Please note that they are NOT referred to as "debris fields" in the documentation which shipped with the Raider. They are something like "Mission tokens" that are only called for in campaign play. Again, they are officially not referred to as "debris fields".

Cool. I like that. Thanks.

You can squeeze four in with a variety of options. As a default starting point I like to take Accuracy Correctors because it is essentially "for free" given the title. That frees the action economy. Next, do I take a blanket no-name list? You can run 4 of the Tempest Squadron pilots with each carrying a cluster missile, but everyone is initiative 2, and you still have to use an action to Target Lock at some point. That list caps out at 100 points even. Or... you can take 4 of the Storm Squadron pilots, with two of them carrying cluster missiles. Now you're initiative 4 and have a higher probability of delivering your ordinance before it's shot down. Or you can mix and match the above lists and have fewer storms and more cluster missiles - etc. Finally, you can do 3 of the above in some fashion, and add in one of the Ace Pilots. And once you do that, I 'm just too much of a bad player to make any decisions that aren't basically monkeys pulling levers and seeing what happens. I like Zertik Strom for economy//good pilot ability. Vader can be squeezed in here if you give up on cluster missiles. Or do you just go with 3 aces with Adv. Targeting Computers and learn to fly aces better? I own 4, and I've painted them all, and I like the look of them flying. Overall they are pretty decent ships. My current list is: Zertik Strom, Elusiveness, Twin Ion Mk II Storm w AC & Cluster & Twin Ion Mk II Storm with AC Tempest with AC I think that was 100 even. Sometimes I think I should avoid flying aces because the ship is a little plain in how it maneuvers and I'm not too great a player.

True Story: I was playing a guy who was measuring during movement and checking arcs to see whether he wanted to barrel roll or not. I told him that wasn't allowed during activation. He said "what difference does it make if you can measure during the combat phase" My answer "Because it's cheating and it bothers me." He stopped, paused, and said, you know if you think that's cheating, I don't think we have much chance at playing together. I packed up my stuff and I left (then I took 6 months off the game, and from what I've seen, he is not a player in the community anymore). Incidentally, I found out later he has a nickname "Cheater Tim" Cheating is cheating. Explain why a particular 'cheat' (and I use the term whether it is unintentional or intentional - which is important) is advantageous and why it's not allowed. For new players, I let it go once or twice but afterward I start enforcing actively ("wait, you can't do that during this phase" or "hey, now that you placed your barrel roll template down, you're committed to the barrel roll on that side). That works a lot better than calling someone a cheater, I've realized... Things I was wrong about personally for 6 months: I thought secondary weapons were immune from obstruction penalties. I placed turn-templates outside the pegs of the ship to move them without having to move ships in the way. The problem with that is that when you put a curved template outside the pegs, you are changing the movement radius (and performing, thusly, turns that aren't even in the game). These were things I was 'cheating' on and was completely innocent of intent to break rules.

Etahn Abaht kills lists without shields and he's one of my favorite pilots. However, he's fragile. I never run him without the following build: Elusiveness R7 Astromech Fire Control System FCS and an R7 means you can force a re-roll on anyone who has you target locked. Tactically, you target lock higher PS ships in the activation phase if you can. If they force you to use your target lock, great (nothing messes with attackers like making them re-roll dice before they can re-roll them). If you use your TL defensively you can acquire a new TL when you fire. If they don't force you to use your TL defensively (they shoot at someone else or miss), then when you fire, you have the option of firing at a lower PS ship in order to acquire a new Target Lock and possibly use that one defensively when the lower PS ships shoot at you. it's a very nice option. Elusiveness enables you a good failsafe should you have get caught without a necessary target lock. Any list with Abaht relies on his critical capability. A-wings make great additions because of they're flanking ability. I love Poe, but again, Abaht does best when more shots are flying. He's like Howlrunner in that way. When using fewer ships, you lose his force multiplier. I run him in a list I call "Abaht's flying circus" with 2 A-wings just like yours 1 Bandit Z-95 and Airen Crackin Z-95 Crackin shoots high in the order, and he can also help out Etahn Abaht after he shoots with yet another way to get the target lock you need. Cracken is almost always overlookied as a target early. Abaht has to survive for his ability to be used. He becomes a hated target once people figure out what he can do. One of the most underrated pilots in the game, I think.

I also don't know how to synergize S&V lists, but so far I've figured out that less expensive is better, as I get less upset when they blow up... Talonbane lends himself to Swarm Tactics. Bodyguard lends itself to anyone else who wants to protect Talonbane. I used a HWK-290 with Moldy Crow and Bodyguard and it was pretty effective. I got Talonbane to throw 5 dice twice into a Decimator (Had I had Glitterstim 1 of those turns would have gone much better both offensively and defensively). The problem was keeping the HWK in range to use bodyguard, and finding a 3rd ship. I also didn't take crew on it, and had I had Recon Expert, that might have gone better. My third ship was Guri, who could also have been the bodyguard, and done some focus shenanigans. As a new S&V player, my favorite EPT is Bodyguard, and my second favorite is Draw Their Fire. I'm going to try two Khiraxz PS5 pilots, 1 with Bodyguard, 1 with Draw Their Fire, and Bobba Fett...

Let me guess, you're a big an of PS8+ boosting Nope. I'm a noob to the game with 40 years of wargaming experience. I recognize the best weapon in the game on the cheapest ships in the game with 8 hit points each. That's the new meta. I don't know what the old meta was, because I wasn't around. I'm actually a prostitute for 4 TIE Advanced with accuracy correctors. Screw rolling dice... Hopefully something in the next wave adds more flavor. Apparently your years of experience never taught you how to analyze a meta. Especially the top tier meta. Just look at the top 16-32 SQUADS of Worlds. Not the factoids that Juggler posted, but the actual squads. I fail to see how you can get much more flavorful than what we saw at Worlds. A diversity that the TLT helped shape. What's the point in making your statement? Your point has no validity to my argument. What won worlds, exactly? Hmm, hmm. I mean, by your measure, Heaver is the only meta that matters in the game. Did you miss the part where a 2-TLT list won Worlds? Did you?

You're assuming he's not cheating. I am not making that assumption. (Nor am I making an accusation.)

Let me guess, you're a big an of PS8+ boosting Nope. I'm a noob to the game with 40 years of wargaming experience. I recognize the best weapon in the game on the cheapest ships in the game with 8 hit points each. That's the new meta. I don't know what the old meta was, because I wasn't around. I'm actually a prostitute for 4 TIE Advanced with accuracy correctors. Screw rolling dice... Hopefully something in the next wave adds more flavor.

TLT should have been unique: one per list. I personally think it is taking the game in a direction I do not wish to follow. I personally believe it was scantly play-tested.

I can answer that one, and ask another related. "You do what the card says, not what it doesn't say." In your example, changing the range does not change the nature of the original maneuver chosen. The card instructs you to increase or decrease the range as desired, and only that. Red remains red. Green remains green. My related question: The card does not require Eclipse to perform only maneuvers on the TIE Advanced dial. So I presume Eclipse can choose a 2-Right turn and change it to a 1-Right turn (without penalty). Similarly, a 4-K-turn can be either a 3-K, or a 5-K. Am I correct? However, she cannot perform maneuvers that do not exist, such as a 4-turn or 4-bank or 6-straight.

Stay on Target, anyone? Select any 2 maneuver, complete any 1,2 or 3 maneuver (possibly as a Red maneuver). I've used PTL, and it's good, very good. I typically run her with Zertik Strom (because I love his ability to boost a squad defensively), and when I run Strom, he runs VI so that the two can fire at Initiative 8.

What I tell anyone when asking what they should buy next: There are no bad choices. Buy what appeals to you, learn how to incorporate it into lists. In friendly games, upgrade cards are easily proxied (or better yet borrowed, creating friends). I thought Defenders were sexy, and that maybe is my only disappointment (I bought two, and at my skill level they are very difficult to use well) but I still enjoy flying them (and did a custom paint job). I loved the Imperial Raider and it has totally changed my game to have the TIE/x1 (granted, this is not a casual investment for a newer player). The K-Wing has caused me to play much more Rebel than I ever have before. I bought a Star Viper just to have Autothrusters and Accuracy Corrector even though I have no other S&V ships. But after buying it, I've borrowed S&V cards from friends and I love the Star Viper. Every player should have two starter sets (and probably better to have one of the FA core and one of the original core) if only for dice alone and the extra ships. It's an excellently balanced game, and you have to learn to play anything, so buy what you want to push around the table.

I quote Palpatine: "Good is a point of view, Anakin"

I certainly appreciate your position. I feel strongly that it is a question of starting point of reference with regard to spirit of the law and letter of the law. Where a game is concerned, the letter of the law is all that need apply. Where society is concerned, we have to decide whether we want the letter to cover more broadly or more specifically (to a freakin game). Dash maneuvering and Target Lock measuring is beyond the letter. However, where objecting to the legal interpretation of a rule is concerned, there is no morality. There is only opinion. I object the the interpretation of the Target Lock rule (if you want to make a firm law that will end this 'shenanigan" then you write a rule which declares that if you are not in range of the attempted Target Lock, you use your action (or default to a focus, for example). I am actually an excellent technical writer by profession. I could probably write excellent 'letter of the law' were I writing in Spanish. But English has been raped by every respectable language in Europe. And when you settle on the letter of the law in English, it's already too late...

On a K-wing, it means you have 3 dice at all ranges (the K-Wing's primary is 2-attack 360). I bought a K-Wing and put it out with a TLT the same night. My opponent had to point out that the K-Wing's primary is indeed effective at range 1 because I thought it was forward only. This makes K-Wings really hot. The TLT fires twice, so it can sneak a hit by a focus/evade token much easier with one or the other attack (it is the bane of interceptors often). Against 1-Agility ships, it's probably going to do better at range 3 than most 3-attack dice ships. It makes the Y-Wing a better ship with better options. It makes the Hwk and multi-Hwk lists much more viable. It sticks it to the Empire because they can't use it. Two attacks with 3 dice means you don't need to concerns yourself nearly as much with Target Locks (indeed, they are unnecessary with a TLT) and Focus. Now on a K-wing, add crew and bombs and it gets so pleasurable to imagine that I sometimes pass out...

Well, I overlooked the word "may" probably because my brain immediately locked in the idea that you would never do otherwise with that ability. The newb also overlooked that Dash cannot fire if he lands on an asteroid (I don't think it's happened to me yet, though). I also wasn't recognizing that Dash's abilities would let him boost/barrel roll onto asteroids and bump other ships.I love the Rules Questions sections - I learn so much here. I do understand, then. If I may speak my own ethical perspective in explaining my understanding, using barrel roll/boost with the ability "off" is like trying to acquire a target lock on someone obviously beyond range 3. It's permitted even if you're on opposite sides of the map, and in that facade one effectively 'cheats' at determining range and positioning, which can have a number of downstream advantages. In the same way trying a boost/barrel roll first with the ability off allows Dash's player to see if that gives him an arc dodge or bumps a ship so it can't shoot at him. It does seem to boil down to that ethical perspective. And because it's legal, it becomes a moral divide, eh? I'm with the guys who say it should be on/off at beginning of activation. But then I have an overdeveloped sense of justice.

I've been playing regularly now for about 4 months, and my skill has graduated from hopelessly punching at things in the dark to having a plan that sometimes comes together. Man, for other newbs, one of the most discouraging things for me was trying to figure out my own preferred play style while building dumb lists or doing dumb things and losing quickly. That's the norm, I would say. When I started to realize that I like the safety of shields, and I prefer 4 or more ships, I started to be able to develop an understanding of matchups. Two things I still see others do that seem beyond my skill set. The first, and tangentially related is using fewer ships (3 smalls, for example). In giving up shots and actions and block opportunities and hit points (usually), the room for error is minimal and I've not done well with 35-45 point ships. I wish I had the skill to run Rexler Brath and one other ship, and I've tried, and my ability to win seems very different than my 4 and 5 ship lists. But more recently, I'm seeing people use large ships in 2 and 3 ship lists, and I just don't get how lists with only two attacks wins. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I see it happen. I'm not playing against those guys or those lists (randomly). And when I've added anything but the Decimator or Dash to a list, (and often when I do add them) I lose actions by being blocked or simply clumsy with the difference in spacial reasoning. Last night I tried 2 Firesprays in a friendly game (against 2 punishers and a bomber) and I almost kinda got powned between Redline missiles and Deathrain bombs. (Boba Fett had the good sense to "accidentally" fly off the board after Kath went down on the far side of the map. My opponent got lucky on some evade rolls, and had done the insane thing of putting autho-thrusters on a Punisher, which paid off twice, and with only 2 attacks against rather beefy opponent ships, my Firesprays were effectively hunted by those other clumsy ships. Poetic license aside (sorry), I want to add a large ship to my skill set, building on what I have now, which is a sort of generalist idea how to play 4-ship versatility lists. I'm a better Empire player than a Rebel player, and I don't own S&V ships (I borrowed some yesterday for the experiment on 2x Firesprays). Where does one start in list-building with a large as a newb, and managing a 2 or 3 ship list? I have in mind a Doom Shuttle (24pt) a generic Defender, and a somewhat 'fat' named Defender Thanks in advance for the shared knowledge and assistance.

I very much agree with the above. Accuracy correctors isn't just about guaranteed results (which as I say is the primary reason I play it), but it is also excellent in action economy. Focus every time or evade. Once in a while a Target Lock for a possible missile. If an AC-ship bumps, oh well.

As a new guy whose first large ship foray is with Dash, I didn't even realize his ability is optional! Related question: why on earth would you ever prefer NOT using his ability?

FoxNews hates orgasms because liberals like them. Move along, nothing to see here.

For the record, I wouldn't take Rhymer out of that list with those missiles. That's pretty awesome, and I'm probably going to try that myself.

I've played /x1s with ACs and I have 5 wins. I've played around with a variety of pilots, some cluster missiles, etc. I have a playstyle affinity for the ACs (not worrying about attack dice relaxes the heck out of me). I think the demoralization aspect is similar, but I can see how yours would be greater. I hadn't thought about a list like yours with the Bomber, but I love your creativity. My idea was to go with 3 Storms with ATCs led by Howlrunner (determination & hull upgrade). Similar concept... The most diverse list I brought using ACs was 2 Storms, 2 Tempests, 3 cluster missiles between them. The clusters against Agility 1 ships make a very big difference. Indeed, I would put this list up against an emperor shuttle with confidence I could bring it down in one round, two at most. The list I find optimized for fun/compedtetiveness is "Strom's Storms" 3x Storms with AC and Strom using a few upgrades. Strom's ability is surprisingly useful (assuming I'm using it correctly - Strom doesn't have to be the target to remove an attacker's range bonus). The downside of the Storm/Tempest is simply this: arc dodgers. It's well and good to count your hits before you roll the dice, but when the attacker isn't in arc, ACs don't help you. Auto-thrusters have also been a small bane of this list. I'm a newer player, and too many times I've been caught trying to line 2 or 3 ships up to get that interceptor or star viper with one hit left only to have it boost/barrel roll out of arc. I see nothing glaringly vulnerable in your list, and Rhymer with Adv. Homing is a shrewd use of ability. However, if he is shooting first in your list, he's going to be shooting at targets that have their focus/evade still. I've always found that to be the problem with high-initiative pilots and ordinance. The nicest thing about the Adv. Homing is that it doesn't consume the Target Lock upon firing. Another factor is that until you acquire a target lock, your list isn't capable of its full potential. In that activation where you need to get into firing range (i.e., three) to spend your action on that Target Lock, if you are in someone's arc, you're more vulnerable. That's kind of small factor, but without your TL, your firing phase is only potent as a 12-point Academy pilot. A few things can prevent that TL, and the accuracy corrector isn't bothered by that. My question is this, though: Outside of his pilot ability (which is itself very fragile to critical hits), why spend points for a separate missile delivery system in his TIE? I see an option where you keep 3 Adv. Homing Missiles (on the TIE Advanced) and you save 20-something points. Where I play, the Predator EPT has become very common, and for that reason I avoid pilots under initiative 3. Good luck. As a TIE Advanced freak, I'm interested to know how it goes. Send me a PM some time

The effectively 0-point accuracy corrector enabled by the TIE/x1 title has made that list a wonderful list to play given my temperament. It's really stress free for me, and fosters a 'fly casual' attitude in me. It's also won me 5 games in a row a (using 4x ACs) and I think maybe a little un-fun to play against by my local opponents. Mathematically speaking, how does the Accuracy Corrector fair in the statistical models compared to other 2-attack dice ships? Why does anyone use anything else on TIE Advanced? It's become my favorite ship in the game.

When I have played my 4x TIE Adv./x1s, the overall initiative has been what you'd expect. Arc dodgers can give the list fits, and Autothrusters are annoying to this list (but they can't be as annoying as 2 auto-hits at range 3). I have yet to play large ships with it, but I think it would do well against any 1 Agility ship. The highest initiative I've used is Zertik Strom, at Init: 6. That's not great. What is great is his pilot special ability. If a firer is within range 1 of Strom, it gets no range attack bonus. That works great for this list. I'm pretty happy with the TIE Adv. Dial (and it benefits a ton from Ion Mk II). The chief problem is you get 4 run-of-mill pilots or 3 aces that can get decked out a bit. I personally am not as comfortable flying 3 ships as I am 4. A serious question on the Accuracy Corrector on TIE Advanced: Is it the kind of list that's harshly competitive? As with a 4xY wing with TLT list, this list is a bit 'easy'. I think there are people in my FLGS who would prefer I not play THAT list against them, and I'm starting to understand that. Just as my mental health has benefited a ton from foreknowledge of what my attack dice will do, it is demoralizing to them. Maybe 'easy' isn't the correct term, which is why I say 'harshly aggressive.' I could play this list a lot, despite its lack of flavor (winning tastes awesome on its own, it turns out). But as a guy who has had to play against lists that were 'un-fun to play against', I think this list falls into that category.