Just table them and don't lose more than one of your auxiliary ships and you'll be fine

Very much so...which is why I'm glad I'll be sticking to my Vic1 in wave 2 for my competitive list...I can't wait to see peoples' faces when a lowly Vic1, one of the most dismissed ships in the game baring Neb's I feel, rolls up into the face of their Impstar and nearly smashes it to piecies in one volley of: 3red, 2blue, 5black with a concfire dial and token with Screed and potential XX-9 Turbolasers...so much sexy-time. All of this considering that I don't even know any of the new awesome-ass upgrades to come in wave 2...please give us previews soon

Outpost is almost certainly 40 points for them after 2 turns, then it depends how well the fights go and such to see if you can start winning points from the objective. The time I played this objective he had the token for 1st and 2nd turn, then by 3 he lost 1 of his 2 victories and my vic was close enough to contest it, and 4th turn saw his second ship burning to ash. Just depends if you can dive in head-first and engage on the station by turn 3..and be sure to not lose any ships or many fighters while tabling him in order to get that 10-0. Though, I do see Ambush as one of the few objectives that can actually swing very heavily in the first players favor...for instance if I have my 400 point list of: Vic1, Glad1 (Demolisher), and a Raider with squads. I can just put my Vic and Glad RIGHT in their face and my raider can catch up by turn 2 with ease. This allows me to blast away with my brawlers even sooner than usual and with my squadrons I can dive into the fight immediately.

I'm waiting for mine (the Raider) and I was debating this concept too. I see ships as a huge point sink, so adding (relatively) cheap upgrades to massively increase their base power is huge...but the corvettes act more like X-Wing ships, in that the base cost is MUCH lower and closer to the upgrade costs so you can almost double the cost of the ship if you kit it out; and that's rarely going to be worth having a second ship imo. My thoughts is a Raider with OLP, and maybe one of the titles if it's really good. In rebel lists i'd prob do the same with a CR90a...though not sure since Screed-Raider with OLP is much more effective at what it does

you care, because squadron kills award you points that are factored in to determine who wins the game the only time no one cares is when one side's cap ships get completely wiped, which is exceedingly rare in 6 rounds not to mention you don't need dedicated bombers to do serious damage to the opponent's ships. Xs, As and even enough fighters will murder a ship, especially if said ship is either slow or carries 1 die anti-squadron or both the key advantage I've found in dedicated bombers is either the range (Rhymer for imperials, which lets bombers with a squadron command fling black dice further than the range ruler) or the sheer excessive force (B-wings essentially giving you a super VSD to compensate for rebel ships general lack of close range prowess) Most of my games end in a sweep...so maybe that's skewing my thinking. However, I still think my points explain how people tend to view squadrons. If you don't have bombers to threaten ships, then the only thing your fighters do is pile in...there's no real need to worry about screening positions and such like that. No worrying about intercepting enemy bombers with your A's or Squints. If you embrace the combined-arms of squadron combat it makes for a better game imo...and a more effective fleet as far as i'm concerned.

We did 120 minute rounds, the clock only went to 90 minutes...I finished all my games in with about 20-30 minutes left on the first countdown. So I would agree FFG overestimated the game-time. This was with all extremely unexperienced players too. 4-5 games per person at the most. I would hope the 400pt games would keep to 120 minutes instead of the proposed 150? increase.

That Carrack Cruiser is so sexy...gunna have to save up for one.

What were the bids? I'm curious to see how many points are being left behind for these tactics.

Not really an interpretation..that's exactly what it says

Honestly, no objective favors you...that's kind of the point. Going first is a pretty big advantage, as setting up 2 back-to-back barrages of heavy firepower can be game winning. When you're first, the goal is to pick the objective that hurts you and helps him the least. @Maturin: I think bidding to go second is a gross waste of points. First player has enough of an advantage that I'll take it when offered, but generally people are going to bid in order TO go first. So you're kinda hurting yourself in more games than you're helping imo. Especially when you consider how much 3-8 point upgrades can add to your combat ability.

The biggest factor, to me, is your ship makeup. If you take squadrons that are good at killing other squadrons, you don't need to invest in ships that have 2 dice anti-fighter stats. If you're already investing in those ships, you might consider Corellian Corvette's path of tying them up till your flack frigates get in range...so minimal fighters, but tough ones. As for general design philosophy beyond the ship/squadron interactions, my thoughts are this: Your list is better suited with a mix of everything...this allows you to engage people in an actual fight of skill and tactics. The main reason is probably prevalent due to people liking to write off squadrons: they only fight other squadrons. Squadrons don't really give you points or win games in the context of the ship battle. So I should just focus on fighting and killing ships, and make the token gesture in case someone has squadrons that can be a pain. My view to counter this is to make sure you have bombers. Why? As I stated above, whats the point in squadrons if all they do is fight stuff that "doesn't matter"...make it matter. Bomber's threaten them and force them to play as such. If they don't have ANY fighters then you get squads that can freely threaten him with heavy damage: each blue die is a 50/50 chance of damage that he can't do much against with tokens. Black bomber (or even red with X-Wings) die are killer in decent numbers. What this does, is gives you a purpose for your squadrons..protect the bombers. It also forces your opponent to worry about said bombers. What this creates is an actual battle that matters, like the ship one, instead of mimicking Warhammer 40k non-objective games of pushing dudes into a pile till all are dead. And this point is probably the main crux for most people without realizing it. Who cares if your pile of fighters can kill my pile of fighters? If bombers are involved it turns the fight into something that actually matters. This is easier for Rebels with X-Wings...but Y's and B's are much heavier hitters so running them might give you some purpose.

Only 10 points over a Victory II for all that!?! The increase in the fore battery armament alone is pretty much equivalent to Expanded Launchers; never mind the additional shields, new defense token, tougher hull, and second anti-squadron die. That is 10 points with less dice at medium range than the VSD deuce. I see naked ISD's as a trap. While they look good in paper they will have the same issues that a VSD has but in bigger proportions with slightly less dice at medium range (far more at close), more hull and shields, more squadron (so far), and more speed (definitely can't turn worse than a VSD) i'd expect more. A VSD-2 isn't a terribly great buy without upgrades either and if the ISD provides that foundation for only a few additional points, then we might not even see upgraded VSD-2s at all I don't think so. The size of the ISD is the limiting factor. Right now a medium ship base is slightly smaller than range 1. So a large base is bigger than range 1. That means that the ISD is going to run into the obstacles far more often than a VSD. So your 7 points of difference will end up taking hits and damage over and over and speed 3 really is not that huge for it because that still puts the end of the base back near the 1 on the tool or further (someone tell me where 7" is on the tool from 3 back please) The Large base is going to be a rude awakening to A LOT of people. The speed 3 is a great choice...it makes the ISD unique instead of a direct upgrade to the VSD...however; it will come with a rather big liability (potentially boon in things like Dangerous Territory as your own mission heh) in that it'll smash into stuff...a lot. Even if the obstacles are well spaced enough to let you through, it will leave you with 2 very exploitable options: 1.) Your opponent will know where you're going to avoid taking damage (and if you screw up you're taking damage you didn't plan on) 2.) Defy convention like Vader in Empire Strikes Back and dive into those rocks...you know you'll take damage, but it'll give you potential surprise. Yet, option 2 is even more complicated by the fact that your base will be large enough that you might double-hit an obstacle if your speed is too low...this leaves a lot of dangers to large ships in the game that will help to balance them against other ships even if they seem "too strong" on paper.

Objectives all-the-way. Defying the convention of: "If imp, try to shoot first." Instead, I have a 300pt list with objectives I love, and roll with whatever I get. I use my tactical and strategic ability to outplay my opponent and try not to rely on gimicks like "first player gets two 'ideal' shots, so go for broke to get it" Objectives can really make a game for you, though so can going first. The thing for me is that you can count on using your objectives and building a strategy around them rather than trying to go first all the time. I shoot for consistency, eliminate as much random-chance as possible.

@Boothy: True, that my squads would trounce yours as I invested more points. But what's interesting, is that that is what I want. I want squads to engage, it makes my fighters useful. So, I find it interesting when people say they can speed bump me...ok, so you're giving me what I want and framing it as a win for you. Since I've my fighters synergized to expect them to handle an equally capable squad, I can invest even less in destroying your screen and more into killing your ships or scoring on SupPos. This game is odd, when you consider it, that it encourages diviersity but also punishes you for token gestures...your 5 fighters and even Bombers, are token gestures at the squad game, and hinder you to the point that (at least the bombers) are wasted points. So I would say 67 points wouldn't be bad...if you avoided the bombers. Essentially you have no way to employ the bombers, and you're investing in more ships meaning you don't necisarily need the bombers. Hard to explain exactly, as its too much and too little at the same time As for the more ships for more activations, yes. That's huge. But my example for that is, say each ship adds 25% power to your list, so a 2 ship list would be 375pts of power, 3 would be 425. But a demolisher of your demolisher is double value: your two ship list jumps to 485 power. Better than a basic 3 ship list. Again, I'm pulling values outa my butt, but I'm just demonstrating a concept. This hinges, to me, on the insane buy-in-cost of armada ships over x-wing fighters lends towards investing into 10-20 points of upgrades for your 50-80 point ship. And when you so that it removes enoigh that you simply can't invest in another large ship.

True. Though I'm really looking forward to my first ~900 point games...gunna be EPIC

Oh...I would like to see them, but I'll snag one off shapeways in the future, as I doubt they'll make it into the game: Carracks. I love those ships...if a box can be sexy, it'd be a Carrack Cruiser

I, too, am really against 4-ship builds. Essentially, adding upgrades to your ships increases their relative power by massive margins, something that just spending more points on antoher ship simply can't get you. Furthermore, playing without squadrons is pretty bad juju. You might be able to pull it off in Wave 2, but even now, the 2 blue-dice flak Glad's simply don't do enough. The most successful attempt I saw was a Vic-2 with the two upgrades that alter blue dice (Warlord and H9 turbos?) so that they essentially autohit all squads in range, as well as two Glad-2s. he couldn't put out enough damage to threaten my squadrons effectively, and it had the potential to draw some shots away form my ships...and i'll take that ANY day.

Asthetically: victory, hands down. Best looking destroyer, bar none. Vindicator is second, here's to hopeing it's in wave 3/4. As for effect, the Gladiator is simply phenomenal. I didn't care about it at all, asthetically, but it plays like a dream. Raider and MC30 are my wave 2s for sure. Rebel glad and a fast imp flanker/squad killer? Hells ya

Also, those large bases are going to be hell to maneuver. There's already issues with medium ships in close for some people, but with such a large base the obstacles will actually cut off large amounts of maneuver options unless you're willing to trade damage for them...and get passed them in one turn

Ya...really disappointed with so few details I want to see more of what the Raider can do...pretty cool looking ship and will fit in amazingly with my current fleet.

I plan on adding 15-30 points more in my squadrons for wave 2. Should be enough. I'd actually consider not even expanding squadrons much if you already have ~100 in squadrons depending on ships you're adding/upgrades. This coming from someone who advocates squadrons like no other atm. Then again, I'm adding a Raider to my list, and it's supposed to be a god at anti-squadron dice, so the points I invest there would be partially applicable to squadron battles as well.

I was thinking hard on Wave 2 last night (couldn't sleep), and aside from getting more and more profound respect for how amazingly well-balanced Armada is, I came across some interesting ideas about the VSD and the ISD. I was considering what would be scary to face with my list. I am planning on taking my VSD, Glad, 9 assorted fighters (2 of which are bombers) and simply add a kitted out Raider and 15-30 points of squadron expansions. I figured the Raider with a decent kit (I'm thinking OLP might be nice on this guy) will run about 60 points, maybe less if I go a little bare-bones on it. This leaves me 10-20 points after the bump to 400...The question would be: direct upgrade to ISD, or kit out my VSD (I prefer this, as I know ISD will be popular as hell and I like to avoid ultra popular things If I can find fun alternatives). Well, consider this: VSD + Hangars + Flight Controllers = 84 points (Haha, didn't realize my Flagship was so cheap, my Dominator is 88) Most recent spoiler on ISD-1 is 92 points, essentially 20 more than my VSD. So I could direct upgrade to that, and have a tougher, faster, beefier flagship. However! Check out this 20 point upgrade: Gunnery Team + Expanded Launchers. If I have the points left over from a cheaper-than-expected raider or minimalist squadron addon I can add Dominator title giving me 2 blue dice, giving me identical pool shots+2 black if I trade those shields. My VSD now hits HARDER than an ISD at short range, though less ability to bypass tokens, granted. Not only this, I was thinking about basic numbers, and I would wager than my single VSD could engage two ISDs head-on and I'd take that trade happily. I would hopefully be going second (as I like) and take fire from one ISD at long-medium range..again, ideally...which isn't that scary. I would move to flank or OLP one/both ships with my other two ships until he moves his second ISD with similar effect of the first. Both having to move, there's a good chance they end up in close-range if I play right. Now, I have 3 red, 5 black, and maybe 2 blue. Plus a ConcFire is in order if I see this coming up. I get to shoot them both. That's an INSANE amount of return fire into his ships (potentially only those 2 if he has squads). With luck I can bypass all his tokens, or force a discard on most of them, and either wreck half his hull or shred his shield...on each big ship. The kicker is, if I survive the squadron phase, and his first attack in the next turn, I'll attack AGAIN with even more damage eeking through. Now, obviously I'm setting everything up in my favor. But the point is, even these big, scary large ships are very manageable. Not to mention that I was focusing on the concept that, if well played, my single ~110 point ship can square off against > 200 points worth of enemy ships and hold his own. Also, the fact that I ignored that I have 2 other ships and 100-120 points of squadrons as well I hope helps to illustrate what I mean. ISDs are simply going to add a ton of new options and ways to play, and FFG seems to have the balance of this game set to a fine, needle, point.

Fire lanes is bad for the VSD, CR-90's have enough dice to take/contest points on the sides of the VSD. I'd agree with Fire Lanes being generally an uphill battle for most imp lists. As for the rest, I sort of agree that they didn't play objectives well...at least in first and third game (Me second with Superior Positions chosen both times). I would simply state that it was my opponents lack of experience (and motivation to understand strategic theory of the game before the game, as experience isn't everything); they weren't aware how dangerous even basic TIEs are in SupPos, one hit with them (50/50) in the aft of a ship and they've paid for their cost almost twice over in points. While I expect this to change a little, I don't know that many people will learn how to effectively counter it with the types of lists that people seem to want to run. So a meta-shift is likely. As for saying SupPos is bad for my list? I can't even comprehend why you would think that...the only other blue I'd consider is Dangerous Territory, and i'm really not a fan for two reasons: 1.) There's only 5x15 points up for grabs, and it's nearly impossible to get them all. 2.) The only ship worth designating is a ship I NEED to shoot with...maybe after wave 2 with my Raider i'd consider it, but honestly it's SupPos all the way in my eyes. People go on-and-on about Haven...I really don't care. It doesn't scare me, it doesn't impart flexbility, just a high degree of exploitable power. My brother played it once and I said "what they hell" and dove in...I won, under haven, with luke/wedge/dutch and some generics. I also forgot about accuracy tokens the entire time. Of course my brother made numerous mistakes too, so maybe an experienced and highly skilled player would put up more of a fight. However, I have Rhymer and a massive figher screen. I can shoot you from outside of your range one, with Escort, and with support. If you're looking to EA me from your flank...it'll be trivially easy to get in behind you for shots under the SupPos objective...glad and bombers w/ advance: 3 black dice at medium range and one of the deadliest brawlers in the game? Good luck. You can stop me, and bomb me to death of course. Rebel fighters are massively powerful, but they have to leave Haven to engage me...have at it. Precision Strike, OTOH, might be pretty **** deadly to me if they are good with their fighters and can get shots off...but I would find it hard to argue that if I lose the squadron war to the point where i'm losing tons of points to PrecStrike bombers, I'll prob just lose my ships anyway. Fair assumption? Opening Salvo looks terrible, I agree. Am I to assume, if I table my opponent and he damages both ships he gets half those points but I don't an extra half-his for killing them? Prob would avoid this like the plauge...actually, most Red's I'd avoid picking as first player haha. Perhaps Advanced Gunnery depending on the list. Hyperspace assault isn't THAT scary with my very fast and maneuverable Demolisher, I just worry about losing 1-3 turns of shooting while "running" and turning back to engage in a position that isn't terrible. This is Ambush my bad Hyperspace assault is scary with certain lists. Though I feel some lists I wouldn't mind allowing this objective. Fire Lanes is bad as well, though I'd argue it's similar to Contested Outpost enough that I wouldn't cry myself to sleep if I picked it over two REALLY bad Red/Blue options. Intel Sweep is, agreed, very bad for me too (as first player, and i'd never pick it as mine) as I don't want to wander around with my Glad, I wana fight. Dangerous Territory is the same, yet worse, since I have to take 2damage or a Face Up card to clear those, AND i'm wandering around not fighting. So, worst case? Opening Salvo is prob worst red for me, so never pick. Fire Lanes is prob worst but really not that bad if I just kill him fast (exact same with Outpost), baring Hyperspace Assault against certain lists (prob a decent amount). That I know where the jump-points are is good enough for me counter their advantage enough that I might take it. Dangerous Territory I prob wouldn't pick...however, I might be inclined to concede the tokens and just blast the clowns non-objective ship to slag, since he has to (potentially) take a ship out of the fight to collect those tokens (same idea in Intel). So really, I'm not too scared of many objectives. I'll take the penalties to empower my demolisher to land 3-4 massive hits on his biggest ship...a luxury I usually prefer to waive so that I can just punish my opponent for wanting/relying on first activation.

Sounds perfect, and is all stuff I'll prob use when/if I olay as Rebels haha. I'd love to play against it to see how it fairs in a psuedo-mirror match.

To the first point: this is the first table top game...hell potentially game, period...that rewards you for diversification. So, no, taking "a little of everything" doesn't hurt you. However, the axiom in my first sentence above IS relevant. In your list, you have 3 ships and 5 fighters and 3 bombers, with the ONLY "quality" item you have is the demolisher title...while very good, your ships otherwise are pretty much barebones. The problem, I feel, with this approach is you're trying to specialize and diversify at the same time...hard convey what I actually mean, but let's look at your fighters: 5 TIEs and 3 Bombers. Against ship-only lists you have a hefty punch, and I won't argue that. But against an opponent with squadrons (often, I'm sure) you only have 3 basic TIEs no screen your bombers that only have range 1 shots. One enemy squadron command has a change of killing most of your TIEs and the second will eliminate all your Squads from the game. So, the way I see it, your squadrons don't add much to your game. Ryhmer alone might give you some teeth with medium ship range on batteries, but you're still in trouble if you get a single interceptor or two to engage you (speed 5 is scary). You said you have 67 squadron points of 100 spent...well, you have a double-whamy there in that you aren't spending your full points, while having very generic and General fighters that can't stand up to anything specialized. So two factors work against your investment. To illustrate: my squadron list has more anti-fighter dedication than ALL of yours AND I have 2 bombers with medium range to threaten ships while you struggle to slow my fighters down. I also have more options to deal with yours: I've ab advanced to force all your shots off my TIEs while they howl+flight control+reroll your few ships dead. I also have two 5 speed ships to make your Bombers utterly useless eoth their range 1. As for your ships...the way I look at it lately, is similar to accounting: fixed cost and variable cost. You have a fixed cost for the ship, and let's assign it a usefulness value. Now if you buy X ships you get Y usefulness. And the fact that the base cost is so high, you have to give up your variable costs (upgrades) to take more. Now imagine that upgrades are a usefulness multiplayer: if I take my demolisher, with ACM, Wulff, and Engine techs. I could (random values for demonstration purposes) argue each upgrade adds ~15-25% increase in usefulness depending on its cost, and compounds further with surgeries like wulff and engine techs. So my 56 point ship pays 32 points (for an 88 point ship) and I would rate it's usefullness value at AT least double its base cost...meaning for 32 points I've added at least 56 points of valie. So with ships, with the high buy-in cost, synergies for a fraction of the ship cost will add MUCH more value to your list than a second ship, which then takes away from other aspects of your list.