In this thread https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/257055-titles-for-x-wings/ GLEXOR brings up the idea of several squad related titles for the t65 x-wing. I think this Idea is really cool though my personal fluff ocd starts itching when I think of mixing red- blue- and rogue-squadron into one 'squad'. However that is fair game in X-Wing we can have all kinds of strange combos. Also things like Darth Vader teaming up with Kylo Ren etc.
I do not want to change anything about that. However I had the Idea of a new Squad-building mechanic that encourages fluff heavy squads. The Idea is that there would be several Squad-Templates and you might choose one during your squad-building.
A Squad-Template would heavily restrict your pilot options but also reward you somehow. The reward might be some special ruels you could use or just plain squadpoint reductions.

For Example:

Black Squadron (BoY)

When building your Squad you might only use the following Pilots
- Darth Vader (TIE-Advanced)

- Mauler Mithel (TIE-Fighter)

- Backstabber (TIE-Fighter)

- Dark Curse (TIE-Fighter)

- Wampa (TIE-Fighter)

- Black Squadron Pilot (TIE-Fighter / Generic)

Your squad recievs a total reduction in squadpoints equal to 20% of your base squad size (e.g. in a 100Point Game your squad recives -20 Squadpoints).

Could this become a thing? Would you be interested? What are your ideas for Squad-Templates?

The idea has potential. However it needs good balancing, which is not really ffg's strongest side.

Warmachine ran an idea like this called theme forces. What it meant was a lot of almost identical lists and a lot of themes never used. The correct reward/restriction balance is very hard to hit and players usually gravitate towards the broken good stuff.

I've laid out ideas in a few threads like this, and adapted/evolved/plagiarised as time goes on.

• I agree that squadrons should be able to pick out named pilots.
• Firstly this has a gameplay benefit (you can 'target' a powerful bonus at specific pilots, rather than just ships) and a narrative benefit (black squadron, as noted) - Also - sorry to nitpick, but Wampa wasn't at Yavin. The last Black Squadron Pilot for Yavin was Chaser - Wampa was at Endor (that's an MC-80 he's flying past).
• This also allows you to pick a squadron 'bonus rule' which specifically benefits otherwise weaker pilots - for example, Obsidian Squadron is Howlrunner, Night Beast, Winged Gundark and Obsidian Squadron Pilot. Howlrunner doesn't really need the benefit, but Obsidian Squadron Pilot and especially Winged Gundark do, whilst Night Beast could do with one - since the latter's abilities involves attacking at range 1 to get extra criticals, and performing green moves to get extra focus, then some combination of the two would be nice - If you could spend a focus token to count an attack as being at range 1 (off the top of my head, not balanced - kind of a slightly better expose) then Night Beast can do that and still have an evade (not bad), Winged Gundark essentially has a mangler cannon (very good) whilst Howlrunner would never really benefit from it herself but her ability becomes vital since you don't have said focus token to modify your (now larger) dice pool.
• To have space for rules 'stuff' including a more extended "this, this and this only" text, I suggest that a squadron card be a pilot card - sized card, not an upgrade card. That way, you could even have the squad-building restrictions on one side and the gameplay stuff on the other.
• Since the squadron card is an independent card, it can have a points cost if it is deemed powerful enough to warrant it.
• The squadron then needs a means to 'attach' itself to pilots - condition token equivalents which are placed on pilot cards seems sensible
• This allows you to have a squad where not all ships in your squad are members of a given squadron (for example, you might have a squad of 50-odd points of Obsidian Squadron 'escorting' 50-odd points of Scimitar Squadron.
• This allows you not just to attach the squadron status to pilots, but to have multiple types of token - so that one such token could be a 'beige leader' instead of 'beige squadron'.
• It also gives you a clear mechanic to distinguish between members of your squad which are and are not members of the squadron (such that 'Escort Flight' might give a bonus to any ship without an Escort Flight squadron token within range 1)
• Theoretically you could have a 'target', 'rival' or similar squadron token which is a token you can attach to an enemy ship (think a sort of Agent Kallus/Score To Settle mechanic for the squadron?)
• Once a ship is destroyed, replace the squadron token on the squadron card
• You need a means to claim the points for a squadron card - I recommend that once there are more squadron tokens on the squadron card than on surviving pilots, you have 'killed' the squadron card, and would receive points for it when calculating who has won the game.
• This also offers space for mechanics where a squadron gets better (or worse) as members are killed, as pilot skill (for example) could be modified up or down by the number of squadron tokens on the squadron card (i.e. the number of members of the squadron lost so far in the game).
• Since the squadron card is a large card, it can potentially have an upgrade bar itself.
• This allows you to attach elite upgrades (for example) to the squad at a reduced price - since an expensive elite upgrade becomes much cheaper if applied to multiple ships with a single purchase (e.g. Youngster)
• Alternatively, it would allow a squadron to have a 'stockpile' of 3 or 4 of the cheap one-use elite upgrades (like Cool Hand) that whichever pilot requires them could draw from.

A problem I generally have with the idea of squadron templates is that they have the potential to really severely limit squad building. If the effect is strong, the only viable squads will be the ones that have a squad template. If the effect is weak on the other hand, why bother in the first place?

So squads would have to be generic enough to allow for a wide variety of ships, which in turn makes balancing become a nightmare.

All in all, fluff-wise, I like the idea, but under practical considerations, it just doesn't appear to work...

44 minutes ago, haslo said:

A problem I generally have with the idea of squadron templates is that they have the potential to really severely limit squad building. If the effect is strong, the only viable squads will be the ones that have a squad template. If the effect is weak on the other hand, why bother in the first place?

So squads would have to be generic enough to allow for a wide variety of ships, which in turn makes balancing become a nightmare.

All in all, fluff-wise, I like the idea, but under practical considerations, it just doesn't appear to work...

Well I guess you should orientate them on the 'slightly underpowerd' end. This won't make them Tier1 lists but it may push them out of the 'auto aggressive' realm into the playable mid-tier realm. So in the end 100% competition oriented players indeed wouldn't bother with Squad-Templates. However not everyone is ignorant to fluff. I tend to carry lists to tournaments that are at least somewhat fluffy.

EDIT: @Magnus Grendel A lot of interesting stuff there. I am somewhat ambivalent to your Idea of combining different Squads. I think it would fit good into epic games as long as you have some restrictens that you need to have a certain minimum number of ships in one squad before you can start a new one.
In standard 100pointish games it would only lead to players starting nitpicking and combining squads that consist of 1-2 ships. And that is not the idea I had for this.

EDIT 2: Now, the best thing would probably be to not make them tournament legal, or to use a restricted list to control which Squad Templates are legal and which not (so they would never dominate the field).
However I would like FFG to bring more support for their cinematic play format. This could go in that direction. After all I see a lot players that complain about X-Wing gettin away from the iconic ships etc. I guess there would be a lot of people who would welcome incentives to play more fluff, even if it wouldn't touch the tournament meta.

2 hours ago, Hannes Solo said:

In standard 100pointish games it would only lead to players starting nitpicking and combining squads that consist of 1-2 ships. And that is not the idea I had for this.

Again, you can easily define the restictions on the squad template as "[X] or more ships from the following list" - I was specifically mentioning TIE fighters and bombers in that you could still be looking at 3 ships from each 'squadron' - I would agree that - certainly when looking at the 2 ship lists you see a lot of when talking about aces these days - you shouldn't have '1 ship squadrons'; that's not a squadron, it's just another upgrade card which doesn't take a slot.

2 hours ago, haslo said:

A problem I generally have with the idea of squadron templates is that they have the potential to really severely limit squad building. If the effect is strong, the only viable squads will be the ones that have a squad template. If the effect is weak on the other hand, why bother in the first place?

So squads would have to be generic enough to allow for a wide variety of ships, which in turn makes balancing become a nightmare.

I understand the concern, but would respond much like Hannes Solo; that assumes that the squad compositions onto which you are (or are not) layering a squadron card are of equal power- they aren't. And taking a thematic squad generally means deliberatley taking pilots you know are ineffective.

Sticking with the comment about TIE fighter squadrons; the 'industry standard' TIE swarm is the 'Pattiswarm':

• Howlrunner - Crack Shot
• Black Squadron Pilot - Crack Shot
• Black Squadron Pilot - Crack Shot
• Black Squadron Pilot - Crack Shot
• Academy Pilot
• Academy Pilot
• Academy Pilot

by comparison, a thematic "obsidian squadron" list would be

• Howlrunner - Adaptability (for the sake of argument)
• Night Beast
• Winged Gundark
• Obsidian Squadron Pilot
• Obsidian Squadron Pilot
• Obsidian Squadron Pilot
• Obsidian Squadron Pilot
• In the case of our suggestions, "Obsidian Squadron" Squadron Card (again for the sake of argument assuming it's free)

Both are a 7-ship TIE swarm. The former, however moves first (allowing blocking), shoots first with half the squad, and has 4 crack shots.

The second.....gets a free evade on Night Beast (who's not the primary target) when he does a green move, gets a hit-to-crit at range 1 with winged gundark, and....gets to shoot before Omicron Group shuttles, I guess?

The former has won a systems open, and the latter has never been seen winnng at a recorded event. This is for good reason.

Hence; you have a 'balance point' to aim for.

part of the point of being able to restrict what pilots can take advantage of them is specifically to give you tools to balance them; a Royal Guard Squadron Card - as an example - would not apply to Soontir Fel, but would apply to Kir Kanos; who could definitely use a 'leg up' in power.

If anything, it should be easier to balance than a lot of new releases; any new elite upgrade has to account for every pilot which currently has an elite upgrade, could gain an elite upgrade (A-wing Test Pilot/R2-D6) or is currently on FFG's development radar with an elite upgrade. Miss one, and you get the Contracted Scout/Deadeye combination that was so loathed about the jumpmaster. By comparison, a squadron card has a known list of ships to which it applies which is unlikely to change in the future.

Sounds like a fun way to bring some under performing ships into the spotlight. I think the key would be to not make ones for fluffy lists that alread pass muster.

Another fun concept would be using this to mix scum pilots into rebel and imperial lists for the times they worked for those factions.

I'd worry it could get completely stupid like a similar thing did in Warhammer 40K. Otherwise, interesting idea

3 hours ago, haslo said:

A problem I generally have with the idea of squadron templates is that they have the potential to really severely limit squad building. If the effect is strong, the only viable squads will be the ones that have a squad template. If the effect is weak on the other hand, why bother in the first place?

So squads would have to be generic enough to allow for a wide variety of ships, which in turn makes balancing become a nightmare.

All in all, fluff-wise, I like the idea , but under practical considerations, it just doesn't appear to work...

I really don't see that as a limiting factor. Squadrons should be limited. . .they are an elemental unit of military organization and should consist of a certain logical set of related items. The game encourages their use by giving a bonus for this limitation--not by trying to make its application universal.

If you don't want to limit your list building, do not take squads.

Otherwise, it can be nice fluff as well as a new game mechanic.

This is actually giving me PTSD from remembering some of the more broken combos in Warhammer 40k Formations which were essentially this but, in the spirit of the thread!

TIE Swarm - Imperial Only
Condition:
Fleet must consist of seven TIE fighters, only one of which may be a unique.

Bonus:
When the number of damage cards assigned to your ships equals or exceeds their hull value, they are not destroyed until the end of the round.

Master and Apprentice - Imperial Only
Condition:
Fleet must contain no more than two ships. Fleet may only contain one unique pilot.

Bonus:
As long as the the generic pilot is within range 1 - 3 of the unique ship, it may perform actions listed on the unique pilots action bar as if they were their own.

Whenever the unique ship performs an action, the generic may perform a free action.

Rogue Squadron - Rebel Only
Condition:
Fleet must contain at least two T-65 X wings.

Bonus:
All friendly T-65 X-wings may re-roll 1 attack dice when attacking

15 minutes ago, Viktus106 said:

Master and Apprentice - Imperial Only
Condition:
Fleet must contain no more than two ships. Fleet may only contain one unique pilot.

Bonus:
As long as the the generic pilot is within range 1 - 3 of the unique ship, it may perform actions listed on the unique pilots action bar as if they were their own.

Whenever the unique ship performs an action, the generic may perform a free action.

Whisper + cloaking Patrol Leader

7 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

Whisper + cloaking Patrol Leader

Welcome to the new meta.

Here is your cup o' tears to hand to your opponent before the game starts, have fun and remember, the Emperor never forgives.

For epic, great. For 100/6, not likely.

As mentioned, 40k 7th edition shows how bad a game can get if a build carries across your full list and limits your flexibility.

1 hour ago, Viktus106 said:

This is actually giving me PTSD from remembering some of the more broken combos in Warhammer 40k Formations which were essentially this but, in the spirit of the thread!

Agreed. But that was the problem of the man who decided handing a mechanicus army ~400 points of free upgrades was 'fair and balanced', not the fault of the idea that an infiltration detachment of Lictors and genestealers shouldn't have to bring a [censored] hive tyrant to be a legal army. Race-specific army detachments had been a thing since right the way back to 3rd edition Index Astartes (where the Imperial Fists got to bring three bunkers), and only once the power creep spontaneously hit a ski-jump towards the end of 7th did it become a real issue.

Also remember that the problem of formations wasn't the issue - the first 'generation' of formations were very prescriptive of component units (One Chaplain, One Command Squad, One Razorback and pay points for it).

It's only later that GW decided that formations could be 'any HQ plus any 3 elites' and then decided to have detachments built of subsidiary formations, adding special rules at each stage of the hierarchy.

It is easily abusable, but so is any other mechanism to attach special rules to a ship .

But yeah - this is why I would rather (most) squadrons be tied to specific pilots.

"Skystrike Academy Graduates" would be something to attach to Academy Pilots & Youngster

"Black Squadron" to Black Squadron Pilot, Mauler Mithel, Backstabber, Scourge, Dark Curse and Chaser (and possibly Darth Vader)

"Obsidian Squadron" to Obsidian Squadron Pilot, Howlrunner, Winged Gundark and Night Beast.

Nothing stops you having "fighter swarm" as a similar 'generic', but that's when the issues Haslo is referring to start to creep in, because you've got to allow for every TIE fighter pilot, and every combination of EPT.

50 minutes ago, FlipmodeSH said:

For epic, great. For 100/6, not likely.

As mentioned, 40k 7th edition shows how bad a game can get if a build carries across your full list and limits your flexibility.

Which most 'meta' archetypes do now - with 3, often only 2 ships, it's hardly like you have 'this element' and 'this element'.

Ultimately, my main thought is that squadrons give you a mechanic to give non-unique pilots some breathing room.

The problem with the way upgrades work in this game is that any unique pilot has everything that his generic equivalent has, plus more stuff (PS/pilot ability), plus the option of more stuff still (elite upgrades, PS-restricted titles).

Since a lot of the time, powerful units come from a combination of multiple upgrades that are more-than-the-sum-of-their-parts, and the ship with the most useful upgrade slots wins (hence part of the issue with jumpmasters)

Generic 'normal' fighters often have next to no slots, and any title or upgrade meant to boost the ship as a whole tends to just make the 'best' named pilot better rather than making it more likely to see more than one pilot; TIE/x1 is essentially the "Darth Vader upgrade", for example.

A squadron upgrade which only 'attaches' to specific pilots, rather than individual ships, gives you a means to give a 'leg up' to generic pilots, who at the moment do very badly compared to their elite peers and have no mechanic to give them anything that said elites can't co-opt for themselves.