23 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Nice word that, Compromise.

Is Tempest useful? You have a Tie Bomber, but pay 4pts for the privilage of escort. Is that useful? Well I ask you guys this, is it a fighter which wants to get stuck into the squadron fight protecting Dengar and Mauler? If so, why are you not running Black Squad. Instead is it a bomber that wants to go attacking ships? If so, why did you pay 4 pts for escort?

Yeah, compromise. A wonderful word.

More hull than Black, better bomber dice than Black, better bomber dice than TIE Advanced, better antisquadron dice than a bomber, Escort in a pinch if you want it to protect Dengar or Mauler or another wounded bomber, drops the bomber's Heavy . Of course you pay for all of that, but it's definitely a noncommittal compromise squadron.

Just now, Ardaedhel said:

better antisquadron dice than a bomber

Is that actually true though? I agree with Snipa, if you were going to take an Advanced its an upgrade worth taking. Otherwise, its costly.

@Undeadguy

Speed 2 lets you jump far enough away to bomb a ship, unless they have chosen to saturate the area with squadrons. And if they have done that no ammount of intel will help. At which point, speed 2 lets you gang up on single squadrons at a time. Its what Broba did, prevented me from getting to his corvette, but all that achieved was letting me hit each xwing 1 at a time.

14 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Is that actually true though?

Yes? Double average damage, more reliable, possibility for accuracies, can't be completely shut down with obstruction... In fact, I can't think of a single metric by which the TIE Bomber's anti-squadron is better*. Tempest's anti-squadron is even more points-efficient.

I agree it's not always worth the points cost, of course: it's usually worth taking as a drop-in replacement for an advanced. It's a great way to bridge the gap between AA and AS in a bomber-heavy build with some keystone squadron dependencies (Dengar, Rhymer, etc,) though.

*edit: Flight Controllers is better for cheaper squadrons, so there's one metric where it's "better."

Just now, Ardaedhel said:

Yes? Double average damage, more reliable, possibility for accuracies, can't be completely shut down with obstruction... In fact, I can't think of a single metric by which the TIE Bomber's anti-squadron is better. Tempest's anti-squadron is even more points-efficient.

I agree it's not always worth the points cost, of course: it's usually worth taking as a drop-in replacement for an advanced. It's a great way to bridge the gap between AA and AS in a bomber-heavy build with some keystone squadron dependencies (Dengar, Rhymer, etc,) though.

My theory on anti squadron dice is the only metric that matters is odds of damage of 1 or greater. And Tie Bombers score very highly on that.

Just now, Ginkapo said:

My theory on anti squadron dice is the only metric that matters is odds of damage of 1 or greater. And Tie Bombers score very highly on that.

That's fine. Tempest scores higher.

It does seem that 1 damage is often good enough, after that I want 3 damage... And after that five... Averages of even numbers tend to get braced, and I hate when that happens. 3 is much better than 2, but 4 is not much better than 3, especially with jan flying around.

So I can see what gink is saying, also what Ard is saying as well... In a vacuum TIE bomber is probably a better all arounder than the TIE fighter...

5 hours ago, Snipafist said:

Honestly I prefer to think of it as an extra 1 point on a TIE Advanced if you were going to be using a generic Advanced anyways (as opposed to or perhaps after including an ace Advanced or Black Squadron). You've already got the Bomber support apparatus built into the fleet already, might as well have some of your support be able to function as a bomber if it has nothing better to do. It's not a priority purchase for me, but (sorry, repeating myself) if I was going to be using a generic Advanced anyways and had a spare point, it's a pretty easy choice.

TIE Advanced is an escort option for TIE Bombers, but nothing in comparison to the escort+counter of YT-1300 or the counter+intel of HWKs. Black squadron is a unique squadron so you can only have 1 and it being a non-ace no defense tokens which isn't good for a 3 hp squadron. Jumpmasters have intel + swarm which can make Rhymer balls more deadly rerolling those blanks but it doesn't protect rhymer.

To be honest what Imps have going for them bomber wise that Rebels can't is Relay with the Lambda shuttles. This allows Bombers to go way ahead of some of the slower VSD ships and still be effective with squadron dials and token commands. So Imps ave a powerful formation that is pure offense, Rebels have the sticky difficult to deal with bombers that take a considerable amount of effort to remove.

3 hours ago, Marinealver said:

TIE Advanced is an escort option for TIE Bombers, but nothing in comparison to the escort+counter of YT-1300 or the counter+intel of HWKs. Black squadron is a unique squadron so you can only have 1 and it being a non-ace no defense tokens which isn't good for a 3 hp squadron. Jumpmasters have intel + swarm which can make Rhymer balls more deadly rerolling those blanks but it doesn't protect rhymer.

While in general I find generic TIE Advanced to be slightly overcosted (if the game allowed half-points, I'd price them at 11.5), I think it needs to be stressed that they benefit from a cheaper cost, twice the speed value, and a 50% better anti-ship attack than YT-1300s. In terms of being a raw meat shield, the YT-1300 wins, but the Advanced has definite positional advantages which allows you to better position it to gain from Escort. I'm not even quite sure how to compare it to a HWK, given Escort and Intel are like apples and oranges - you can't really directly compare the two but they do make a delicious sangria together.

It should also be noted that Tempest (as has been mentioned already) is a pretty decent addition to a Rhymerball and Zertik for only 3 points more is extremely good at just getting in the way and taking a beating. Vader's another animal altogether, but he hits like a truck and goes well with a Jendon ace ball for that reason.

In short, the generic TIE Advanced has its selling points but the real money is in the unique variants. I can't really advise using a generic TIE Advanced unless you're already running at least one unique and potentially two.

30 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

While in general I find generic TIE Advanced to be slightly overcosted (if the game allowed half-points, I'd price them at 11.5), I think it needs to be stressed that they benefit from a cheaper cost, twice the speed value, and a 50% better anti-ship attack than YT-1300s. In terms of being a raw meat shield, the YT-1300 wins, but the Advanced has definite positional advantages which allows you to better position it to gain from Escort. I'm not even quite sure how to compare it to a HWK, given Escort and Intel are like apples and oranges - you can't really directly compare the two but they do make a delicious sangria together.

It should also be noted that Tempest (as has been mentioned already) is a pretty decent addition to a Rhymerball and Zertik for only 3 points more is extremely good at just getting in the way and taking a beating. Vader's another animal altogether, but he hits like a truck and goes well with a Jendon ace ball for that reason.

In short, the generic TIE Advanced has its selling points but the real money is in the unique variants. I can't really advise using a generic TIE Advanced unless you're already running at least one unique and potentially two.

Yeah the counter intel is not the same as escort. Escort protects against squadron attacks, Intel keeps your squadrons from being tied down. There is no Escort Intel but counter escort and counter intel combos make it very dificult to engage the escorts to get to the bombers. Rebels just have the pieces that fit together perfectly.

Imperials do have their own build. Rhymer is the best Bomber Ace. Also with the Lambda Shuttle Relay2 Imperials can literally put their bombers anywhere on the board.

But yeah in summary, Imperials have the best Bombers, Rebels have the best Bomber Escorts.

19 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

But yeah in summary, Imperials have the best Bombers, Rebels have the best Bomber Escorts.

Not to continue being contrary for its own sake, but I don't really agree with this either. Imperials do have the most cost-effective one-die bombers in the TIE Bomber, but they're really poor when it comes to heavy bombers - Firesprays and Decimators(although Decimators aren't technically bombers) are okay but expensive and Rebels have B-Wings and Scurggs, both of which offer superior damage at a lower cost despite some issues you need to build around with both, which Rebels can do. You can go for an Imperial ace heavy bombers approach (I'd start with Jendon + Maarek + Morna Kee), but it's not going to be able to pump in as much damage as B-Wings with Yavaris , for example.

Conversely, the Rebel Escort+Intel combination (whether you go for X-Wing or YT-1300 + Jan/HWKs) is superior at tanking damage overall (either due to Jan+X-Wings or 7-hull YT-1300s + Counter 2 HWKs), their Imperial equivalent is superior at being in the right place and setting the terms for where exactly the Intel bubble is going to be and who is able to protect it due to speed 4. If all you are doing as an Imperial is bringing Intel+Escort as a meat/tech shield for your TIE Bombers, then you're correct that it's an inferior version of the Rebel equivalents because it has less defensive tech and less hull and will be brought down more quickly and then your bombers have problems. If it's used alongside more dedicated Imperial fighter squadrons that get the alpha on enemy squadrons and then finally brings in the Intel/Escort at the right place to mess with the survivors, you're playing more to Imperial strengths.

19 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

Not to continue being contrary for its own sake, but I don't really agree with this either. Imperials do have the most cost-effective one-die bombers in the TIE Bomber, but they're really poor when it comes to heavy bombers - Firesprays and Decimators(although Decimators aren't technically bombers) are okay but expensive and Rebels have B-Wings and Scurggs, both of which offer superior damage at a lower cost despite some issues you need to build around with both, which Rebels can do. You can go for an Imperial ace heavy bombers approach (I'd start with Jendon + Maarek + Morna Kee), but it's not going to be able to pump in as much damage as B-Wings with Yavaris , for example.

Conversely, the Rebel Escort+Intel combination (whether you go for X-Wing or YT-1300 + Jan/HWKs) is superior at tanking damage overall (either due to Jan+X-Wings or 7-hull YT-1300s + Counter 2 HWKs), their Imperial equivalent is superior at being in the right place and setting the terms for where exactly the Intel bubble is going to be and who is able to protect it due to speed 4. If all you are doing as an Imperial is bringing Intel+Escort as a meat/tech shield for your TIE Bombers, then you're correct that it's an inferior version of the Rebel equivalents because it has less defensive tech and less hull and will be brought down more quickly and then your bombers have problems. If it's used alongside more dedicated Imperial fighter squadrons that get the alpha on enemy squadrons and then finally brings in the Intel/Escort at the right place to mess with the survivors, you're playing more to Imperial strengths.

I see what you mean, there are more bombers than just TIE Bomber and Y-wings as many squadrons have the bomber trait. Bomber with blue and black antiship dice is statistically one of the best you can have. But offensive capabilities is more than just dice as the speed is the range of the bomber's attack (After a squadron command). And given Rhymer's increased range makes them that much more potent. The Rebels do have more ships with Bomber but many of those ships are more like Fighter bombers, basically a starfighter with a couple of dumb bombs kind of like putting bombs on a F-14 or F-16. And bringing up the VT-49 you don't need Bomber trait to be effective at an antiship role if you have high enough anti ship value. Of course the VT-49 is more like a gunboat. If it were a higher speed it would be a perfect flotilla hunter.

But along with bomber squadron there is also squadrons in a bomber support role. Most common is escorts where as we have both agreed on Rebels have nailed down. But for Imperials it is more of increasing the range with ships like Lambda Shuttle and relay 2 giving Imperial bombers virtual control over the entire play area. Basically there is no reason you can not activate a bomber without a squadron command unless all your ships are dead. The jumpmaster is not as good of an escort as the YT-1300 but with intel and swarm it makes a perfect Imperial counterpart in a squadron that increases the effectiveness of the Bombers in an anti ship roll. Dengar may not have escort but giving all squadrons counter is a good substitute.

But anyways Imperials have the better bombers because their range is much superior of their rebel counter parts. The Rebel lancer is fast but it is expensive also outrunning escorts is not a good strategy for Rebels. I would argue that Rhymer/Bomber-Dengar-Lambda might not be as tough as Y-wing-YT1300-Hwk/Jan but it will be more of a threat than the Rebel formation.

9 hours ago, Marinealver said:

But anyways Imperials have the better bombers because their range is much superior of their rebel counter parts. The Rebel lancer is fast but it is expensive also outrunning escorts is not a good strategy for Rebels. I would argue that Rhymer/Bomber-Dengar-Lambda might not be as tough as Y-wing-YT1300-Hwk/Jan but it will be more of a threat than the Rebel formation.

I disagree.

Imperial squads are good at doing 1 thing, or they are very expensive like the Tie/D.

Rebel squads are good at doing multiple things, and are slightly more expensive than the "do 1 thing Imp squads".

Creating a successful Rebel bomber list is much easier than creating a successful Imp bomber list because you can take 3 X-Wings and Jan, both of which are extremely valuable in a squad composition. Bomber to combo with BCC and 4 blue for anti-squad, plus Escort for 13 points. The Tie/A doesn't come close to competing with that. The Y-Wing is a better squad because it has +1 hull and can attack squads with 2 blue, or 3 blue with FC, and effective 4 blue with Toryn.

Comparing the raw stats of any squad is pointless because you never run bomber fleets without a **** ton of synergy. BCC, FC, Toryn, ability bubbles, Chirpy, etc.. Point for point, the Tie/B is superior to the Y-Wing in regards to bombing. But how many times do you see a lone Tie/B with no buffs getting a speed 4 shot on a ship?

There is merit to both type factions bombers, but Rieekan Aces has proven itself time and time again, and has created some very hot topics. I think Tokra is one of the few to consistently win with a Imp bomber list, as well as the list that won GenCon? Was that a 2 ship bomber list?

Two ship Ace ball. Bombers are just part of the mass of aces.

11 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

I disagree.

Imperial squads are good at doing 1 thing, or they are very expensive like the Tie/D.

Rebel squads are good at doing multiple things, and are slightly more expensive than the "do 1 thing Imp squads".

Creating a successful Rebel bomber list is much easier than creating a successful Imp bomber list because you can take 3 X-Wings and Jan, both of which are extremely valuable in a squad composition. Bomber to combo with BCC and 4 blue for anti-squad, plus Escort for 13 points. The Tie/A doesn't come close to competing with that. The Y-Wing is a better squad because it has +1 hull and can attack squads with 2 blue, or 3 blue with FC, and effective 4 blue with Toryn.

Comparing the raw stats of any squad is pointless because you never run bomber fleets without a **** ton of synergy. BCC, FC, Toryn, ability bubbles, Chirpy, etc.. Point for point, the Tie/B is superior to the Y-Wing in regards to bombing. But how many times do you see a lone Tie/B with no buffs getting a speed 4 shot on a ship?

There is merit to both type factions bombers, but Rieekan Aces has proven itself time and time again, and has created some very hot topics. I think Tokra is one of the few to consistently win with a Imp bomber list, as well as the list that won GenCon? Was that a 2 ship bomber list?

I rarely find jack of all trade units to be good in turn based table top games. But as you said and most of my posts have been mentioning was not just the bomber squadrons but the support squadrons. Imperials have the range which makes them deadly, but as you said they are one of those type that either do good or get annihilated. Rebels have the synergy where their formations not only is better than the sum of their parts, but also makes it harder to remove which means unless a considerable amount of firepower is dedicated they will be doing damage. And most players would rather concentrate their firepower on the end goal which is other ships.

2 hours ago, Marinealver said:

And most players would rather concentrate their firepower on the end goal which is other ships.

Amusingly enough, hence my original post! I can't get people to play fighters here in Chicago, so I've resolved "H*ck it, i'm playing fighters until I get bored. They're good squads, Bront."

And no, I didn't just fall down a WeRateDogs rabbit hole for an hour or so. No.

38 minutes ago, geek19 said:

Amusingly enough, hence my original post! I can't get people to play fighters here in Chicago, so I've resolved "H*ck it, i'm playing fighters until I get bored. They're good squads, Bront."

And no, I didn't just fall down a WeRateDogs rabbit hole for an hour or so. No.

I actually like the fact that squadrons have a big impact on the game. When it first came out you had whole lists at the top table that didn't use any. Now you have to at least plan for them. They are like the inverse of vehicles in 40k (as ships move more like vehicles and squadrons move more like infantry). Not needed in you army, but you need to prepare for them.

10 hours ago, Marinealver said:

I actually like the fact that squadrons have a big impact on the game. When it first came out you had whole lists at the top table that didn't use any. Now you have to at least plan for them. They are like the inverse of vehicles in 40k (as ships move more like vehicles and squadrons move more like infantry). Not needed in you army, but you need to prepare for them.

Well to be honest, when the game first came out, squads were hard to use. Bombers were especially difficult to utilize. Wave 2 introduced boosted comms, wing commander, and rogue squadrons. Wave 3 gave us BCC, Comms Net, and the transports for activating squadrons. Wave 4 introduced FCT and FC. AFFM and Relay showed up in wave 5. And that's not even including new ships, commanders, etc that also improved squadrons.

Wave 1 was **** hard to use squads. Vics couldn't stay in range of their squads. AFMK2s could, but didn't really want to as that meant moving closer to enemy ships. Yavaris is good, but to keep him in range in Wave 1 meant you were usually way too close to a vic or glad. In wave 1 it was very easy to lose touch of those squadrons and then they were left alone trying to chase down ships in the squadron phase. Squadrons were almost a self induced handicap in Wave 1. Each wave has made using squadrons easier, and has made those squadrons more effective.