For getting the ISD and cool squads maybe try Thrawn as the admiral to get the most out of the squadron value while still doing its killing.

5 hours ago, MisterThrawn said:

@cynanbloodbane I completely agree with you regarding a list with one ISD and 3 flotillas for support. I wanted to run a similar list. That's why I bought a third Gozanti. It's challenging to build a list with a cool squadron compliment and a powerful ISD without the use of flotillas. This archetype has DEFINITELY been hurt and should not have been. There is risk inherent in running it. With the changes to relay, which I thought were appropriate, the flotillas in this scenario are involved in the conflict in a relatively close proximity rather than from across the board.

I also agree with you @thecactusman17 .

The rule change that I have the hardest time with is the tabling rule if your one capital ship remaining is a flotilla in conjunction with the flotilla cap. It's too much. A flotilla can be used as an objective ship to secure points in other ways for your fleet and for fleet archetypes that aren't necessarily abusive. They are an element to your fleet's assets that can contribute to it's success in defensive and offensive ways. When someone takes a third of their force in squadrons, there is a risk associated with a reward related to how many resources you commit to that element. I realize it's a game about capital ships and that if you eliminate all capital ships regardless of victory tokens that you earn with squadron resources you utilize at the risk of being tabled. But, to add on the risk of being tabled by losing a flotilla when to support a fleet they need to be in some proximity to it? It's just too much.

The ruling I'm happiest with is the Tabling rule, but I also understand why they had to combine it with a hard cap. If they didn't cap the number of flotillas you'd still have the same lists depending on not losing the "big" ships while Flotillas acted as activation spam and support elements - something these lists were already designed to do. Further, fleets like Tokra's Demo + flotillas list would still generally function by scattering flotillas around the board and leaving a single speed 4 flagship to escape any unfavorable engagements. These lists were often boring to watch and difficult to counter as a fundamental aspect of the game mechanics, which is why they were so popular in tournaments.

I need to get in some practice games, but I know that ultimately this is going to be a better long term game to play and watch as a result of these fixes. It makes so many classic lists viable once more, and makes so many potential future lists built around getting the most out of your normal ships more appealing. My only real concern is that it seems to expose a weakness in that Imperials having more expensive ships at the moment.

6 hours ago, geek19 said:

I've watched and played against @Capt. Griff , and he's doing fine with the flotilla nerf. I can hear your complaints about how you can't 1+3 anymore, but you have the Quasar, so you can push them. What's wrong with ISD-Quasar-Gozanti? Standard Sloane, and it's pretty solid from what I hear....

This was literally the exact list I tabled on turn three, immediately after the errata. . That fleet is possibly THE WORST fleet to play in a meta that has Raddus. The tabling rule is pants on head level ******. The cap is not much better.

Before, if your focus was squads, you could play a all carrier fleet in BOTH Rebels and Empire with some version of a X+3 setup. (Vic/guasar/3), (ISD/quasar/3), **** gladiators could work if you pushed it, whatever would kinda work. Since you as the player are banking on your Squads doing most of the heavy lifting, and they are often a full third of your fleet, you simply cannot afford to allow the table rule to trigger. But now, you have to strike this balance between having enough CnC to order around that giant Imp ball of squads, while close enough to the combat with the new relay (which I approve of) that you can actually get it where it needs to go (which is why I approve of the relay, you can't play far at no risk while still applying force). You can't do it anymore. Sloan was approaching good, and then they neutered her by taking away the thing she was depending on and it wasn't relay... It was that she could get enough orders at all with flottilas. But now, you just destroy one or two ships and BAM! Game over. Almost two hundred points get 'killed' without you ever having to even look at them, just tank their damage. If you go against a Sloan fleet and it has two ships and you fail to kill them after two rounds of combat your fleet was questionably worth putting out there.

4 hours ago, ForceSensitive said:

This was literally the exact list I tabled on turn three, immediately after the errata. . That fleet is possibly THE WORST fleet to play in a meta that has Raddus. The tabling rule is pants on head level ******. The cap is not much better.

A squadron based fleet that can theoretically block the drop slash force a sub-optimal drop? I disagree.

4 hours ago, ForceSensitive said:

Before, if your focus was squads, you could play a all carrier fleet in BOTH Rebels and Empire with some version of a X+3 setup. (Vic/guasar/3), (ISD/quasar/3), **** gladiators could work if you pushed it, whatever would kinda work. Since you as the player are banking on your Squads doing most of the heavy lifting, and they are often a full third of your fleet, you simply cannot afford to allow the table rule to trigger. But now, you have to strike this balance between having enough CnC to order around that giant Imp ball of squads, while close enough to the combat with the new relay (which I approve of) that you can actually get it where it needs to go (which is why I approve of the relay, you can't play far at no risk while still applying force). You can't do it anymore. Sloan was approaching good, and then they neutered her by taking away the thing she was depending on and it wasn't relay... It was that she could get enough orders at all with flottilas. But now, you just destroy one or two ships and BAM! Game over. Almost two hundred points get 'killed' without you ever having to even look at them, just tank their damage. If you go against a Sloan fleet and it has two ships and you fail to kill them after two rounds of combat your fleet was questionably worth putting out there.

So you're saying running a carrier fleet finally has it's own set of dangers and it's not just point and shoot and win? Cool.

And if Sloane is neutered, so are Rieekan and Dodonna as other traditional squadron pushers.

I certainly don't think Sloane is "neutered" by any stretch. She's still incredibly powerful. If anything, Pryce will make her a continuing serious contender able to handily win the squadron war.

And I don't think that fleet was nerfed "accidentally." It felt awful playing against a Sloane 134 fleet, killing the only combat ship(s), and knowing you still had to survive the rest game getting poked down by Maarek/Jendon being controlled by a flotilla on the other side of the table, and that realistically you couldn't get many more points. Old relay/flotilla abuse fleets, even if the game went south for them could easily disengage and not give up any more points effectively ending the game whenever they wanted.

On 4/12/2018 at 4:34 AM, ForceSensitive said:

This was literally the exact list I tabled on turn three, immediately after the errata. . That fleet is possibly THE WORST fleet to play in a meta that has Raddus. The tabling rule is pants on head level ******. The cap is not much better.

Before, if your focus was squads, you could play a all carrier fleet in BOTH Rebels and Empire with some version of a X+3 setup. (Vic/guasar/3), (ISD/quasar/3), **** gladiators could work if you pushed it, whatever would kinda work. Since you as the player are banking on your Squads doing most of the heavy lifting, and they are often a full third of your fleet, you simply cannot afford to allow the table rule to trigger. But now, you have to strike this balance between having enough CnC to order around that giant Imp ball of squads, while close enough to the combat with the new relay (which I approve of) that you can actually get it where it needs to go (which is why I approve of the relay, you can't play far at no risk while still applying force). You can't do it anymore. Sloan was approaching good, and then they neutered her by taking away the thing she was depending on and it wasn't relay... It was that she could get enough orders at all with flottilas. But now, you just destroy one or two ships and BAM! Game over. Almost two hundred points get 'killed' without you ever having to even look at them, just tank their damage. If you go against a Sloan fleet and it has two ships and you fail to kill them after two rounds of combat your fleet was questionably worth putting out there.

I can promise you that ISD + Quasar + Squads is more than enough to make it to round 6. I don't even have a float for a third activation. Multiple ships =/= guaranteed success. Though admittedly I use Jerrjerrod and not sloan but I feel the concept is the same. I feel as long as you have the offensive capability to out destroy what is coming at you (and also have initiative) you can fair pretty well with sloane. She doesn't need an army of floats to be good.

some people say star destroyers were not that hurt by the Faq....

but then what is THIS !?

On 11/4/2018 at 11:37 AM, NebulonB said:

lol, people really dont appreciate

Having said that, its easier now, we just this week mutually killed our battle ships to have only flots left. Wave 7 made Aresius‘ list even more horrifying with Bail and C&S....and then that.

It has its justified place in the Annals, for sure.

The fact is, i can play my list even in this meta, the only things who change is i have problem to activate squadrons, but if i want i can bring a six ships list + 8 squadrons.

On 14.4.2018 at 8:10 PM, Geressen said:

some people say star destroyers were not that hurt by the Faq....

but then what is THIS !?

It is true. ISD are not hurt by the FAQ, they are hurt by other ships and squadrons

On 14/04/2018 at 7:10 PM, Geressen said:

some people say star destroyers were not that hurt by the Faq....

but then what is THIS !?

Thats what happens whan an ISD trys to follow the falcon into an asteroid field...........

On 4/11/2018 at 4:27 PM, thecactusman17 said:

The ruling I'm happiest with is the Tabling rule, but I also understand why they had to combine it with a hard cap. If they didn't cap the number of flotillas you'd still have the same lists depending on not losing the "big" ships while Flotillas acted as activation spam and support elements - something these lists were already designed to do. Further, fleets like Tokra's Demo + flotillas list would still generally function by scattering flotillas around the board and leaving a single speed 4 flagship to escape any unfavorable engagements. These lists were often boring to watch and difficult to counter as a fundamental aspect of the game mechanics, which is why they were so popular in tournaments.

I need to get in some practice games, but I know that ultimately this is going to be a better long term game to play and watch as a result of these fixes. It makes so many classic lists viable once more, and makes so many potential future lists built around getting the most out of your normal ships more appealing. My only real concern is that it seems to expose a weakness in that Imperials having more expensive ships at the moment.

I can see your point. I still feel a little salty about the combination of the hard cap in conjunction with the tabling issue. I suppose I just need to get used to it. I still love the game!

On 4/17/2018 at 3:47 PM, slasher956 said:

Thats what happens whan an ISD trys to follow the falcon into an asteroid field...........

As you can see the asteroid field took the worst part though.