I'm wondering if the ability to TL/Focus at range 3 will help.. When fighting against turrets with Interceptors your best bet is to try and lurk at range 3. Where you have 4 Agility (5 with stealth). With TL and Focus you are very likely to get 2-3 hits through on the Falcon each time.

A guaranteed evade is nothing to sniff at, but it's also the combination of the differences. You have to look at the whole. It doesn't matter how different the two ships are, it's their cost which is the same. The strengths and weaknesses of the two ships have been assessed to be equal. Equally pointed costs do not have to result in the same stats. A 50 pt YT-1300 is nothing at all like 5 TIEs.

And regarding the comparison to the A-wing, as said above the game clearly believes that 1 hull point is equal to 3 pts.

Finally, the absence from tournaments is most likely a reflection of the points economy on the Imperial side combined with the advantage of throwing more dice. Why take 1 ship to the battle when you have 2 available which essentially give you better overall dice chances? It's why so players appear to be trying to find a rebel swarm.

edit - sorry, on topic but why is it a problem that the Interceptor can get shot by a turret ship? It's not like the opponent hasn't made a sacrifice in points to get that ability or that that's the strength of the ship. This sounds like wanting to have an invincible ship. What's wrong with a ship with a flaw?

A guaranteed evade is nothing to sniff at, but it's also the combination of the differences. You have to look at the whole. It doesn't matter how different the two ships are, it's their cost which is the same. The strengths and weaknesses of the two ships have been assessed to be equal. Equally pointed costs do not have to result in the same stats. A 50 pt YT-1300 is nothing at all like 5 TIEs.

And regarding the comparison to the A-wing, as said above the game clearly believes that 1 hull point is equal to 3 pts.

But your ignoring entirely that the A-Wing can shed stress far easier. If you count this as similar to an R2 unit, that is a 1pt upgrade. Also hull when built into a ship is not costed at 3pts, upgrades are generally a bit overpointed for what you get.... But as I said your putting everything on the 1 hull and ignoring that a boost is probably better than a barrel roll and the fact the A-Wing has a far better dial.

Finally, the absence from tournaments is most likely a reflection of the points economy on the Imperial side combined with the advantage of throwing more dice. Why take 1 ship to the battle when you have 2 available which essentially give you better overall dice chances? It's why so players appear to be trying to find a rebel swarm.

If this was the case the Firespray wouldn't be getting used, but it is. Same with the Bomber which is more expensive than a Tie. The only ship not being used is the Advanced.

edit - sorry, on topic but why is it a problem that the Interceptor can get shot by a turret ship? It's not like the opponent hasn't made a sacrifice in points to get that ability or that that's the strength of the ship. This sounds like wanting to have an invincible ship. What's wrong with a ship with a flaw?

There is nothing wrong with a ship with flaws. But it does make them less reliable in a tournament scene than a ship which is OK against all comers. The Interceptor is paying a lot for the ability to avoid shots by maneuvering out of arc, this is risky against most lists. You have to fly cleaverly and any mistake could cost you a lot. Against turrets they are just overcosted as the maneuverability accounts for nothing. I don't see it as a huge issue, but is a reason why you don't see them as much as some ships at tournament level.

edit - sorry, on topic but why is it a problem that the Interceptor can get shot by a turret ship? It's not like the opponent hasn't made a sacrifice in points to get that ability or that that's the strength of the ship. This sounds like wanting to have an invincible ship. What's wrong with a ship with a flaw?

We have 6 ships on the Rebel side and 3 of them are either capable of using turrets or have a 360° fireing arc. Thats 50%

So it should be - and it is - very likely to encounter them in play. The only way to counter this is to beef your Interceptors out, which make them probably too expensive to field 4 at 100 points. Using 3 squints only isn't recommented for competitive play.

edit - sorry, on topic but why is it a problem that the Interceptor can get shot by a turret ship? It's not like the opponent hasn't made a sacrifice in points to get that ability or that that's the strength of the ship. This sounds like wanting to have an invincible ship. What's wrong with a ship with a flaw?

We have 6 ships on the Rebel side and 3 of them are either capable of using turrets or have a 360° fireing arc. Thats 50%

So it should be - and it is - very likely to encounter them in play. The only way to counter this is to beef your Interceptors out, which make them probably too expensive to field 4 at 100 points. Using 3 squints only isn't recommented for competitive play.

I don't entirely agree with the stats, as you will be playing imperials 50% of the time and they do OK in that matchup. But you are almost guaranteed to have a couple of matches against turrets in a tournament, and a 3 squint list will have major problems in those match-ups. As you need to win most of your matches to place, you just can't risk Paper vs Scissor matches, so the Squints get left at home. A single squint in a list is not nearly as bad, but running all squints is just a bad idea.

This doesn't make Squints bad or even overpointed, just not ideal for tournaments. Which is fine.

And really, what is holding the Interceptor back is NOT their cost. It is the prevalence of the Falcon and swarms. The Interceptor's greatest strength is their maneuverability, especially the higher cost ones with Push the Limit. It is really hard to get out of firing arcs of turrets and a well spread out swarm. But against most of the ships, and Interceptor is just going to outfly. And that is something the hallowed point cost formula can't discover. That is why there is playtesting.

Well said.

I'd actually like to bring this conversation back to the Interceptor. The squint is my favorite ship and I've never flown a squad without at least one, but I have real issues fighting the Falcon and, to a lesser degree, swarms or Y-Wings. As much as I love these new pilots and can't wait to use them, I don't know if Imperial Aces really solves the problem of turrets. Against any other ship, I can outfly them and shoot them from behind. This doesn't help against the YT-1300. The Interceptors greatest strength is entirely negated by a 360-degree firing arc.

How do we fix that problem?

Are you asking for a technical fix to the problem (new or revised stats/abilities to make certain ships more competitive vs other ships?

or

Are you asking for a tactical fix to the problem (how can I use existing ships/abilities/upgrades to be more competitive vs certain ships/builds)?

Chris

edit - sorry, on topic but why is it a problem that the Interceptor can get shot by a turret ship? It's not like the opponent hasn't made a sacrifice in points to get that ability or that that's the strength of the ship. This sounds like wanting to have an invincible ship. What's wrong with a ship with a flaw?

Not at all. I'm not interested in invincible ships. The Interceptor is hardly invincible versus X-Wings, A-Wings, or B-Wings--one wrong move and you're vaped. They can stay out of fire arcs--they have an amazing dial--and they can dodge with evade if they roll well. I don't want to pay 25+ point to rely on lucky rolling, however, and they can't maneuver out of a turret's arc.

I do like Rodent's point about range 3 sniping; Targeting Computer + Stealth Device is nice (but super expensive). I wonder if it proves worthwhile.

EDIT: Chris, I'd actually prefer a tactical! I think the game is generally fairly balanced, I just want to know how to use my beloved Interceptors better.

I meant 50% of the rebel ships have the 360° ability, which is bad news (ok not really new) for the Interceptor.

Of course you can also encounter Imperial lists in competitive play.

When we take a look at the ships that are really ideal for tournaments, we are down to the X-Wing and the TIE Fighter. Now the rebels got the B-Wing, which seems to be ideal as well, together with the Advanced Sensors Upgrade. All other ships are either semi-ideal or a high risk to take. The Interceptor is between semi-ideal and high risk right now.

What about two squints and four eyeballs? An up-gunned swarm.

As a base to work from, you can have 3x Academy Pilots, Howlrunner, and 2x Alpha Pilots for 90 pts.

For questions concerning the Advanced consult this discussion: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/94711-fixing-the-tie-advanced/

I've read it and the arguments made are, for the most part, well expressed. They also sound like a bit of "belly aching", to me. So the TIE Advanced is a bit more expensive than some would like... So what? So point for point they are not as cost effective as some other ships... Big deal! But that keeps them from being used as much as you'd like to see them in competitive play... Yawn... Well, the TIE Advanced IS a rare ship in the original source material. How many do we ever see in the movies? Perhaps their higher cost reflects their relative rarity in the SW universe. If we reduced their costs by 2 or even just one points, how many would we see played then? Is this even remotely in the "spirit" or "flavor" of the SW universe? NO, it is merely what works best in competitive play but the game is so much more than that.

In the "real world" and history, not everything is fair. Not all comparisons are fair. The "in universe" designers of the TIE Advanced were attempting to create a quality fighter, that one-on-one could go toe-to-toe with the Rebel Alliances (then) top fighter, the X-wing, with a good chance of coming out on top. Is it perfect? No, it is still just a prototype. Is it expensive? Hell yes, limited production items usually are!

If the game was invented from scratch, with no connection to SW movies/books/video games/lore, etc... then maybe the "TIE Advanced is broken and needs to be fixed" arguments would have more weight but this is not the case and they don't. Why? Because the game makes some small attempt to simulate (or at least replicate or emulate) what we have seen/read/know about the ships involved, at least relative to each other. Yes it is a game, but it attempts to imitate the original source materials and present that in a fun, playable, game format. I am fairly certain that game mechanics and ship stats were developed before any sort of points costs were developed and it appears that the "official" method to assign points was rather arbitrary and then modified to reflect play test experience or relative costs. Though FFG has never released its "official" points cost system, I seriously doubt that it is as complex as some of the attempts I have seen to retcon it; more likely, it was arbitrary, them modified as a result of play testing, then SWAG'd, incorporating a lot of what the designers thought would be "about right".

In the end, I doubt that FFG will change anything.

Chris

Lets complete this thought by breaking down all available ships and go with the figures:

How ideal is the ship for competitive play?

1: ideal

2: semi-ideal

3: high risk

X-Wing: 1
Y-Wing: 2
Millennium Falcon: 1-2
A-Wing: 2
HWK-290: 2-3
B-Wing: 1

TIE Fighter: 1
TIE Advanced: 3
Slave I: 2
TIE Interceptor: 2-3
Lambda-class: 3
TIE Bomber: 2

Yeah I like that type of list better.. 2 Interceptors and then bulk up on chaff is a much more solid tournament list. and the new 181st pilots are quite good for that kind of list..

I'm also wondering about the Great Chalk Heffalump piloted by Yorr and with Engine Upgrade as with 2 tricked out Interceptors and as many extra Eyeballs as you can fit.

Lets complete this thought by breaking down all available ships and go with the figures:

How ideal is the ship for competitive play?

1: ideal

2: semi-ideal

3: high risk

I think 4: Not worth it... should be added. The Shuttle is high-risk but can pay off.. the Advanced really is in a class of it's own.

Well, the TIE Advanced IS a rare ship in the original source material. How many do we ever see in the movies? Perhaps their higher cost reflects their relative rarity in the SW universe.

That's fine to say. But making something overcosted just means it doesn't get played, not that it's rarely played... Limited to 1 per 100pts and properly pointed would be highly preferable to just not worth taking.

When you only have 6 ships you can choose from and 1 is not worth taking your just limiting builds and diversity.

I'm not sure if I like Phennir or Cornwal more. Both benefit greatly from Veteran Instincts, in regards to avoiding damage in a dogfight, but it won't do jack against swarms or turrets.

You could toss Vet and Stealth on 'em, but that would be expensive as hell. Might as well take the Emperor's Guard title and give 'em shields, too.

Question.

What about augmenting a TIE Swarm with Carnor Jax? Rather than augment the Academies shooting, you smash into them and prevent their use of evasive tactics.

edit - sorry, on topic but why is it a problem that the Interceptor can get shot by a turret ship? It's not like the opponent hasn't made a sacrifice in points to get that ability or that that's the strength of the ship. This sounds like wanting to have an invincible ship. What's wrong with a ship with a flaw?

Not at all. I'm not interested in invincible ships. The Interceptor is hardly invincible versus X-Wings, A-Wings, or B-Wings--one wrong move and you're vaped. They can stay out of fire arcs--they have an amazing dial--and they can dodge with evade if they roll well. I don't want to pay 25+ point to rely on lucky rolling, however, and they can't maneuver out of a turret's arc.

I do like Rodent's point about range 3 sniping; Targeting Computer + Stealth Device is nice (but super expensive). I wonder if it proves worthwhile.

EDIT: Chris, I'd actually prefer a tactical! I think the game is generally fairly balanced, I just want to know how to use my beloved Interceptors better.

I play a lot vs Falcon/Han, so I'm used to the 360° turret. And I always have Interceptors in my list. The best way to fight against turrets really is staying out of range if possible as long as possible (R3 preferably) and making heavy use of evade token. My Interceptors nearly always come with Stealth (unless I play swarm), and at R3 and even R2 with Evade they last very long, while slowly bringing down the turret vessel (they tend to have low agility values, those turret carriers).

Needs some practice to use them this way, as you really have to know where you have to go and you need to estimate the play style of your opponent (is he going to rush you, or not?).

For tournament play? Probably not well suited, high risks involved - one bad roll and your craft's gone.

To finalize the rough estimation about the competivity of the available ships:

Given the figures from above,

the average rating of rebel ships is 1,67 and the Imperials get a 2,25 in average.

Or in short: The Rebels have the better ships - at least when it comes to competitive play.

This also reflects the results of our local tournaments: the Rebels win rate is about 70%.

These is just a bunch of interesting numbers.

To finalize the rough estimation about the competivity of the available ships:

Given the figures from above,

the average rating of rebel ships is 1,67 and the Imperials get a 2,25 in average.

Or in short: The Rebels have the better ships - at least when it comes to competitive play.

This also reflects the results of our local tournaments: the Rebels win rate is about 70%.

These is just a bunch of interesting numbers.

I don't entirely agree that it improves the win rate, but it does mean that they can run a wider variety of builds. One of the reason I feel that people run so many Tie Swarms is because they like Imperials, and have far less other reliable builds to choose from.

It is really only the Falcon that is an issue for the Interceptor, and even then, it is the high cost pilots that it really affects. Turr, Lorrir, and Cowall both have abilities that are negated by the Falcon's turret. Positioning is almost negated when you are facing the Falcon. It also hurts the interceptors with PTL (soon to be the Sabers and Royal Guards). Now, I don't see this as necessarily a bad thing. It is only bad just do to the proliferation of the double Falcon builds. Ideally, I think Wave 3 is going to cause a bit of a shift away from those builds.

The worse I will say about the Advanced is that it might've been balanced based on Vader. Who I will be using more, as I am starting to see some fun Squad Leader combos. Kir Kanos replaces DS-61-2...

Yes ... maybe I must add that the local Imperial players seldom use pure tie swarms. There are almost always Squints and Firesprays (and now the Bombers) in the mix. Sometimes even Vader in his Advanced or a shuttle.

The main problem I have with facing the falcon with Ints is that it kind of ruins the fun of flying the Ints, but I wouldn't call it an insurmountable problem by any means.

Also, props to major for all the number crunching. I'm a huge nerd for math (going to school for actuary)

Kir Kanos replaces DS-61-2...

Replacing Mauler? NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo............

I do think a couple of Advanced with Howlrunner/Biggs/Jan Ors style abilities may fix the problem a bit too.

Part of the issue that the Advanced has is it's a tank, but a tank does nothing if the enemy can just ignore it. At the moment you can more or less ignore an Advanced deal with the rest of the force and then come back to it. Why would you fire at an Advanced when you could fire at a Tie/Ln which goes down twice as fast and does the same amount of damage. In other words it's always at the bottom of the target priority list (unless Vader is in it) which means it's extra survivability does very little.

The A Wing doesn't have this issue as much as it is cheaper and the better dial and boost means it can boost in for decent shots every so often.

You could even ignore Vader just like you would ignore an A-Wing and concentrate on easy targets and heavy hitters first.

unique pilots with supporting abilities would be just great for the Advanced. But then FFG would have to make up pilot names. Kagi in an Advanced would be useful. A tank is useless if he can't keep aggro, so that the damage dealers can do their work

The YT-1300 still needs to hit the interceptors though, which isn't as easy as you might think with 3 agility and an evade action.