Fascinating discussion about the value of strategic and its relation to objectives.

Just a small comment/question for the esteemed community: if the red objective is the weakness in your objective suite then why not make red slightly less attractive to your opponent and the blue/yellow objectives slightly more palatable. Use one strategic squad to bait your opponent to choose blue/yellow and build a big killer in your own list that would love to use Advanced Gunnery. I know that I've looked many times at my opponent's Advanced Gunnery card and thought, "Hmm. Ya know...I could still shoot different hull zones on their same ship with my monster arc. And if I lose my big hunter-killer ship, I'm losing the game anyway. I bet I could make it work!"

3 minutes ago, RobertK said:

Fascinating discussion about the value of strategic and its relation to objectives.

Just a small comment/question for the esteemed community: if the red objective is the weakness in your objective suite then why not make red slightly less attractive to your opponent and the blue/yellow objectives slightly more palatable. Use one strategic squad to bait your opponent to choose blue/yellow and build a big killer in your own list that would love to use Advanced Gunnery. I know that I've looked many times at my opponent's Advanced Gunnery card and thought, "Hmm. Ya know...I could still shoot different hull zones on their same ship with my monster arc. And if I lose my big hunter-killer ship, I'm losing the game anyway. I bet I could make it work!"

Interesting idea, but generally speaking Adv Gunnery is not taken lightly. The fallout is... huge.

1 minute ago, Green Knight said:

Interesting idea, but generally speaking Adv Gunnery is not taken lightly. The fallout is... huge.

That's my point, actually. Including Advanced Gunnery in your objective suite brings your Blue/Yellow objectives into serious consideration, even if your opponent knows you have squads with strategic. And Tokra indicates that it could, of course, backfire on you. Your opponent might just have a ship that could REALLY make it work well for them.

So there's a risk, and that's probably good. But which red objective would you rather be playing as second player: Targeting Beacons or Advanced Gunnery?

11 minutes ago, RobertK said:

That's my point, actually. Including Advanced Gunnery in your objective suite brings your Blue/Yellow objectives into serious consideration, even if your opponent knows you have squads with strategic. And Tokra indicates that it could, of course, backfire on you. Your opponent might just have a ship that could REALLY make it work well for them.

So there's a risk, and that's probably good. But which red objective would you rather be playing as second player: Targeting Beacons or Advanced Gunnery?

Most Wanted?

Red missions are definitely the Achilles' Heel to a Strategic list, at the current point. But it's not insurmountable - as others have said, it's entirely possible to build a list so that the red mission is just as unpalatable as the other two. More importantly, the Red mission should give you a better chance at winning. If that means Ackbar Advanced Gunnery, so be it. Personally I'm trying out Sato Opening Salvo as well (not going so well but I'm keeping at it!). But yes, your build needs to be able to handle the Red mission adroitly.

So to try to haul the discussion back a bit toward the original post, let's talk ideal squadron composition for Strategic for a second. 2 vs 3 Relay Blail had mentioned.

In my ideal world, it'd be 3 VCX for maximum Fire Lanes/Sensor net shenanigans, with a HWK or two (or three - Gink's point here) for Intel, and some escorts. We're now talking 80-ish points here, and that's probably a good minimum. Properly supported with flak, it can take on many big squadron balls on equal terms. Kitted out further it can be quite potent itself.....

(ran out of time, I'll continue later if possible)

Quote @Blail Blerg (after i messed up the quote format) After a little offtrack i will try to answer the questions i guess .

Quote

In heavy squadron builds, when should you consider 1, 2, and 3 Strategic squads?

It really depend. I always wanted to use a list with 8x VCX. In Corellain Conflict. When doing Base Defense (Ion Cannon left, Ion Cannon right, and fire at will)....
Works better on imperial side. Where all base defense are base defense for sure. It is really hard when the ion cannon start to hammer on the enemy ships from turn 1.

But normaly not more than 1. Maybe even 0. Because (as i wrote earlier already) no one will give you the two missions that can use the tokens.

Quote

How much do you plan to heavily depend on Strategic? Has it worked?

You mean beside Corellian Conflict, where you will have your token mission for sure? .
Yes, when the opponent was crazy enough to pick the yellow or blue mission when i had 2 strategic it worked really well. But it would have worked as well with only 1 strategic or even without.
There is only one time where it was really good. Me being player 1 and playing his fire lanes when he had not strategic. But this is as well really uncommon .

Quote

Light screen builds are also now viable, since its mostly banking on not meeting a Rieekan 5 ship 3 transport BBC Yavaris from **** build. 51-70points. I will also input from my experience that under 50 points, no matter what, tends to fare extremely poorly vs any build with 100+ squadrons. Yes, I've heard of people saying its worth it, but from my experience, a good player will simply down both Shara and Tycho or whatever you have within one turn, good dice rolls permitting. However, we now see an advent of medium squadron builds (yet another boon for diversity), instead of just light or 134 mass. These are like the BTAvenger and Ackbar lists with a squadron component as a second damage source. A light 50 ish squadron screen will do okay against something of that sort. You'll also find you can now use that light screen to hamper their strategic squadrons.

100% agree on this. 50 points is nothing against a 134 squadron screen. They die in one turn.
50 to 100 points can be painfull but is till a low threat (in general), because these can take down some squadrons and delay the fight against the ships for more than one turn. And reduce the damage on the ships by killing a few of your squadrons.
100+ points is a good squadron list that can cause some trouble, and once a full 134 point list is supported by ship upgrade cards (Yavaris, Galant Haven, Jamming Field, Toryn, Flight Controller, ...) they become a heavy squadron screen.

Quote

I prefer 70 ish for a light screen though. Its my trauma kicking in, but I do tend to like taking some black dice non-bombers, or Tie Defenders, Shara and Tycho + others, for a robust screen with some utility. I love also, at 70 points, taking one strategic squad! One Lambda! Sometimes two lambdas! The Valen Ciena + 2 Lambdas is really a thing of beauty. I love this little group. Adding 2 tie Ints or fighters rounds it out to a nice medium sized screen that deals very well with squadrons, but also let's you play Strategic in the case your opponent doesn't really take squadrons. Strategic squads also can force a heavy squad build to split its focus to downing your Strategic squads as opposed to alpha striking your ships. Also, I find that at 6/8 hp, the Strategic squads are just perfect for staying alive, and delaying, damage soaking to extend the life of my screen to 2-3 turns instead of 1.
They also generally make the game so much more fun! This is squadron play that has a secondary objective.

Quote

What do you all think? Is Valen Ciena 2 Lambdas good for a screen? Since only 2 squads can tie up bombers? How about Shara Tycho 2 VCX? Should you always add 2 tie fighters? 2 Awings? Have people gotten use out of adding 2 Zs?

I am heavy squadron player. A screen of Valen, Ciena and 2 Shuttles is no screen at all (for me) .
But yes, a list with Valen and a few shuttles can be really painful to fly against. But this might be not because of the stratgic. You can as well use Decimators with Valen. Same effect.

Quote

By the way, Valen is awesome. He negates counter if he has a buddy.

Valen and Shara. The ultimate Hate-Love.

On 9/13/2017 at 3:02 PM, Blail Blerg said:

I will also input from my experience that under 50 points, no matter what, tends to fare extremely poorly vs any build with 100+ squadrons. Yes, I've heard of people saying its worth it, but from my experience, a good player will simply down both Shara and Tycho or whatever you have within one turn, good dice rolls permitting. However, we now see an advent of medium squadron builds (yet another boon for diversity), instead of just light or 134 mass. These are like the BTAvenger and Ackbar lists with a squadron component as a second damage source. A light 50 ish squadron screen will do okay against something of that sort. You'll also find you can now use that light screen to hamper their strategic squadrons.

I prefer 70 ish for a light screen though.

Imo, Strategic is a wonderful game design that truly makes the squadron game more interesting at all levels, light and heavy. It makes it something more than a pure damage race, which is what the old style of squadrons used to be.

By the way, Valen is awesome. He negates counter if he has a buddy.

Fantastic points, this has been my experience as of late. You just can't ignore squads anymore.

1 hour ago, eliteone said:

Fantastic points, this has been my experience as of late. You just can't ignore squads anymore.

Why not? Essentially there should be a plan to counter squadrons, but squadronless play is perfectly viable in the current meta.

1 hour ago, PT106 said:

Why not? Essentially there should be a plan to counter squadrons, but squadronless play is perfectly viable in the current meta.

Players manage to get Sato's effect whilst squadronless? Or are you suggesting some people dont use Sato? Are there other admirals?

Wierd

5 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Players manage to get Sato's effect whilst squadronless? Or are you suggesting some people dont use Sato? Are there other admirals?

Wierd

I actually have a Sato list I want to try. And NO, I did NOT hit my head recently.

10 minutes ago, geek19 said:

I actually have a Sato list I want to try. And NO, I did NOT hit my head recently.

No, not recently.

This sort of madness is the result of an old one, no doubt.

32 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

No, not recently.

This sort of madness is the result of an old one, no doubt.

"It's an older head injury, sir, but it checks out. I was going to clear them...."

4 hours ago, eliteone said:

You just can't ignore squads anymore.

Lol

@geek19 you put my comments together and you get:

Strategic MC30s v2
Author: Ginkapo

Faction: Rebel Alliance
Points: 398/400

Commander: Commander Sato

Assault Objective: Opening Salvo
Defense Objective: Fire Lanes
Navigation Objective: Sensor Net

MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 points)
- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)
- Assault Concussion Missiles ( 7 points)
= 74 total ship cost

MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 points)
- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)
- Assault Concussion Missiles ( 7 points)
= 74 total ship cost

GR-75 Medium Transports (18 points)
- Bright Hope ( 2 points)
- Toryn Farr ( 7 points)
= 27 total ship cost

[ flagship ] Nebulon-B Support Refit (51 points)
- Commander Sato ( 32 points)
- Salvation ( 7 points)
= 90 total ship cost

GR-75 Combat Retrofits (24 points)
- Comms Net ( 2 points)
= 26 total ship cost

GR-75 Combat Retrofits (24 points)
- Comms Net ( 2 points)
= 26 total ship cost

2 VCX-100 Freighters ( 30 points)
1 Tycho Celchu ( 16 points)
2 HWK-290s ( 24 points)
1 A-Wing Squadron ( 11 points)

Card view link

@Ginkapo's list has surprisingly good anti-squad. Even with Toryn out of position early on, it did some good damage to my Imperial squadrons in a test game.

Squadron balls really hate consistent overlapping blue as fields. So don't underestimate this.

Have you guys got a pic of what the scrum looked like?

Also, did you find @Ginkapo prioritized AA-defense, or AA as offense, or Strategic? Did he/you go out of his way to prioritize strategic, or was it incidental (maximal efficiency considerations) within the general scrum?

49 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Have you guys got a pic of what the scrum looked like?

Also, did you find @Ginkapo prioritized AA-defense, or AA as offense, or Strategic? Did he/you go out of his way to prioritize strategic, or was it incidental (maximal efficiency considerations) within the general scrum?

We played my Advanced Gunnery - I had no Strategic objectives for him to screw with. So he used his squads to delay mine and get in some Sato shots. He wasn't overly successful with the squads themselves, but they were able to make me hand around to get shot at by ships, including 2 Combat GR-75s.

Normally I have Fire Lanes in that same list, but to gain an advantage from that objective, his squads would have to close with the tokens. I think that would have led them to an earlier demise, but I can't discount the possibility that he'd be able to move a few tokens for good effect.

1 hour ago, Blail Blerg said:

Have you guys got a pic of what the scrum looked like?

Also, did you find @Ginkapo prioritized AA-defense, or AA as offense, or Strategic? Did he/you go out of his way to prioritize strategic, or was it incidental (maximal efficiency considerations) within the general scrum?

Against Sloane or Gallant haven.... AA defense

Otherwise offense

23 hours ago, Tokra said:

@Aresius can easy use your Adv. Gunnery against you and go in for a double front attack from the MC80 liberty on the HMC80 and just kill it. And this is the problem on this mission. It is NOT Gunnery team.

I pick 2 time Adv. Gunnery in german nationals and the mission give me more advantages than my opponent.

Playing this list today at uk nationals (minus Bright Hope)

Played Sloane twice. 7-4, 5-6.

35 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Playing this list today at uk nationals (minus Bright Hope)

Played Sloane twice. 7-4, 5-6.

These results are not really good (not for you and not for your opponent). Depending on the number of rounds and players this result might be even a cut killer.

The problem with playing for strategic and going light fighter screen is if you opponent goes heavy fighters and plays heavy strategic. You basically hand you opponent the points for your strategic upgrades plus the objective points.

Taking some of the examples of using strategic squadrons you can basically fit in another squadron for the points you add in for those strategic squadrons. You can just about get two tie fighters for the cost of one Lambda or just about 3 A-Wings for the price of 2 VCX's - or you could just cut the points use them elsewhere. We've entered an age where generics aren't really expected to last that long (that goes for aces as well with Sloane roaming around) so lack of health is not as important as taking more individual fighter stands if you are looking for more cover. It's the safer play.

1 hour ago, Tokra said:

These results are not really good (not for you and not for your opponent). Depending on the number of rounds and players this result might be even a cut killer.

It's true, however in a large tourney it still keeps you in the running but does put pressure on you as long as the fleet is capable of generationg 9-2 and 10-1s for other matchups. At Nova I went 5-6 9-2 7-4 4-7 8-3 and ended up missing the cut by 1 point. Postmortem I can say that it was recoverable even during last game.

And as if on cue....

A 5 activation mc30 Awing fleet.

I got all but 1 fire lanes token..... 254 MOV. 9-2 I think.

Happier Tokra?

More amusingly, I am yet to use Sato once.... though my last opponent said it was Sato that stopped him picking Opening Salvo. He did have two VCX.

I’ve been working myself up to running this combo…

Assault Carrier -23

Minister Tau

Slicer tools

Suppressor Title

EMC

Rapid Launch Bays

Morna Kee

Col Jendon

The ship is near unkillable. The idea is that at some point you’re going to position so that they move within 2.6 of you before you activate. That will cause them to spend a defense token due to Suppressor title. You activate and dump out Morna Kee and Jendon. They activate and put 6 rerolling dice into the ship. The Carrier shots with another dice and moves away and hopefully gives them new order.