Hi, long time lurker finally jumping in.... warning, long post ahead! I loved flying both the TIE Avenger and TIE Defender in the PC game, so have a lot of nostalgia for both and would like to toss in my 2 cents. Before talking about the Defender values, I think you really need to nail down the Avenger first, so I would like to start there first. I would really, really like to see the Avenger as a new model in all of its dagger shaped glory. Thematically, the Avenger is a space superiority fighter, with lots of shields, and even greater maneuverability than the Interceptor.

Attack: 3

From the wookiepedia, The Avenger is armed with 4x L-s9.3 cannons, the same as the standard TIE Int. So 3 dice is very reasonable from both a thematic and gameplay balance perspective.

Agility: 3

Standard TIE agility value. The Avenger is more maneuverable than any of its predecessors, but that should show up in the dial. Upping it to 4 dice could break the gameplay anyway.

Hull : 3

Standard TIE hull.

Shields: 4

The Avenger has a shield SBD of 100, twice that of an X-Wing. FFG has applied a scale of 25 SBD = 1 shield for the X-Wing, Y-Wing, A-Wing, and B-Wing, so 4 shields would be the expected value for the Avenger. If they are very concerned with balance, then you could argue for only 3 shields, but personally I would rather see it reflected in the cost.

Maneuver dial: Better than the TIE Int, or anything else to this point. Thematically and in the PC game, it was significantly faster than the Int (145 MGLT vs 111 according to wookiepedia) and was even faster than the A-wing. If there were a time to introduce a 6-speed maneuver, this is it. Obviously we have to leave it up to FFG on how to implement the dial, but I had the thought of adding "advanced maneuvers", where you can tack on a 1 forward or bank onto any non-red maneuver. This is different than an engine boost, in that the +1 template would connect directly to the end of the previous template, to essentially create a new template, and would be part of the maneuver and therefore would not cost an action. If the base maneuver was green, the final move becomes white, and if it was white, then it becomes red. It would require a 2nd dial to be placed (none/forward/bank left/bank right), defaulting to none if the player opts to only place one dial. This means that an Avenger could turn 180 degrees without generating stress via green turn + advanced maneuver bank 1 + bank engine boost action, at the expense of using its only action to do so. Personally, I think that it thematically fits, and still doesn't break the game balance between turrets and an appropriate ship cost.

Ship slots: same as TIE Int, plus: targeting computer and one missile slot. I expect we will see the tractor beam as being a cannon slot upgrade. Technically the tractor beam could be installed on the Avenger, although it was rare. I feel that to keep the purpose of the ship in-game as more of a space superiority fighter, and to distinguish it from the Defender, it should not have a cannon upgrade slot.

Cost: ??? Let FFG figure out what's balanced, but it would probably come in at the low 30's for your basic PS2 ship. It would be nice if you could run 3 Avengers in a 100 point squad, so I would set a maximum of 33 points for a PS2 ship, and then do some careful analysis to make sure the points are balanced.

OK, with that out of the way, what about the Defender?

Attack: 3. From the wookiepedia, The Defender is armed with 4x L-s9.3 cannons, the same as the Avenger and the standard TIE Int.

Agility: 2/3

I could go either way on this, but I would actually gravitate towards 2 agility because it has such a large profile. On the other hand, it's stupid fast, so I would be OK with 3 as well. I just remember that the Defender was generally an easier target to hit than the Avenger simply because it was bigger.

Hull : 3

Standard TIE hull.

Shields: 8. It has 200 SBD, twice that of an Avenger and four times that of an X-Wing. For balance/point reasons, it might make sense for the Avenger to have 3 shields and the Defender have 6. The only combination that I would be leery of is 8 shields with 3 agility, which is frankly terrifying.

Maneuver dial: basically the same as the Avenger, although technically it was slightly more maneuverable and faster, and also with the option of advanced maneuvers.

Ship slots: same as the Avenger plus a cannon slot, which would allow it to equip the new tractor beam, Ion cannon, etc. You could also argue for adding a 2nd missile slot, and giving it one or two proton torpedoes is also thematically appropriate. If you want to really throw in the kitchen sink, then add the System Upgrade slot too.

Cost: It was supposed to have the combat capability of a flight of 4 TIE fighters, so the thing should be a beast, and accordingly priced in the 40's. It would be nice to be able to fly two of them at low PS level, or one PS8/9 pilot with upgrades, with a couple smaller fighters on the side.

Nice post MajorJuggler! I agree with you on all points. I could be interesting if there were no low PS level Defender pilots. I don't imagine the Empire giving anyone but the best pilots a chance to fly it.

Kinda feels like the next few waves for imperials might be mid level pilot focused. The imperial interceptors box being higher lvl PS, avenger/defender/predator ship options... That or mindless drone swarms.

I don't think you can go "this ship can take on 4 Ties and win" and then base your stats on that. Because this is a game. You see Wedge take on swarms of Ties, but if you designed and pointed them up that way, I think the game would fall apart. I believe they will be better than a Eyeball or Squint, but not nearly by those margins, as where does that leave them with bigger ship like the Falcon.

I was looking at the tie defender on a couple websites. It seems to have shielding that is slightly worse than the b wing (usually, although Star Wars canon is notoriously inconsistent) and a lighter hull than the other ties. While it is technically a little faster than the ties and the a wing, I don't think it's practical to give it a faster maneuver as we souls need to see a new maneuver template. The way I see it, having the defender look like this:

Attack 3(same number of guns as an x wing)

Defense 3(while slightly more maneuverable than some ties, that can be in the special abilities and actions)

Hull 2(it has a lighter and smaller body than other ties)

Shield 4(it's got more shields than an x wing and a wing but less than a b wing)

Then give it the possibility of adding an ion cannon and missile launchers because that is what it carries as standard armarment. Actions should include focus, evade, boost, target lock to reflect it speed and manueverability.

Some pilots could have abilities to do rerolls or get an extra boost or something. Just like the a wing or an interceptor, it takes a skilled pilot to really make the ship shine.

I was looking at the tie defender on a couple websites. It seems to have shielding that is slightly worse than the b wing (usually, although Star Wars canon is notoriously inconsistent) and a lighter hull than the other ties. While it is technically a little faster than the ties and the a wing, I don't think it's practical to give it a faster maneuver as we souls need to see a new maneuver template. The way I see it, having the defender look like this:

Attack 3(same number of guns as an x wing)

Defense 3(while slightly more maneuverable than some ties, that can be in the special abilities and actions)

Hull 2(it has a lighter and smaller body than other ties)

Shield 4(it's got more shields than an x wing and a wing but less than a b wing)

Then give it the possibility of adding an ion cannon and missile launchers because that is what it carries as standard armarment. Actions should include focus, evade, boost, target lock to reflect it speed and manueverability.

Some pilots could have abilities to do rerolls or get an extra boost or something. Just like the a wing or an interceptor, it takes a skilled pilot to really make the ship shine.

That feels about right to me.

I was looking at the tie defender on a couple websites. It seems to have shielding that is slightly worse than the b wing (usually, although Star Wars canon is notoriously inconsistent) and a lighter hull than the other ties. While it is technically a little faster than the ties and the a wing, I don't think it's practical to give it a faster maneuver as we souls need to see a new maneuver template. The way I see it, having the defender look like this:

Attack 3(same number of guns as an x wing)

Defense 3(while slightly more maneuverable than some ties, that can be in the special abilities and actions)

Hull 2(it has a lighter and smaller body than other ties)

Shield 4(it's got more shields than an x wing and a wing but less than a b wing)

Then give it the possibility of adding an ion cannon and missile launchers because that is what it carries as standard armarment. Actions should include focus, evade, boost, target lock to reflect it speed and manueverability.

Some pilots could have abilities to do rerolls or get an extra boost or something. Just like the a wing or an interceptor, it takes a skilled pilot to really make the ship shine.

That feels about right to me.

What if the defender was balanced by two rebel ships. Maybe two weaker ships like z95s.

I still think that the defender should get >3 attack.

I was looking at the tie defender on a couple websites. It seems to have shielding that is slightly worse than the b wing (usually, although Star Wars canon is notoriously inconsistent) and a lighter hull than the other ties. While it is technically a little faster than the ties and the a wing, I don't think it's practical to give it a faster maneuver as we souls need to see a new maneuver template. The way I see it, having the defender look like this:

Attack 3(same number of guns as an x wing)

Defense 3(while slightly more maneuverable than some ties, that can be in the special abilities and actions)

Hull 2(it has a lighter and smaller body than other ties)

Shield 4(it's got more shields than an x wing and a wing but less than a b wing)

Then give it the possibility of adding an ion cannon and missile launchers because that is what it carries as standard armarment. Actions should include focus, evade, boost, target lock to reflect it speed and manueverability.

Some pilots could have abilities to do rerolls or get an extra boost or something. Just like the a wing or an interceptor, it takes a skilled pilot to really make the ship shine.

That feels about right to me.

What if the defender was balanced by two rebel ships. Maybe two weaker ships like z95s.

I still think that the defender should get >3 attack.

I don't particularly like the idea of a ships base attack going above 3, in a similar way to not liking the idea of the Agility going above 3 either. TBH, the perfect solution to me would be a 2+1 Attack split where the +1 was a second tier of dice, lets call it a purple dice with a blank replaced with a critical. It would have a better attack than 3 red dice, but it would not allow you to get any more total hits. Which would not allow it to get to the point where most ships have no chance of dodging it.

Interesting, seems that the TIE-Defender Topic becomes interesting again.

There are a few cards i made right after wave 2, some of them I like to share with you:

Of course i had named pilots as well - but it seems they are piloting shuttles now ....

I agree with Rodent, 3 dice for either attack or defense seems to be the resonable cap for the way this game plays. If you want more then you need some sort of secondary weapon.

But lots of people see the TIE Defender as something way more awesome than a standard TIE or even X-Wing.

I have a couple of ways where these could be addressed, but they both come down to upgrades.

1st- just give the TIE Defender lots of upgrades slots. Like maybe two modifications slots, it sort of needs a cannon slot so that it can have an ion-cannon.

2nd- I think it is fair to say that the TIE Defender is for Aces only. You could cose the gap between game play limits implied by the game so far by simply giving the TIE Defender some really cool pilots. In fact I think it might be cool if there are no generic TIE Defeders. They are going to be so expesive that you won't be able to field many of them anyway.

just some thoughts

Interesting, seems that the TIE-Defender Topic becomes interesting again.

There are a few cards i made right after wave 2, some of them I like to share with you:

That System upgrade is way too powerful for 2 points. It basically means that you have target locked the whole world. This is better than the Weapons Engineer.

That System upgrade is way too powerful for 2 points. It basically means that you have target locked the whole world. This is better than the Weapons Engineer.

You would still need to take an action to place a Target Lock, so it would only be really useful to feint an attack, or if you still had a Target Lock from a previous turn.

My issue is more esoteric, I don't like have an upgrade called System Upgrade when there is a whole catagory or upgrades called System Upgrade... that's just going to get confusing.

My issue is more esoteric, I don't like have an upgrade called System Upgrade when there is a whole catagory or upgrades called System Upgrade... that's just going to get confusing.

Like I have wrote: I actually made those cards long BEFORE wave 3 was known.

Focus of this post are the Defender's stats

My issue is more esoteric, I don't like have an upgrade called System Upgrade when there is a whole catagory or upgrades called System Upgrade... that's just going to get confusing.

Like I have wrote: I actually made those cards long BEFORE wave 3 was known.

Focus of this post are the Defender's stats

LOL.. I was joking... just rather amusing.. I think I prefer the 3/3/2/4 spread, it's a bit different to have a Tie which only has 2 hull.

Those ship cards are really close to what I had in mind for the TIE defender.

A 3-3-2-4 build is too fragile, when it comes against bombers with proton bombs.

First i had a 3-3-3-4 build in mind, but i thoufgt that would be too costly points-wise.

I liked the idea to field a named pilot + 2 generics more, so I decided to give them only a '3' for shields.

Ok, ok ... ill post my named pilot cards, too ... just for the fun of posting it.

Yet again: Those were made before wave 3 was known!

- -

LoL... yeah you can see that Yorr and Jendon turning up in wave 3... I do love the pictures though, they are really nice. We will have to find them new names.. Like BOB THE DESTROYER.

I don't think you can go "this ship can take on 4 Ties and win" and then base your stats on that. Because this is a game. You see Wedge take on swarms of Ties, but if you designed and pointed them up that way, I think the game would fall apart. I believe they will be better than a Eyeball or Squint, but not nearly by those margins, as where does that leave them with bigger ship like the Falcon.

The stats I gave are basically straight from the old TIE Fighter game as per wookiepedia, and it could certainly handle itself against a Falcon 1v1. As for the 4:1 reference, I was quoting this:

" Sienar Fleet Systems followed specific Imperial instruction in developing the TIE Defender, ^[4] among them the requirement that the fighter would exceed the mission capability of a flight group of four standard TIE Fighters. ^{[16] "}

Some of the Defender's capabilities are simply from higher stats / shields, and some of it is from it's upgrade slots that allow it to be heavily customized on a per mission basis.

Nice post MajorJuggler! I agree with you on all points. I could be interesting if there were no low PS level Defender pilots. I don't imagine the Empire giving anyone but the best pilots a chance to fly it.

It's true! I thought this quote was funny:

I was looking at the tie defender on a couple websites. It seems to have shielding that is slightly worse than the b wing (usually, although Star Wars canon is notoriously inconsistent) and a lighter hull than the other ties. While it is technically a little faster than the ties and the a wing, I don't think it's practical to give it a faster maneuver as we souls need to see a new maneuver template. The way I see it, having the defender look like this:

Attack 3(same number of guns as an x wing)

Defense 3(while slightly more maneuverable than some ties, that can be in the special abilities and actions)

Hull 2(it has a lighter and smaller body than other ties)

Shield 4(it's got more shields than an x wing and a wing but less than a b wing)

I'm not sure where you got that the B-Wing has stronger shields than the Defender, but that information (at least according to the wookiepedia and the old TIE Fighter game stats) is incorrect. Here are some shield values from various ships:

X-Wing: 50 SBD

Y-Wing: 75 SBD

A-Wing: 50 SBD

B-Wing: 125 SBD

TIE Avenger: 100 SBD

TIE Defender: 200 SBD

To be consistent with the rest of the smaller starfighters, the Defender should have 8 shields, and the Avenger should have 4 shields. Period. Maybe FFG will change the scale like they have for some other ships (i.e. YT-1300), but making it only 3/3/3/3 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If you only give the Defender 3 shields, then how much would you give the Avenger?

Interesting, seems that the TIE-Defender Topic becomes interesting again.

There are a few cards i made right after wave 2, some of them I like to share with you:

Of course i had named pilots as well - but it seems they are piloting shuttles now ....

Bloodthirsty is terribly broken. Even gunner/Luke doesn't let you make multiple attacks per round that can land hits (except when using Cluster Missiles if you miss on the 2nd missile). The cost for that card would have to be 7+. System Upgrade is an interesting concept, but yeah that's probably better than a Weapons Engineer and would have to cost a little more.

LoL... yeah you can see that Yorr and Jendon turning up in wave 3... I do love the pictures though, they are really nice. We will have to find them new names.. Like BOB THE DESTROYER.

And this is also the ultimate chance for Maarek Stele!

Absolutely! According to my source, Yorr and Jendon were actually piloting T/Ds, not shuttles ... but the EU should be great enough to deliver us a few new names I've also made cards for the shuttle (and the bombers) btw, and I came up with only one name, which is a different one ... BUT the wave 3 shuttle pilot cards are quite nice - i like them more then mine

Basically, I would rather see a properly done Avenger at 3/3/3/4 than a super-nerfed TIE Defender at 3/3/3/3 or 3/3/2/4. I would go so far as to say that I would rather they not even release the Defender AT ALL if they were going to nerf it into oblivion, because if they released it at 3/3/3/3, it wouldn't actually BE the TIE Defender... it would basically be a nerfed Avenger that LOOKS like a Defender. And that would annoy the heck out of me.

I see your Point. So you want to have a 4/4/4/8 Ship as the Defender to reflect 'the real value' of this ship for about 2/3 of the available squad points overall. I really like the model of a T/D. And thats the reason why i like to be able to field 3 of them - not just 1. An I think FFG want so sell more than just one to each player, if there are going to produce a model like the TIE Defender.

I was looking at the tie defender on a couple websites. It seems to have shielding that is slightly worse than the b wing (usually, although Star Wars canon is notoriously inconsistent) and a lighter hull than the other ties. While it is technically a little faster than the ties and the a wing, I don't think it's practical to give it a faster maneuver as we souls need to see a new maneuver template. The way I see it, having the defender look like this:

Attack 3(same number of guns as an x wing)

Defense 3(while slightly more maneuverable than some ties, that can be in the special abilities and actions)

Hull 2(it has a lighter and smaller body than other ties)

Shield 4(it's got more shields than an x wing and a wing but less than a b wing)

Then give it the possibility of adding an ion cannon and missile launchers because that is what it carries as standard armarment. Actions should include focus, evade, boost, target lock to reflect it speed and manueverability.

Some pilots could have abilities to do rerolls or get an extra boost or something. Just like the a wing or an interceptor, it takes a skilled pilot to really make the ship shine.

That feels about right to me.

What if the defender was balanced by two rebel ships. Maybe two weaker ships like z95s.

I still think that the defender should get >3 attack.

I don't particularly like the idea of a ships base attack going above 3, in a similar way to not liking the idea of the Agility going above 3 either. TBH, the perfect solution to me would be a 2+1 Attack split where the +1 was a second tier of dice, lets call it a purple dice with a blank replaced with a critical. It would have a better attack than 3 red dice, but it would not allow you to get any more total hits. Which would not allow it to get to the point where most ships have no chance of dodging it.

I see your point, but I respectfully preopose this hypothetical argument.

The proposed hull (2) and shield (4) capabilities sound very good. By bumping up the armament to 4 or greater, the point value should be so high that only two or three defenders could be played in a 100 point list.

It is supposed to have more weapons than an xwing.

Only TWO Z-95 headhunters to be equivalent to a TIE Defender??! Did you ever play the old TIE righter game? The Defender was like a tricked out Ferrari and the Z-95's were like... pylons.

Basically, I would rather see a properly done Avenger at 3/3/3/4 than a super-nerfed TIE Defender at 3/3/3/3 or 3/3/2/4. I would go so far as to say that I would rather they not even release the Defender AT ALL if they were going to nerf it into oblivion, because if they released it at 3/3/3/3, it wouldn't actually BE the TIE Defender... it would basically be a nerfed Avenger that LOOKS like a Defender. And that would annoy the heck out of me.

Wow. Perhaps I should ask if you ever played X-Wing where a single X-Wing could be flown against full flights of TIE Fighters. While it may cost nearly twice the points that a T/F costs maybe I'll just say that its stats don't compare to how the X-Wing performed in the video game. Different media are going to be using different stat representations.

If you want a Defender with more/bigger guns that is why it should include a Cannon upgrade. Some of you want it to be tougher than a B-Wing but when I look at it I certainly see no reason why it would be given the flimsy/exposed design.

With people crying for "more shields" to represent many given ships perhaps FFG should just make some "improved shield upgrade" and even "superior shield upgrade" cards that could grant +2 and +3 (or more) shields with a cost to match.

A flight of TIE fighters.... ppffff... I can remember better than that, this one time I blew up a DEATH STAR in an X-Wing!

Joking aside, the stat representations for the small base ships have, to this point, been carried over almost 1:1 from the TIE Fighter game into the FFG minis game. I don't see them totally throwing that out the window for one ship, is all.

Agreed!

TIE Defender SBD: 200

B-Wing SBD: 125

To be fair the B-Wing should have more hull points in the FFG game, but probably for balance reasons they decided to keep it at 3. It would certainly be reasonable to see an Avenger with 3 shields and a Defender with 6 shields though.

I see your point, but I respectfully preopose this hypothetical argument.

The proposed hull (2) and shield (4) capabilities sound very good. By bumping up the armament to 4 or greater, the point value should be so high that only two or three defenders could be played in a 100 point list.

It is supposed to have more weapons than an xwing.

4/3/2/4 at, say, 33 points @ PS3 would be almost as much of a glass cannon as the interceptor, which doesn't fit with the history of the ship. More importantly, 4 attack dice breaks the game balance in-game, and isn't even historically justified (see previous post).

Sort of, but not exactly. I suggested something in the ballpark of 3/3/3/8 or 3/3/3/6 costing something in the 40's, not 4/4/4/8 in the 60's (with a couple upgrades I guess). 4 attack / defense would likely break the game balance anyway. But yeah, sales figures matter! With the escalation style tournament and with casual/team gameplay over 100 points, I don't see it being THAT big of an issue by the time wave 4/5 comes out. But, you're right, I approach things as an engineer not a bean counter.

Wow. Perhaps I should ask if you ever played X-Wing where a single X-Wing could be flown against full flights of TIE Fighters. While it may cost nearly twice the points that a T/F costs maybe I'll just say that its stats don't compare to how the X-Wing performed in the video game. Different media are going to be using different stat representations.

A flight of TIE fighters.... ppffff... I can remember better than that, this one time I blew up a DEATH STAR in an X-Wing!

Joking aside, the stat representations for the small base ships have, to this point, been carried over almost 1:1 from the TIE Fighter game into the FFG minis game. I don't see them totally throwing that out the window for one ship, is all.

If you want a Defender with more/bigger guns that is why it should include a Cannon upgrade.

Agreed!

Some of you want it to be tougher than a B-Wing but when I look at it I certainly see no reason why it would be given the flimsy/exposed design.

TIE Defender SBD: 200

B-Wing SBD: 125

To be fair the B-Wing should have more hull points in the FFG game, but probably for balance reasons they decided to keep it at 3. It would certainly be reasonable to see an Avenger with 3 shields and a Defender with 6 shields though.

I see your point, but I respectfully preopose this hypothetical argument.

The proposed hull (2) and shield (4) capabilities sound very good. By bumping up the armament to 4 or greater, the point value should be so high that only two or three defenders could be played in a 100 point list.

It is supposed to have more weapons than an xwing.

4/3/2/4 at, say, 33 points @ PS3 would be just as much of a glass cannon as the interceptor, which doesn't fit with the history of the ship. More importantly, 4 attack dice breaks the game balance in-game, and isn't even historically justified (see previous post).

I see your Point. So you want to have a 4/4/4/8 Ship as the Defender to reflect 'the real value' of this ship for about 2/3 of the available squad points overall. I really like the model of a T/D. And thats the reason why i like to be able to field 3 of them - not just 1. An I think FFG want so sell more than just one to each player, if there are going to produce a model like the TIE Defender.

Sort of, but not exactly. I suggested something in the ballpark of 3/3/3/8 costing something in the 40's, not 4/4/4/8 in the 60's (with a couple upgrades I guess). 4 attack / defense would likely break the game balance anyway. But yeah, sales figures matter! With the escalation style tournament and with casual/team gameplay over 100 points, I don't see it being THAT big of an issue by the time wave 4/5 comes out. But, you're right, I approach things as an engineer not a bean counter.

The balance is in the points. Defenders cost more so players can field less ships. That's why firesprays cost more than tie fighters.