44 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

I'm going to bend the rules I made a bit and post a squadron, it's already in X-Wing so why not Armada?

Scrolling through the Wookieepedia page it said a squadron of Star Wings often had to escort another squadron of Star Wings to the target because at the time no other Imperial starfighters had hyperdrives, hence the Escort rule.

I don't think that steps on the TIE Advanced's toes does it? The Advanced is twice as fast, not heavy, and is 4 points cheaper. I envisioned the Star Wing would protect it's own Jumpmasters and Interceptors somewhat ironically from any alpha strikes.

Maybe bump up the hull to 7, swap a red die for that black anti-squadron battery and a blue for a black anti-ship. Not sure i like the choice of escort and heavy though...

2 minutes ago, idiewell said:

Maybe bump up the hull to 7, swap a red die for that black anti-squadron battery and a blue for a black anti-ship. Not sure i like the choice of escort and heavy though...

Wookieepedia said it struggled to combat X-Wings and A-Wings because of their agility, so I thought Heavy would represent that in-lore problem well.

I really like the idea of 2 black bomber dice for some reason... ?

Hmm... I think I need to link to this article I wrote.

On 9/6/2018 at 10:52 AM, cynanbloodbane said:

If a TIE Fighter gets 1 blue die aginst ships, the Lancer should at least have that.

The reason Nebulon-Bs don't have three blue AA dice is because they can't be allowed to wipe a field of generic TIEs in two turns.

Which sucks for fighter balance mechanics, since effective aa would be nice to throw against beefier rebel fighters.

But for the sake of future proofing, you can't enable something that can easily one shot TIE fighters. I mean, this with ruthless strategists.

2 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

The reason Nebulon-Bs don't have three blue AA dice is because they can't be allowed to wipe a field of generic TIEs in two turns.

Which sucks for fighter balance mechanics, since effective aa would be nice to throw against beefier rebel fighters.

But for the sake of future proofing, you can't enable something that can easily one shot TIE fighters. I mean, this with ruthless strategists.

Are you suggesting there is infighting in the Imperial ranks? ?

15 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

Hmm... I think I need to link to this article I wrote.

My flak machine pops like a balloon if an ISD or MC80 looks at it funny, so I thought that was enough to counteract that superb squadron shredding.

Plus I hate seeing over 37,085 crewmen on an ISD die to a moisture farmer that has a twisted sense of morality. ?

3 hours ago, Piratical Moustache said:

I'm going to bend the rules I made a bit and post a squadron, it's already in X-Wing so why not Armada?

Scrolling through the Wookieepedia page it said a squadron of Star Wings often had to escort another squadron of Star Wings to the target because at the time no other Imperial starfighters had hyperdrives, hence the Escort rule.

I don't think that steps on the TIE Advanced's toes does it? The Advanced is twice as fast, not heavy, and is 4 points cheaper. I envisioned the Star Wing would protect it's own Jumpmasters and Interceptors somewhat ironically from any alpha strikes.

Heavy and Speed 2 are part of the reason nobody takes YV-666s competitively. Have you flown Assault Gunboats in TIE Fighter?

I don't think these deserve heavy. XG-1s were used in dogfight capacities to intercept and destroy enemy fighters- concussion missiles were a noteworthy warhead they carried in the X-Wing flight simulator (much to the frustration of anyone playing that game). They are certainly an improvement over plodding craft like Lambda shuttles and TIE Bombers.

Problem is the Firespray is pretty much what I'd picture of the XG-1. An independent strike fighter with decent fighter attack capabilities but also good ordnance strikes. That fits the Firespray's identity pretty well. I have suggestions on how to make it different from the Firespray to be an Assault Gunboat, but two black dice with bomber is not it. That's more for something like the TIE Punisher, with it's four ordnance pods laden with all manner of explosives. I can't think of any other craft deserving of the best fighter bombing dice in this game than basically a flying missile rack.

2 hours ago, Piratical Moustache said:

My flak machine pops like a balloon if an ISD or MC80 looks at it funny, so I thought that was enough to counteract that superb squadron shredding.

Plus I hate seeing over 37,085 crewmen on an ISD die to a moisture farmer that has a twisted sense of morality. ?

But what about CR-90s or Nebulon-Bs? Can they stop this thing?

Fact of the matter of it is, 3 dice is unprecedented, and there's very few things in the game right now that can one-shot entire squadrons. From other squadrons, its expected. But capital ships doing similar need to invest in other upgrade cards to gain that ability, sacrificing some options for the one option of maximizing AA firepower.

Another fault I see with this is that there is no competition for what you're doing with your firing arcs. It will unquestionably, always be using its AA. The battery dice are not even considering (indeed, your first version had none). Try a few games with this ship against an all-ship list and tell me how satisfying it is to run this vessel.

If it's not, well, this is why people didn't bother with generic TIE Fighters in lists until Sloane came along.

FWIW I'd suggest a Lancer that packs 2 blue AA and a CR-90's attack profile on the battery, followed by the defense token selection you've chosen at the point cost you've outlined. WHat you get with the Lancer is a cheaper offering of 2 dice AA with better range and a more reasonable battery with those 2 reds out the front (or switch it up, put two reds on the side and two in the front for a broadsider). It would be cheaper than the GSD and with some standoff range by comparison. It's not phenominal, but it wouldn't be such an outlier that it's useless in tournament settings where you have to be prepared for anything.

9 hours ago, Norsehound said:

Heavy and Speed 2 are part of the reason nobody takes YV-666s competitively. Have you flown Assault Gunboats in TIE Fighter?

I don't think these deserve heavy. XG-1s were used in dogfight capacities to intercept and destroy enemy fighters- concussion missiles were a noteworthy warhead they carried in the X-Wing flight simulator (much to the frustration of anyone playing that game). They are certainly an improvement over plodding craft like Lambda shuttles and TIE Bombers.

Problem is the Firespray is pretty much what I'd picture of the XG-1. An independent strike fighter with decent fighter attack capabilities but also good ordnance strikes. That fits the Firespray's identity pretty well. I have suggestions on how to make it different from the Firespray to be an Assault Gunboat, but two black dice with bomber is not it. That's more for something like the TIE Punisher, with it's four ordnance pods laden with all manner of explosives. I can't think of any other craft deserving of the best fighter bombing dice in this game than basically a flying missile rack.

So if I removed Heavy and changed the Bomber dice to Blue/Black, would the 16 point price need adjusting? The Empire has so many speed boost options for squadrons that don't need it, that here would be a squadron that really wants those upgrades.

I shift back and forth on whether or not I like the TIE Punisher's looks, but you're right that if any generic squadron would have two Black Bomber dice it would be the Punisher.

9 hours ago, Norsehound said:

But what about CR-90s or Nebulon-Bs? Can they stop this thing?

Fact of the matter of it is, 3 dice is unprecedented, and there's very few things in the game right now that can one-shot entire squadrons. From other squadrons, its expected. But capital ships doing similar need to invest in other upgrade cards to gain that ability, sacrificing some options for the one option of maximizing AA firepower.

Another fault I see with this is that there is no competition for what you're doing with your firing arcs. It will unquestionably, always be using its AA. The battery dice are not even considering (indeed, your first version had none). Try a few games with this ship against an all-ship list and tell me how satisfying it is to run this vessel.

If it's not, well, this is why people didn't bother with generic TIE Fighters in lists until Sloane came along.

FWIW I'd suggest a Lancer that packs 2 blue AA and a CR-90's attack profile on the battery, followed by the defense token selection you've chosen at the point cost you've outlined. WHat you get with the Lancer is a cheaper offering of 2 dice AA with better range and a more reasonable battery with those 2 reds out the front (or switch it up, put two reds on the side and two in the front for a broadsider). It would be cheaper than the GSD and with some standoff range by comparison. It's not phenominal, but it wouldn't be such an outlier that it's useless in tournament settings where you have to be prepared for anything.

Admittedly I often forget about same faction matches, I was just thinking about Imperial vs Rebel when making this.

I don't necessarily mind the idea of a very specialized ship, where it is simply a counter for a style of fleet. I did consider bending the lore for a CR90 like armament, but I felt people might say I made a better CR90 for the Imperials.

That being said I don't disagree with your points, all I want to have is a reliable defensive screen against bombers. In my experience TIEs rarely succeed in defending ships, while it is very easy for the Rebels to defend their ships, then start bombing.

Okay so I went with a combat flotilla design. I didn't want to give it a scatter though so I think the flotilla idea is that the group of Lancers can provide decent antiship firepower that the ship seems to lack. A cheap combat small ship with decent side arcs and excellent anti squadron in terms of range and firepower.

Give it a title that adds a red dice vs bombers or replace a dice vs bombers. Adding a red dice give it a 3/8 chance to hit at medium range without making it long range.

I made a dreadnought design based on original and imperial support vessel. Though I think the dreadnought is a bit undercosted.

On 9/6/2018 at 6:00 PM, Piratical Moustache said:

Post any Rebel or Imperial ship (2 variants like FFG) with a description of why you want it, and your reasoning on the stats. I thought it would be fun to see other people's ideas and who knows, FFG might like a few of them.

There isn't a dedicated anti-squadron ship in the game and I think the Imperials could really use one in particular. The Lancer will defend your other ships from squadrons, but can't really do anything else, so bringing a Lancer in a list is a bit of a gamble. I also wanted a flak oriented Raider to retain the Flechette Torpedoes advantage, so no Ordinance slot or black dice for the Lancer.

The GR75 has no dice because it has no guns at all. The Lancer is very well armed, its weapons are just not tailored for anti-ship duties. Two blue or one all around seem fitting. Command 2 could also be more fitting, the Lancer is in the same weight class as a Nebulon-B. 3 Anti-squadron are a lot. Either you give it two red or three blue at most.

On 9/9/2018 at 1:13 AM, Piratical Moustache said:

I'm going to bend the rules I made a bit and post a squadron, it's already in X-Wing so why not Armada?

Scrolling through the Wookieepedia page it said a squadron of Star Wings often had to escort another squadron of Star Wings to the target because at the time no other Imperial starfighters had hyperdrives, hence the Escort rule.

I don't think that steps on the TIE Advanced's toes does it? The Advanced is twice as fast, not heavy, and is 4 points cheaper. I envisioned the Star Wing would protect it's own Jumpmasters and Interceptors somewhat ironically from any alpha strikes.

to be honest I like the version by @DiabloAzul better:

The XG-1 is not slower than Y-Wings (or X-Wings), I also dont see neither Heavy nor Escort beeing an integral part of how it flies.

On 9/9/2018 at 1:52 AM, chr335 said:

When I first designed them I used the faster then cr90 legends speed but I think drop them to speed 3

The Carrack is describes as evenly armed all around, so I dont see a strong fron arc as very fitting. Nice that you got the two version in (altough I would label them "Carrack light cruiser" and "Carrack support crusier". But as the "Flak" version swaps its Ion cannons for lasers, that should be a bit less punch in it against ships.

I like cynanbloodbane version, altough I like your Idea of making it speed 4 better. It was afterall famed for its speed.
therefor I propose this:

14 hours ago, TallGiraffe said:

Okay so I went with a combat flotilla design. I didn't want to give it a scatter though so I think the flotilla idea is that the group of Lancers can provide decent antiship firepower that the ship seems to lack. A cheap combat small ship with decent side arcs and excellent anti squadron in terms of range and firepower.

I like it, although I may drop the side arcs to one & add a black anti squad dice. This way its very specialised (as it should be) and the anti squad is very deadly but you only get the full dice at close range (so it’s not crazy over powered). My thinking is- if an ISD has 2 blue anti squad then a dedicated anti fighter flotilla should be better at it.

9 minutes ago, ISD Avenger said:

My thinking is- if an ISD has 2 blue anti squad then a dedicated anti fighter flotilla should be better at it.

But why? It is also A LOT smaller. So while the percentage of "flak" decdicated weapons might be greater, the absolute numbers are not (even so I think the Lancer should have red/blue or 3 blue as anti-ship, because otherwise it must be super-cheap.

4 hours ago, DScipio said:

But why? It is also A LOT smaller. So while the percentage of "flak" decdicated weapons might be greater, the absolute numbers are not (even so I think the Lancer should have red/blue or 3 blue as anti-ship, because otherwise it must be super-cheap.

But why not? It’s not known how many anti fighter guns an ISD has. 2 blue seems very generous.

And it’s not just about quantity or size, it’s about coordination of fire etc etc. A dedicated flotilla with less guns could (should) still arguably be better at anti fighter than an ISD.

3 hours ago, ISD Avenger said:

But why not? It’s not known how many anti fighter guns an ISD has. 2 blue seems very generous.

And it’s not just about quantity or size, it’s about coordination of fire etc etc. A dedicated flotilla with less guns could (should) still arguably be better at anti fighter than an ISD.

I don't think there's anything wrong with saying a small, corvette-sized ship has the firepower and target-acquisition package of a battleship. Raiders may have a similar setup but black dice are short range and hit better- so multiple two-blue-dice throwers is going to cover a decent amount of space, with the chance of an accuracy on their hits.

In fact at 37 points it would be the cheapest 2x blue AA dice thrower in the game, sitting beneath the Neb-B's 57. While you can point to the Raider that ship is short range only and with a wonky defensive profile, particularly against fighters, probably to make up for the fantastic AA suite/possibilities.

I'd give the lancer some red dice as well, but just a few, say one on the side and one in the front with a 2 blue in the flank and one out the front. Ships at this size are either underpowered (GZ), or strictly close range without an upgrade (RDR), or are more expensive (ARQ/GSD). Having it be your flak boat with some red dice advantages at least lets it contribute some firepower to the fleet battle while being useful in other areas. The variant could add more red dice to the blue, though I wouldn't suggest going the other way around. The Armed Gozanti was probably supposed to be like this, but in my experience everyone always picks the cheaper option so the Gozanti does that one thing (commanding fighters, passing tokens) much cheaper than being a gunboat too. Forcing the reds at least means it can still contribute in the fleet battle instead of being a blue boat only.

Though, that brings up another thought...

Most ships in the game can be pressed to do multiple roles. Even the ARQ can be pushed into a flanker with Needa, TRCs, and Engine techs. What's the alternative function for the lancer? Right now it's only an AA boat without any other kind of function to it. By giving it reds, you could turn it into the cheapest gunship available for the Empire, by allowing slaved turrets/EA/DTTs and Gunnery teams. It'll be a lot better at it's job than the Gozanti and sate the want some Imperial players have for an easy-to-use corvette.

Listen guys. At some point we have to realize we can't just give a ship 3 Anti squadron dice because "IT WAS MADE TO DECIMATE SQUADRONS LIKE INSTANTLY" and just make stuff that actually is, you know balanced properly for what we have.

Looking at my Lancer design. It is pretty cheap at 34 points. It has decent health and firepower though it is slow and flotilla rules mean it can just be rammed with impunity. (I mainly did Flotilla honestly cause it would look cool on the table.) Comparing this to a CR-90 B, it might be over costed.

There does seem to be this weird thing about 3 anti fighter on a ship, like it would be the end of armada as we know it.

I don’t get it. A 3 dice anti fighter ship can be limited in other areas to make it viable.

As for role redundancy. Most imp fighters are very specialised, no reason a ship can’t be the same.

Give it 3 Anti-Squadron dice-but each one a different color. Say 1 red, 1 blue, 1 black. Is it still a good Anti-Fighter ship? Yep, but it's not an insta-kill except at close range (where it should be most dangerous anyway).

39 minutes ago, ISD Avenger said:

There does seem to be this weird thing about 3 anti fighter on a ship, like it would be the end of armada as we know it.

I don’t get it. A 3 dice anti fighter ship can be limited in other areas to make it viable.

As for role redundancy. Most imp fighters are very specialised, no reason a ship can’t be the same.

That is why I suggested an upgrade/title that adds dice against bombers. It is limited and not completely destroying 3 hull tie fighters everyone is complaining about the throw away fighters made to be expendable.

2 hours ago, TallGiraffe said:

Listen guys. At some point we have to realize we can't just give a ship 3 Anti squadron dice because "IT WAS MADE TO DECIMATE SQUADRONS LIKE INSTANTLY" and just make stuff that actually is, you know balanced properly for what we have.

Looking at my Lancer design. It is pretty cheap at 34 points. It has decent health and firepower though it is slow and flotilla rules mean it can just be rammed with impunity. (I mainly did Flotilla honestly cause it would look cool on the table.) Comparing this to a CR-90 B, it might be over costed.

The Lancer would be a small ship rather than a flotilla, it's 250 meters long, 100 meters longer than the Raider.

3 hours ago, Norsehound said:

I don't think there's anything wrong with saying a small, corvette-sized ship has the firepower and target-acquisition package of a battleship. Raiders may have a similar setup but black dice are short range and hit better- so multiple two-blue-dice throwers is going to cover a decent amount of space, with the chance of an accuracy on their hits.

In fact at 37 points it would be the cheapest 2x blue AA dice thrower in the game, sitting beneath the Neb-B's 57. While you can point to the Raider that ship is short range only and with a wonky defensive profile, particularly against fighters, probably to make up for the fantastic AA suite/possibilities.

I'd give the lancer some red dice as well, but just a few, say one on the side and one in the front with a 2 blue in the flank and one out the front. Ships at this size are either underpowered (GZ), or strictly close range without an upgrade (RDR), or are more expensive (ARQ/GSD). Having it be your flak boat with some red dice advantages at least lets it contribute some firepower to the fleet battle while being useful in other areas. The variant could add more red dice to the blue, though I wouldn't suggest going the other way around. The Armed Gozanti was probably supposed to be like this, but in my experience everyone always picks the cheaper option so the Gozanti does that one thing (commanding fighters, passing tokens) much cheaper than being a gunboat too. Forcing the reds at least means it can still contribute in the fleet battle instead of being a blue boat only.

Though, that brings up another thought...

Most ships in the game can be pressed to do multiple roles. Even the ARQ can be pushed into a flanker with Needa, TRCs, and Engine techs. What's the alternative function for the lancer? Right now it's only an AA boat without any other kind of function to it. By giving it reds, you could turn it into the cheapest gunship available for the Empire, by allowing slaved turrets/EA/DTTs and Gunnery teams. It'll be a lot better at it's job than the Gozanti and sate the want some Imperial players have for an easy-to-use corvette.

Perhaps an IPV-1 for cheap flak and some red dice? It's turbolasers could target starfighters while still being a light threat to ships.

Edit: A Carrack-class light cruiser would fit very well with what you're saying, it has an anti-starfighter refit that trades ion cannons for laser cannons.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Carrack-class_light_cruiser%2FLegends