https://stayontheleader.blogspot.com/2020/03/generic-efficiency-revisited-new-points.html

The little people are rising up!

Generics are my preferred way to play, at this point. I've never cared for Ace Wing.

Another lover of Ion Scyks! They're such a natural comparison to Strikers and Interceptors. Same cost, same 3-red dice (mostly), a best-of-both-worlds defensive statline, and dial that's rather solid. Blues could be nicer (2-bank would be quite welcome), but still. No bonus movement action, but they potentially kibosh your opponent's maneuvers.

I've had a tonne of fun with 3 or 4 of them (the 4th could instead be an Autoblasters Sunny Bounder) and Fenn Rau. Ion isn't bad; but I think it does best with a somewhat diversified list, to back it up with access to plain damage (to beat those Long Haul Truckers), and Fenn feels good at that to me.

//

I'll tell you the ship I wish was in here: Ion Turret TIE Aggressors. Same price as an Ion Scyk, but with a turret instead of a cannon, and a similar-but-not-identical defensive statline. I wish I had a second TIE Aggressor model, since it's such an awkward little lovechild between the Ion Scyk and the TIE/sf, two of my favorite ships.

51 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Same price as an Ion Scyk, but with a turret instead of a cannon

Intruiging. You lose a lot from not having the 3 dice out at range 3, I think, but potentially gain something back by having a turret arc instead

These are good numbers

Would be interesting to see how this fares for the Upsilon and YT2400 vs 3 dice and 2 dice ships.

Can one simply compare the final table against each other in 2 die vs 3 die comparisons?

I did play with 4 aggressors w/ion, they are very annoying indeed. They did quite well in a local tourney, losing just in last match vs some trandoshan slavers beef. The damage output is low, but the point exchange is tasty.

And yes, they often over-ion stuff.

the list is:

4x tie aggressor (ion turret)

2x Nu squadron (autoblaster, xg-1, advanced slam)

200pts

37 minutes ago, alien earth said:

I did play with 4 aggressors w/ion, they are very annoying indeed. They did quite well in a local tourney, losing just in last match vs some trandoshan slavers beef. The damage output is low, but the point exchange is tasty.

And yes, they often over-ion stuff.

the list is:

4x tie aggressor (ion turret)

2x Nu squadron (autoblaster, xg-1, advanced slam)

200pts

Yeah that’s exactly the sort of list people dismiss, but this calculation would suggest is a lot better than you think.

4 hours ago, alien earth said:

4x tie aggressor (ion turret)

2x Nu squadron (autoblaster, xg-1, advanced slam)

200pts

I wonder if having 1-2 ships that can spike damage would make up for your hard counters (beefy big bases). HLC for easy 4-dice or protorps for nasty crit trains seem like a good fit. Autoblasters are good for pushing damage but the list seems like 100% anti-ace tech and struggles against beef.

Actually, a couple of Sabers come out at the same cost. Or Bombers with APT and Protons or Prockets, Seismic, and Fuses or MF. Or FCS Tempests. Or some solid bomb-strikers...

37 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

I wonder if having 1-2 ships that can spike damage would make up for your hard counters (beefy big bases). HLC for easy 4-dice or protorps for nasty crit trains seem like a good fit. Autoblasters are good for pushing damage but the list seems like 100% anti-ace tech and struggles against beef.

Actually, a couple of Sabers come out at the same cost. Or Bombers with APT and Protons or Prockets, Seismic, and Fuses or MF. Or FCS Tempests. Or some solid bomb-strikers...

yeah, was quite just a test. it really struggles against beefy big bases (and I definitly did't see that 2xTrandoshan+sonny+ywing list coming at all), but if i was a better player maybe focus fire can get thru. They really reliably land 6/7 damages on a Yv666 each turn, plus ions...

I choose Nu squadrons because they ARE fast and cheap, and it's not easy to get points from them at all. The plan was that: give my opponent very few points overall.

maybe could better work in a different way with a couple of alphas o sabers, or something 3/4dicey, as you suggest. Or a defender messing around, o even a decimator.

47 minutes ago, alien earth said:

even a decimator

For point denial I feel like that would be a really good choice. Not sure how the stats are on damage-dishing though.

Also, just finished reading the original blog post and this is really good! I do love a good deep statistical evaluation.

20 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:

https://stayontheleader.blogspot.com/2020/03/generic-efficiency-revisited-new-points.html

The little people are rising up!

Interesting write up. One thing I didn’t see and perhaps I just missed it. The SF Gunner and it’s abilities improving or hurting its overall ship efficiency. Certainly a curious thought.

Well with the gunner you become basically a slightly less efficient t-65. Same stats at 42pts, rear arc

An interesting analysis. One thing that isn't considered is crits, which means that it slightly overvalues hull compared to shields. E.g. Kihraxz fighters actually die faster than a T-65 because they are more likely to take Direct Hit, Hull Breach, etc. They may also have their shot ruined by Weapons Failure if they're low initiative.

Also, the table for "Offence vs point cost" for 3-dice ships appears to show that the T-65 X-wing is 2% less efficient than itself?

11 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:

Well with the gunner you become basically a slightly less efficient t-65. Same stats at 42pts, rear arc

no boost/Br shaenigans, though. Double arc/double tap instead.

I did my own chart, in wich i compare the raw damage output (in points/shot) vs a T65, considering token combinations, and the raw input (as above, vs a T65 point/shots conceded). Then i just subtract and have some funny results.

Thank you SOTL, really inspiring work

PS I apoligize for my bad english, guys, and bad formatting 😫