What exactly was the designed intent for Cloak as it currently is? What was it supposed to allow you to do that made it worth 14 points on a squadron with that stat line?

1 minute ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

What exactly was the designed intent for Cloak as it currently is? What was it supposed to allow you to do that made it worth 14 points on a squadron with that stat line?

I think not needing intel, psuedo speed 5, and the 4 damage spikes anti ship. But they just dont kill squads and they die way too fast.

Just now, Space_Cowboy17 said:

What exactly was the designed intent for Cloak as it currently is? What was it supposed to allow you to do that made it worth 14 points on a squadron with that stat line?

I think someone broke it down previously and showed that cloak was worth 1-2 points on that chassis...

Because an extra blue is better than a reroll... 4 Hull takes out out of 90% of grneric one-shot territory, they maintain their speed, and have the ability to disengage - literally - without intel, and have crazy potential double damage spikes... even without the spikes, their base damage isn’t bad...

Theyre designed as penetrators but they are too much of an investment for what the results are. Maybe whisper is worth 20 bc of the brace and scatter and ace ability. But not 14 for the generics. I always get better results with interceptors and bombers instead of having imexpensive squads that cant kill and die too easy.

Sloane Phantoms aren't just for killing squads. They are fighter-bombers. They are great for following up an interceptor alpha strike. They hit ships harder than TIE Bombers. And that's before you even consider Cloak. I think a mix of interceptors and Phantoms could give the 2+3 list trouble.

57 minutes ago, RobertK said:

Sloane Phantoms aren't just for killing squads. They are fighter-bombers. They are great for following up an interceptor alpha strike. They hit ships harder than TIE Bombers. And that's before you even consider Cloak. I think a mix of interceptors and Phantoms could give the 2+3 list trouble.

The issue is that the things are incredibly swingy; even with Sloane, you just can’t rely on them as a consistent source of damage, which makes them not really worth the price you payed for them. Plus more conventional Sloane lists absolutely murder them. Maybe if they had bomber, they’d be worth it. But as is, point for point, TIE Bombers generally hit harder (thanks bcc) and can take more, too.

Have DCaps Vics been mentioned yet? They’re amazing long range flotilla killers; they even have the arc for a double kill if GH players are flying in a nice, tight formation. Just food for thought...

32 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

The issue is that the things are incredibly swingy; even with Sloane, you just can’t rely on them as a consistent source of damage, which makes them not really worth the price you payed for them. Plus more conventional Sloane lists absolutely murder them. Maybe if they had bomber, they’d be worth it. But as is, point for point, TIE Bombers generally hit harder (thanks bcc) and can take more, too.

Have DCaps Vics been mentioned yet? They’re amazing long range flotilla killers; they even have the arc for a double kill if GH players are flying in a nice, tight formation. Just food for thought...

TIE Phantoms do an average of 1 damage unaided, same as TIE Bombers.

With Sloane, they go up to 1.23. TIE Bombers go up to 1.25 with BCC. TIE Bombers generally don't really do anything with Sloane, so I feel like you and @RobertK are speaking at cross-purposes here.

I'm not entirely on board with TIE Phantoms as a 2+3 solution, mind you, but they're better than most people give them credit for.

First of all, great discussion, I certainly learnt few things.

19 hours ago, Brikhause said:

Sun Tzu:

Another great Sun Tzu quote, which pretty much sums up what was said here:

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be put at risk even in a hundred battles.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.

On 12/17/2017 at 7:21 PM, Brikhause said:

Best way to make people not play it any more is to learn how to beat it. It is very beatable it just doesn’t fly like 90% of the lists out there. Most of the best lists don’t! All the top lists have a niche that the vast majority of the people are not familiar on how it works.

The thing I love about this game is that the variables change every game even with the same lists. This is largely due to the board size and objective play and you have to learn the variables.

I probably play this game much more than the average player. I mean I get 2-3 live Games a week and then throw another 1-2 more games I am watching and studying outcomes on I learn a lot. Not to mention I have had the honor of playing some of the top players in the world and learning from them. I didn’t always get the outcome I wanted from against the top players, but it does not mean I didn’t get great value out of the game.

I think to many people come into this game thinking it is like x-wing where you try and build a list that counters everything and nearly every game of x-wing is identical because with that list you deploy nearly the same way, the objective is the same, and the play area is smaller.

Think of it this way; this game has many more dimensions then x-wing. Your opening move can be a bigger deal in Armada then in x-wing, where it tends to be a little more forgiving since you don’t have to commit your ships to a certain type of speed. So if you view it like that you understand why Kirk defeated Khan in the Wrath of Khan. It is not like Khan wasn’t smarter than Kirk he was considered a great military mind his nemesis, but he was not thinking in 3-D.

Then when you understand those dimensions(the variables) pass it on to other players so that they understand that they have to adapt and think on a bigger stage. Who knows maybe they won’t give guys like me such large MoV’s anymore. Then it won’t be worth playing the list.

You want to know my true secret, I have a good band of brothers in my community that love this game, are highly experimental, and share their experiences with one or another. Win or lose I relish the after game where we discuss what went wrong and how the game could have gone differently. Especially with our newer players I try to give them as much heads up as I can and make them aware what they are doing wrong. I usually let them make the mistake so they learn the hard way a little, but they learn very quickly and as a result even our newer players who are willing to listen learn very quickly if they stay committed to learning. Players like @Parkdaddy, @Vergilius, @Ardaedhel, and so many others have been a fountain of knowledge and support for me. I do alright in this game more so because I have so many guys like them! I look forward to @Tirion being one of those brothers when I move to Spokane!?

which brings me another point I was discussing with Vergilius:

Sun Tzu:

Like this one

sun tzu

“If the enemy has alliances, the problem is grave and the enemy’s position strong; if he has no alliances, the problem is minor and the enemy’s position weak.”

Something to ponder on! Want to be a threat make good alliances!

Yeah I'm pretty awesome... I mean...just ask me I'll tell you!

7 hours ago, Snipafist said:

TIE Phantoms do an average of 1 damage unaided, same as TIE Bombers.

With Sloane, they go up to 1.23. TIE Bombers go up to 1.25 with BCC. TIE Bombers generally don't really do anything with Sloane, so I feel like you and @RobertK are speaking at cross-purposes here.

I'm not entirely on board with TIE Phantoms as a 2+3 solution, mind you, but they're better than most people give them credit for.

Yuh, that's what I'm looking at as well. I won't dismiss something just because its damage distribution has a high variance. Its the expectation value that matters, and with Sloane that is 1.22 damage per shot. Sloane also reduces the variance because she lets you re-roll critical hits.

Another thing that folks get caught up with is this "damage done per point spent". Ok, damage per point as a measure works if you plan to bring a large swarm and also build a list around being able to activate them all. In that case, Wedge Antilles is a terrible buy since he is 19 points for that 1.00 average damage per shot. Of course that's nonsense, because he has so many other capabilities...just like Phantoms do.

I think it's more relevant to consider damage done per activation, since it's usually activations that are at a premium when you are trying to alpha strike something.

I'm not entirely convinced Phantoms are the answer either, but I do like their flexibility. In a way, they are the squadron-equivalent to Sloane. Sloane gives you meta flexibility...bring a large Imperial squadron group and even if your opponent brings no squadrons, she gives them something important to do. Phantoms are similar. If you need them to be bombers, they do just as well or better than a TIE Bomber squadron. If you need them to disrupt your opponent's squadrons, they are a nice second line fighter after an initial alpha strike of your favorite ace/interceptor combination. Phantoms are Sloane's bombers...sprinkled with decent anti-squadron ability and the ability to be very pesky with positioning. If 2+3 lists rely heavily on precise squadron positioning, Cloak seems a good way to mess with that.

So in summary, to stop this list type, you want to destroy the carriers or disrupt their formation if you cant deal the type of automatic damage that gets through the gallant haven bubble.

Or force them to play your missions and have missions that punish a lack of board presence. Putting heat on them by racking up a decent mission objective lead can force a more rushed response, snipe a few over extended squads and call it a day... Not a big margin probably but 6<5 and 7<4. You just need to average out to about an 8 every round by the end of the day to be in it to win it normally.

The squadrons are what kill things not their guns, so the fleet's effective threat range is distance 3 plus distance 1. More for 2 squads with FCT, but not a huge threat range.

Probably a bad idea to give a 6 ship Yavaris fleet Last/First activation just to play your objectives.

41 minutes ago, Matt Antilles said:

Probably a bad idea to give a 6 ship Yavaris fleet Last/First activation just to play your objectives.

Depends on your objectives and how quickly you can kill their stuff?

5 hours ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

Or force them to play your missions and have missions that punish a lack of board presence. Putting heat on them by racking up a decent mission objective lead can force a more rushed response, snipe a few over extended squads and call it a day... Not a big margin probably but 6<5 and 7<4. You just need to average out to about an 8 every round by the end of the day to be in it to win it normally.

The squadrons are what kill things not their guns, so the fleet's effective threat range is distance 3 plus distance 1. More for 2 squads with FCT, but not a huge threat range.

To be fair, with FCT the range is 1 + 1 + 3 which is actually a little past 5 (red-dice range). Still, that had better be a strong alpha or those squads are going to die.

48 minutes ago, rasproteus said:

To be fair, with FCT the range is 1 + 1 + 3 which is actually a little past 5 (red-dice range). Still, that had better be a strong alpha or those squads are going to die.

Unless Gallant Haven is traveling at speed 3, which puts it just about exactly where it needs to be to cover those squadrons.

Referring back to:

On 12/14/2017 at 0:09 PM, Ardaedhel said:

In my experience, this list should be flown fast and aggressive in most matchups, not slow

Which, again: all of this is hard to do. There are a lot of moving pieces that all have to coordinate well here, or it all falls apart. Which is why I think the list has a very high skill ceiling: if somebody can manage to reliably not screw up all those moving pieces, it's very hard to beat it. But it's also easy for a minor mistake to be that Achilles' Heel that you can exploit for the win, if you know what you're looking for. Squadrons within existential threat range but outside of the GH bubble are one such mistake.

1 minute ago, Ardaedhel said:

Which, again: all of this is hard to do. There are a lot of moving pieces that all have to coordinate well here, or it all falls apart. Which is why I think the list has a very high skill ceiling: if somebody can manage to reliably not screw up all those moving pieces, it's very hard to beat it. But it's also easy for a minor mistake to be that ***** in the armor that you can exploit for the win, if you know what you're looking for. Squadrons within existential threat range but outside of the GH bubble are one such mistake.

I wouldnt say you need a very high skill to run it as much as just practicing the nuances. You can be 90% effective with this list after a handful of matchs and good understanding of the mechanics. You will lose to highly skilled players but will still have a good showing I think. It comes down to list synergy. No other list I have seen can do the things that this list does. I mean this GH list can EAT damage if played right so effectively it makes you want to table flip. What other combination out there can do that?

Just now, ripper998 said:

I wouldnt say you need a very high skill to run it as much as just practicing the nuances. You can be 90% effective with this list after a handful of matchs and good understanding of the mechanics. You will lose to highly skilled players but will still have a good showing I think. It comes down to list synergy. No other list I have seen can do the things that this list does. I mean this GH list can EAT damage if played right so effectively it makes you want to table flip. What other combination out there can do that?

No other list does the same things, but that doesn't make it broken. No other list can weather as much damage as Motti ISDs, but that doesn't make those broken. No other list can put out as much damage under shields as CR90B rammers, but that doesn't make those broken (stupid, maybe, but not broken). Etc, etc.

And I strongly disagree that 90% effective is the same thing as perfect execution with this list. I have played numerous competent players that just completely fell apart using it, usually by slow rolling, overextending squadrons, or missing overlapping synergies. I've played exactly one other player besides @Brikhause who didn't make some fatal mistake when using this list, and he's not on the forums. I mean, you've played @Jahangeer358, right? He is a good player who has been playing this for almost as long as Brik, and isn't racking up anything like the same unassailable dominance with it. This would explain why you saw it dominating Worlds but not the lower tier tournaments last year--almost all of the best players brought it (except @Caldias, who brought the counter).

It's not that it's not good in the hands of anything other than a dominant player--it's just reasonably competitive at that level because opponents can penalize mistakes. The dominance comes when there are no mistakes to capitalize on.

I definitely sympathize with your plight though. Don't worry: it'll be @Tirion and @ninclouse2000's problem soon.

A list that is utterly dominant when flown mistake free against other high level lists that are also flown mistake free, is OP though. Remember that player skill is not a variable to be considered when discussing balance. Balance must be achieved assuming a mirrored skill level in players.

If you had to bet your house on the outcome of a game between yourself and your evil twin where one of you was using a 2-3 Rebel list and the other was running some other well thought out tournament worthy list, would you be torn and have a hard decision or would it be a no brainer?

3 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

A list that is utterly dominant when flown mistake free against other high level lists that are also flown mistake free, is OP though. Remember that player skill is not a variable to be considered when discussing balance. Balance must be achieved assuming a mirrored skill level in players.

If you had to bet your house on the outcome of a game between yourself and your evil twin where one of you was using a 2-3 Rebel list and the other was running some other well thought out tournament worthy list, would you be torn and have a hard decision or would it be a no brainer?

Lol, well, I fly the hard counter regularly, soooo... eh?

53 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

No other list does the same things, but that doesn't make it broken. No other list can weather as much damage as Motti ISDs, but that doesn't make those broken. No other list can put out as much damage under shields as CR90B rammers, but that doesn't make those broken (stupid, maybe, but not broken). Etc, etc.

And I strongly disagree that 90% effective is the same thing as perfect execution with this list. I have played numerous competent players that just completely fell apart using it, usually by slow rolling, overextending squadrons, or missing overlapping synergies. I've played exactly one other player besides @Brikhause who didn't make some fatal mistake when using this list, and he's not on the forums. I mean, you've played @Jahangeer358, right? He is a good player who has been playing this for almost as long as Brik, and isn't racking up anything like the same unassailable dominance with it. This would explain why you saw it dominating Worlds but not the lower tier tournaments last year--almost all of the best players brought it (except @Caldias, who brought the counter).

It's not that it's not good in the hands of anything other than a dominant player--it's just reasonably competitive at that level because opponents can penalize mistakes. The dominance comes when there are no mistakes to capitalize on.

I definitely sympathize with your plight though. Don't worry: it'll be @Tirion and @ninclouse2000's problem soon.

I am not specifically talking about brikhaus though as he is a skilled player. Also, while this hasn’t dominated the arena last year before worlds, we are starting to see that change as this type of list has won 3 regionals now? And I am talking about the card synergy being OP. Not the single use of GH, but Jan, Biggs, GH shenanigans. So much damage mitigation. It’s the Adar, fct, yavaris combo. All this together makes it a huge force to be reckon with. What other combinations are out there that have such a profound effect? BT/Avenger?

And I am sad to see Brik go, he is a good dude who really pushed the community. Trying to help take the reins but no one person can do as much as he has done for us here. He will be missed for sure.

6 hours ago, ripper998 said:

I am not specifically talking about brikhaus though as he is a skilled player. Also, while this hasn’t dominated the arena last year before worlds, we are starting to see that change as this type of list has won 3 regionals now? And I am talking about the card synergy being OP. Not the single use of GH, but Jan, Biggs, GH shenanigans. So much damage mitigation. It’s the Adar, fct, yavaris combo. All this together makes it a huge force to be reckon with. What other combinations are out there that have such a profound effect? BT/Avenger?

And I am sad to see Brik go, he is a good dude who really pushed the community. Trying to help take the reins but no one person can do as much as he has done for us here. He will be missed for sure.

There is no question that I’ll be missing you guys! But I am confident I am leaving the community in your good hands @ripper998 everything can be done if you learn to do it in baby steps. Little by little at a time.

7 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

Lol, well, I fly the hard counter regularly, soooo... eh?

And what is the hard counter?

(Sorry if I missed it. When the discussion turned to how to fix game design problems, my brain tuned out.)

1 minute ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

And what is the hard counter?

(Sorry if I missed it. When the discussion turned to how to fix game design problems, my brain tuned out.)

First you learn to play Mon Mothma! Then you profit!

7 minutes ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

And what is the hard counter?

(Sorry if I missed it. When the discussion turned to how to fix game design problems, my brain tuned out.)

Mothma MC30s.

It is Ardaedhel speaking, after all