34 minutes ago, TheEasternKing said:

I don't agree, if it takes you being in the top 0.01 percentile of Armada tournament players to build a fleet with VSD's and win, that does not make VSD's competitive or a good ship. It means someone so far beyond average to be ( a statistically irrelevant integer) outplayed his opponents.

Look at the break down %'s for Imperial fleets on ship composition in top 8 winners, what % of them are running 1 or more VSD's? (in the big tournaments, not some store champ where 4 people turned up.)

So in order to be good the VSD have to make you win being just an average player? Average players don't win Worlds or Nationals so I guess it will never reach your standards.

21 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

So in order to be good the VSD have to make you win being just an average player? Average players don't win Worlds or Nationals so I guess it will never reach your standards.

To be fair, Imperials have never won Worlds. So it's a whole faction of scrubs IMHO.

16 minutes ago, geek19 said:

To be fair, Imperials have never won Worlds. So it's a whole faction of scrubs IMHO.

1 hour ago, geek19 said:

To be fair, Imperials have never won Worlds. So it's a whole faction of scrubs IMHO.

Don't worry, I'm working on it!

Yes, the VSD is slow. Yes, it barely turns. But it is still very capable. Most importantly, when constructing a fleet it is often convenient to turn to the lower-cost VSD so that I can squeeze in that saved 40 or 50 points somewhere else.

20 hours ago, Ginkapo said:

Or third way. You can experiment and find ways to challenge the status quo, and take VSDs competitively because they have their niche.

Let us know when they've succeeded, because I think if there were a way, someone would have found it by now and we all would be using it. D-Cap gunboats aren't enough.

31 minutes ago, Cavgunner said:

Yes, the VSD is slow. Yes, it barely turns. But it is still very capable. Most importantly, when constructing a fleet it is often convenient to turn to the lower-cost VSD so that I can squeeze in that saved 40 or 50 points somewhere else.

Capable of crossing the board fast enough to commit it's second row of battery dice against a speed 0 objective-camping list just waiting for you to get in range? Ok. Let's see how many VSDs last charging into the teeth of some Cymoon/Liberty/Fighter ambush lists designed to camp an objective, because they're "capable".

And yes it has to be the teeth, because anything other than a straight line and I'm arriving on turn 5 and my opponent already left.

19 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

Let us know when they've succeeded, because I think if there were a way, someone would have found it by now and we all would be using it. D-Cap gunboats aren't enough.

Capable of crossing the board fast enough to commit it's second row of battery dice against a speed 0 objective-camping list just waiting for you to get in range? Ok. Let's see how many VSDs last charging into the teeth of some Cymoon/Liberty/Fighter ambush lists designed to camp an objective, because they're "capable".

And yes it has to be the teeth, because anything other than a straight line and I'm arriving on turn 5 and my opponent already left.

I assume that you don't intend it, but there is an acidic tone to your response that is rather off-putting. You make Armada sound like a min-max death march rather than an experience to be enjoyed. I am aware of the VSD's limitations, just like everyone else here is, and nothing in this game exists in a vacuum.

I don't enjoy the feeling of powerlessness and futility. It's a feeling I get when trying to put VSDs into play competitively, and it hurts when my favorite ship continues to let me down.

It also hurts when players are suggesting the VSD is wonderful in its current position, like it doesn't need fixes. It invalidates my experience of continually seeing them trashed by heavies, outrun when trying to flank, letting me down in competitively, and just not being good enough compared to what the ISD offers. After all this thread is, "Do the VSDs need an overhaul?" and the OP even asks, "Why isn't [my VSD] an ISD?" So it's not just me.

I have a critics' mindset. I know the VSD's flaws and how they "should" be played as defensive ships, JJ hard-flankers, I know all of that. It also means I know what I can't do with them. And I want my favorite ship to be as flexible and desirable as an ISD. It has many makings of being a great ship, but two things need to be fixed for it to last in the 400 point meta it was not designed to handle back when it was just the core set: Speed and/or protection.

Otherwise ISDs will win out every time, and my favorite ship is the poorest competitive choice to take in an Imperial list.

6 hours ago, geek19 said:

To be fair, Imperials have never won Worlds. So it's a whole faction of scrubs IMHO.

Yep but Rebels winning just proof those players have super powers, rebel ships are still crap. ?

1 hour ago, Norsehound said:

I don't enjoy the feeling of powerlessness and futility. It's a feeling I get when trying to put VSDs into play competitively, and it hurts when my favorite ship continues to let me down.

It also hurts when players are suggesting the VSD is wonderful in its current position, like it doesn't need fixes. It invalidates my experience of continually seeing them trashed by heavies, outrun when trying to flank, letting me down in competitively, and just not being good enough compared to what the ISD offers. After all this thread is, "Do the VSDs need an overhaul?" and the OP even asks, "Why isn't [my VSD] an ISD?" So it's not just me.

I have a critics' mindset. I know the VSD's flaws and how they "should" be played as defensive ships, JJ hard-flankers, I know all of that. It also means I know what I can't do with them. And I want my favorite ship to be as flexible and desirable as an ISD. It has many makings of being a great ship, but two things need to be fixed for it to last in the 400 point meta it was not designed to handle back when it was just the core set: Speed and/or protection.

Otherwise ISDs will win out every time, and my favorite ship is the poorest competitive choice to take in an Imperial list.

Why your invalidations are better than theirs?

Also you could try to change your favourite ship by another? It won't make the VSD good but it will fix your frustration ?

I also love the VSD but I do it with its limitations.

##savetheVSD

I think most of that criticism on the VSDs can be reduced on the fact that its a slowgoing, lazy ship. Thats all, and thats just one aspect - but, to be honest, a huge aspect.

"It can't mess with larger ships"

- Yes, because its difficult for VSDs to keep their (competitive!) front-arc in play. And it is difficult, because its hard to maneuver.

"You cant use it as a flanking ship"

- Thats true, because its to lazy to do such a thing.

"Its hard to play on obectives with it"

- Yes, but (according to the objective) it could be hard vor VSDs to even reach the zones of interest or react on key game-changing situation.

"It can even be killed by some smaller ships - so it must be a crappy thing"

- Also true. It's nearly impossible to change their flying direction more than 90 degree per game. So no chance of getting their front arc in action several times.

So its all about the VSDs maneuverability. Improve that, and you will got a "more competitive" ship on the table. Nav-commands or Jerry are solutions. There are tactical roles made vor VSDs, exspecially carrier-roles. And VSDs got an advantage on Quasars: They can do ship/ship-combat, as Quasars can't really do.

4 hours ago, Norsehound said:

Let us know when they've succeeded, because I think if there were a way, someone would have found it by now and we all would be using it.

I have made many unconventional fleets that have been highly successful. Nobody ever starts using any of the lessons from them. So excuse me if I dont care about your rhetoric that you want to learn. You dont. You never have. You never will. As you have just said you have a "critics mindset", and in all honesty thats your biggest issue with VSDs and other ships. Until you open up to challenging your preconceived ideas nothing will ever change.

4 hours ago, Cavgunner said:

I assume that you don't intend it, but there is an acidic tone to your response that is rather off-putting. You make Armada sound like a min-max death march rather than an experience to be enjoyed.

Cavgunner, meet Norsehound.

10 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

I have made many unconventional fleets that have been highly successful.

Would you share some with me? I didn't decide what I'm going to explore after Nationals but I think VSDs are interesting.

3 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Would you share some with me? I didn't decide what I'm going to explore after Nationals but I think VSDs are interesting.

Try my blog

34 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

I have made many unconventional fleets that have been highly successful. Nobody ever starts using any of the lessons from them. So excuse me if I dont care about your rhetoric that you want to learn. You dont. You never have. You never will. As you have just said you have a "critics mindset", and in all honesty thats your biggest issue with VSDs and other ships. Until you open up to challenging your preconceived ideas nothing will ever change. 

About two months ago I told myself that I should challenge this longstanding notion that the VSD is in a bad spot. It's only fair, so I started out taking two VSDs with Tua and Brunsen and a sidecar GSD. The list had some problems, but I iterated enough times with some practice games to think it had some merit. In fact I was rather surprised on how other parts of my list were failing worse than the VSDs, they were doing ok. I took it to tournament play... it ended up dead last, with a day of disappointment without really much to show for the three games I took it into.

Same with generic TIEs. Tried one game with them and I realized the generics were too fragile to really be worth it, even in a Sloane list. It repeated a lesson in the wave 2 days when I tried mass TIEs to snowball my enemy under blue dice. In the final game I realized I was only giving my opponent points.

These things weren't meeting my expectations of what I want on the table. And maybe that's my problem, expecting too much of the VSD and hoping it can be something it isn't.

For the Regional tournament I took my well-practiced ARQ battery list and came in second, clawing apart a lot of heavies all through standoff firepower. It's a list type I made wanting to replicate the success of the Rieekan aces list I was beating my head against for a summer some years ago, without relying on fighters in turn.

Maybe I should give up on hoping the VSD can be more than it is. It's not going to be what I want it to be.

I think VSDs could use some new options, but there's builds that work well now. I'll agree VSD2 is too expensive for what it does, but I'll always take a VSD1 over an ISD. Personally I think the ISD is bad and not very competitive. The ISD got an overhaul, but it's still an expensive point piñata. It's an overcosted VSD with a contain.

Running multiple VSDs is not a very good idea, but running multiple of any imperial ship is usually bad idea.

2 hours ago, Kristjan said:

P     ersonally  I think  th  e ISD is bad and not v  ery  compe  ti  tiv    e   .          

@Baltanok do we have numbers for top 4 Imperial lists with one or more ISDs? I’d like to empirically nip this in the bud before we get another improvement thread.

5 hours ago, Norsehound said:

Same  with generic TIEs. Tried one game with the  m and I realized the generics were too fragile to really be worth it, even in a Sloane list.   I  t   repeated a lesson in the wave 2 days when I tried mass TIEs to snowball my enemy under blue dice. In the final game I realized I was only giving my opponent points.

Don’t mess with generics. I’ve flown them since Sloane came out and gotten good results in the four tournaments I’ve brought them to (first, third, first, first.) They’re not forgiving, but they can get work done.

19 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

do we have numbers for top 4 Imperial lists with one or   more ISDs? I’d like to empirically nip this in the bud before we get another improvement thre  ad.

Now I want to make a "Are ISDs Uncompetitive?" thread with the description just being "Too late @The Jabbawookie !" ?

40 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

@Baltanok do we have numbers for top 4 Imperial lists with one or more ISDs? I’d like to empirically nip this in the bud before we get another improvement thread.

Yes, yes we do.

Wave 7 regionals:

all fleets: 72 of 382 made it to top 4 (19%)

All Imperial 37/155 (24%)

At least 1 ISD 30/120 (25%)

2+ ISD 10/37 (27%)

So, fleets with ISDs are more likely to end up in the top 4 than fleets without them. ISD's also appeared reasonably reliably in the top cuts in the tournaments covered by the overnight report. (thanks @Captain Weather )

top 4 at one of (German, UK, US, Euro, NorthAm, or world champs) 10/24 have ISDs

53 minutes ago, Baltanok said:

Yes, yes we do.

Wave 7 regionals:

all fleets: 72 of 382 made it to top 4 (19%)

All Imperial 37/155 (24%)

At least 1 ISD 30/120 (25%)

2+ ISD 10/37 (27%)

So, fleets with ISDs are more likely to end up in the top 4 than fleets without them. ISD's also appeared reasonably reliably in the top cuts in the tournaments covered by the overnight report. (thanks @Captain Weather )

top 4 at one of (German, UK, US, Euro, NorthAm, or world champs) 10/24 have ISDs

So the majority of players flying ISD didn't win the tournament. Such a crap ship. ?

Maybe they should do some new VSD versions like the Cymoon/Kuat ISD's. Not sure if they would be able to change the maneuverability but it would be interesting to see what they could change, preferably without making the old versions totally obsolete.

38 minutes ago, Captain Ordo N-11 said:

Maybe they should do some new VSD versions like the Cymoon/Kuat ISD's. Not sure if they would be able to change the maneuverability but it would be interesting to see what they could change, preferably without making the old versions totally obsolete.

I am not sure what new VSDs could change without invalidating the old versions. I still use ISD1s and 2s because the Cymoon and Kuat can't take certain roles away from them, but if there was a Cymoon style VSD would you take a VSD2 anymore?

3 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

I am not sure what new VSDs could change without invalidating the old versions. I still use ISD1s and 2s because the Cymoon and Kuat can't take certain roles away from them, but if there was a Cymoon style VSD would you take a VSD2 anymore?

Yeah, I'm really not sure if it would even be possible. If so great, but maybe it would be better to leave them alone or replace them. I don't know if any option is good.

3 minutes ago, Captain Ordo N-11 said:

Yeah, I'm really not sure if it would even be possible. If so great, but maybe it would be better to leave them alone or replace them. I don't know if any option is good.

If it just had the ability to go Speed 3 through some means, either innately or by Engine Techs I would run it more, even if the Victory had no yaw clicks at that speed it would be better. All of the other problems the Victory has can be solved, but nothing can be done about speed right now.

11 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

If it just had the ability to go Speed 3 through some means, either innately or by Engine Techs I would run it more, even if the Victory had no yaw clicks at that speed it would be better. All of the other problems the Victory has can be solved, but nothing can be done about speed right now.

Officer that adds a support team slot similar to Tua. Or maybe a non unique title (crimson command?) that acts like engine techs.