I think the problem here is that your using what is currently known about engineering and physics and are trying to impose those those same resrictions on the SW universe, that and you might not have red alot of the tech books for SW ships and didnt know the whole story from the get go Example of this was the bit about the shields having to be on and gemetrically changing. Lets face it with out that a ship trying to do that would destroy itself in our atmo.. They did a study couple years back they found more people like SW over ST but out of the two groups ST fans where alot more hard core about the ST lore than SW fans are about SW lore.

Any after reading what you said about Theoretical physics and such I realize you are just funing me so...

Shields don't have anything to do with it though, since TIEs can fly in atmosphere, and they don't have shields. Lets take the standard TIE Fighter as an example, since it has no shields.

Maximum acceleration is listed as 4,100G = 40,180 m/s^2, assuming earth gravity of g = 9.8m/s^2.

Lets assume, for the sake of argument, that a TIE Fighter is 1000 kg. I don't know what it is offhand, but that will get us within an order of magnitude.

The TIE's thrust on full acceleration would therefore be, using F = ma:

F = m*a = 1000 kg * 40,180 m/s^2 = 40,180,000 Newtons.

Grabbing some quick thrust numbers for reference from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust

The Space Shuttle has a thrust of around 30MN, and the F-16 has a thrust of 106kN.

Comparing the TIE Fighter to the F-16: The TIE Fighter has 380 times the thrust of an F-16, and weighs less than 1/8th as much as the F-16 empty weight.

Comparing the TIE Fighter to the Space Shuttle: The TIE Fighter has a third more thrust than the Space Shuttle, and weighs about 1/2000 of the Shuttle's loaded lift-off weight.

Either way, the TIE Fighter can only get to 1000 km/hr. Once it hits that speed, it can't accelerate anymore. So what, exactly is determining maximum speed in atmo? Clearly it's not terminal velocity. It's also clearly not structural integrity, because 4000G's of acceleration will put more stress on the airframe than cruising at 1000km/hr.

See the problem? I'm not saying I care, it's sci-fi, not reality. It was just an interesting observation that the physics is so far removed from reality that it's, well, egregious.

For bonus, consider a 1000 kg TIE Fighter that starts at a standstill and accelerates at 4,100G until it reaches it's maximum velocity.

• Calculate x(t) the distance traveled as a function of time.
• Plot the third derivative and explain its importance.
• Calculate the velocity of the Ion particle flow taking into account relativistic effects. Assume the mass of the particle flow being ejected per second is one millionth the initial mass of the spacecraft (1000 kg) = 1 gram / second.

I would give problems like these to my freshman class, so they could think about stuff in popular culture in engineering or physics terms. I did one example where they had to calculate the number of capacitors required to maintain a voltage on an electric fence for a specified amount of time, so you could guarantee that the velociraptors would stay inside even if external power went out.

P.S. I don't know what funing is. But I like your signature.

Guess theirs nothing left to do but talk about Defender values.

Guestion is would anyone want Red Star 1 to be in this game and if so how much points would it cost and how high should the stats be in this game since it is the most advanced/powerful/manuverable/fast TIE Defender.

They could give the defender even an energy management system as an epic mode fighter

There are so many possibilities.

This is just a quick and rough estimation:

PS2 Defender at 3-3-3-8 : 45 points

45 points is about right once you start slapping on things like beam weapon slots and annon slots. I can dig up the old math I did on the TIE Avenger at 3/3/3/4 cost and then the defender pricing, I thought it's in this thread here somewhere.

What would you think about giving the Avenger and (uber version) Defender white K-turns? It's maneuverable enough that if any ship could warrant it, it would be these ships. They have about twice the maneuverability as ships that can do red K-turns, so it actually makes some sense. It'll make the ships cost more for the dial though, and then they would be relatively weaker against turret ships, generally (which isn't all bad).

For the Avenger I was thinking something like:

3/3/3/4

Dial: TIE Interceptor dial, but K-turns white, and everything else green.

33 points at PS2.

I think last time I did the math it came out to 31 points for an avenger at 3/3/3/4, but that was without white K-turns.

Lastly out of the Bombers you forgot the King bomber the TIE Interdictor. It carries four times the payload of a TIE Bomber. It prob could kill all life on a planet if it were to drop it whole payload. If neutron weapons were used by Rad Trooper before the Bomb run I def know it would because neutron radation boosts proton weapons destructive capabilites 100 fold.

I found a new Bomber:

TIE/ne NEMESIS STRIKE BOMBER

2 medium laser cannons, 2 heavy laser cannons ... crew: 2 (pilot, gunner) ... a cool name ... a LOT of ordnance ... and shields!

First off, great discussion. I love following threads like these.

I also appreciate the MathWing. Some statistics and actual mathematics, albeit oddly placed when applied to sci-fi where the physics of the engines and many of the strange features of the craft, such as Star Wars complete disregard for true space physics and allowance of ships to fly in space as if they were in an atmosphere, are very gratifying.

I'd like to chime in.

I applaud the attempts at putting stats as similar to possible as the fluff, same as GW releasing the 'cinematic versions' of their space marines, where an entire army that had previously counted nearly 60 armed men in power armor with transports and artillery now consisted of 3 fellas with rifles.

Therefore, despite the EU's way of taking everything found in the movies and adding +++ to them just so they are cooler or better or faster or whatever they need to make their novel stick out, I am a huge fan of the Defender.

I feel like, as many have noted, it was the Empires answer to two issues: the first being the fragility of most TIE craft, and so their ability to handle multiple, or long scale engagements was essentially null, and two being the need for a multipurpose long range craft that did not require a support ship. I would think the previous ship to fill this role would be the skipray blast boat, which I don't recall being much of a dog fighter. Please correct me on that one.

So, I picked up three of the Shapeways TIE Defenders, and have two painted up, one as a standard gray and black TIE and one as a Royal Guard craft, and used the previously posted cards with these stats:

Carnor Jax

PS8

(enemy ships in range one cannot use or gain focus or evade tokens)

F 3

A 3

H 3

S 3

Focus, Evade, BarrelRoll, TL

Missile, Elite, Cannon

Cost: 36

Skye Vox

PS7

(Roll 1 additional die on your next attack in the round after performing a green maneuver)

F 3

A 3

H 3

S 3

Focus, Evade, BarrelRoll, TL

Missile, Elite, Cannon

Cost: 35

I gave each a homing missile, and put a Stealth Device and Adrenaline Rush on Carnor Jax.

I had enough left over for a basic Bomber with a Proton Torpedo armament.

We ran them in three scenarios.

Despite the cries here for more shields or boost, these ran like beasts. Homing missiles on the approach, barrel roll and enough toughness to take a few hits through the high agility.

They took out: Millenium Falcon plus Rookie Wingmen (close battle, used a Shuttle actually with PTL instead of Adrenaline rush on Carnor, and two or three TIEs instead of the second Defender).

Then against a zerg rebel list, with Y, Rookie Rookie and an A Wing, all with Missles/Torpedoes.

They faired pretty good against this list. The first time through, the foe took the bait and opened up on the Bomber, trying to get him before his low PS came up to stop those torpedoes. Being a decoy anyway, this let the two Defenders close in and evaporate some X Wings.

The lack of maneuvering on the Y Wing, who went torps but no turret came to bear, and he did nothing after the first salvo. The player was new to maneuvering and put his A Wing in some bad spots, so we know how that ends.

On the 3 missions, only a single Defender fell to enemy fire. However, I felt that they weren't unbalanced considering the high cost, and have to be played well or else they end up like Soontir in a bad spot, only for twice the cost. High risk high reward ships, and not sluggers like Firesprary or YT or B Wings.

On a side note for stands, I used some basic flight stands, and used tiny magnets to connect the ships to the stands for easy storage.

I think the problem here comes from people thinking of how strong it was in a game and trying to translate that dominating strength into X-Wing. The big problem with that was the Defender was supposed to be the PINNACLE of TIE Fighter's selectable craft. Effectively, it's you at the end of an adventure game with all your awesome weapons and spells and shields and abilities. it's Link with a fully maxed out inventory. It's Samus with her full suit and upgrades. The problem is that YOU CAN'T BRING THAT INTO THIS GAME. I'm all for having the Defender, seriously. I loved TIE Fighter. I still do. I still play it. But even I can't try to justify having it be so awesome that it breaks the game, because now I love this game too. So i would propose:

Attack: 3 (They have the same number of cannons as an Interceptor)

Evade: 3 (just like most other TIEs)

Shields: 4

Hull: 2 (together with shields that's 6 hit points, as good as a Bomber, but ignoring crits for most of it. seems fair, yeah?)

actions: Either Target Lock/Barrel Roll, Evade, Focus, Boost

upgrades: modification, System Upgrade, Missiles, Cannon

The point cost would be heavy, someone who knows the meta math behind how they do that can figure it out better than i could. Same for Pilot Skill. Give it a maneuver dial similar to/exactly like an Interceptor, and you have what someone out there proposed already. Something that can go toe-to-toe with a B-Wing, take a little less punishment, fly a little better. And depending on whether it gets target lock or barrel roll, you can always give it Expert Handling or Targeting Computer to round it out. I don't imagine there'd be too many non-elite pilots flying these things.

THREAD NECROMANCY! Move along... nothing much to see.

Only mildly so.

I think the problem here comes from people thinking of how strong it was in a game and trying to translate that dominating strength into X-Wing. The big problem with that was the Defender was supposed to be the PINNACLE of TIE Fighter's selectable craft. Effectively, it's you at the end of an adventure game with all your awesome weapons and spells and shields and abilities. it's Link with a fully maxed out inventory. It's Samus with her full suit and upgrades. The problem is that YOU CAN'T BRING THAT INTO THIS GAME. I'm all for having the Defender, seriously. I loved TIE Fighter. I still do. I still play it. But even I can't try to justify having it be so awesome that it breaks the game, because now I love this game too. So i would propose:

Attack: 3 (They have the same number of cannons as an Interceptor)

Evade: 3 (just like most other TIEs)

Shields: 4

Hull: 2 (together with shields that's 6 hit points, as good as a Bomber, but ignoring crits for most of it. seems fair, yeah?)

actions: Either Target Lock/Barrel Roll, Evade, Focus, Boost

upgrades: modification, System Upgrade, Missiles, Cannon

The point cost would be heavy, someone who knows the meta math behind how they do that can figure it out better than i could. Same for Pilot Skill. Give it a maneuver dial similar to/exactly like an Interceptor, and you have what someone out there proposed already. Something that can go toe-to-toe with a B-Wing, take a little less punishment, fly a little better. And depending on whether it gets target lock or barrel roll, you can always give it Expert Handling or Targeting Computer to round it out. I don't imagine there'd be too many non-elite pilots flying these things.

PS: 5

Attack: 3 (They have the same number of cannons as an Interceptor)

Evade: 3 (just like most other TIEs)

Shields: 4

Hull: 2 (together with shields that's 6 hit points, as good as a Bomber, but ignoring crits for most of it. seems fair, yeah?)

actions: Either Target Lock/Barrel Roll, Evade, Focus, Boost

upgrades: modification, System Upgrade, Missiles, Cannon

The point cost would be heavy, someone who knows the meta math behind how they do that can figure it out better than i could.

You're essentially starting with a TIE Interceptor and adding some shields. Starting at PS1 and accounting for additional hit points using square root law:

18*(2)^0.5 = 25.45

Round that up to 28 points because you're upgrading 4 hull to shields, along with a slight fudge factor for Lanchester's Laws (where the square root law comes from) undercosting more powerful ships when the squad size is small. Then add another point for getting targeting computer and a missile slot, you're at 29 for PS1. It could arguably be another point higher, but you're already paying a very high premium for maneuverability, since this is an inherited cost from the TIE Interceptor. (The Interceptor would only cost around 15 if it didn't have boost and the higher maneuverability.)

What's interesting about this stat lineup that you listed, is that if you add one more hull point and give it a better dial, it exactly describes the TIE Avenger, which should probably be around 31 points at PS1 @ 3/3/3/4.

First off, great discussion. I love following threads like these.

I also appreciate the MathWing. Some statistics and actual mathematics, albeit oddly placed when applied to sci-fi where the physics of the engines and many of the strange features of the craft, such as Star Wars complete disregard for true space physics and allowance of ships to fly in space as if they were in an atmosphere, are very gratifying.

I'd like to chime in.

I applaud the attempts at putting stats as similar to possible as the fluff, same as GW releasing the 'cinematic versions' of their space marines, where an entire army that had previously counted nearly 60 armed men in power armor with transports and artillery now consisted of 3 fellas with rifles.

Therefore, despite the EU's way of taking everything found in the movies and adding +++ to them just so they are cooler or better or faster or whatever they need to make their novel stick out, I am a huge fan of the Defender.

I feel like, as many have noted, it was the Empires answer to two issues: the first being the fragility of most TIE craft, and so their ability to handle multiple, or long scale engagements was essentially null, and two being the need for a multipurpose long range craft that did not require a support ship. I would think the previous ship to fill this role would be the skipray blast boat, which I don't recall being much of a dog fighter. Please correct me on that one.

So, I picked up three of the Shapeways TIE Defenders, and have two painted up, one as a standard gray and black TIE and one as a Royal Guard craft, and used the previously posted cards with these stats:

Carnor Jax

PS8

(enemy ships in range one cannot use or gain focus or evade tokens)

F 3

A 3

H 3

S 3

Focus, Evade, BarrelRoll, TL

Missile, Elite, Cannon

Cost: 36

Skye Vox

PS7

(Roll 1 additional die on your next attack in the round after performing a green maneuver)

F 3

A 3

H 3

S 3

Focus, Evade, BarrelRoll, TL

Missile, Elite, Cannon

Cost: 35

I gave each a homing missile, and put a Stealth Device and Adrenaline Rush on Carnor Jax.

I had enough left over for a basic Bomber with a Proton Torpedo armament.

We ran them in three scenarios.

Despite the cries here for more shields or boost, these ran like beasts. Homing missiles on the approach, barrel roll and enough toughness to take a few hits through the high agility.

They took out: Millenium Falcon plus Rookie Wingmen (close battle, used a Shuttle actually with PTL instead of Adrenaline rush on Carnor, and two or three TIEs instead of the second Defender).

Then against a zerg rebel list, with Y, Rookie Rookie and an A Wing, all with Missles/Torpedoes.

They faired pretty good against this list. The first time through, the foe took the bait and opened up on the Bomber, trying to get him before his low PS came up to stop those torpedoes. Being a decoy anyway, this let the two Defenders close in and evaporate some X Wings.

The lack of maneuvering on the Y Wing, who went torps but no turret came to bear, and he did nothing after the first salvo. The player was new to maneuvering and put his A Wing in some bad spots, so we know how that ends.

On the 3 missions, only a single Defender fell to enemy fire. However, I felt that they weren't unbalanced considering the high cost, and have to be played well or else they end up like Soontir in a bad spot, only for twice the cost. High risk high reward ships, and not sluggers like Firesprary or YT or B Wings.

On a side note for stands, I used some basic flight stands, and used tiny magnets to connect the ships to the stands for easy storage.

That's awesome about getting those Shapeways models and painting them! Do you have any pictures?

Also, Carnor Jax becomes MUCH better when he is in a beefier craft, because he's out there longer and you're automatically getting more use out of his ability. I like it.

Your PS7 ability is probably a little overpowered for PS7 (possibly even for PS9), but in principle I really like the idea. You probably just have to add "... add a stress" and it would be balanced, just my 2 cents.

Your cost of 36 at PS8 looks about right. It basically works out to the same point breakdown in my previous post but losing the Boost, downgrading a shield to a hull, and gaining a cannon. That's probably net 0 or -1, putting you at 27-28 for PS1. Carnor Jax is +8 points, so that gets you to 35-36, so 36 looks good.

i read the original post and all I could think was..... WTF you want me to chew threw 11 hit points and you get 4 dice, only if I get to field 3 Wedge's per your one ship.

Whatever you do, keep in mind that there is the TIE Avenger, too.

The Defender and the Avenger shouldn't share the same profile.

So if the Defender gets a 3-3-3-3 ... then the Avenger gets what?

Defender and Avenger had different roles. Like the X-Wing and the B-Wing.

The Avenger is a space dominance fighter;

the Defender a fighter/bomber capable to take on capital ships even in small numbers.

Imagine the Avenger as the TIE X-Wing and the Defender as the TIE B-Wing, role-wise.

I think we are better off with a 'real' TIE Defender, maybe for epic mode only.

i read the original post and all I could think was..... WTF you want me to chew threw 11 hit points and you get 4 dice, only if I get to field 3 Wedge's per your one ship.

Sounds close to a firespray with HLC. No problems there. The points come out in the wash.

Whatever you do, keep in mind that there is the TIE Avenger, too.

The Defender and the Avenger shouldn't share the same profile.

So if the Defender gets a 3-3-3-3 ... then the Avenger gets what?

Defender and Avenger had different roles. Like the X-Wing and the B-Wing.

The Avenger is a space dominance fighter;

the Defender a fighter/bomber capable to take on capital ships even in small numbers.

Imagine the Avenger as the TIE X-Wing and the Defender as the TIE B-Wing, role-wise.

I almost find it odd that you say they Avenger and Defender should be nothing alike yet you compare them to the X-Wing and B-Wing which actually seem to share a number of similarities in this game. The B-Wing may get more, and arguably better, upgrade options but at the base level the B-Wing costs one more point for the same primary weapon damage and hull strength and while giving up a point in agility and arguably a worse maneuver dial gains three in shields and the barrel roll option.

Worried about having "room" for an Avenger if the Defender is 3/3/3/3 with a host of options then the Avenger would be 3/3/3/2 and not carry as many options for a slightly lower price. Oh, now I see the complaints out it makes the Advanced "useless" but I thought the general consensus is that the Advanced already is.

Honestly, the only reason that there is so much discussion about the Defender is because there were multiple stat versions of it in the video games. The Avenger only had one baseline to go off of, so I don't see any reason whatsoever why it shouldn't be 3/3/3/4.

Even if we get a nerfed Defender at 3/2/3/4 and the Avenger at 3/3/3/4, then the X-wing:B-wing vs Avenger:Defender analogy still works fairly well, since the Defender would presumably get a cannon slot, beam weapon, and possibly other multi-purpose goodies that the Avenger would not have access to.

If they ever release the Defender, then I will, of course, feel obligated to have a 200 point battle between a Defender squad, and a massive swarm of TIE Fighters.

Nice. I feel the Defender fits the beefier multi-purpose role well.

The Avenger, even though I'm afraid I don't have much love for it as I (blasphemously) never played the TIE Fighter game or any of the X Wing vs TIE Fighter games, and have no experience with it. I've had some experience with the Defender, but mostly from articles.

I agree that the Defender fits a multi-purpose starfighter role, not equivalent to the B Wing, but as a heavy fighter. The Avenger appears to be an upgraded superiority fighter that could be proposed to replace the Interceptor with a beefier ship. I could see Imperials balking at it due its price tag, as Fluff wise, they would need to build a ton to man all the outposts, bases, academies, ships and more with a new ship./

Anyway, I would see the Avenger as having a good move counter, Interceptor or A Wing, with maybe less forward green, and the right and left turns green. I would think a System upgrade, and Missiles would fit well (since Imperials don't do the Astromech thing), Target Lock, Barrel Roll, Boost, Focus and Evade (I know 5 base right?), and about the same stats as a Defender here, 3/3/3/3, with maybe a 3/3/4/3 or a 3/3/4/2. It would be kind of pricey though, which would allow Imperials the option, same as the Defender, to go with a beefier squad of just a few ships much as the Rebels do currently.

For abilities, I would have the Defenders with raw offense and the Avengers as maneuver upgrades like many Interceptors (see Turr and Soontir, our heroes).

So there ya go...anyway...here are my Defender models. I bought three, but have only painted two. I'm thinking of doing my final one with a blue similar to the Interceptor and then do the 181st kill stripes on it.

So here they are. I took one to show the magnets I used to attach them to the base, so they have 'quick release' bases, which will make it easy to swap the bases once I get nicer ones that are closer to the X Wing ones in size.

Nice. I need to make some custom magnetic pegs / bases for a couple of my own ships, I had the pegs get stuck and break off in a HWK and a Y-wing.

I had an idea for the defender.

In order to balance the concept that it is better, but not make it crazy powerful and imbalance the game.

give it good stats, A3, D3, H3, S3,

give it the advanced action bar, and the interceptor dial

upgrade bar with missile, cannon, sensor, and......

a new upgrade category specific to the defender

they would be one time use items, some ideas are....

---discard this card to perform one free speed one or two maneuver.

---discard this card to gain 2 evade tokens for use this round.

---discard this card to add one attack dice to your attack this round

---any crazy ability you can think of as a one time use.

if you did it as one time actions, you could make the ship do some impressive things, but the pilot would

have to balance when to use them. So it would add some depth of strategy, as well as make it fun and

rewarding to play. Also it would provide counter play for your opponent to get you to use your skills too early as an example.

i think giving it one or two slots for this type of thing would be interesting.

I had an idea for the defender.

In order to balance the concept that it is better, but not make it crazy powerful and imbalance the game.

give it good stats, A3, D3, H3, S3,

give it the advanced action bar, and the interceptor dial

upgrade bar with missile, cannon, sensor, and......

a new upgrade category specific to the defender

they would be one time use items, some ideas are....

---discard this card to perform one free speed one or two maneuver.

---discard this card to gain 2 evade tokens for use this round.

---discard this card to add one attack dice to your attack this round

---any crazy ability you can think of as a one time use.

if you did it as one time actions, you could make the ship do some impressive things, but the pilot would

have to balance when to use them. So it would add some depth of strategy, as well as make it fun and

rewarding to play. Also it would provide counter play for your opponent to get you to use your skills too early as an example.

i think giving it one or two slots for this type of thing would be interesting.

Now that I have seen they are experimenting with using ships int he ST version of the game that have stats with a 7 in them maybe we should consider making stats higher. Although the firepower for the Defender should stay at 3. Or we could just let the big craft get stats with numbers that high like the transport and runner coming out soon.

Did you make Red Star 1 or is that a Imp Guard Defender? Ether way it looks great.

Here is my 2 cents: In order for the Tie Defender to be taken, the Tie Avenger needs to be looked at.

From what I have read and from Expanded Universe information (and in agreement not to break the system), I have thought of the following.

Even though I believe that the Avenger and Defender should have an agility of 4, but it will break the system, so as many people would have it, it'll be 3.

However, I have a few proposal, for example, to keep it with the EU data of SBD 100, the Avenger would have a shielding of 4, which will be adjusted accordingly to the point system (I just added 16).

Since the Avenger is only for elite and loyal pilots, only a skill 4 or higher (which is reflected in the card). Because of the primary role of the Avenger is a Space Superiority StarFighter, it's actions are focus, barrel roll, boost and evade with a systems upgrade (due to its advanced nature as well as it's priority as a hunter-killer). It has evade because of its small profile, making it easy to invade incoming fire.

Since it has a secondary role of being an attack fighter, a Title card is used for the starfighter which will have Targeting Computer and Missile upgrade which costs 3 points (it is not unique, hence higher cost than Slave 1's title).

The Tie avenger is more agile and faster than even the A-wing or Interceptor, the dial reflects it as well. It'll be the first to have a white koiogran maneuver because of its agility.

So here are what I have for the Avenger stats: With its 'bare' stat with the title, it'll come to a total of 40points

As for the Tie Defender, I have read that it has double shielding, hence its SDB is 200, hence the Title Card of the Defender will reflect that.

The Defender will have the same values as the Tie Avenger, however to reflect its greater maneuverability, it is reflected in the dial.

Tie Defender is used as a heavy attack fighter that can do any role, hence its upgrade have Systems upgrade, Torpedo and Cannon, in which it all has.

It's point value is high because of its movement, pilot skill, stats and upgrade potential. With its original spec with the title, it'll be a total of 60 points before any upgrades; hence reflecting it costing 5x of a Tie Fighter.

The Tie Defender do not have the evade because of its larger profile but have the Targeting Computer in its placement because of its attack role.

The Tie Defender is reserved for the most loyal and elite pilots in the Imperial fleet, but not better than the Royal Guard, so their piloting skills reflect this.

So here are the Defender stats:

So this is what my interpretation would be, in reading through everything. The EU cannon of its original spec is upheld and its points cost (of it being expensive) reflects its stats.

As for the movement dials of both ships, I'm still not set on it.

What do you think?

P.S. Sorry for the low quality of the pictures, I have to use MS Paint and I'm not good with graphics.

I think a green Koiogran, whatever the background may say about its agility, is over the top. If an interceptor and a-wing can't even manage a white one, then a Defender shouldn't be green.

I'm not convinced anyone should have a non-red Koiogran. Yes, Adrenaline Rush , but that's one-use.

Other than that, fine on the dial.

Also, I know it's expensive but the Strike Starfighter card seems massively harsh. Theoretically, it's the same as four shield upgrades, but it just seems off having that much shielding on one ship. Do we want (in game terms) the defender to be really that tough?

3 koigorans on each? And a green one on the Defender? Yeah that is totally broken. Makes PtL + Koigoran possible which is just broken.

Reading through some of the back pages, I noticed that everyone seems to reference the Tie Fighter game stats. I was just wondering but has anyone noticed that the game stats just don't really translate to this game very well. Has anyone else noticed this?

Several discrepancies between Tie Fighter game and X-Wing Minis:

The A-Wing has the same shielding as an X-Wing

All the ships generally having the same hull value

The B-Wing having less hull than the Y-Wing

As to the Tie Defender I've never broken down the math on it, but giving something that is supposed to be incredibly maneuverable incredible survivability may be a recipe for disaster to this game unless you pay a huge premium, like 45-50 points base. The reason I say that is the worst case scenario, an invincible monster with upgrades like Stealth device/PTL/Advanced Sensors, should be cost prohibitive. That being said, I trust FFG with this game because they seem to have captured the uniqueness of each ship while working within their own system.

Regardless of their cost, these ships must feature a weakness on the board - and so far the proposed designs have none. Until such a time as they do have a weakness and aren't extremely unbalanced (which they were created to be in their PC game debut), I doubt we'll see these being officially released.

I'm still not sold on the idea of a new model for the Tie Avenger. The Avenger is just the final end point of development of the advanced - shouldn't it just be a title upgrade for the advanced miniature that gives it an extra firepower for 4 points and maybe a systems upgrade slot? Additionally, if you just add an Avenger title card for the Advanced, it leaves plenty of design space open for the Defender without the crazy overlap you see by trying to squeeze in 2 superiority fighters that are better than the existing superiority fighter in the interceptor.