The Quasar is really pretty. I didn't like it at first, but now its starting to grow on me. It seems fun in small games and versus small ships where the battery still matters.
Is the Quasar Too Fragile?
When I played against the quasar I saw the points investment in a pretty eh ship defence token wise and destroyed it round 3 with two cr90s
useful for the imps? Definitively
a massive target? Oh hell yes, it's impossible to resist
IMO imp star would be better
that and also it is cheaper to get squadron dials with 2 flotillas. They should have dropped the cost about 4 points.
Edited by Marinealver2 minutes ago, Marinealver said:that and also it is cheaper to get squadron dials with 2 flotillas. They should have dropped the cost about 4 points.
Are we still on the "2 flotillas are better than a quasar" argument? Cant put Flight Controllers on a flotilla, can't flak to red range with 2, and can't push 6 squadrons in one activation with them. I say this all as a jealous Rebel, the Quasar is great at its role. Its role is "PUSH SQUADRONS" and "technically have guns" and it does them both admirably.
Sorry @Marinealver, i'm not critical of you, i've just been hearing this argument so much recently and it's so aggravating on a ship that came out what, 2 weeks ago?
3 hours ago, Vae said:I tried this a couple of weeks ago with 3 MC30T with enhanced armaments and Ackbar. It was nice to roll 11 dice in 1 arc (and 8 additional as an Ackbar slash at one point!) but brace still brought it down massively. Afterwards I came to the conclusion that I would have been better with 2 APT crits on a double-arc shot vs one target rather than the extra 2 black dice on just 1 attack.
Use sensor teams. With a dice roll that big a single acc is worth a lot.
4 minutes ago, geek19 said:Are we still on the "2 flotillas are better than a quasar" argument? Cant put Flight Controllers on a flotilla, can't flak to red range with 2, and can't push 6 squadrons in one activation with them. I say this all as a jealous Rebel, the Quasar is great at its role. Its role is "PUSH SQUADRONS" and "technically have guns" and it does them both admirably.
Sorry @Marinealver, i'm not critical of you, i've just been hearing this argument so much recently and it's so aggravating on a ship that came out what, 2 weeks ago?
oh no I get it, and yeah I don't like the argument either, but I do think the idea was quasars were suppose to replace the gozanti as carriers. However the simplest test of point cost over squadron commands and Gozanti still is the cheapest. Although the gap between Gozanti and Quasar is much less than the gap between Quasar and ISD.
And yes Rebels don't have any option like that forcing them to either transport or Command MC-80 but after the flotilla nerf Rebels now have the better command ship in the form of cheaper hammerheads. Imperials are still stuck with Raiders.
Just now, Marinealver said:oh no I get it, and yeah I don't like the argument either, but I do think the idea was quasars were suppose to replace the gozanti as carriers. However the simplest test of point cost over squadron commands and Gozanti still is the cheapest. Although the gap between Gozanti and Quasar is much less than the gap between Quasar and ISD.
And yes Rebels don't have any option like that forcing them to either transport or Command MC-80 but after the flotilla nerf Rebels now have the better command ship in the form of cheaper hammerheads. Imperials are still stuck with Raiders.
Stuck with Raiders? Stuck...... with them. Stuck WITH them. Stuck with THEM.
All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders.
All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders.
All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders. All work and no play makes Jack stuck with Raiders.
@geek19 too much.
Has anyone tried Tua and ECM's? Just curious, seems like too many points to me
8 hours ago, Vergilius said:I think the idea has merit. Most of the time, you're not getting more than the one activation of damage. As @Caldias pointed out above, its still subject to brace. But still, that's 1.25 average damage per die, or 2.5 average damage overall. And to be fair, a double arc APT is no guarantee of two face-up cards. I haven't done the math in a while, but I think it is somewhere around 1.6-1.7 average damage. Of course, we can't quantify what the face-up crit is actually worth in terms of damage, but no exercise in comparison is perfect, as this thread aptly illustrates. So there's a slight boost and its 2 points cheaper. Make it an H9 MC30 and you can make the damage stick much more easily, and with External Racks and CF dial, that's 3+CF side and 2+ER out the front. It doesn't matter which he braces, there's going to be comparable damage.
I'll be eager to hear about how it goes.
ER can also hit squadrons and so present some form of self-defense for the mc30. Weaker cluster bombs but can use on any one thing
2 hours ago, TallGiraffe said:@geek19 too much.
@Snipafist ran 4 External Racks raiders against me last night. If he's stuck with them, how do I get stuck? Without playing Imps, of course.
6 minutes ago, geek19 said:@Snipafist ran 4 External Racks raiders against me last night. If he's stuck with them, how do I get stuck? Without playing Imps, of course.
You kill them with 2 Vic II with QBT, LS, GT, and DC. Take initiative and destroy all 4.
1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:You kill them with 2 Vic II with QBT, LS, GT, and DC. Take initiative and destroy all 4.
Vic 2.... Is that some new Rebel ship that I haven't heard about yet? Should I start a forum post about how the Rebels need a vic-ii title that lets us have one because space reasons?
In actual seriousness, while I'm glad that the Vic has come back and is worth playing again, I'm hoping FFG is working on a way to have Assault Frigates more worth playing.
2 hours ago, geek19 said:
In actual seriousness, while I'm glad that the Vic has come back and is worth playing again, I'm hoping FFG is working on a way to have Assault Frigates more worth playing.
I think you mean the Vic 2. The Vic 1 was seen alot in wave 5 actually as they were cheap durable carriers with everyone bringing out accuracy generation. (at least in my meta)
As for Assault Frigates, I think they are pretty decent right now. They have always been durable with a generous amount of shields and diverse suite of defense tokens along with the defensive retrofit slot. We have seen a few Turbolaser upgrades to increase their firepower as will in the form of DTTs and QBTs. And they still own a decent maneuver chart that can be enhanced with dials and Madine. The Assault Frigate and hammerhead corvettes are excellent for Sato too.
2 hours ago, geek19 said:@Snipafist ran 4 External Racks raiders against me last night. If he's stuck with them, how do I get stuck? Without playing Imps, of course.
I'm absolutely flabbergasted that anyone could be "stuck" with Raiders. I don't even know what to say. They're amazing once you know how to use them well and with External Racks they can punch even higher above their weight class once a game than they already did. I freely admit running four of them is a bit silly, but it was fun!
This conversation has really gone off the rails, however, but then again I'm not really sure how long "I think the Quasar is too fragile" "I do too" "I don't" can keep cycling through naturally before it was done for anyways.
9 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:I think you mean the Vic 2. The Vic 1 was seen alot in wave 5 actually as they were cheap durable carriers with everyone bringing out accuracy generation. (at least in my meta)
As for Assault Frigates, I think they are pretty decent right now. They have always been durable with a generous amount of shields and diverse suite of defense tokens along with the defensive retrofit slot. We have seen a few Turbolaser upgrades to increase their firepower as will in the form of DTTs and QBTs. And they still own a decent maneuver chart that can be enhanced with dials and Madine. The Assault Frigate and hammerhead corvettes are excellent for Sato too.
The problem i have with running them with Madine is that i can get better firepower and staying alive-power ability in an LMC80. It WORKS, mind you, having run them under him, but not substantially enough in my mind to make them a better choice than an LMC80 (right now).
And yeah, Sato works with the assault frigate. I have other concerns with Sato (I think that's the best/nicest way i can say that).
My issue with them is that BECAUSE they're so dependant on the double arc and the swinginess of red dice, i remember a lot more of the "dice shafted me" games than the "dice were amazing" ones. Couple that with the fact that i have too many memories of Demo eating their face and i'm hesitant to love again.
Rather than Madine/Sato, I think Garm might be the better candidate for pairing with the Assault Frigate. For a Combat-oriented AF, maybe Rapid Launch bays so that you get a pretty powerful swing at an enemy ship at the end of the activation. For setting up the double-arc, it either has to be the center-piece of your list, or you need an activation rhythm and flying pattern that allows you to activate it just right relative to your other ships. On the bright side, its cheap enough to be trade-able.
2 minutes ago, Vergilius said:Rather than Madine/Sato, I think Garm might be the better candidate for pairing with the Assault Frigate. For a Combat-oriented AF, maybe Rapid Launch bays so that you get a pretty powerful swing at an enemy ship at the end of the activation. For setting up the double-arc, it either has to be the center-piece of your list, or you need an activation rhythm and flying pattern that allows you to activate it just right relative to your other ships. On the bright side, its cheap enough to be trade-able.
Garm IS good with it. And I know this is Steel Squadron heresy, but I haven't played Garm in AGES. Part of me wants to go back and try him, but then I have to either give up my mc30s or this new Leia quest I'm on.
And while I'm intrigued by trying it with Leia, I have other ideas first before I wander into trying her with the Assault Frigate.
15 minutes ago, geek19 said:Garm IS good with it. And I know this is Steel Squadron heresy, but I haven't played Garm in AGES. Part of me wants to go back and try him, but then I have to either give up my mc30s or this new Leia quest I'm on.
And while I'm intrigued by trying it with Leia, I have other ideas first before I wander into trying her with the Assault Frigate.
There are too many things to try in this game! Whatever will we do?
7 hours ago, Vergilius said:There are too many things to try in this game! Whatever will we do?
Get caught up in the latest zany scheme? Or follow up a zany scheme with an even ZANIER one?
Or I can keep playing one thing and getting super good with it. One of the two.
11 hours ago, geek19 said:In actual seriousness, while I'm glad that the Vic has come back and is worth playing again, I'm hoping FFG is working on a way to have Assault Frigates more worth playing.
I actually think they have they just didn't take.
Ackbar makes them better, DTT's, You could take veteran gunners for red modification, RLB's work on them, they can technically carry boarding teams...I mean, thats off the top of my head a few things that the AFMK2 brings rebels access to, or is one of the better users of. The greatest weakness of the afmk2 is, IMO, its reliance on red dice. It used to be the best carrier option, but nowadays there are several cheaper ways to push squads. So you might want it to do that a little, but often you are taking it as a gunship, and as a gunship its lackluster without having access to better red dice modification. I dont think it has an ion slot either, so no Leading Shotsnanigans.
Its just that they dont stand up the way the vic fixes do, IMO. And part of that is I think, a design space issue. The game is getting increasingly more specialized, but the AFMK is a generalist. If shes too good, she runs the risk of making several ships suboptimal/obsolete. Wheras the Vic can also run a kind of generalist role based on its stats, in practice it gets kitted out to be extremely specialized. A large part of that, to me, comes from its manuever chart, where its baked in achilles heel forces specialized builds or play in order to make it work.
3 hours ago, Madaghmire said:Its just that they dont stand up the way the vic fixes do, IMO. And part of that is I think, a design space issue. The game is getting increasingly more specialized, but the AFMK is a generalist. If shes too good, she runs the risk of making several ships suboptimal/obsolete. Wheras the Vic can also run a kind of generalist role based on its stats, in practice it gets kitted out to be extremely specialized. A large part of that, to me, comes from its manuever chart, where its baked in achilles heel forces specialized builds or play in order to make it work.
I could see some kind of CC-style campaign expansion that included new title cards, which could help specialize your Assault Frigates a bit more if you wished, kind of like how Nebulon-Bs are greatly helped by their titles to have more specific roles. The problem is including any kind of generic upgrade to help with that could cause serious problems at making more specialized ships even better at their roles, which is particularly dangerous when it comes to red dice-focused turbolaser upgrades (as you run the risk of the alpha fleet being a boring gunline).
They are probably the best Rebel ship for using Boarding Troopers, but they don't really benefit substantially from using it and need to get rather close to pull it off so it's still not great. Maybe something in the offensive retrofit slot? Imperial ships certainly wouldn't mind getting some more competitive options for that slot (although wave 6 is admittedly a substantial improvement from wave 5 in that regard).
3 hours ago, geek19 said:Get caught up in the latest zany scheme? Or follow up a zany scheme with an even ZANIER one?
Or I can keep playing one thing and getting super good with it. One of the two.
Closer to the latter is what usually happens.
3 hours ago, geek19 said:Are we still on the "2 flotillas are better than a quasar" argument? Cant put Flight Controllers on a flotilla, can't flak to red range with 2, and can't push 6 squadrons in one activation with them. I say this all as a jealous Rebel, the Quasar is great at its role. Its role is "PUSH SQUADRONS" and "technically have guns" and it does them both admirably.
I think the reason the Rebels aren't getting an awesome space carrier is because with awesome fighters and awesome carriers, what else would you need? On the Imperial side we already fear Yavaris- that makes up for any great carrier the Rebels would have gotten.
My concern is whether the QF can survive in situations where, I dunno, Demo or some crowding Hammerheads set out to destroy your carrier. Would you wish you had an ISD-II or a VSD instead? Empire already has good fighter 3/4 options... is the Quasar worth it in comparison, or is dropping down to 2 defense tokens too much of a liability for whatever you get?
I feel players are going to find it worth it for two reasons: It's cheaper than either of the ISDs, and the upgrade slots with Fighter 4 is appealing over the VSD. But that line of thought feels like saying Interdictors are great because they carry Experimental Retrofit slots.
I dunno, VSD is a poor ship stat-wise, but it's supposed to be the Imperial's go-to jack of all trades medium. By default everything else has to be worse than the VSD in order to keep the VSD viable, leaving us with a bunch of crap one-trick-pony mediums that you'd still wince about and reach for the poorly-performing VSD for firepower (vs Interdictor), resiliency (vs Quasar Fire), or cost (Imperial). I just wonder here in the end if the QF is going to beform better than the Interdictor does in terms of visibility in the meta, or if it's going to be set aside for other alternatives because the QF can't take a hit when someone's gunning for it.
3 minutes ago, Norsehound said:..., VSD is a poor ship stat-wise, ...
...what?