I've seen a game where 1 player brought 16 Ties, and everyone kind of laughed at the novelty and ridiculousness of that many squads on the board. I think the seps are looking like a faction where this won't be novel or ridiculous, but instead make you nervously count their total squad command value. And I'm a huge fan.
Seppie Squads article
3 hours ago, Ophion said:The hyenas are nice, but they are a hike on the tie bomber and the ywing, much less hull for the points, and cannot be escorted.
And republic ships have excellent flak.
They are going to die like flies if the enemy can hit them. If you can time it, you might be able to get one attack in with hyperwave then a second with your first activation the next round.
You will also need bcc for them to be reliable as anyone who has ever used xwings will atttest.
I like doing these side-by-side comparisons, so (the forums don't like wiki image embeds) :
The Hyena does have the least hull for the most points. 11 isn't exactly expensive for a generic though. 2 blue dice puts it on par with the Rebel Y-Wing (slightly less consistent than the Republic Y-Wing), and not quite as hopeless as a TIE Bomber if it does have to shoot at other squadrons. Speed 4 is pretty good and will get it in and hitting fast if you can sneak it around the Republic's slower squad screens. Hull 4 is definitely a knock against it (though still tougher than Vultures and Trifighters), and coupled with its higher cost, ATN/spam lists aren't going to be very efficient.
The Hyena's main advantage over the other two is its anti-ship damage. Yes, red dice are swingy- occasionally you hit the two damage, more often you miss- but with AI, you basically have a built-in BCC with the second die. The odds of rolling 2 blanks are about the same as BCC rerolling a blank into another blank with an X- or E-Wing. A Hyena with AI rolls an average of 1.5 damage, compared to 1 for any given black-die bomber. Its the same average as a Firespray, Decimator, or ARC-170, but on a speed 4 squadron for 11 points and with the potential to swing into 3-4 damage if you're lucky. Throw in an actual BCC and you're now looking at an average 1.78 damage, compared to 1.25 for a single black die or 1.69 for two blues.
Your average damage-per-points for the basic bombers without and with BCC is:
Y-Wing: 0.1/.13
TIE: .11/.14
Hyena (with AI): .14/.16
The running theme for Separtist squadrons is that they're fast, cheap, expendable, and specialized like Imperial squadrons. They need support and commands for AI, but they pay back dividends in the amount of value you get per unit.
Republic flak is somewhat better for the cost, but mostly pretty bog-standard. Acclamator's better than a VSD, Consular Armed Cruiser is Nebulon Escort for much cheaper, Charger is as meh as it gets. Definitely not going to be single-handedly holding back enemy bomber swarms. The Separatists lack escorts, but its not like the TIE Advanced is a staple Imperial squadron.
(I tried uploading the bomber cards but couldn't and now I can't get rid of this picture)
Edited by Flyinpenguin117I saw in the German rules leak something about only 1 ace per 100 build points. Will that impact this much? That should limit all the fleets to fewer aces. Also we still don't know what else might be changing both rules and card wise. I am really looking forward to the new possibilities and I think these Sep fighters are pretty great.
1 hour ago, vadersson said:I saw in the German rules leak something about only 1 ace per 100 build points. Will that impact this much? That should limit all the fleets to fewer aces. Also we still don't know what else might be changing both rules and card wise. I am really looking forward to the new possibilities and I think these Sep fighters are pretty great.
This was known for awhile. I'm sure the CW ace rosters are designed around this restriction. Separatists aces in particular seem more like straight upgrades on their base models, rather than fundamental buildarounds, so they shouldn't have a problem building a decent squad roster with the 4-ace limit.
I am exited to try them out. It is a different feel for the most part, there are similarities. Overall, I think they will hit that swarm idea very well and bring some potentially devastating damage.
9 hours ago, Captain Corvid said:
The Belbullab-22 seems like a tough, heavy-hitter, and will probably get a lot of use out of its Screen ability. I can see it being used a lot in the Squadron Phase because it doesn't have AI.
General Grievous is certainly a beast! And also helpful with Relay 2. I know someone said Grievous could munch generics, but I'd like clarification from FFG that a "squadron with no readied defense tokens" does include generics, or if it's limited to squadrons with defense tokens, which must be exhausted. Also, if an Ace has discarded its defense tokens, does that trigger Grievous' ability? Grievous is a Jedi-Killer and there are a lot of Jedi Aces, so it would make sense if Grievous was more adept at killing Aces than generics.
That's another card with wording fated to provoke arguments, so it would be helpful if FFG spelled it out from the start so we know with absolute certainty how it works.
I've seen a few people saying that the wording on Grievous is ambiguous, but I really don't see how it is.
"While attacking a ship or squadron with no readied defense tokens, each of your [crit] icons adds 1 damage to the damage total."
That seems 100% clear to me. Grievous asks one question--does the target have any readied defense tokens? If yes, proceed as normal. If no, crits count for damage. It really is that easy. The confusion seems to be from people trying to add extra qualifiers that aren't actually on the card.
So, generic squadrons--No defense tokens ready or otherwise=no readied defense tokens, Grievous counts crits.
Ships/ squadrons with only exhausted defense tokens=No readied defense tokens, Grievous counts crits.
Ships/ squadrons that have all their defense tokens exhausted=no readied defense tokens, Grievous counts crits.
Ships/ squadrons with 1+ readied defense tokens=Yes, readied tokens, Grievous does not count crits.
It seems that CW beats GCW in squadrons easily. Can't decide about ships yet but after a few expansions it seems that clones or seppies will be the way to go if you wanna win tournaments.
1 hour ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:I've seen a few people saying that the wording on Grievous is ambiguous, but I really don't see how it is.
"While attacking a ship or squadron with no readied defense tokens, each of your [crit] icons adds 1 damage to the damage total."That seems 100% clear to me. Grievous asks one question--does the target have any readied defense tokens? If yes, proceed as normal. If no, crits count for damage. It really is that easy. The confusion seems to be from people trying to add extra qualifiers that aren't actually on the card.
So, generic squadrons--No defense tokens ready or otherwise=no readied defense tokens, Grievous counts
Pretty much this
53 minutes ago, Norell said:It seems that CW beats GCW in squadrons easily. Can't decide about ships yet but after a few expansions it seems that clones or seppies will be the way to go if you wanna win tournaments.
Wow, really?
Im not seeing anything here that would compete with a properly built imperial squad ball. None of the aces other than grevious have the sheer killing power or utility of mauler, marek jendon, ciena et al. And if we are talking generic wars, which may be coming back a bit with the ace cap, seps have no equivalents to damage boosting howlrunners and dengars. Repupblic have good jedi aces but again i dont see them standing up to the best imperial builds.
Ships are, at present a bit different. Acclamator is clearly better and cheaper than the victory, but we dont know how the venator is going to fare against the ISD (if lore is followed sort of accurately, i would guess -poorly). Consulars are awesome, but not currently as good and efficient as a trc90. Munificents look better than the assault frigate, except they are speed 2 which may mean they are easy meat for large ships. The hardcell i am eagerly waiting for the details of, and i hope im wrong, but so far it looks like expensive garbage.
ike, long term, maybe they will get there? But it would have to be the result of sustained unbalanced releases.
Grevious with Tri-fighter screens seems like it could be a very fun and potent anti-squadron combo. Especially with the aces
Edit, wrong thread
Edited by ransburger
My interpretation of this card is that Snipe 3 does not Stack with AI so you don't get to throw 4 dice while Sniping because Snipe 3 puts a hard cap on the Snipe.
I am just looking for some consensus. I am happy to be wrong, it could be interpreted that you're AI is while attacking and Snipe is an attack so add a die but I just see Snipe 3 being a hard cap. Again, happy to be wrong.
Edited by Thrindal14 minutes ago, Thrindal said:
My interpretation of this card is that Snipe 3 does not Stack with AI so you don't get to throw 4 dice while Sniping because Snipe 3 puts a hard cap on the Snipe.
I am just looking for some consensus. I am happy to be wrong, it could be interpreted that you're AI is while attacking and Snipe is an attack so add a die but I just see Snipe 3 being a hard cap. Again, happy to be wrong.
Yes, snipe increases. You could already use Flight Controllers with E-wings or Saber Squadron to increase the snipe, so AI should also increase snipe.
16 minutes ago, Thrindal said:
My interpretation of this card is that Snipe 3 does not Stack with AI so you don't get to throw 4 dice while Sniping because Snipe 3 puts a hard cap on the Snipe.
I am just looking for some consensus. I am happy to be wrong, it could be interpreted that you're AI is while attacking and Snipe is an attack so add a die but I just see Snipe 3 being a hard cap. Again, happy to be wrong.
Well according to CNGYSO article on Saber Squadron ( http://cannotgetyourshipout.blogspot.com/2017/02/imperial-squadron-review-tie-interceptor.html )
Snipe works with Swarm, FC, and Howlerunner. So with that already in the game then Snipe works with AI.
I questioned the hard cap at 3 first as well, but then thought that was just setting the attack pool at 3 then AI adds a die to the attack pool.
My 2 cents.
19 hours ago, Herr Style said:Who cares? They’re only Droids.
No pension plan needed in my up and coming Separatists Navy.
3 hours ago, Ophion said:Consulars are awesome, but not currently as good and efficient as a trc90.
trc70
1 hour ago, Thrindal said:Again, happy to be wrong.
Well today's your lucky day, then!
As stated above, snipe 3 is your base attack, and after throwing 3 blues, AI kicks in and adds a die. If you have an FC platform then that can add an additional die.
1 hour ago, Bravo Null said:trc70
Only one evade makes them less efficient with TRCs, since they'll have to discard that token once they start taking shots back and can't use them anymore. Though 2 red in the sides does give them a little more damage.
9 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:I've seen a few people saying that the wording on Grievous is ambiguous, but I really don't see how it is.
"While attacking a ship or squadron with no readied defense tokens, each of your [crit] icons adds 1 damage to the damage total."That seems 100% clear to me. Grievous asks one question--does the target have any readied defense tokens? If yes, proceed as normal. If no, crits count for damage. It really is that easy. The confusion seems to be from people trying to add extra qualifiers that aren't actually on the card.
So, generic squadrons--No defense tokens ready or otherwise=no readied defense tokens, Grievous counts crits.
Ships/ squadrons with only exhausted defense tokens=No readied defense tokens, Grievous counts crits.
Ships/ squadrons that have all their defense tokens exhausted=no readied defense tokens, Grievous counts crits.
Ships/ squadrons with 1+ readied defense tokens=Yes, readied tokens, Grievous does not count crits.
Just because a handful of people on this forum believe that they understand a certain card's ability, doesn't mean that they are correct. And it certainly doesn't mean that all Armada players will interpret the card the correct way.
Do you understand that a particular comment on this forum is only seen by maybe a few hundred Armada players? There are thousands of Armada players who have never visited this forum and probably never will; some of whom might be uncertain about how Grievious' ability works, which could lead to disputes, even in tournament play.
FFG has made rules and card clarifications countless times, which have resulted in FAQs and card updates.
So the dismissive attitude of "The card seems 100% clear to me. FFG doesn't need to clarify it," is unwarranted and unfounded. That unjustified attitude just plays into the fallacy that FFG never makes mistakes. If FFG never made mistakes, the most recent FAQ wouldn't be 24 pages long. That's a lot of uncertainty that had to be resolved by FFG .
Trying to overcomplicate and read in to a card also doesn't help. This one really is cut and dry.
1 hour ago, Formynder4 said:Trying to overcomplicate and read in to a card also doesn't help. This one really is cut and dry.
Of course, because you speak for every Armada player on this forum (and in the entire world) -- or so you think, apparently. So because you, and a few others, believe that you understand Grievous' ability correctly, there's no possibility anyone, anywhere, ever, could interpret the card differently, and therefore an official clarification from FFG (or AMG, in the future) will never, ever be necessary, and therefore will never happen.
I wonder: How many times have people like you on this forum said that a card's meaning is "cut and dry", and months (or years) later, FFG added it to the FAQ to clarify the matter?
Because I'm willing to bet that every Armada card or rule or update that appears in the FAQ was originally defended by someone like you, who dismissed someone else's concern about something being poorly worded, ambiguous, confusing, or just plain wrong (misprinted). But it turned out that there was a legitimate issue, which FFG recognized and ultimately addressed to resolve the problem. The 24-page FAQ is proof that FFG has had to make clarifications, updates, and fixes (errata) to Armada innumerable times during the game's 5-year lifespan. I think it's unreasonable to assume that FFG has it "perfect" this time, and the FAQ will never be updated at any point in time after Clone Wars Armada is released next week.
What I can't comprehend is why you and others are so resistant to official clarifications , which have no conceivable downside and can only serve to benefit the game and the Armada community by ensuring that all players understand it?
Grievous litearlly functions exactly as Vader does just only when the target does not have any readied defense tokens. People easily understood Vaders effect back 5 years ago, this is really not that complicated. The effect is worded very clearly.
34 minutes ago, >kkj said:Grievous litearlly functions exactly as Vader does just only when the target does not have any readied defense tokens. People easily understood Vaders effect back 5 years ago, this is really not that complicated. The effect is worded very clearly.
The issue some people have is if a squad that never had defense tokens counts as having no readied tokens. Not about the Vader stuff.
In this case, I don't think it's ambiguous. But I do see a case for someone guessing that FFG made a mistake and intended it to be something else.
1 minute ago, homedrone said:The issue some people have is if a squad that never had defense tokens counts as having no readied tokens. Not about the Vader stuff.
Why wouldnt it?
1 minute ago, >kkj said:Why wouldnt it?
Sorry. I was slow to edit my statement.
I agree that I think this has a clear effect. Though someone might guess that FFG meant to say something else? I guess?