight controller platform. Sloane or not, it has been incredibly common in games I've played. It also remains to be seen if hammerhead/oe/flechettes becomes a thing as well. That's a more nuanced change, but one hammerhead could potentially shut down an entire small ace cap like this.

Yes, this is true, however Quasar is pretty weak against ships, so that alpha stike may obliterate Valen/Ree in one round, but with no bombing for that round and Quasar being dead next round. Most likely a beneficial exchange for the ISD player.

I played Destraa round two of the tourney. Flying two defenders and four TIEs plus Boba, I had no problems killing both aces and then bombing one of his flotillas to dust.

Destraa, I always tought just two squadrons is not enough fighter coverage, altough putting flechette son the Raider may help. Still.

Maybe dump a Gozanti for more fighters!

2 hours ago, BrobaFett said:

Did you play this against a heavy bomber fleet? How did it go? It's my conjecture that Ciena/Valen seems like it is going to lose a bit of it's efficacy (as will all scatter ace small screen) in wave 6 and without adapting a means of responding to the threat I didn't know how you planned to deal with them.

No heavy bomber fleets. @Darth Lupine had the biggest fighter compliment, although I did go against a Sato fleet with Tycho/Shara combo. My aces dropped after a long cat and mouse game in which he killed the Raider before committing. Can't blame him there.

1 hour ago, SgtDurandal said:

Quick thought, have you ever considered swapping out Motti (24) and the 3 x Ordnance Experts (12) = 36 for Vader = (36)?

While you loose the additional hull points you gain re-roll for all ship dice, not just the close range dice. Not sure the trade off is worth it but was curious if the thought ever crossed your mind?

With no defensive retrofits to protect defense tokens, and no Devastator title, Motti is the significantly better choice for this setup, allowing the ISDs to weather attacks until they can bring their firepower to bear. I traded shots with an Admonition in game one for three turns, and didn't lose the ISD.

1 minute ago, Darth Lupine said:

Maybe dump a Gozanti for more fighters!

If I do that, I'm honestly dropping the Raider too, so I can squeeze in a quasar and a moderate size fighter ball.

43 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

I played Destraa round two of the tourney. Flying two defenders and four TIEs plus Boba, I had no problems killing both aces and then bombing one of his flotillas to dust.

Destraa, I always tought just two squadrons is not enough fighter coverage, altough putting flechette son the Raider may help. Still.

Well, it sounds like in this game the fighter coverage did what it was supposed to do: protect ISDs and die. Its mainly an insurance against all-bombers fleets.

1 hour ago, PT106 said:

Well, it sounds like in this game the fighter coverage did what it was supposed to do: protect ISDs and die. Its mainly an insurance against all-bombers fleets.

He mainly avoided the ISDs, honestly. Think we traded one, maybe two volleys of fire in total?

Just now, Destraa said:

He mainly avoided the ISDs, honestly. Think we traded one, maybe two volleys of fire in total?

Ideally, 2 volleys at short range from ISDs should be enough to get a definitive advantage. (The whole idea of the build is usually to sacrifice squadron cover to put 2 killer ISDs on the table as it's hard to avoid both if flown agressively).

2 minutes ago, PT106 said:

Ideally, 2 volleys at short range from ISDs should be enough to get a definitive advantage. (The whole idea of the build is usually to sacrifice squadron cover to put 2 killer ISDs on the table as it's hard to avoid both if flown agressively).

Dangerous territory with Insidious on the backfield. Had to devote one ISD against that.

He got one frontal volley at insidious from medium range, and then I flew past. I purposefully avoided the ISDs completely, took out his raider, the flots carrying Motti, and his fighter aces, plus scored all the objectives for an 8-3.....exactly as planned.

In Destraas favor, we are frequent playing buds, and he tought I was going to use my hyper aggressive style, similar to his own.....and I totally switched tactics on him. My intention was to decoy off an ISD with insidious, grab all the objectives and kill his raider. The flotilla was a bonus, lol.

If we are talking next wave, Destraa, then yeah, perhaps a Quasar is needed. I'm still trying to fit one in myself.