I usually play casual games with friends, have only been in one Tournament thus far. To be honest, it makes me sad seeing a list with 2 Millennium Falcons or 2 Slaves. It just isn't Star Wars IMHO.

(My Tournament list was the Old Gang: Skywalker in a X- Wing and R2-D2, Han's Falcon along with Chewie. It went well actually! Just was missing Obi-Wan and Leia!)

I like Darth but in our games he always is seen as the biggest threat and dies first, poor bugger! I like giving him the leadership ability so that when he is not engaged he gives his second action to another pilot in need of boosting.

Tournaments end up being more akin to Math-hammer and simply put that doesn't do it for me. We need to play more scenario driven games. That is where you use ships that you normally wouldn't (eg Vader and crappy Y-Wings) and you get the memories!

I don't read forums to get power lists and came to my own conclusion very quickly that the Tie Interceptor for is my favourite ship and Sontir Fel is a beast! I read about him in Wookipedia the other day and now I like him even more as he has a face. But man, Sontir Fel sure drag out a game! Had a 200 game where all had been destroyed except Fel and Skywalker. Their dog fight dance went for an hour until we called it a draw!

How many ships have had multiple complaints about their usefulness vs their point cost? Remember a year ago when everyone was convinced the Y-Wing was terrible? Then the A-Wing was released and how many threads were started to discuss how awful a ship it was? Note that both of those were 2-attack value ships.

You don't hear so many complaints about them now, because (in my opinion) people have learned how to fly them. You can't fly a Y-Wing like an X-Wing and expect the same results. It didn't mean there was a problem with the Y-Wing. Same with the A-Wing. It has certain strengths and weaknesses that have to be accounted for when you use it. Same goes (again, in my opinion) for the Advanced. Point for point, it seems to be almost perfectly matched with the X-Wing. No one complains the the X-Wing is overcosted, so that seems to argue that the Advanced isn't either. You can't fly the Advanced like an X-Wing, but that isn't a point value issue.

It seems to me that the real problem with the TIE Advanced is that it just doesn't fit into the Imperial "mindset" (for lack of a better word) of as many cheap fighters as possible. Its almost always better to take two Academy TIEs than one Advanced. I think the Advanced can be a very effective ship if flown correctly. Its a defensive ship, where the X-Wing is an offensive ship and defensive ships are always harder to fly successfully. Look at the YT-1300, and how many people have claimed its too powerful. It isn't, its just easy to fly. The Advanced is a good ship, it just isn't as easy.

Just my opinion.

I was one of the folks campaigning to improve the T/A. I play it A LOT and not in competitive games. I've also flown the A-Wing A LOT and not in competitive games.

The T/A simply doesn't perform and I do not mean Vader. I do not want to take a ship just to fire a missile, I want to fly it and know it will influence the game. The T/A doesn't. It's not math, it's table top usage and even in scenario play, it really is handicapped for a ship that was supposed to be the pinnacle of its type.

At days end, all our arguments are moot as the ship is VERY UNLIKELY to be changed by FFG, so I will fly Vader and pretty much not the others and lament a little what this ship could be.

It wasn't a pinnacle of it's type. It was the prototype that was latter modified into the mass production bomber. It was good in-universe but the imperial never took to it.

Well the fact that you fly Vader goes towards my earlier statement that you need a named pilot to make the most of the advance. Abilities and elite pilot skills fill in the gaps and on a defensively minded ship going earlier in the attack order is good for trying to strip the focus off of people who might be shooting at you soon.

I have personally enjoyed great success in my personal games with both Vader and Steele. I won't fly more than one Advance at a time in a standard point game but they've served me well.

Vader is awesome and needs no real help. I fly him a great deal, especially with Turr and Soontir, with Engine Upgrade and Daredevil he is nigh on unstoppable :-)

I still maintain the others T/A's need some help.

I think all the complaining about the tie advanced is imperial players wanting every ship to be cheap like the tie fighter. 2 points less is the concensus and that maybe a single EPT?. They can get high PS unique pilots with great abilities for 15 points on ties, some of those abilities are incredibly good. The tie advanced does exactly what it was meant to do and Vader is truly a beast even without upgrades. He has a free PTL that doesnt generate stress. Everyone says PTL is the best card and its underpriced. Well maybe it was perfectly priced on Vader. But everyone says Vader is overcosted so....anyways. I also like Marik. He gets ragged on alot but i once used cluster missiles and marksmanship and did 6 damage to a YT with 2 double damage crits and 2 hits. Since then never made fun of Marik although he did roll badly, no evades cause he didnt avhe focus already used it . He just needs marksmanship and the crits fly and you choose the worst one. Double damage, no more secondary for the ywing. Its amazing. I like the advanced. Its not something i'd make a list entirely of but it definately has its place and I like the ship as is. Especially the 2 uniques as they are easilly some of the best.

Vader is awesome and needs no real help. I fly him a great deal, especially with Turr and Soontir, with Engine Upgrade and Daredevil he is nigh on unstoppable :-)

I still maintain the others T/A's need some help.

Steele is great if kitted out. It ramps up his price but especially against Y-s and large bases he's not to be dismissed.

The shuttle and Firespray can also target lock

Neither of those is a fighter. The firespray is pretty nimble for it's size but there's a reason it has an back arc. Shuttle takes even more work to get decent shots with.

At days end, all our arguments are moot as the ship is VERY UNLIKELY to be changed by FFG, so I will fly Vader and pretty much not the others and lament a little what this ship could be.

What do you want it to be. Do you want it to surplant the TIE as the go to Imperial Ship I certainly don't. That would be less Star Wars-y for me.

I like that it is pretty much Vader's ship.

Can it be used in other ways sure. But I am sooooo glad that people still fly standard TIEs instead of the TIE Advanced.

Several things:

• To the best of my knowledge, no squad with a TIE Advanced has ever done well in a high level tournament, with the possible exception of Darth Vader when the game was still very young.

Vader was in the second place list in 2012 Gen Con, and I believe in the 6th place list at 2013 Gen Con (the 2013 player is in my local meta). I'm not sure how the advanced has done elsewhere, as the only major X-Wing events I've followed have been Gen Cons.

My biggest complaint about the TIE advanced is that it's maneuver dial is no better than (and arguably worse than) the standard TIE

These 2 opposing threads have 2 different mindsets to go along with their 2 different opinions. One says the tie advanced, when compared to others ships, is over costed and came up with multiple ideas to balance it against other ships. One says it's not all about winning and you can fly one and do ok.

If you are happy with how the tie advance performs for you, great. Math has been done to the best of our ability to show that during on table performance the tie advanced comes up short. Play testing options to allieveiate that is being done now to further improve game experience.

I do feel the advanced is underwhelming to he point of obselecence because I enjoy playing Xwing at the highest level I can, tournament or not. I have also flown the advanced (Vader and not) multiple times to that end and have never been satisfied with the results. To convince me otherwise someone is going to have to do more than say "but Vader is awesome" and ""it's not that bad".

If you really want to convince people the advanced is all good, start posting battle reports highlighting it's awesomeness, utility, and survivability. The times it conquers all, was the last ship standing, or at least was one shot/die roll away from victory. I've never seen or heard that about the advanced. I've heard that about the shuttle, awing, ywing, and Hwk- the other ships that often are looked past. And I hear and see it all the time about interceptors, who see just slightly more "tournament" level play.

Don't know when this post became ranty, but the advanced is still the bottomest of the barrel, and there are ways to make it not so, or at least not so much so.

My biggest complaint about the TIE advanced is that it's maneuver dial is no better than (and arguably worse than) the standard TIE

It is arguably worse than the X-Wing dial. I feel a 1 Straight is more useful than a 5.

@Rakky Wistol

You are definatly entitled to your opinion. I haven't really loved the B-wing, but I am crazy about the A-wing. We can all have different preferences and expereinces with the game.

My original point was not so much that the TIE Advanced was just as good as other ship, but that it is not broken. In any game Miniature Game there are going to be units you like and units that you find underwelming. I am not trying to say that you are wrong for not liking the TIE Advanced. I am just saying that being slightly less effective than other ships does not make it broken. I don't think that we need to change rules, or point values to keep the ship in the game.

I also respect your desire to play the game as competativly as you can. That is not a wrong way to play. But part of that style of play is to identify what ships you find to be the best "deal" for the points. As X-Wing goes I think it is very well balanced, and the point values are all pretty good, but they aren't going to be perfect. One aspect of competative play is finding those ships that are under priced and taking them. Finding those ships that are over priced and avoiding them. People get on these forums and have long conversations (and can we say arguments) about what those ships are. Part of what makes you a good player might be your ability to make good decisions about what what ships are worth their price. None of this means that if you find a ship that a slighlty worse value for your points that that ship is somehow broken and its shortcommings should be fixed.

I am willing to admit that the TIE Advanced might not be as good a ship as some of the other ships. My point is that it isn't drastically worse than other ships. And that the slight difference does not make the ship broken.

I will only end with my original thesis, I am not saying that the TIE Advanced is the best ship in the game or that it is better than any specific ship. I am simply say that it works within the confines of the game. It is a very viable choice for anyone who wants to fly them in their squadron.

This.

You don't hear so many complaints about them now, because (in my opinion) people have learned how to fly them. You can't fly a Y-Wing like an X-Wing and expect the same results. It didn't mean there was a problem with the Y-Wing. Same with the A-Wing. It has certain strengths and weaknesses that have to be accounted for when you use it. Same goes (again, in my opinion) for the Advanced. Point for point, it seems to be almost perfectly matched with the X-Wing. No one complains the the X-Wing is overcosted, so that seems to argue that the Advanced isn't either. You can't fly the Advanced like an X-Wing, but that isn't a point value issue.

This.

Honestly, I think this whole big TIE Advanced dilemma (as well as A-Wings, Interceptors, Y-Wings, Shuttles, HWKs, and any other ship that has been complained about) isn't necessarily about which ship is better or worse , but rather, about which ships are easier or harder to fly. TIE Fighters, X-Wings, and Falcons are all relatively easy to play, once you learn how to maneuver and action management and all that. These other ships that people complain about do have their strengths, but the problem is that their strengths are more difficult to bring to bear. Boosting or Barrel Rolling out of the right firing arc at the right time can easily make the difference in a game, but it takes a lot of skill (and luck) to fly your ship just right so that you end up in that sweet spot where you can move out of the way but still get your shot in.

Anyway, that's my two credits.

Edit:

Quote: Hrathen:

"My original point was not so much that the TIE Advanced was just as good as other ship, but that it is not broken. In any game Miniature Game there are going to be units you like and units that you find underwelming."

Also, this.

Well said.. I've said as much myself, and I think you said it better here.. lol

Also, to the OP: Nice Name.

Praise Jaddeth!

From a purely mathematical level just adding up all the attack dice from all the different ships and then dividing by the number of ships types to find the Mean attack dice is flawed logic. If you really wanted to find the mean attack dice you would need to take weighted averages based on how often different ships were used. For example the TIE is by far the most common ship used, and Named YT-1300 (though they show up in a lot of games) do not show up in any great numbers. And yes there are almost no ships with only one attack dice, and they don't show up very often at all, but if you were to take a weighted average it would be above 2, but not significantly so. Of course if you used the mode for your measure of center 2 is obviously average. Of course if you have studied advanced mathematics (I have a masters degree with an emphasis in statistics probability and teaching.) then you know that best measure of center is the median. (Mean is used more because it is easier to calculate and predict in large populations, try finding p-scores for medians they are a bear.) And according to the median 2 would most definitely be the center.

The technical aspect of the averages is interesting, but ultimately a minor side point in the overall context of the TIE Advanced balance discussion. I still think that the mean is far more informative in what is essentially a binomial distribution; the median and mode quantize the results too much to yield useful information. Cool beans on the degree. I'll have my PhD in Electrical Engineering later this year, I picked up a few statistics and probability courses along the way. All of the math here is at an undergraduate level though, nothing too complex.

The most useful data point in regards to balance though, I think, is to look at the amount of points spent on 2 and 3 attack dice ships. I grabbed 16 squads listed from Worlds 2013 here (14 out of the top 16, plus 2 close runner ups) from Worlds:

http://moseisleyraumhafen.forumieren.com/t814-x-wing-wm-2013#10078

I count 840 points on 3 attack dice ships, and 760 points on 2 attack dice ships. Most of those 2 attack dice are from TIE Fighters.

There is certainly no questioning that Barrel Roll is very good, particularly so on a higher PS ship. The question is if it can sufficiently mitigate the opposing squad's damage to bring it down to that of the TIE Advanced. In a heads up fight X-wings vs TIE Advanced, the X-wings will do significantly more damage, around 50% more (for example 1.21 vs 0.86 at range 2 w/ focus is 43%). So, for the TIE Advanced to break even, it needs to be able to get out of ALL firing arcs one turn out of three. It's actually worse than that, because then you are firing without a focus, so your damage goes down, unless you also simultaneously get into a range 1 shot. And it's still slightly worse than even that, because comparing apples to apples, the X-wing also had an action, and so even if it can't use its focus for attack, it can use it for defense. Even at range 1, that brings the expected damage back down to 0.55. (3 dice w/o focus vs 2 dice w/ focus). When you really look at the numbers, it is extremely difficult to make back the damage deficit with barrel rolls.

On the bright side, if you can get all your shots in at range 1 with focus, then the TIE Advanced are "only" outgunned by about 25%.

Wow, such passion.

Is there no way we can accept these may work for you but they don't for most people?Or are we going all Warhammer community where we declare only certain build 'optimal' thus suggesting that everyone has to play the game and that the game, ergo, actually sucks.that is until someone wins with a different list and we try to make ourselves feel better by claiming the 'meta changed'?

Some people like it, most don't... Soo...?

[...]

So, lets start with a 21 point ship, and reduce its damage output by 30%, which is the ratio of damage that the Advanced does to the X-wing vs what the X-wing does to the Advanced (0.86/1.21 = 0.71). The "value" of this ship would then be 21*(0.71)^0.5 = 17.7. Now we need to add barrel roll and evade. I would consider that to be worth about 1-2 points , so voila, you're back at around 19 points. Again, the dial is about a wash, although the lack of a straight 1 does hurt the Advanced relative to the X-wing. I don't really like getting point values this way because there are too many variables involved with figuring out average damage numbers, but it just shows that you basically get about the same answer anyway. If I compared TIE Fighters and X-wings I would probably find that they are about costed correctly relative to each other.

[...]

I know I've cut out a lot of your post AND if I've missed the part clarifying the question I'm about to ask, please highlight it for me...

In the area I Bolded and Underlined, why is both Barrel Roll AND Evade combined to be considered 1-2 points? If it was just barrel roll I understand. But shouldn't the value of Evade negating 1 attack dice be much higher?

Yes, I understand from the math that Evading rather than Focusing would be taking away from the offensive capabilities of the Advance but It would also be taking away from the offensive capabilities of the Shooter.

I'm sure you've taken evading into consideration throughout your calculations. but how did you come to the consideration that both Barrel Roll and Evade combine for 2 points. Stealth, R2-F2, Elusiveness, and Expert Handling which all increase the defensive aspects of a ship's survivablity cost north of the 2+ range for points.

[...]

So, lets start with a 21 point ship, and reduce its damage output by 30%, which is the ratio of damage that the Advanced does to the X-wing vs what the X-wing does to the Advanced (0.86/1.21 = 0.71). The "value" of this ship would then be 21*(0.71)^0.5 = 17.7. Now we need to add barrel roll and evade. I would consider that to be worth about 1-2 points , so voila, you're back at around 19 points. Again, the dial is about a wash, although the lack of a straight 1 does hurt the Advanced relative to the X-wing. I don't really like getting point values this way because there are too many variables involved with figuring out average damage numbers, but it just shows that you basically get about the same answer anyway. If I compared TIE Fighters and X-wings I would probably find that they are about costed correctly relative to each other.

[...]

I know I've cut out a lot of your post AND if I've missed the part clarifying the question I'm about to ask, please highlight it for me...

In the area I Bolded and Underlined, why is both Barrel Roll AND Evade combined to be considered 1-2 points? If it was just barrel roll I understand. But shouldn't the value of Evade negating 1 attack dice be much higher?

They give you options, but as you are still limited in the number of actions you can take a turn, they don't add a huge amount to the relative power of the ship. Also on a 3 dice ship an Evade is not much better than a Focus. But the Focus can be used both offensively or defensively.

It's also worth noting that upgrade cost is not the same as the cost when things are built into the ship. If you take a Tie-Fighter and attach upgrades to make it equal to a A-Wing, the A-Wing would cost around 25pts, it actually is pointed at 17.

If you work from either the X-Wing or A-Wing, you end up with the same thing the ship is around 2pts too expensive.

The thing is Vader is not awful, his ability is probably under pointed, however the chasis Vader is stuck on is over pointed. So overall Vader is coming in even or possibly 1pt too expensive... The issue is all the other pilots.

As you say in casual play the Advanced is fine. I don't mind running one, it's challenging. However in a competitive setting you can feel it holding you back. And even the people that are saying the Advanced is OK, aren't saying it's good, they are saying it's passable. If the majority of players are saying it's week and the minority that can play with it are saying it's passable, something is probably wrong.

[...]

So, lets start with a 21 point ship, and reduce its damage output by 30%, which is the ratio of damage that the Advanced does to the X-wing vs what the X-wing does to the Advanced (0.86/1.21 = 0.71). The "value" of this ship would then be 21*(0.71)^0.5 = 17.7. Now we need to add barrel roll and evade. I would consider that to be worth about 1-2 points , so voila, you're back at around 19 points. Again, the dial is about a wash, although the lack of a straight 1 does hurt the Advanced relative to the X-wing. I don't really like getting point values this way because there are too many variables involved with figuring out average damage numbers, but it just shows that you basically get about the same answer anyway. If I compared TIE Fighters and X-wings I would probably find that they are about costed correctly relative to each other.

[...]

I know I've cut out a lot of your post AND if I've missed the part clarifying the question I'm about to ask, please highlight it for me...

In the area I Bolded and Underlined, why is both Barrel Roll AND Evade combined to be considered 1-2 points? If it was just barrel roll I understand. But shouldn't the value of Evade negating 1 attack dice be much higher?

They give you options, but as you are still limited in the number of actions you can take a turn, they don't add a huge amount to the relative power of the ship. Also on a 3 dice ship an Evade is not much better than a Focus. But the Focus can be used both offensively or defensively.

It's also worth noting that upgrade cost is not the same as the cost when things are built into the ship. If you take a Tie-Fighter and attach upgrades to make it equal to a A-Wing, the A-Wing would cost around 25pts, it actually is pointed at 17.

If you work from either the X-Wing or A-Wing, you end up with the same thing the ship is around 2pts too expensive.

[...]

So the Flexibility of Focus is far greater than the Complete Negation of an attacker's attack dice through Evade?

currently the only ships with Evade actions are all 3-Defense ships, Firespray, and YT-1300+Title. So I must say that if the action is negligible on ships with 3-Defense why was the option even given to them? Or is allowed as an upgradable action through an EPT or Modification?

The value of the Action must be great enough for it to not be featured as a purchasable option for all ships, other than the reasoning that it tells which ships canonically are more maneuverable.

which I why considering the Evade action combined with Barrel Roll to be between 1-2 points incredibly hard to wrap my head around. Taking the evade action says to me "no you roll one less dice for attacking"

yes the yield potential of Focus increases defensively as the number defense dice increases. but that is yield potential and not an secure chance.

Yes there will be times when the attacker rolls all blanks or focus w/o Token also. But the Evade action at the basic level would be denying a dice roll entirely provided a hit was rolled.

----

just a note:

Balancing an Awing-Prototype to a TIE-Academy is TIE(26) vs Awing(22) in how upgrades/actions are added through existing options.

TIE: Shield x2 (8), TL (2), Engine (4)

AWing: Hull (3), Barrel Roll [Expert Handling](2), or (1) if you consider the "remove TL part of handling"

But yes the difference between the 2 is a large 4-5 point range.

I gotta agree with Rodent here: the Advanced isn't as good as it's original equivalent, the X-Wing. The X-Wing has an easier dial to fly with while also having the benefit of optional astromechs, all of which give some pretty nice benefits to an already stable combat platform. The Advanced, while possessing higher speed and agility, is not worth the same amount of points for what is presented. Sure, barrel roll and evade are great actions, but if the starting dial itself is crummy (why can't it use sharp turn 1? That's ridiculous.) than it's going to suffer because the original movements are underwhelming. So if Tempest was lowered to 20, and Storm to 22 or was given an elite talent, people wouldn't be complaining nearly as much here. Maarek and Vader being overcosted is totally arguable, but I'll actually put them on the same par as their X-Wing counterparts and say they're just fine the way they are.