@Drasnighta Perhaps it's just critically overheating in the box art. Leading to the next wave's experimental upgrade, "Experimental Coolant Pump", which prevents your Interdictor from immediately exploding every time it resolves an experimental upgrade.

I was thinking about this earlier today. Certainly, boarding and capturing a ship would be a risky waste of time and resources in a stand-alone, 6-round game. However, with the advent of campaigns and long-term strategy, and fleets that may well need to survive several tough battles with limited reinforcement...suddenly capturing is looking more useful. [If you've played the Homeworld series of real-time tactics PC games, then you know exactly how this feels.]
Let's say a flight of bombers has ripped into the starboard side of an ISD, destroying the shields and dealing several damage cards. Then, a Hammerhead comes in and launches a boarding party toward that same side. This boarding attempt, by some cleverly designed rule, rolls <x> number of <y> dice (immune to friendly and enemy card effects, and defense tokens). The damage total of that is then dealt to the ISD with some sort of special type of damage card (a "boarding card"). If the total number of damage + boarding cards becomes equal to the ISD's hull value, and there are more boarding cards than damage cards, then the ship is considered captured. If the damage cards outnumber the boarding cards, then the ship is scuttled. Perhaps it could even be that if the ISD has boarding cards, but is not captured or destroyed by the end of the round, the number of boarding cards it does have is reduced by <x> (to reflect losses in the boarding team).
I'm sure there are a number of problems with that system, but it has the advantage of not needing special-case rules for different classes of ships (i.e. larger and stronger ships are more difficult to capture by their nature), and quick-and-easy captures would be extremely rare, since the boarding attack still has to deal at least half of the target's hull value in special damage to take the ship in order to capture it. This would also allow the possibility of multiple ships working in conjunction to take over a big, valuable target like an ISD.
EDIT: Yet another facet of a system that works like this is that the attacker does genuinely have to be careful about how much damage they deal to a ship they want to capture.

I think it's a great idea to have a ultra long range ship. I think the rules and mechanics of the ship need to be figured out a bit. But it can hello spread out the fighters and I think your token approach is much better for attacking an area with a volley.  
Oooooo what if they put those two ships in a pack together. Like the reb and imp aces in xwing. Then you get all the new rules, dice and other pieces together.

I’ve been bouncing this around for awhile in my head, but an offhand comment in Green Knight’s errata thread (tangent, I’m so proud of us for not turning that into a flame war, great job guys) convinced me to finally write this up. Much of my background focuses on naval strategy, operations, etc., both in the present and in the recent past (20th century). So with that in mind, I have collated something of an organization to the types of ships the starships in Armada play, based on their role and capabilities. A note, I know that almost every ship in Armada can be forced to play the role of carrier, so I’m mostly focused on ship-to-ship capabilities and design. I’d like to see what people think of my delineation and comparisons, and of a note I’ll save for the end.
 
Let’s start with the light units. Both flotillas rather defy conventional denomination schemes, but for the sake of it I’m filing them under corvette-carriers (that’s carriers that are corvettes, not ships carrying corvettes, for the record). The best real world analogs are the Bogue style escort carriers built by the Allies during World War 2, cheap, slow, expendable(ish), and kept around not to fight other combatants face to face, but to organize squadrons and perform critical fleet support functions. They are, I will note, the only ships that are carriers in the American sense, which is to say without significant internal armament.
 
Next up are four small ships often grouped together that I am going to break apart for doctrine reasons, the CR90, the Raider, the MC30, and the Gladiator. For the CR90, I would classify this ship as a frigate. It’s fast and agile (frigate-built), and effective as a light screening ship capable of pitched combat, but not a dedicated killer. Even with TRCs, CR90s have a rather standoffish approach to combat, and they certainly have relatively low damage output compared to many other options in game. They exist as flanking fire support, drawing attention and energy away from the main battle group, and with titles like Tantive IV, they fulfill a similar support function in fleets to the corvettes. An example comparison is the recently retired Perry class frigate.
 
Raiders, MC30s, and Gladiators by contrast are destroyers. Just as fast and agile as the CR90, instead of plinking away at the edge of battle they dive right in, gunning for high damage output and destruction. Raiders are destroyers with an anti-aircraft (squadron) bent, like the WW2 era Fletcher class, whereas Gladiators and MC30s destroy ships, pure and simple. A more modern comparison for the latter pair would be the Cold War era Soviet Sovremenny class destroyers, or the American Spruance class destroyer. These are the aggressive units in a fleet, with high dice-hull ratios, and often high points-hull ratios as well. Like frigates, destroyers typically operate in groups, often with cruisers or a battleship present, but wolfpacks are not necessarily unviable.
 
The next category is light cruisers, filled by the Nebulon-B, the Arquitens, and the Pelta. These are ships that start to form the backbone of fleets. While not necessarily as high-performance as destroyers or frigates, light cruisers are found in many fleets as the flexible muscle, and the ships where a loss is actually possibly a significant degradation to fleet fighting power. By counterpoint, they are also usually the lightest ship that can safely wander off into danger from its own angle (e.g. Yavaris plus squads). They are equally adept at organizing squadrons, particularly the Pelta, and fighting ships face-to-face, and offer (generally somewhat) improved durability over destroyers and frigates. Sending a light cruiser to fight a destroyer is not a guaranteed victory for the cruiser, but odds are in its favor when played well. For historical comparison, I would compare the Nebulon to the Omaha class scout cruiser, the Arquitens to the Leander class, and the Pelta to a (somewhat slower) Cleveland class, with the Independence class light carrier filling in the Command version as the game’s only escort carrier. As a rule of thumb, the lightest most fleets will go for flagships is a light cruiser for these reasons, barring the odd destroyer swarm (e.g. Clonisher) or a lifeboat flotilla.
 
There is a case to be made that the durability of the Gladiator and MC30 slide them into the light cruiser category, leaving the Raider alone like the CR90. In some configurations, particularly MC30 Scout Frigates in Ackbar fleets with Gunnery Teams as long range harassers, MC30s provide the long range fire and moderate durability common to CLs, while the Gladiator’s brace token means it can be more survivable than an Arquitens. However, and I expect this to be a point of discussion, I have left them as destroyers, albeit heavy destroyers, by virtue of their aggressive playstyle to maximize black dice effectiveness, and the design intent that is less intent on a survivable multi-role platform than a dedicated attack unit. There is not actually a good comparison in real naval strategy for that much firepower packed into a platform both that expensive and that delicate, but given that the entire point of the ships is to deliver dice to target, I stand by the destroyer classification.
 
Above light cruisers are heavy cruisers, the Assault Frigate MK 2, the Victory, and the Interdictor. These are all solid ships, capable of holding a battle line, and with support from either another heavy cruiser or multiple light units effectively challenging enemy battleships. These ships are often the flagships of fleets without the dreadnoughts, and are fully in the range of capital ships in the classical sense. They are able to fight, and fight well, without the lighter units, but if the lighter units attempt to fight without them against superior forces, the odds are not in their favor. Heavy cruisers are most notable over light cruisers for the significant improvement in durability they offer, in addition to the usual firepower improvement. The Interdictor is something of the odd man out here, as it is fully as durable, and situationally as powerful as the other two heavy cruisers, but performs a far more subtle fleet support function than the other two ships that doesn't have a good real equivalent. A good general comparison for all of them is the Baltimore class or the Slava class cruiser, with the Saipan class carrier channeling the carrier capability.
 
The final category of starship is the battleship. This is the Imperial class Star Destroyer, the MC80, and the MC80 Liberty. These are the ultimate capital ships, with little to fear on the table besides each other, the ships they are built to fight. They fully meet the classic definition of a battleship, capable of both weathering and dealing incredible amounts of damage. They also are capable of providing incredible squadron support capabilities like fleet carriers, and are priced like all that to boot. A further subdivision might be that the Imperial and the Liberty are the category of fast battleships, providing (relative) speed and firepower, while Home One is a World War One style dreadnought with thick armor (shields and defensive retrofits) at the cost of speed. Historical comparisons to the Iowa class (Imperial), Bismarck (Home One), and the Scharnhorst (Liberty) are not at all out of place.
 
If you are only interested in an analysis of the game as it stands right now, and no speculative nonsense, stop here. This is my large, somewhat ham-handed analysis of Armada, and an attempt to write out how I approach each ship when I am fleet-building, and analyzing opponent tactics on the table. At some point I’ll probably do a similar large writeup for squadrons, but let’s start with ships. What did you agree with? What do you think I got dead wrong? How would you tweak this for future-proofing against incoming ships?
 
Moving away from the current classifications, have you noticed what ship type ended up left out? Battlecruisers. (If you wish to fight me about whether or not Scharnhorst is a battlecruiser, spoiler: she isn’t, she’s a fast battleship with a very specific mission set, PM me, this is the Armada forum.) There are two overall understandings of the battlecruiser, the British version and the German version. (The Japanese version is just early fast battleships, so that doesn’t count.) The British version, invented by Admiral Jackie Fisher, focused on battleship grade ships with battleship grade guns, but cruiser-grade speeds, meaning cruiser-grade armor. These were ships like HMS Invincible, HMS Renown, and the mighty HMS Hood, intended to avoid enemy battleships and sweep away enemy cruisers with hugely superior firepower. The German approach was (surprise, surprise) the inverse, trading the biggest guns for battleship grade armor with the cruiser grade speed, often leaving German battlecruisers with firepower sufficient to cow cruisers, but less overwhelming than British types. Examples would include SMS Von der Tann and Derfflinger. A great example of the distinction is the results of the Battle of Jutland, where numerous British battlecruisers were destroyed (doing something doctrinally they had no business doing), more than one with all hands, whereas the German battlecruisers all survived (more or less) the pounding delivered by British rifles.
 
That’s all a very long and convoluted way of introducing my second question, what does a battlecruiser for Armada look like? Is it a more powerful MC30, a Speed 4 ship reliant on evades and shields to bear it to target? Is it closer to the Liberty, a ship with weaknesses that render it somewhat less powerful than the current battleships, but more than powerful enough to annihilate cruisers in its way? Am I barking up the wrong tree, do the fast battleships of the Imperial and Liberty varieties indicate we’ve already past that point in the evolution of Armada ship types?

The long range middle ships from star wars empire at war would fit this category perfectly.  Broadside cruiser for empire and Marauder cruiser for the rebels. Comes with new dice that have three misses, two hits, two crits and 1 accuracy. These ships were great at attacking fighters when they were ideal.  And ships that were close together as the missiles sprayed an area. I would have two upgrades assisted with the new dice:
You can attack an area with a diameter of distance 2 at ultra long range with three new dice. All fighter squadrons in that area suffer 1 damage for every hit icon.
When you attack a ship at ultra long range if damage is dealt every other ship at close range suffers 1 damage.
Forget hammerhead Corvettes I want ultra long range middle ships.
 
I guess you beat me to the punch Quantum Dot Guy.

Define "relatively". I posted several months ago about a possible implementation of the Broadside-class kdb-1 from Empire at War. The post also detailed a couple possible upgrades. A fully upgraded ship had the ability to perform a single, reduced attack against an enemy ship within distance 1-5 (sensor range) of another friendly ship or two friendly squadrons. In addition, it could forgo standard attacks completely and place a special token anywhere in its attack range (including the previously mentioned upgraded range), up to 3 times per game. This token represented the target of a missile volley, and would detonate (at the beginning or end of the next Ship Phase) in a true area of effect that dealt fairly significant damage to both enemy and friendly units.
 
I agree the ship should be pretty fragile and worthless in direct combat. As in, something a CR90 could confidently handle by itself.

Stupid Imperial engineers. Who authorized routing the coolant lines through the bridge again??

Yeah, I've just 'wasted' most of the day...also Death Star Exhaust port is mentioned too

I would love this and think this is how long range weaponry in Armada should have been, and it would address many oddities. It would help start engagements sooner (great!) and would help with the table management since ships would be more spread out (even greater!).
Snipe and Relay do a good job at spreading the clustering out a little but it could/should have been taken much further.

Easily one of the best blogs I've ever read, so enjoy. Every article is great and worth reading, but some of my old favorites were #12, #20 and #35.
Protip(s): the citation/footnote markers (which look like [1]) are clickable, and usually offer expanded text. [Citation needed] is often clickable as well. Finally, each picture has mouseover text that's usually quite funny. If you're on mobile, you can read it through this lite app and tap the pictures to see the text. Using the app has the added benefit of getting a notification when a new article goes up.
Just so this isn't COMPLETELY off topic, #2 features Yoda and mentions an X-Wing.

Omg - how did i not know about this. Thank you!

Yeah, I learned from the best.
https://what-if.xkcd.com/27/

True. They could even come back and say that, all along, they meant for the movement restriction to apply to the ship rather than the squadrons.

From my knowledge, yes, Michael was the TO for the Minnesota regionals. The rest of the community was told that he ruled RLB activates squads and allows them to attack when they are placed. It is possible it was a single case, but I find it more likely he would stay consistent and in the FAQ it will be the same ruling he made. That said, it is possible the dev team will overrule and go the other way, or come up with something else.
I like to play with rules that are consistent with what FFG says, even if it is not FAQ official. I'd rather have something, even if I don't agree, than nothing.

https://store.xkcd.com/products/citation-needed-sticker-pack

I actually just saw that while searching for the link.
I think I might get me a pack.

I tried clicking more times than I care to admit.
[citation needed]

Do note that #TeamOrange argue that squadrons deployed by RLB are activated but get to attack immediately.
#TeamPurple submit that squadrons deployed by RLB do not get to attack right away but get to activate normally during the squadron phase (or by another ship... or even the same ship).

Mr. Gernes said squads deployed this way are activated and get to attack, so that is close to an official answer. 
Which means no, you cannot do the stated combo. The AF drops off the 3 squads and they immediately get to attack in the order that they are placed.

Thing is, he didn't say it in any way that we can actually hear it, unless you were standing in FFG HQ at that very moment.
 
Give me an email...  That's all I need.  All I want.  Some measure of veracity.

...  I didn't want to. 
 
Because, as I said, I was intending on attempting to take Rapid Launch Bays in either argued configuration to the Hothgary Regionals, and I didn't want to be biasing the TO of the Regional (who does ask my opinion) on which was it was, beforehand...  Kind of hoping that we either got an FAQ before the Day, or at least, some other guidance came first.
 
 
 
BUT.
 
I have to, now.  As I have been asked to Judge an upcoming comp, and a ruling was specifically asked for as soon as possible...
 
So, here is me pouring my heart out on interactions and thoughts...

 

 
 
There are two schools of thought, and each of them revolve around the words "instead" and "activation".  
 
The first interpretation of the card is as follows:

 
I Spend my Squadron Command.
Instead of doing anything activating that squadron, I place the Squadron within Distance 1.
This Squadron is placed Unactivated, and does nothing, other than being placed.
As a further caveat, the Squadron that was just placed, cannot move this (ship) activation.
 
 
 
The second interpretation is as follows:
Instead of doing a regular squadron command, where I pick a squadron and move and shoot it,
I place a set aside squadron.  This counts as its activation and its movement.  It is allowed to shoot immediately, but counts as activated.
 
 
 
Both interpretations are not only legal in the fact that they do not contradict any other specific rules or FAQs, but they are both plausable in both rules interactions, and indeed, in power applications of the game.
From this point, I'll just refer to them as Purple and Orange as above, as to not inherently bias anything (First/Second, Red/Blue, Green/Red)...  Its a small thing, but its part of my thought process, and that is what is asked for.
 
 
 
 
Purple allows you to fully deploy a set of squadrons, but those squadrons are limited in what they can actually do, other than grant awesome positioning...
 
They cannot be shunted along with FCTs (which is the other primary method of gaining awesome positioning with Squadrons), but with a secondary Ship to activate them, they gain their full Movement + Shooting capabilities...  This has the potential to seriously extend a squadrons threat range, but requires the "multiple moving parts" aspect to work correctly...  Squadrons have to be placed, they have to sit through an enemy activation, and then, and only then, can they actually accomplish anything...  But what they could be accomplishing is quite powerful, being that they may be subject to other effects, such as Flight Controllers, or the coveted Yavaris.  On the Imperial side, this would include additional movement from Corruptor or Vector or such, as well as the Flight Controllers or other such bonuses.
 
 
 
Orange does not just present an awesome positioning ability, but a dedicated first-strike method.  It does involve having a suitably equipped ship in position before activating the ship (or judicious application of the Flight Commander upgrade Card)...  Because the squadrons are placed down, are immedaitely activated and immediately finish their activation by shooting...  The Positioning of the Squadrons is not all that restricted, barring a heavily impacted battlefield or judicious use of enemy CAP...  But without the Enemy preparing and placing things in your way (or even if you do and just have one of those be an Intel Ship), you potentially slam damage directly onto an enemy that has already been weakened by Shooting, or in preparation for your shooting...
 
 
Now, after looking at the Theoretical applications of both of them, let us see how "Bad" things could be.  IE, let us try to break the game or Upgrade with its application...
 
Under the Orange Ruling: 
 
The Imperial-I Star Destroyer comes immediately to mind with first-strike capability.  The Squadron Command Value is used, so the Rapid Launch Bays would stack with the bonus provided by Expanded Hangar Bays (as Rapid Launch is not a Modification)...  This is further added to with Flight Commander for the Crew Upgrade Slot.

The Imperial is going to Shoot its Front Arc (which, in itself, as we know, can be quite devestating to enemy Shields)...  Then it can move, getting closer or still attempting to stand off...   Then the Flight Commander allows you to place down Major Rhymer and 4 Bombers.
 
Major Rhymer and the bombers has quite the preferential range, and adds 5 Medium Range Black Dice (effectively) to the Imperials Firepower.
 
How does this differ from the ISD just giving the Squadron Command in the first place?

Unless the enemy is completlely swarming the ISD, you can utilise Rhymer and his Range advantage to be placed in such a way as to not be engaged - and guarantee their firing capability...  A Single A-Wing thrown forward is not going to be able to lock them down - they're going to be able to place and shoot...
 
 
On the Rebel side, naturally, you're looking at B-Wings...  A Carrier with B-Wings that can Dump their dice in your face at close range...  With Judicious applicaitns of B-Wings, Norra and Toryn Farr on your carrier, you can deal ladels of dice into the enemy's face and drop almost anything's shields...
 
A singular fun application is using Quantum Storm with a Banked Nav Token and a Squadron Command 
 
 
 
The Purple Side's applications of the above are a little different - because in order to be able to actually shoot those squadrons this turn, and gain anything other than positioning, we're going to have to rely on something else.  Now, there are numerous someting elses, and they are including (but not limited to)

The Rogue Rule.
Another Ship being within Distance to give a Command.
Having a Relay Squadron being one or more of the Squadrons you Deploy, and then relying on another Ship.
Getting lucky and still having a Target nearby in the Squadron Phase.
 
 
The potential for getting, say, B-Wings up the Table unmolested, past a fighter screen, and then being able to activate them with Yavaris is **** tempting, but starts to put things in the "many moving parts" category.
 
 
 
So now, given the two examples of relative power (and ease of use for that power), I look at the Upgrade itself.
 
It is in a moderately contested slot (The Offensive Retrofit) which most often sees Boosted Comms or Expanded Hangar bays.  With the specific exception of the ISD-I it crowds out either of those upgrades.  The price point of those upgrades is 4 and 5 respectively, with the Rapid Launch Bays being a 6.
 
In order to gain full effectiveness, there is multiple Officers that could be placed in its slot to assist...  Without flight commander, you have to respect the order of operations for the command, in which you Reveal (and do) a Squadron Command before shooting and maneuvering...  Which requires a good deal of forethought and foresight.
 
When we also compare "relative power" of other upgrades, we can see what the upgrade bands tend to be...
 
1-3 point upgrades are either eminently disposable, eminently unreliable, or a small benefit that could be leveraged in a timely manner.
 
4-8 point upgrades are quite staples...    We're looking at numerous Turbolaser Upgrades, Officers providing bubble benefits, positioning bonuses and such...

Then we have some upgrades up in the 9-10 point, which on the face of things, could be eminently game breaking, or at least revolutionary...  We see Demolisher up there, of course, but looking at non-uniques, we're looking at things like Quad Turbolaser Turrets (which themselves, are providing benefits that flow on to objective choices and such), and high-return officers such as Adar Tallon or Rear Admiral Chiraneu...
 
 
So, in final thoughts:
 
 
If it were Cheaper, I'd immedaitely consider Purple.
 
If it were more Expensive, I'd immediately consider Orange.
 
 
In the middle, its a toss up.
 
So, given the bit of a toss up, I look at which will have a greater effect on the game...
 
I am a great component of synergy, and firmly believe that the Designers intend for you to get greater rewards, the more moving parts you can successfully manage...   Failing to manage the moving parts, or having a canny enemy disrupt them, is the valuable counter to the game design...
Game design rarely wants to immediately reward the point and click mentality, if you want to remain balanced in the long term - because the more point an clicks you introduce, the more simplistic overall balance and variety becomes.
 
Given that insight into games design in my former life, 
 
I am liable to agree that Purple is more intended of the two...
 
The unfortunate part of it is, we also have additional effects and ramifications that need to be settled...  Ergo, what happens when a Ship is Destroyed with those Set aside squadrons?  How do we know what activation colour to have squadrons on?
 
There is only one place we can even hint at answers for that, and again, as a secondary (similar but non-related) source, is the Hyperspace Assault FAQ...
 
Given that, it gives some favourable answers to the Purple rules concept as well...  As that dictates that squadrons off board are placed with their activation slider matching the turn counter (but, as a difference, this is a strict placement rather than a deployment)
 
 
 
I Spend my Squadron Command.
Instead of doing anything activating that squadron, I place the Squadron within Distance 1.
This Squadron is placed Unactivated, and does nothing, other than being placed.  Its Activation Slider is set to match the Turn Colour.
As a further caveat, the Squadron that was just placed, cannot move this (ship) activation by means such as Fighter Coordination Team, or any other future further upgrade that grants immediate distance moves.
  Once the Deploying Ship has finished its activation, the restriction of moving is removed, and the Squadron is Free to act as per normal, given the game state at that point...
 
 
 
 
People are, of course, Free to Disagree with my assessment.  But as a TO, that is not only the decision I have come to, but how I have come to it...  I hope that demonstrates a little as to the thought pattern I go through.  I do give a lot of thought to the decisions I make.   Theres not just what I want and hope to happen, and I don't argue from that precedent...  I do my best to remain impartial, and look ahead into what I consider is best for the game...  Of course, that is inherently biased for me, as I enjoy the game design concept of Synergistic Rewards.

Well at least you now understand the responses you are getting here

@Ardaedhel
 
Dude's wearing a Purple Shirt there.

Then embraced the Dark side! Is funnier.

You misinterpret.  
I don't have a "Side".
I am stating that if you assume that the Squadrons are not activated, then you have assumed the Purple Interpretation.
If you assume that the squadrons are activated and immedaitely shoot, then you ahve assumed the Orange Interpretation.
 
That is the most significant distinction between the two interpretations - which, as I stated in the linked post, are both valid interpretations.