I have had a pretty laid back weekend and as such had a lot of time to look on the forums, and it has been great withe the announcement of wave seven, however I ran into a few comments stating that the ISD-I and ISD-II where now dead with the advent of the new ISDs. This gave me pause and as I did not have much else to do I compiled my thoughts on the subject into somewhat of an article , and I wanted to share my thoughts with the community (Disclaimer: I am dyslexic and as such grammar and spelling tend to elude me at times, I have proof read it myself, but I may not have caught everything and as this was something I did for my enjoyment and not work related or school related I did not wish to enlist the services of my wife, so please do forgive me for any mistakes that may have been made thank you.)

Star Destroyers the new and the old

I have been very excited about wave seven as with everyone else, and am really excited to see two new ISDs. ISDs are my favorite ship in the game I would consider them my “best” ship I have a decent amount of experience flying them and could not be happier about more ISDs. However somewhere on the forums I read something about the ISD-I and ISD-II being dead now. It is my belief that for the health of the game its best if no ship is “dead”. So I started to dive in and compare the new ISDs to there older counterparts respectively. First I do want to state that I feel that it is to early to jump to any conclusions until we know more about some of the upgrades is the Chimaera Expansion Pack. But without further ado lets start diving in and comparing the ships with what we do know about them. ( we will be referring to the Imperial Star Destroyer Kuat Refit as the ISD-K)

ISD-I vs “ISD-K”

First lets talk about what this ship have in common: They have the same speed chart, same Defense tokens, same hull same anti-squadron, same command value, same Engineering value and same front hull zone armament. That is a lot in common so now lets talk about some key differences.

Lets start with what is the most obvious thing first the ISD-K costs 112 points that is two more than the ISD-I is it worth thoughts two extra points well we will have to look into the other differences to determine weather or not it is worth it.

Lets talk about its side and rear arch dice complement. The ISD-K drops a red for a blue on both sides and drops a blue for a black in the back. At first glance this may seam like a down grade from the ISD-I, but jumping a little ahead to upgrades because the ISD-K has a natural blue on all of its arch's Leading shots becomes a better upgrade for this ship than the ISD-I meaning you don't need a commander, such as Vader or Screed or an upgrade like ordnance experts to help re-roll/manipulate your attack pool.

Now lets look at the upgrade slots now. First off the ISD-K losses an offensive retrofit but gains a defensive retrofit making it more durable than it's ISD-I counterpart. We can say Tua is an option for the ISD-I but the ISD-K has the defensive retrofit and can leave it crew slot open and crew upgrades can be quite powerful, and I find most offensive retrofit upgrades a little lacking.

The ISD-K also drops the turbolaser slot for and ordnance slot, to me this is where the differences really come to a head having ordnance makes your black dice and your close range attacks that much more deadly. You can take ATP or External racks etc and this ship will lay down some crazy pain.

Lastly lets look at the last difference between the two ships, and witch for me really gives each ship its own unique roll in a fleet, and that is squadron value. The ISD-I has a squadron value of 4 the highest value any ship has, other ships have a value of 4, but no one has more than 4. Looking at the ISD-K it only has a squadron value of two. This distinct difference it what really sets the ships apart the ISD-K is a much more specialized ship it is designed to be a heavy Brawler/Busier Gunship because of its ordnance slot it will put out more damage than an ISD-I with its defensive retrofit it will have more staying power than the ISD-I. However the ISD-I is a jack of all trades it can still be a gunship though not quite as potent of a gunship as its ISD-K friend, but it can also be a carrier and oddly with Thrawn coming into the mix it is going to be easier than ever to use the ISD-I as a gunship and carrier, however the ISD-I might find re-rolls in all of its archs harder to come by then the ISD-K it will need a commander or it could use leading shots and Quad Battery Turrets (one of my personal favorites). In short the ISD-K has a more specialized roll in a fleet as a gun boat, but the ISD-I is a jack of all trades not Amazing at anything but good at everything. (note: you can make the ISD-I into a deadly supper carrier, but you can do that with the quasar for less points and if you make it into that supper carrier you are missing out on some of the upgrades to make it into a good gunship. I.E. giving up the weapons team slot to Flight Controllers when a gunship really wants to take other upgrades.)

here is examples of ISD-I and ISD-K builds (both are avenger/boarding troopers because why not)

Imperial I-Class Star Destroyer (110 points)
- Avenger ( 5 points)
- Boarding Troopers ( 3 points)
- Expanded Hangar Bay ( 5 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
- Leading Shots ( 4 points)
= 132 total ship cost

Imperial Star Destroyer Kuat Refit (112 points)
- Avenger ( 5 points

- Boarding Troopers ( 3 points)
- Reinforced Blast Doors ( 5 points)
- Leading Shots ( 4 points)
- External Racks ( 3 points)
= 132 total ship cost

So what one is better the ISD-I or the ISD-K well that comes down to what you want in your fleet do you need a supper heavy brawling gunship, or do you need a balanced ship with firepower but also squadron power too, its up to you.

Lets more forward now lets take a look at the ISD-II vs the ISD Cymoon 1 Refit (referred to after this as the ISD-C).

ISD-II vs “ISD-C”

Lets start this off as we did the last one what do these ships have in common: Same speed chart, same defense tokens same hull, same command value, same engineering value, and the same rear hull zone armament. They still do have a lot in common just like the ISD-I and ISD-K but again there are some differences that define the role of these ships.

Again lets start with cost the ISD-C cost less than the ISD-II it costs a whole 8 points less and in list building 8 points is pretty significant. So lets look at the other differences so that we can determine why it is 8 points cheaper.

Lets look at its attack dice first, starting with the anti-squadron armament. With the ISD-C it gives up the two blue anti-squadron dice for two black anti-squadron dice meaning its ability to attack squadrons is limited to close range so that is a slight downside however when we do attack squadrons we will do consistently more damage to them. Moving on to the side arch's of the ISD-C we lose one red and gain a blue so we have less power at long rage from the side arch's of our ship. Moving on to the front arch of the ISD-C we lose two blue and gain one red for a net loss of one die in our front arch however our front arch as more power at long range than and ISD-II but less overall firepower from it's front arch.

Beside having slightly less overall firepower, The ISD-C has some different upgrade slots than the ISD-II as well first and foremost it losses its ion cannon upgrade slot for a turbolaser slot, while it is really cool and nice to have two turbolaser slots the loss of the ion cannon slot makes this ship less consistent in damage output, to get re-rolls for consistent damage it is relying on lack luster upgrades like Veteran Gunners and Dual Turbolaser Turrets (while I think DTT is a good upgrade with as large as an attack pool you are rolling its lacking) and as you probably want to use gunnery teams in your weapons team slot so there are not many options. In the end I think this ship wants Darth Vader at its helm and I think this will be a great ship for Vader, though it may shine with other commanders, but that is contingent on well its other new upgrade slot.

The ISD-C losses its defensive retrofit for a fleet command upgrade slot, this is an interesting trade and I find it hard to judge the value of this trade we have 3 fleet command upgrades: all fighters follow me is lack luster with Imperial squadrons I feel as they are already incredibly fast, then we have Shields to Maximum and that one has proven to be lacking slightly as well (though I have seen it do wonders in a CC fleet never seen it do anything awesome in Tournament play), and that leaves us with Entrapment Formation I do see some use out of this guy can be very helpful and is probably the best fleet command we have at this time. However is at least one other Fleet command upgrade in this expiation, possibly two, and that is INTENSIFY FORWARD FIREPOWER!!!!

sorry got a little to into that and the card is probably only called Intensify Firepower sadly but I digress. If this card lets you get re-rolls the ISD-C may find other commanders other than Vader, but if it adds a dice to a ships next attack then I think the ISD-C will be Vader's ISD, again without more information its hard to tell.

There is one other minor difference the ISD-C only has 3 squadrons compared to the ISD-II 4 this however I don't find quite as a big deal as 3 is nothing to really get in a huff about, but the ISD-II will be a slightly better squadron pusher if you need that.

It is much harder for me to come to a conclusion about the ISD-II vs the ISD-C as they fill nearly the same rolls long range artillery ship. However the ISD-C dose have the ISD-II beat in long range firepower but if the ISD-II gets into Medium range well it will do much more consistent damage than the ISD-C, in addition it will last longer thanks to defensive retrofit, again ISD-C can take tau but it cost 2 point plus the lost of the officer slot, and as pointed out to me you probably want Wulff Yularen on the ISD-C as he will keep your fleet command triggering every round by himself. The ISD-C's value really hinges on the upgrades in it's expiation pack and I cant give a full determination of it value, however as it stand now Vader will take the ISD-C over the ISD-II everyday, but every other commander I think really wants the ISD-II with the info we have at this time.

Here is just an example of builds I would use with ISD-IIs and ISD-Cs with what we have right now.

Imperial Star Destroyer Cymoon 1 Refit (112 points)
- Darth Vader ( 36 points)
- Wulff Yularen ( 7 points)
- Gunnery Team ( 7 points)
- Spinal Armament ( 9 points)
- X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points)
- Entrapment Formation! ( 5 points)
= 182 total ship cost

Imperial II-Class Star Destroyer (120 points)
- Gunnery Team ( 7 points)
- Reinforced Blast Doors ( 5 points)
- X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points)
- Leading Shots ( 4 points)
= 142 total ship cost

In conclusion I think it is far to early to say any variation of the ISD is “dead” we don't even know many of the upgrades or what they do in this pack and we have no clue what is in the MC-75 pack. For all we know the generic title for the ISD could be a title that is negative points and makes ISDs cheaper, we really don't know. Also a lot of the value in the ISD-C really comes down to what do the new fleet command upgrades do, What do the unique titles for the ISDs do? There are to many variables to say this ship is “dead” form what I see now all 4 of the ISDs have there place in a fleet it just depends on what that fleet really wants its ISD to do. , But let me know what you all think in the comments below and thanks for reading.

“We need to Utilize every weapon at our disposal if we are to defeat the Rebellion”

- Grand Admiral Thrawn

While it's true that each of the variants will have their place, I suspect that the slightly more focused ISD-K and ISD-C (which is an excellent naming convention) will likely see more play than their generalist siblings.

The jury is still out on which version of the black die ships is the better boarding Avenger platform due to the lower squadron value of the K, though I suspect the ability to take external racks, a more viable leading shots and a native defensive slot is likely worth that trade-off. Without Avenger, the difference between the pair becomes rather more pronounced, as the K is just flat-out better at being the close-range slugger both ships wish to be.

The C, on the other hand, is a different beast entirely to the II. Slightly lower total dice and lacking the defensive retrofit and ion cannon slot, but picking up a fleet support slot and twin turbolasers, give it the role of long-range beatstick and command ship, instead of the jack-of-all-trades mainline battleship of the ISD-II.

13 minutes ago, Diabloelmo said:

While it's true that each of the variants will have their place, I suspect that the slightly more focused ISD-K and ISD-C (which is an excellent naming convention) will likely see more play than their generalist siblings.

The jury is still out on which version of the black die ships is the better boarding Avenger platform due to the lower squadron value of the K, though I suspect the ability to take external racks, a more viable leading shots and a native defensive slot is likely worth that trade-off. Without Avenger, the difference between the pair becomes rather more pronounced, as the K is just flat-out better at being the close-range slugger both ships wish to be.

The C, on the other hand, is a different beast entirely to the II. Slightly lower total dice and lacking the defensive retrofit and ion cannon slot, but picking up a fleet support slot and twin turbolasers, give it the role of long-range beatstick and command ship, instead of the jack-of-all-trades mainline battleship of the ISD-II.

While I agree overall with your analysis, and the OP's, I think that the ISD-I still retains an important slot as a battle ship. While the ISD-K does seem to be a better close-range slugger, the lack of a turbolaser slots means that the damage it produces will be spread out more evenly through the use of redirects, whereas the ISD-I can equip XI7s to ensure that it's damage remains primarily on the hull zone it is attacking. Since hull damage is more important than shield damage, keeping the damage focused in 1 arc is, I think, an ability sufficient enough to have a hard time deciding between an ISD-I and an ISD-K if I were to go for a mostly-naked close range slugger. The ISD-I with XI7 is 116 points, the ISD-K with ER is 115. The one has 2 more dice, the other has the ability to keep most of it's damage on 1 hull zone. Overall, I am not sure which comes out on top, so really, I can't see the ISD-K replacing the ISD-I as the go to close range ISD Brawler, but rather a more or less even split between people who hope for more damage through the extra dice to mitigate the redirects (or who go for crit-dependent upgrades like APT), or those who prefer to drill, and think that the damage from the dice is more likely to be redirected away.

2 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

While I agree overall with your analysis, and the OP's, I think that the ISD-I still retains an important slot as a battle ship. While the ISD-K does seem to be a better close-range slugger, the lack of a turbolaser slots means that the damage it produces will be spread out more evenly through the use of redirects, whereas the ISD-I can equip XI7s to ensure that it's damage remains primarily on the hull zone it is attacking. Since hull damage is more important than shield damage, keeping the damage focused in 1 arc is, I think, an ability sufficient enough to have a hard time deciding between an ISD-I and an ISD-K if I were to go for a mostly-naked close range slugger. The ISD-I with XI7 is 116 points, the ISD-K with ER is 115. The one has 2 more dice, the other has the ability to keep most of it's damage on 1 hull zone. Overall, I am not sure which comes out on top, so really, I can't see the ISD-K replacing the ISD-I as the go to close range ISD Brawler, but rather a more or less even split between people who hope for more damage through the extra dice to mitigate the redirects (or who go for crit-dependent upgrades like APT), or those who prefer to drill, and think that the damage from the dice is more likely to be redirected away.

ER (and Expanded Launcher) offer the ability to actually improve over an XI7 shot. All of the following does assume the enemy brace is locked down. Two extra black offers the possibility of four additional damage, which can clean off a shield arc or better on any ship currently available. You now have the entire damage of the original front arc on option to smash into the target zone, whereas with XI7 it would be that damage minus one (the one XI7 allows). Now, on average, those two dice only offer two damage, just shy of three on rerolls IIRC, so you will not always improve the "penetrating" results seen on an XI7 salvo, but when you do, you will get an extra hull damage, possibly more, and a cleaned shield arc to boot.

On which ship (if any) will be the red-headed stepchild, my money is actually on the ISD-K. It isn't as good an Avenger platform as the ISD-1 normally (though when it works, it works significantly better), and it's the only one that isn't generalist. It's a Gladiator, sized up to beat up everybody. In my experience, the best ISD builds use the ships to accomplish multiple tasks simultaneously, especially battleship-carrier, and this is the area the ISD-K simply can't hold up versus any other variant. The ISD-2 retains its title as a standoff multirole ship, the Cymoon is a command ship with exceptional extreme range firepower that can be a carrier in a pinch, and the I-1 can frankly do whatever it wants. We'll see how it all shakes out, but those are my suspicions.

Great write up! Appreciate the time and thought.

2 hours ago, xero989 said:

Also, sorry to be the one to point this out (and go slightly off topic), but the AA dice are opposites. Look at the one, then rapidly at the other, and the card is winking at you. . .

Really looking forward to put Expanded Launchers onto a ISD-K or the MC75 (it better has a ordnance slot!) I think having those big and fast ships (at least in the case of the ISD) beeing able to equip ordnance could finally be a way to justify Expanded Launchers on a ship. (Glads and MC30s exluded)

Yes, many thanks for this. I really like the side by side comparisons. Fantastic!

2 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Also, sorry to be the one to point this out (and go slightly off topic), but the AA dice are opposites. Look at the one, then rapidly at the other, and the card is winking at you. . .

WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT!?!?? Now it cannot be unseen ;-; just like Bossk and Defender AA!

3 minutes ago, GiledPallaeon said:

ER (and Expanded Launcher) offer the ability to actually improve over an XI7 shot. All of the following does assume the enemy brace is locked down. Two extra black offers the possibility of four additional damage, which can clean off a shield arc or better on any ship currently available. You now have the entire damage of the original front arc on option to smash into the target zone, whereas with XI7 it would be that damage minus one (the one XI7 allows). Now, on average, those two dice only offer two damage, just shy of three on rerolls IIRC, so you will not always improve the "penetrating" results seen on an XI7 salvo, but when you do, you will get an extra hull damage, possibly more, and a cleaned shield arc to boot.

On which ship (if any) will be the red-headed stepchild, my money is actually on the ISD-K. It isn't as good an Avenger platform as the ISD-1 normally (though when it works, it works significantly better), and it's the only one that isn't generalist. It's a Gladiator, sized up to beat up everybody. In my experience, the best ISD builds use the ships to accomplish multiple tasks simultaneously, especially battleship-carrier, and this is the area the ISD-K simply can't hold up versus any other variant. The ISD-2 retains its title as a standoff multirole ship, the Cymoon is a command ship with exceptional extreme range firepower that can be a carrier in a pinch, and the I-1 can frankly do whatever it wants. We'll see how it all shakes out, but those are my suspicions.

I would like to respectfully argue that the K is a perfectly viable contender for the Avenger, as it gains far better mileage out of Leading Shots due to the side-arc blue die. This makes it less reliant on outside sources (re: Vader) for the rerolls it so desperately craves, and the extra damage gained from the ordinance slot makes up at least a large amount of the potential damage lost from the less-effective boarding party. The benefits from having an inbuilt defense slot (and a free officer slot to boot) do provide it with a little better staying power than the I, and having a wider variety of Commanders it can viably work with does have an appeal all on its own. Still, a great deal of testing needs to be made, and if one if better than the other, it won't be by much - which is fantastic!

2 minutes ago, >kkj said:

Really looking forward to put Expanded Launchers onto a ISD-K or the MC75 (it better has a ordnance slot!) I think having those big and fast ships (at least in the case of the ISD) beeing able to equip ordnance could finally be a way to justify Expanded Launchers on a ship. (Glads and MC30s exluded)

The Raider would also like a word

2 minutes ago, Diabloelmo said:

I would like to respectfully argue that the K is a perfectly viable contender for the Avenger, as it gains far better mileage out of Leading Shots due to the side-arc blue die. This makes it less reliant on outside sources (re: Vader) for the rerolls it so desperately craves, and the extra damage gained from the ordinance slot makes up at least a large amount of the potential damage lost from the less-effective boarding party. The benefits from having an inbuilt defense slot (and a free officer slot to boot) do provide it with a little better staying power than the I, and having a wider variety of Commanders it can viably work with does have an appeal all on its own. Still, a great deal of testing needs to be made, and if one if better than the other, it won't be by much - which is fantastic!

Like I said, the K can potentially be a more dangerous BT Avenger than the existing I-1 builds, but without XI7 or a squad capacity to ensure every token is down for the count, it's reliant on dice to make up the difference. On average, they can't. In possibility, they can. Time will tell. I expect a plethora of both to hit the table, hard.

1 minute ago, Diabloelmo said:

The Raider would also like a word

I have played a Raider with Expanded Launchers and Sensor Teams in the past, and i think in 75 % of cases External Racks would be better. Staying alive at close range with a hull 4 ship isn't easy, especially if the only way to stay in range is to ram the other ship which is further decreasing your hull. One Accuracy and that Raider can be gone. Not saying its not feasible, just very very hard to pull off.

1 minute ago, >kkj said:

I have played a Raider with Expanded Launchers and Sensor Teams in the past, and i think in 75 % of cases External Racks would be better. Staying alive at close range with a hull 4 ship isn't easy, especially if the only way to stay in range is to ram the other ship which is further decreasing your hull. One Accuracy and that Raider can be gone. Not saying its not feasible, just very very hard to pull off.

*Squint*

...alright, I'm going to be honest, I totally misread the original post as External Racks. I blame a long night at work.

15 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Also, sorry to be the one to point this out (and go slightly off topic), but the AA dice are opposites. Look at the one, then rapidly at the other, and the card is winking at you. . .

My mistake ?

26 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

Great write up! Appreciate the time and thought.

Thank you I'm glad you enjoyed it.