5 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:Agreed on the Kittens. I've faced lots of well-flown Arqs and they're just not good. For a long time I thought it was just because I use MC30's so much and they wreck Arqs... Then I started running into them with other ships too and realized they really are that bad. :/
Yea it's really disappointing because I think the Arq is one of the best sculpts in the game.
8 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:I have. One of the guys I play with is easily the best Arq player I've seen, but he still only uses 1. Needa and TRC. And he still takes Demo because Demo is superior to another Arq.
Mass Arqs is weak against DC+GT Vics and Ackbar. They are good against squads because of the Redirects and Contain.
There's a big problem with Vader Arqs and it's why it doesn't win tournaments. You're taking upgrades to cover the weaknesses of your ships. Red dice are the weakest of the three, so you end up taking upgrades that add more red dice like EA or DTT so you can bump your average damage. Since red dice don't have rerolls, you grab Vader.
Here's the breakdown.
4 EA Arqs with Vader : 292 points.
Average damage with CF and rerolling blanks: 4.83
Cost: 73 (9 from Vader split among 4 ships)4 Glads with OE : 240 points
Average damage with CF and rerolling blanks: 6.44
Cost: 60Glads spitting 5 dice vs Arqs spitting 5 dice with rerolls. Glads still room for an Ordnance slot AND a commander that builds on top of the Glads natural upgrade synergy. Considering red dice have a 12.5% to roll an Acc meaning the Glads can likely use their Brace and Evade most attacks, the Glads can take the shots coming in and then simply kill the Arqs with a double arc, which I didn't even take into account for this.
Glads are just better than Arqs. Hands down, there is no argument to be had. The damage output to cost is better, and Glads have consistently proven to be more effective in competitive play than Arqs. I'm pretty sure a Glad wolf pack won recently in GA. I also run 2 Glads and have won a few tournaments.
If he's the best Arquitens player you've seen, but he only plays a single Arquitens, then how would you know how effective mass Arquitens can be? And perhaps the reason you don't see mass Arquitens in a tournament is because not everyone wants to spend the money on buying 3-4 Arquitens. I've seen a Liberty go down in one round of shooting from concentrated fire at long range from Arquitens.
Are you comparing the Arquitens to the Gladiator, or are you comparing Arquitens to Demolisher ? Because Demolisher is a single outstanding outlier in comparison to most ships in the game.
In a direct one on one comparison of dice and stats I suppose it can be argued that the Gladiator is better for raw stats. Black dice are better than red dice. But that doesn't take gameplay in consideration. The Gladiator has to get within close range to do any real damage to a ship. And if it's not Demolisher , it runs the risk of being shot to pieces before it gets close. Meanwhile, an Arquitens can sit back and continue to throw dice at a target or two from long range the entire time. That damage adds up through the game.
In short, the Arquitens is better than you're giving it credit for and still requires little investment to make it an effective red-dice ship.
8 minutes ago, Derpzilla88 said:If he's the best Arquitens player you've seen, but he only plays a single Arquitens, then how would you know how effective mass Arquitens can be? And perhaps the reason you don't see mass Arquitens in a tournament is because not everyone wants to spend the money on buying 3-4 Arquitens. I've seen a Liberty go down in one round of shooting from concentrated fire at long range from Arquitens.
Are you comparing the Arquitens to the Gladiator, or are you comparing Arquitens to Demolisher ? Because Demolisher is a single outstanding outlier in comparison to most ships in the game.
In a direct one on one comparison of dice and stats I suppose it can be argued that the Gladiator is better for raw stats. Black dice are better than red dice. But that doesn't take gameplay in consideration. The Gladiator has to get within close range to do any real damage to a ship. And if it's not Demolisher , it runs the risk of being shot to pieces before it gets close. Meanwhile, an Arquitens can sit back and continue to throw dice at a target or two from long range the entire time. That damage adds up through the game.
In short, the Arquitens is better than you're giving it credit for and still requires little investment to make it an effective red-dice ship.
I'm comparing it to a Glad. I play both Glad titles so I understand how both of them feel. Demo is for comparison only because it has a greater threat range than an Arq already built on top of the superior Glad chassis.
The defense tokens favor the Glad in a fight between a Glad and an Arq. Evade and Brace at long and medium. At close the Arq will be dead from a double arc.
In short, my comparison is the result of 3 months hard work (1-2 games a week) trying to figure out how to run an Arq. And my list got better after I dropped my Arq for Insidious.
If you want to still run them, that's fine. But if you ever find yourself just barely winning, drop the Arq for Demo if you don't have it already, or for another Glad. You'll notice the difference immediately.
1 hour ago, Ardaedhel said:Agreed on the Kittens. I've faced lots of well-flown Arqs and they're just not good. For a long time I thought it was just because I use MC30's so much and they wreck Arqs... Then I started running into them with other ships too and realized they really are that bad. :/
Pretty much. When they first came out I flew 3 a few times. Anything with evades can knock off a dice or make you reroll it. (If you're not at long range you are pretty vulnerable)
You have to take a turbolaser upgrade either Dual Turbolaser Turrets or Quad Battery Turrets to help your fickle arcs. So you are almost at 60 for a ship that is swingy and unlikely to do more than a damage or two against targets with an evade. And Larger ships will easily win by attrition.
I think the ARQ is okay... just not flexible. I've built mine to deliver as many massive battery strikes as many times as possible under Vader and it's surprising how many ships will go down under that kind of sustained firepower. Demo has to close on a target to do damage and while it's easy for Demo to do, there are things in the way to stop Demolisher from having its way (like anything the Interdictor can do, and cheap blocking flotillas). The point of the ARQ was to be cheap arc-broadside firepower in a fleet where you always have to close. It does it's job adequately, and better than it's mirror opposite: the Nebulon.