How large were Acclimators?

The imperials did have a chance to confiscate 3 HH, but the guys on Lothal aren't that bright it seems.

3 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

How large were Acclimators?

About as big as the Interdictor's.

On 11/21/2017 at 10:13 AM, Geressen said:

Tarkin novel apparently mentions carrack light cruisers.

The problem is Carracks were bigger than a CR90 (almost the size of an Aquitans), and carried firepower on par with a Nebulon-b. Which would make them too big and too expensive.

A better choice might be something like a Tartan class patrol cruiser or a Vigil class corvette.

I wouldn't mind a Carrack, or Lancer, but really am not interested in a Vigil or Tartan. I don't feel that Imperials "need" another small ship. If anything I'd rather have something Interdictor/VSD sized, and stuff bigger than the ISD like Allegiance, or Bellator.

8 hours ago, Viktor Tanek said:

The imperials did have a chance to confiscate 3 HH, but the guys on Lothal aren't that bright it seems.

Well, the Empire is not going to miss three dinky little transports when their ships as a whole are militarily superior. In fact, in this game many of them are one for one, but this game also rewards large numbers of ships for activations and spammed upgrades. It's what makes a pair of hammerheads (two attacks, possibly with intel officer support) superior to one Victory Star Destroyer (attacked 2-4 times, unable to use brace token freely).

2 hours ago, ktflory said:

I wouldn't mind a Carrack, or Lancer, but really am not interested in a Vigil or Tartan. I don't feel that Imperials "need" another small ship. If anything I'd rather have something Interdictor/VSD sized, and stuff bigger than the ISD like Allegiance, or Bellator.

Before the empire gets another medium-large ship, they need fixes to make their medium fleet viable. I know this is a bold statement, but consider if there's ever a reason to take a VSD over an ISD in a situation other than shaving points. In my judgement there is none- the ISD is so much better in every regard for the cost. And if the VSD is so poor of a combatant, naturally the other specialist ships have to be even worse so they don't edge the VSD out of the combat medium spot.

The Empire has such a higher skill level to play because you need to leverage those medium ship assets in a way that doesn't expose their weaknesses. You can't drive a QF up to the enemy- it can't defend itself. Interdictors are worthless point sinks without at least one experimental retrofit, and a large part of your strategy will revolve around it so it's not a waste in points.

If it were up to me I wouldn't mind seeing a dreadnought (maybe fractal's, to avoid the dopey EU depiction). If it's also locked at speed 2 maybe it can deliver even more upgrades (this time that actually matter) to help the VSD out and make it more self-sufficient and actually worth taking in numbers.

The only Imperial ship that could serve as another Flotilla is the Suprosa/Mobqet, but it's function would be closer to the GR-75 medium transport

What about those atr assault transports from tie fighter?

Flotilla rules, 2 black dice front, black antisquad, no other gun batteries.

Upgrade slots officer, gunnery team and offensive retro, so they can carry a boarding team of some sort.

Wonderfully expendable. Almost like an ork ship in armada.

I 110% agree about there being no reason to take a VSD over an ISD. This is why I run so many dual ISD lists.

However... I don't think there is much of a chance that the VSD will be "rebalanced" to give it new life.

I think my greatest hope is that the game will go to 500pts in the near future, so that medium ships have a use for the Empire.

8 hours ago, melminiatures said:

The only Imperial ship that could serve as another Flotilla is the Suprosa/Mobqet, but it's function would be closer to the GR-75 medium transport

How about that, the Mobquet is actually more canonical in another TV show than in Star Wars. This is a picture from Firefly, and the only time the Mobquet has appeared in a TV show or movie.

Imperials could get a lot of mileage out of more boarding options, be it table top models as well as better boarding trooper type cards (perhaps a dedicated stormtrooper card & progressing upwards in cost & effect-darktroopers? deathtroopers?)

But in terms of another small ship, I’d favour bigger not smaller.

What about the Imperial Bayonet class light cruiser. small and imperial looking enough

http://starwars-exodus.wikia.com/wiki/Bayonet-class_Light_Cruiser

On 11/23/2017 at 0:34 AM, Norsehound said:

Before the empire gets another medium-large ship, they need fixes to make their medium fleet viable.

I agree with much of your argument regarding the VSD and Interdictor. They're entirely underwhelming. Some people hate on the Quasar, but I like it for exactly what it is.

The thing is, I'm of two minds: thematic and game balance. Usually, with me, the former wins. Thematically, I would be satisfied with a cost discount to the VSD and Interdictor. I think they'd be great ships for maybe 10 points less. (I'll leave it to others to make the precise points argument. I'm just ball-parking.) I think that would leave the Empire with a more uniform fleet with less diversity. Exactly how the Empire should be.

On the game balance side, I think it's pretty clear that (just as in X-Wing) the Empire just gets the shaft from FFG, and the tournament data demonstrate that people are choosing to play Rebels more, and Rebels are more likely to win than the Empire is. The Empire also started one ship down in the Core Set, and in the upcoming wave the Rebels are getting a new ship, while the Empire is getting a repaint.

I think the flotillas are pretty even as are the Gladiator and the MC30. In the Corvette class, the CR-90 clearly outshines the Raider for utility. Between the Neb B and the Arquitens, I'd favor the latter, except for Yavaris . I hate Yavaris . The Hammerhead and the Quasar came in the same wave, but they're really not comparable, IMO. I haven't seen enough Hammerheads flow against me to really have an opinion of the latter. In the medium range, some people don't like the AFmkII, but that seems to be to be a very serviceable and versatile ship, whereas the VSD and Interdictor aren't. (Now, were I to be rating on looks, I think the AFmkII has a shape that only a mother could love).

In the big ship range, the Rebels have two big ships to the Empire's one. That's just obscene. While I think the ISD is awesome, it's also quite expensive.

Now, I will shut up if FFG gives us the SSD (and doesn't make it suck).

2 hours ago, Kalic89 said:

What about the Imperial Bayonet class light cruiser. small and imperial looking enough

http://starwars-exodus.wikia.com/wiki/Bayonet-class_Light_Cruiser

I quite agree. The Bayonet or the IPV are the best options.

Just a mind: FFG doesn't hate Imperials ... in this game. I fly both factions, and we're getting to the point in this game where some ships are starting to languish on both sides. This is nothing compared to the variety death of Xwing Imperials.

The VSD is pretty awesome and has tons of build options. I'd say its also effiicient except when compared to Ackbar kiting (or to squadron damage).

The Interdictor is definitely underwhelming.

But currently the AFmk2 is having trouble, and you even mention the lack of Hammerheads: they too are hard to fly.

--

Here's generally the main problem: All of these FFG-games are based around any selection of ships for the most efficient and best list. That's the only dividing factor among them. Flight ability doesnt matter enough to cause personal styles to matter.

As long as the game is only about the most efficient ways of winning a game, it will always end up boiling down to the same theoretical considerations.

The only way to break out of this, is to create other metrics that supercede strength and efficiency - namely, alternate win-conditions, flight/decision style mattering, unit selection limited ingame and not based on purchase power.

If you agree with this, let us know.

Also this has a lot to do with medium ships feeling weak, or the previous wave's assertion that large ships were useless and activation was king. It has everything to do with efficiency, and Armada makes it worse by breaking things into turn activations. Which causes this skew of either more turns matter (small ships) or swingy single turns matter (large ships with activation buffer). One option is to make medium ships very powerfully efficient for cost, but that generally just hides the fact that there's a systemic issue with the game.

I still think the game is in a much better spot than Wave 5. We've elevated one-shot damage to utterly clearing out small ships, so medium ships do have a niche in not dying to one-shots, like BT Avenger, or Yavaris Norra Bwings.

Also, strategic is an alternate win-con, and it really turns the game on its head. Really makes squadrons have multiple utility. Strategic imo is good design.

If I had to suggest, another alternate win-con would be ship-based. Have small bases on the map where if your ship is next to them, you gain some amount of points. This would spread out the battle and provide yet another consideration for how to win the game.

18 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Just a mind: FFG doesn't hate Imperials ... in this game. I fly both factions, and we're getting to the point in this game where some ships are starting to languish on both sides. This is nothing compared to the variety death of Xwing Imperials.

I think in both cases, here and X-Wing, optimal strategies used in the core of the game just swings against the themes of the faction.

In X-Wing arc dodgers are not as valued now that turrets and bombs are in ascendance, because you can't dodge either of them. So the Empire faction, designed for placement and agility, suffers greatly when things that ignore placement are in ascendance.

In Armada Empire is medium-large biased with specialist small ships. With Activation still pretty key and spamming upgrades, those kinds of strategies are better rewarded by the smorgasbord of small ships in the Rebellion list. Empire is just points sinks that have to make up for it by killing as many small ships per activation as they can.

Just now, Norsehound said:

I think in both cases, here and X-Wing, optimal strategies used in the core of the game just swings against the themes of the faction.

In X-Wing arc dodgers are not as valued now that turrets and bombs are in ascendance, because you can't dodge either of them. So the Empire faction, designed for placement and agility, suffers greatly when those two things are in ascendance.

In Armada Empire is medium-large biased with specialist small ships. With Activation still pretty key and spamming upgrades, those kinds of strategies are better rewarded by the smorgasbord of small ships in the Rebellion list. Empire is just points sinks that have to make up for it by killing as many small ships per activation as they can.

Or large ships... We are getting more ISD options, but like I said, this is why it woulda been nice to have some small ships to go with it.

5 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Just a mind: FFG doesn't hate Imperials ... in this game. I fly both factions, and we're getting to the point in this game where some ships are starting to languish on both sides. This is nothing compared to the variety death of Xwing Imperials.

The VSD is pretty awesome and has tons of build options. I'd say its also effiicient except when compared to Ackbar kiting (or to squadron damage).

I don't think that FFG hates Imperials, I just don't think they try hard enough to keep Imperials balanced with Rebels. @Norsehound says it very well, above.

Regarding the VSD, if you say so I'll perhaps give the VSD another try*, but can you explain how it is efficient, or how to build/fly it so that it is worth its opportunity cost?

9 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

...and you even mention the lack of Hammerheads: they too are hard to fly.

That was really just a comment on my lack of a lot of playing since they came out. The most recent tournament I ran had Hammerheads all over the place. Admittedly, that tournament was a while ago, and I can't recall just how well they did, but they were all over the place.

11 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Here's generally the main problem: All of these FFG-games are based around any selection of ships for the most efficient and best list. That's the only dividing factor among them. Flight ability doesnt matter enough to cause personal styles to matter.

As long as the game is only about the most efficient ways of winning a game, it will always end up boiling down to the same theoretical considerations.

The only way to break out of this, is to create other metrics that supercede strength and efficiency - namely, alternate win-conditions, flight/decision style mattering, unit selection limited ingame and not based on purchase power.

If you agree with this, let us know.

I'll let you know when you've convinced me. However, at the moment, I don't think I necessarily understand your argument. Armada is pretty darn good when it comes to alternate win conditions. That's what the objectives are all about. Now, I wish that objectives did more to influence the outcomes of games (YMMV), and I wish that the objectives didn't feel so gamey**, but I think it makes the matches more open to alternate win conditions than, say, X-Wing (which I still love, but have had even less opportunity to play this year).

What do you mean by "Flight ability doesn't matter enough to cause personal styles to matter"?


*After I try more of a Raider build. I am currently working with an Arquitens build, which I am taking to Regionals next week.
**By which I mean that I am unconvinced that the game mechanics they introduce give me a good mechanical sense of the situations they are attempting to model.

4 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Or large ships... We are getting more ISD options, but like I said, this is why it woulda been nice to have some small ships to go with it.

I don't get what you mean here, Blail. Large ships are okay in this game, but Empire definitely takes the cake by being the biggest and the baddest. It works because of it's stat and battery power- almost to the point of making the Rebel larges too weak to be contenders, but the Liberty at least has dual turbos to combine with to make their shots more interesting than those out of an ISD. Pity the Cymoon is going to take that advantage away from them.

I feel because of their larger HP pools and biggest battery available to the respective factions Large ships are always going to have an appeal for the Rebellion or the Empire. It's Medium ships that are in this weird twilight area of not having the health to last long, the battery to hit hard, or the cost to be expendable. The Empire picks up their mediums because they do things no other ships can do in the game (Ultra-cheap fighters out of the QF, Experimentals out of the Interdictor) but if you make a standard list, your best options are still ISDs or small ships for padding.

I hear you guys. Lemme see if I can make it more clear...

First, my VSD loadouts - You asked me a question of efficacy, I'm going to admit my answer isn't perfectly in line with what you asked, but I do hope it helps you just the same. Efficacy- I've found that VSDs definitely punch for their cost if you get at least 1 forward arc shot with 6 dice. I have a personal flight style I call the slow flank, its derived from a 2d simplification of the Thach Weave and what I used to fly aggressive Palp Aces in Xwing. I start the VSD or the Lambda on a flank at around 1 range ruler away from my other ships and slowly turn it so that the flank and the main force become facing each other. Attacking from two sides. With a forward facing ship such as the VSD, its relatively imperative to go fast to get into position, but then take it real slow once youre there. In Xwing, this translated to basically doing 2 straight 2 bank into 1 slights the whole time. The Lambda and the VSD make up their cost simply by being behind the enemy and constantly taking shots. (In Armada, avoid being totally behind and missing shots due to movement).

Second thing, VSDs are hard countered by Ackbar. Don't even bother. I've got a LOT of experience with this. Chasing ackbar means you'll lose.

Here are choices for VSD:

The most efficient and simple choice is this: VSD 1, QBT and SFO (+ Moffy J) . This is the base build I recommend. QBT can be dropped if you give yourself even better firepower, but its utterly the best choice imo. QBTs give you access to blue accuracies at range, and make all your arcs near 25% to 33% better so that getting around a VSD doesn't help small ships. SFO makes you much more efficient by optimization (cost relevance). Moffy J of course is the best for VSDs, the maneuverability makes it much more guaranteed to get your forward arc shot. From there, if you get it once or twice, you've made up the VSD's cost. This build is extremely cheap too.

Other options:

VSD1 base + ER (+OE) = burst damage. Best placed facing certain conflict.

VSD1 naked with ER SFO = extremely cheap burst.
+ Kallus blue range Kallus flak = You can add ER to the roll to one-shot a pesky squadron. Its still a close range death machine.

VSD 1s + Vader = firepower.

VSD1 + FC + BC = mid size carrier. You have two sets of zone control here, squadron death ball and R1 of the VSD. Add ER and SFO/Kallus to taste.

VSD2 + DC + QBT + SFO = medium range death zone, and long range sniper. This VSD is supreme for zone control value and has a good chance of one-shotting a flotilla at long range. Very dangerous. Add LS or Vet Gunners for increased one shot reliability. Or GT for highly effective zone control vs MSU.

Of course, you can always add Tua ECM to any of these builds. I do recommend this if possible.

--

Most of this is based on the idea that you can use the slow flank to get the VSDs to fire once or twice each, earning value, and that you like using VSDs to slowly zone away area the enemy is safe in. Its best to combine this with another set of zone control: Demo, another VSD, squadrons. etc.

So, you have 6 different VSD builds based on what you want them to do. And that's just what I prefer, maybe you like something I haven't discussed.

This a generic base build for a 5 ship build with 2 VSDs. You can change it as you desire for your meta tastes. It has a strong AA complement + one strategic to annoy your opponents 79 pts + Kallus). 5 ships for activation. Doesn't really care 1st or 2nd, but prefers 1st. Objectives are hilarious. Salvage Run might not be great, but you do have 1 strategic and you get 2 extra obstacles to make it harder to get around your VSDs.

Deploy the 1st VSD directly controlling the main battle area, speed 1. Number 2 about a range ruler away on a flank, set to speed 2. Demo on whatever flank you want. Gozantis can be used as road blocks or upgraded to Boosted Comms or Comms Nets.

You get 2 or 3 zone control elements. You have ones strategic so squadron fleets can't just ignore your squads.

Honestly, also, you shouldn't mind losing any of these VSDs. Just take something out of theirs worth more. Drop some squadrons. There's really no serious weakness. You got many ways to win, and you can curate the list to whatever style you prefer.

The only thing this build really fears is more dedicated Demo builds and Ackbar builds.

Vs other Demo and squadrons, you can drop a Gozanti and add upgrades or bid. Reminder, you can add ER to VSDs for a very punchy flak shot.

VVGZZ Moffy J - Generic 5 ship - s6AA b10 - (Edit to taste, drop 1 Goz if you're comfy, change Demo to bombers, upgrade as needed)

Faction: Galactic Empire
Points: 390/400

Commander: Moff Jerjerrod

Assault Objective: Most Wanted
Defense Objective: Hyperspace Assault
Navigation Objective: Salvage Run

[ flagship ] Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Moff Jerjerrod ( 23 points)
- Skilled First Officer ( 1 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
= 102 total ship cost

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Agent Kallus ( 3 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
= 81 total ship cost

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer (56 points)
- Demolisher ( 10 points)
- Skilled First Officer ( 1 points)
- Ordnance Experts ( 4 points)
- Engine Techs ( 8 points)
- External Racks ( 3 points)
= 82 total ship cost

Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 points)
= 23 total ship cost

Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 points)
= 23 total ship cost

1 Ciena Ree ( 17 points)
1 Valen Rudor ( 13 points)
1 Lambda-class Shuttle ( 15 points)
1 Saber Squadron ( 12 points)
2 TIE Interceptor Squadrons ( 22 points)

Card view link

Fleet

Here's a 200 pt fleet that's squadronless with a great AA concept. AP for more life. Kallus, and ER for squadron one shots.

VV Moffy J - s0 b4 - or OE

Faction: Galactic Empire
Points: 196/200

Commander: Moff Jerjerrod

Assault Objective: Most Wanted
Defense Objective: Contested Outpost
Navigation Objective: Minefields

[ flagship ] Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Moff Jerjerrod ( 23 points)
- Minister Tua ( 2 points)
- Advanced Projectors ( 6 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
- External Racks ( 3 points)
= 112 total ship cost

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Agent Kallus ( 3 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
- External Racks ( 3 points)
= 84 total ship cost

Card view link

Fleet

If an objective is based around killing things for better score, its generally not an alternate win condition. (One can argue about denial games with Most Wanted).

Assuring yourself Fire Lanes based on Strategic is definitely an alternate win con, thus my above comment: Strategic is good for the game.

--

I'm going to warn about a certain emotion or concept that gets thrown around whenever I speak: Criticism or constructive suggestion does not equate that I think the game is bad or that YOURGAMEISBAD. Hence why I repeat ad nauseum these reassuring comments like "I think the game is in a great place right now", because a lot of people think that any amount of negativity or pointed out critique is a deadly sin worthy of Nelson-ing.

5 ship 2 VSDs full bomber Sloane

VVZZZ Sloane - Sloane enhanced bombers or AA - s10Strat b0 - 5 activations, Flight Controllers, 2 Lambdas, Rhymer

Faction: Galactic Empire
Points: 400/400

Commander: Admiral Sloane

Assault Objective: Most Wanted
Defense Objective: Fighter Ambush
Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

[ flagship ] Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Admiral Sloane ( 24 points)
- Skilled First Officer ( 1 points)
- Flight Controllers ( 6 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
= 109 total ship cost

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer (73 points)
- Skilled First Officer ( 1 points)
- Quad Battery Turrets ( 5 points)
= 79 total ship cost

Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 points)
- Bomber Command Center ( 8 points)
= 31 total ship cost

Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 points)
- Comms Net ( 2 points)
= 25 total ship cost

Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 points)
= 23 total ship cost

2 Lambda-class Shuttles ( 30 points)
1 JumpMaster 5000 ( 12 points)
1 Major Rhymer ( 16 points)
1 Tempest Squadron ( 13 points)
1 Maarek Steele ( 21 points)
1 Valen Rudor ( 13 points)
1 Gamma Squadron ( 10 points)
2 TIE Bomber Squadrons ( 18 points)

Card view link

Fleet

Wow, you really like your Skilled First Officer.

I can't say that I've ever tried him, because I don't own any Liberty cruisers.