http://cannotgetyourshipout.blogspot.com/2018/07/imperial-commander-review-grand-admiral.html

Grand Admiral Thrawn. TL;DR version: I think he's neat but he's tough to build for at 400 points.

1 hour ago, Snipafist said:

TL;DR version: I think he's neat but he's tough to build for at 400 points.

I second this. I build fleets on break at work almost every day.... every time Thrawn comes up I always feel like the fleet is just a little shy of being right. Maybe 100 more points to get him just right? lol

Great write up. I actually just got the Chimaera Expansion and Thrawn and have been wanting to try him out in a list or two.

Triple ISD with SFOs. Just saying ?

MMMMMMM......Thrawn Bombers..... ?

I will whole heartily endorse Thrawn bombers with Ruthless strategists, I'd been struggling very hard to find a fleet archetype that fit my play style post FAQ.

I've been refining my own version based off the Euros list and I've only been blown out once or twice in a big loss out of 12 games working on it, and absolutely due to my own mistakes.

I have a store championship this weekend where i plan to report how this fares in the PNW meta.

1 minute ago, Karneck said:

I will whole heartily endorse Thrawn bombers with Ruthless strategists, I'd been struggling very hard to find a fleet archetype that fit my play style post FAQ.

I've been refining my own version based off the Euros list and I've only been blown out once or twice in a big loss out of 12 games working on it, and absolutely due to my own mistakes.

I have a store championship this weekend where i plan to report how this fares in the PNW meta.          

It's an interesting fleet that is a pretty strong counter to Sloane and Rieekan aceholes fleets, both of which are fairly popular archetypes. It seems to struggle against MSU and to a lesser extent big-ship-heavy fleets. I'd be interested in hearing more about it, but we've got a guy running it locally and that seems to be how it's been playing out.

9 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

It's an interesting fleet that is a pretty strong counter to Sloane and Rieekan aceholes fleets, both of which are fairly popular archetypes. It seems to struggle against MSU and to a lesser extent big-ship-heavy fleets. I'd be interested in hearing more about it, but we've got a guy running it locally and that seems to be how it's been playing out.

Interesting. I would think Bombers would be the actual counter to a big-heavy at least...Worth trying though. I LOVE bombers in these metas....

12 minutes ago, moodswing5537 said:

Interesting. I would think Bombers would be the actual counter to a big-heavy at least...Worth trying though. I LOVE bombers in these metas....  

The bombers certainly help, but the ISD and Glad are a bit pillow-fisted against other ships due to their focus on flak, so they can be blitzed before the bombers have enough time to really make it count. That's particularly true of the MSU matchup.

Given no-squads is becoming more of a thing nowadays, TIE Bombers are very competitive in those matchups but they seem pretty win-big lose-big to me. Without Ruthless shenanigans they usually get stuffed by other squad-heavy fleets that are either Sloane or geared to withstand/beat Sloane.

37 minutes ago, Karneck said:

I will whole heartily endorse Thrawn bombers with Ruthless strategists, I'd been struggling very hard to find a fleet archetype that fit my play style post FAQ.

I've been refining my own version based off the Euros list and I've only been blown out once or twice in a big loss out of 12 games working on it, and absolutely due to my own mistakes.

I have a store championship this weekend where i plan to report how this fares in the PNW meta.

I have 100% success with 3-Cymoon Thrawn also scoring 9-2 everytime. Ok, they were just two matches but my numbers are already better than yours ?

24 minutes ago, moodswing5537 said:

Interesting. I would think Bombers would be the actual counter to a big-heavy at least...Worth trying though. I LOVE bombers in these metas....

Basically what is marked below...

9 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

The bombers certainly help, but the ISD and Glad are a bit pillow-fisted against other ships due to their focus on flak, so they can be blitzed before the bombers have enough time to really make it count . That's particularly true of the MSU matchup.

Given no-squads is becoming more of a thing nowadays, TIE Bombers are very competitive in those matchups but they seem pretty win-big lose-big to me. Without Ruthless shenanigans they usually get stuffed by other squad-heavy fleets that are either Sloane or geared to withstand/beat Sloane.

More test is required but new tabling rules enhaced big ships chances. More if we consider that most popular carriers are a neb-b and a quasar. I really think VSD-carriers could take back their place in the meta.

48 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

The bombers certainly help, but the ISD and Glad are a bit pillow-fisted against other ships due to their focus on flak, so they can be blitzed before the bombers have enough time to really make it count. That's particularly true of the MSU matchup.

Given no-squads is becoming more of a thing nowadays, TIE Bombers are very competitive in those matchups but they seem pretty win-big lose-big to me. Without Ruthless shenanigans they usually get stuffed by other squad-heavy fleets that are either Sloane or geared to withstand/beat Sloane.

I can totally see this. That's kinda why that list is not pushing it's way up my playlist right now....

I am enjoying Thrawn a great deal in my Corellian Conflict campaign. Thrawn at 500 points with TIE bombers commanded by VSD's is pretty fun.

Nailed it with the multi-purpose ships. I strongly advise against banking squad dials. You might end up with a squad dial without squads to command. For me, 8 is the magical number for squads. Either you push them 2+6/2+2+4/whatever, you'll have a carrier and gozanties to activate them. Gozanties can adapt, so if you 'run out' of squadrons, its not wasting commands on squads. You only lose command dial for the dedicated carrier if its command 3 ship. So let them do the job first, and Thrawn for me just helps them to maximise their output. For this reason, I bank 1 navigate always so I can get to a favourable position before engaging(turn 2/3), 1 CF for the first round of combat(3/4), and either a second navigate or a repair (for turn 4/5) to disengage/pursue/increase lifespan.
I play him with Ruthlessbombers, building everything around to be able to deal with all sort of threats. Sort of thematic to him as well If there are fighters, I can flak them out of the sky, if there are none, bombers have a good day. Also, while maximising a ships flak they should lose the least firepower against ships. For me, its a ruthless vs OE on Demolisher, I bank a cf token early rounds to get back a reroll at least.

5 hours ago, RobertK said:

I am enjoying Thrawn a great deal in my Corellian Conflict campaign. Thrawn at 500 points with TIE bombers commanded by VSD's is pretty fun.

Last campaign we had a Thrawn list excel. It really helps that everything is barebones, so 400 points at the start of the conflict is very different to 400 points in a tournament. They were flying two ISDs, gozantis and a heavy squadron ball (Maarek, Jendon, IG, etc).

I feel like he could be abused in the Conflict with Arquitens light cruisers. You can fit 6 with X-17s in at the 400 point baseline. No squadrons, but with their longer range carriers will melt after a turn or two. Thrawn pushes Engineering and Concentrate fire, while the cruisers themselves spam navigate. With concentrate fire you're reaching 24 red dice a turn.

Hello I am the player who to bring Thrawn in top 4 euro. (I excuse myself in advance I speak badly English).

The largest advantage of Thrawn is to be able to carry out a double action what makes it possible to carry out super activations which are impossible for the others admiral.

Before I used the flotillas in two different ways are to push the squadrons are to provide token to my other vessels. With Thrawn I can make both at the same time what enables me to have the equivalent of 4 flotillas in the list for the price of two.

Concerning the use of the orders:

During the phases of approach does it of being able at the same time surfed and repaired allows to increase significantly the survival of the vessel (by repairing three shields) while placing it under the best conditions for the following turn. In combination with Price and Early Warning System that enabled me never not to lose my ISD whereas I often sent it in first line to use all his potential.

During the phases of combat Thrawn allows to have the flexibility necessary to adapt. While being released of the ordering of squadron one can thus envisage the orders according to the situation.

- To have a navigation in order to obtain a surplus of mobility of necessary to disengage itself
- To have a repair to increase the survival of the ship admiral's wife
- To have a fire nourished to increase the damage. It is the order which I used the least, but who allowed me to gain a match.

For the last round of the part Thrawn is useless, there is great chance so that all its dials are already used and result of the part general is already decided.

Thrawn makes it possible to create flexible and general-purpose lists which make it possible to adapt to all the threats and not to have thus any weakness. This versatility has nevertheless as a price that Thrawn will be less effective than certain specialized list. It will be difficult for him to make victories higher than 8/3 (just as of the defeats lower than 5/6).

Thrawn is not popular, because one needs an excellent level of player to be played effectively. As of the placement of the obstacles it is necessary to have a tactic of approach and to be able to anticipate the three first towers of games at the time of the deployment (It is true for the other lists, but it is vital for Thrawn). With final much of player player another admiral prefers who will be easier to take in hand. (Why make a complicated list of bomber when it is enough to take Sloane to be effective?)

Finally I am not agreement on your conclusion. Admittedly I could take along Thrawn only in TOP 4 euro, but that remains an excellent service which proves that Thrawn can be viable in high level competition. My defeat is mainly due to my lack of preparation rather than to the lacks of potential of Thrawn (I started to test the list whom the week before euro). Moreover, I think of being able to say without me to mislead that Lightrock and Noggin (two finalists of the euro) had enormously evil against Thrawn and could gain that of accuracy.

PS: I appreciate much your blog that I find very pleasant to read.

11 hours ago, nooby_le_noob said:

Hello I am the player who to bring Thrawn in top 4 euro. (I excuse myself in advance I speak badly English).

Thank you for taking the time to write up your thoughts and present them here! As someone who has been very actively using your list to create a version of my own for the past month, I've found it to bring enough firepower and offer a level of versatility that I enjoy with my playstyle.

11 hours ago, Karneck said:

Merci d'avoir pris le temps d'écrire vos pensées et de les présenter ici! En tant que personne qui utilise votre liste de manière très active pour créer ma propre version du mois dernier, je l'ai trouvée capable d'apporter suffisamment de puissance de feu et d'offrir un niveau de polyvalence que j'apprécie avec mon style de jeu.

I am satisfied that the list pleases you. Thus I had for objective during the Euro to prove that Thrawn could be a competitive admiral it pleases me to see of other player using a variant of the list.

Thus the players of armada are slow to make modifications of meta it will be necessary to wait several months before noticing changes, but I hope to have opened the door which will allow Thrawn to have the place which he deserves.

Could you post your list? I am curious to know the changes which you made.

3 hours ago, nooby_le_noob said:

I am satisfied that the list pleases you. Thus I had for objective during the Euro to prove that Thrawn could be a competitive admiral it pleases me to see of other player using a variant of the list.

Thus the players of armada are slow to make modifications of meta it will be necessary to wait several months before noticing changes, but I hope to have opened the door which will allow Thrawn to have the place which he deserves.

Could you post your list? I am curious to know the changes which you made.

I too would like to see your changes.

Thrawn v7
Author: Karneck

Faction: Galactic Empire
Points: 397/400

Commander: Grand Admiral Thrawn

Assault Objective: Advanced Gunnery
Defense Objective: Contested Outpost
Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

[ flagship ] Imperial Star Destroyer Kuat Refit (112 points)
- Grand Admiral Thrawn ( 32 points)
- Strategic Adviser ( 4 points)
- Ruthless Strategists ( 4 points)
- Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points)
- Leading Shots ( 4 points)
- Ordnance Pods ( 3 points)
= 166 total ship cost

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer (62 points)
- Demolisher ( 10 points)
- Ruthless Strategists ( 4 points)
- Assault Proton Torpedoes ( 5 points)
= 81 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

1 JumpMaster 5000 ( 12 points)
1 Lambda-class Shuttle ( 15 points)
1 Major Rhymer ( 16 points)
4 TIE Bomber Squadrons ( 36 points)
1 "Mauler" Mithel ( 15 points)
= 94 total squadron cost

This is my 7th version, keeping the overall theme but adjusted for my meta and experiances.

While I wasn't excited to drop my 2nd comms net for BCC, watching your entire bomber wing throw blanks on it's first pass solidified the need for one as insurance. Considering you do need your bombers to make up for damage by not using the ordnance slot for anti ship.

Including the good Major only makes sense, without boosted comms, you need a way to force project without having the increased worry about the Lambda getting out of position and losing activations. Also prevents your bomber wing from getting caught in overlapping flak.

Or allows you to detach the major and a bomber to use as "bait" to encourage an alpha into your flak fields, where your ISD then proceeds to murder anything in it's field of fire. I've melted 6 hull squadrons in one round, granted, at the cost of my own bombers hull.

Demo has APT over racks, almost everything has a brace or enough shielding that it didn't seem to add much, even when i needed to pop it on a squadron.

Granted, with no re rolls and some ships/cards able to cancel APT, I find that it's still a better choice when it does land.

I ran Pryce for awhile, i do prefer Pryce but ultimately i find SA to have a tad more flexibility.

12 hours ago, Karneck said:

Thrawn v7
Author: Karneck

Faction: Galactic Empire
Points: 397/400

Commander: Grand Admiral Thrawn

Assault Objective: Advanced Gunnery
Defense Objective: Contested Outpost
Navigation Objective: Superior Positions

[ flagship ] Imperial Star Destroyer Kuat Refit (112 points)
- Grand Admiral Thrawn ( 32 points)
- Strategic Adviser ( 4 points)
- Ruthless Strategists ( 4 points)
- Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points)
- Leading Shots ( 4 points)
- Ordnance Pods ( 3 points)
= 166 total ship cost

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer (62 points)
- Demolisher ( 10 points)
- Ruthless Strategists ( 4 points)
- Assault Proton Torpedoes ( 5 points)
= 81 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

1 JumpMaster 5000 ( 12 points)
1 Lambda-class Shuttle ( 15 points)
1 Major Rhymer ( 16 points)
4 TIE Bomber Squadrons ( 36 points)
1 "Mauler" Mithel ( 15 points)
= 94 total squadron cost

This is my 7th version, keeping the overall theme but adjusted for my meta and experiances.

While I wasn't excited to drop my 2nd comms net for BCC, watching your entire bomber wing throw blanks on it's first pass solidified the need for one as insurance. Considering you do need your bombers to make up for damage by not using the ordnance slot for anti ship.

Including the good Major only makes sense, without boosted comms, you need a way to force project without having the increased worry about the Lambda getting out of position and losing activations. Also prevents your bomber wing from getting caught in overlapping flak.

Or allows you to detach the major and a bomber to use as "bait" to encourage an alpha into your flak fields, where your ISD then proceeds to murder anything in it's field of fire. I've melted 6 hull squadrons in one round, granted, at the cost of my own bombers hull.

Demo has APT over racks, almost everything has a brace or enough shielding that it didn't seem to add much, even when i needed to pop it on a squadron.

Granted, with no re rolls and some ships/cards able to cancel APT, I find that it's still a better choice when it does land.

I ran Pryce for awhile, i do prefer Pryce but ultimately i find SA to have a tad more flexibility.

Kallus would be a good fit on Demo.

Took a few days, but hey, running squadless like all the cool kids do (who aren't playing Sato or Sloane, for that matter)

https://cannotgetyourshipout.blogspot.com/2018/07/squadron-encyclopedia-9-running.html

Missed one. Darth boarding Vader ...

7 hours ago, Ginkapo said:

Missed one. Darth boarding Vader ...

Eh, he helps but if that's lined up against Yavaris and isn't priority one on my end, that's more on me I think. It's a good deterrent, though. And I'll add it to the update eventually (currently working at the moment...)

I also just updated the Cracken article. There's like 3 new sentences in there, mainly for clarification. Link below, but unless you're obsessed with Cracken/my article, I don't expect anyone to notice much of a difference in it (HH TFA remain good! I still haven't played them with him to try it out!) Updating Garm, on the other hand, became more of an issue than i expected (MCEF....) so, "soon" on that one. Anyways, here's Wonderwall Cracken

http://cannotgetyourshipout.blogspot.com/2017/04/general-airen-cracken-know-your.html

I updated the fleet support upgrades article to better reflect the improved potency of Slicer Tools nowadays. I also updated the Arquitens article in several places, but particularly I focused more on when you might want to use a Command Arquitens.