Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DScipio

Fighter stands: How many do they represent?

Recommended Posts

 

 

1 fighter stand represents 1 squadron in my mind, which usually consists of 12 fighters. It makes sense for the methodological Imperials to have a fixed number of fighters in their squadrons, and we know Imperial star destroyers had 6 squadrons of 72 fighters & bombers total = 12 per squadron.

For the rebels, fighter squadron sizes are irregular until post Endor. From the starwars wiki:  "During the following year, Rogue Squadron eventually swelled to twelve—regular size for a New Republic starfighter squadron."

 

I agree that it "Should" be 12, but gameplay wise it just doesnt feel that way - its way smaller.

If it was 12 then heroes - being only a single one of those 12 ships, should be far, far less powerful then they are.

 

Which brings me back to my argument - that its not a fixed number, its a relative value of strength inherited from FFG's views on the ships from X-Wing.

To insist that they must be 12 because that is what a squadron traditionally is, is to completely ignore how the game actually plays.

 

 

Yes because heroes in Star Wars have always taken a backseat to realism, and have barely any impact in the movies ;) In any case I always figured the 'hero' effect isn't just the hero himself but his influence on the entire squadron he is in. As for your earlier example of a fighter squadron vs a corvette: in the movies the Falcon takes down 4 Tie-fighters without suffering any damage, I assume it could have taken on 6-8 with relative ease as well. So is it really that odd that a corellian corvette which is significantly bigger, heavier shielded and better armed than the Falcon, not to mention established in the EU as being pretty much an anti-fighter platform, can take on a squadron and win?

So it basically depends on perception of relative strengths etc. whether 12 strong squadrons make sense or not. To me they do. :)

 

 

Agreed.

 

It's also reasonable to assume that these heroes are leading squadrons assembled from above-average pilots. The abilities of the hero therefore represent the overall superior quality of the squadron.

 

Personally, I prefer abstraction anyway. I don't like to imagine the literal Luke Skywalker flying around on the table (and potentially getting killed by a generic TIE Fighter). In my head the "Luke Skywalker" game piece is just an ace squadron of unknown and unnamed X-Wing pilots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the exact same boat as gibby

 

even in x-wing miniatures, where we get down to individuals, named pilots are just abstract notions next to the ship they're piloting and the abilities they bring

 

hell, x-wing miniatures doesn't even show us their face on the cards :P

 

anyway, taking anything too literally will provide a hotbed of non-canonical horror so don't dwell on it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hull numbers comparison can go both ways: yes, 12 Y-wings have less hull than a YT-1300, but they're also comparable to the shielded side of a Corvette (each take 6 damage to destroy). 3 Y-wings being as durable as a Corvette makes no sense either...in fact, skip the middleman, the YT-1300 can weather more damage than an unshielded Nebulon-B.

 

If one stand of X-Wings represents 3 ships, then 4 of them totals 1 squadron, and in game terms could take out an ISD in an engagement, which isn't a thing in the lore except under exceptional circumstances. 4 squadrons versus an ISD seems more reasonable. At the same time, this means a Corvette could destroy 12 TIE squadrons in the same engagement, so the numbers will never come out quite right no matter how you squint at them. Being a game means that the effectiveness has been scaled in a non-linear manner in the same way the model size has.

 

The squadrons are balanced against each other regardless of whether they're both 3 ships or both 12. In terms of their anti-ship effectiveness, and in terms of lore accuracy, I choose to believe they are squadrons of twelve. To me, a Star Destroyer launching 6 TIE fighters simply makes no sense.

 

If others prefer to see the scale differently, there's no hard evidence that going to prove anyone right or wrong; like the "correct" size for a new mini, it's mostly a case of what feels right to you.

 

But 6 Captial Health points are not by any means the same as 6 squadron Health points.

 

 

Honestly to me it feels like they are 3-4 fighters, I think FFG just used squadron instead of flight as it's a term not really used in star wars.

 

What makes you feel this way?

Edited by DScipio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly to me it feels like they are 3-4 fighters, I think FFG just used squadron instead of flight as it's a term not really used in star wars.

 

What makes you feel this way?

 

I also feel this way, how I look at it. In the starter you get one VSD and six TIE fighter bases. According to wookieepedia the VSD carries two TIE squadrons so if you go on the assumption that they would fit on the ship each base would be four fighters, I prefer thinking of them as three as that is the size you see them working together most of the time in the movies. As I am writing this it came to mind that every time I can think of seeing them in groups of three it was with named pilots, and it was four when they attacked the Falcon. So if you go with the rebels being three per, and the empire being four per you start out with each faction starting with two squadrons or what could be based on the ships that they come with. Again according to wookieepedia the Nebulon-B can carry two squadrons. Now not so important for the rebles as there fighters have hyperdrive, but if the Empire can not transport the fighters on the ships they must be defending and that does not fit well with what I know of the fluff. Anyway just my thoughts they are worth what you paid for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Honestly to me it feels like they are 3-4 fighters, I think FFG just used squadron instead of flight as it's a term not really used in star wars.

 

What makes you feel this way?

 

I also feel this way, how I look at it. In the starter you get one VSD and six TIE fighter bases. According to wookieepedia the VSD carries two TIE squadrons so if you go on the assumption that they would fit on the ship each base would be four fighters, I prefer thinking of them as three as that is the size you see them working together most of the time in the movies. As I am writing this it came to mind that every time I can think of seeing them in groups of three it was with named pilots, and it was four when they attacked the Falcon. So if you go with the rebels being three per, and the empire being four per you start out with each faction starting with two squadrons or what could be based on the ships that they come with. Again according to wookieepedia the Nebulon-B can carry two squadrons. Now not so important for the rebles as there fighters have hyperdrive, but if the Empire can not transport the fighters on the ships they must be defending and that does not fit well with what I know of the fluff. Anyway just my thoughts they are worth what you paid for them.

 

 

Which also comes back to my idea that its not a set value, but rather similar to X-Wing points, so unnamed might be 4, named might be 3, as they cost more points, likewise TIE fighters would have slightly more than X-Wings in each group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think about it this way: the Death Star was taken out by 36 points of units: Luke Skywalker, and Dutch Vander :)

Luke gets out with 2 hull points left, Dutch with 1. Even though he died :P

 

Joking aside, it doesn't really matter terribly. Scale with 'large' ships like Falcons make sense for 3 on 3 encounters for each squadron unit, and that seems to fit with 'video game' durability on what would take out what in the old X-Wing/TIE Fighter games. But since we can't dock, it can be assumed that your Imps brought all the TIEs they cared for, and that your rebel fighters hyperspaced in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Trying to pin exact numbers to them is futile.

 

That statement violates my nerdly right to pontify all things Star Wars.  Star Wars matters man.  Star Wars matters...

 

=)

 

 

and considering the fact that playing the game is equal "futile" I dont know what the first statement is meant to say at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It meant exactly that - As has been discussed ad nauseam in this thread you cannot place numerical values on the number of craft a squadron represents because there are too many exceptions that throw out anomalies.

 

Playing the game isn't futile at all, that's a silly thing to say.

 

But trying to pin down exact numbers in a game that focuses on the higher command, the macro view of the battlefield, and a game that also uses a sliding scales is... well, it's futile. There is little to be gained from going over the same arguments over and over as it just results in the same conclusions.

 

As Einstein said... "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".

Edited by DWRR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Names for different numbers of fighters.

IIRC in modern aviation parlance you have Flights, Sections and Singles.

Flight - 4 craft

Section - 2 craft

I could well be wrong though.

My personal take on a stand of 3 fighters is that they represent more than 3, probably about 12 or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither, it represents 1 squadron, which is an arbitrary and relative strength.

FFG has been strongly influenced by their thinking about the fighters and ships from their experiences in developing X-Wing and it shows here that they have tried to capture the essence of the fighters character without being bogged down in minute balance details by specifying exact numbers of each ships in each squadron for comparison against each other.

 

I think the closest analogy might be to say it roughly represents 60-70ish points of X-Wing fighters

Which could be 3 X-Wings, 6 Tie Fighters, 1 Falcon with upgrades, or 3 B-Wings.  etc etc

(I say Falcon + upgrades because lets face it - noone fields a blank Falcon and if it was the only think you fielded then you would pimp it out to the max).

 

Edit, this theory of points can be cross-verified by looking at the Corvette (CR-90) which features in both X-Wing and Armada. An Armada corvette is about 44 points, which is about 2 hero squadrons. In X-Wing a corvette (with armaments) is about 130 points, which is about double the points value per squadron I mentioned. (60-70)

 

In Armada a single squadron of fighters would be unlikely to blow up a corvette, though Farlander, Rhymer or Luke might give it a bloody nose, and likewise in X-Wing 60-70ish points, depending on ship, against a kitted up Corvette, would also be hard pressed to take one out (but more possible) and if it was B-Wings or similar could bring it close to destruction.

This theory also ties in nicely with the introduction of the new incoming wave 2 rogues and villains - who are a similar points level for a single ship (+ upgrades), so fits this interpretation.

Yep. This is how I see it too, and the numbers (point values) are about right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to chime in:

I prefer them as 3 crafts. What other players think doesn't matter to the game, so this is ruleswise a moot point, but I'd like to explain why I prefer them as three crafts nevertheless. I base my opinion on the strenght of starfighters as presented in the X-Wing, TIE-Fighter and X-Wing Alliance games, as I have never played X-Wing miniatures. The novels I won't take into account, as it greatly depends on the author, what the crafts are capable of.

 

Pro:

1. 12 X-Wings would perform better on a battlefield, they will destroy a CR90 and a Neb-B without any difficulty, if they aren't hindered by TIEs. In Armada, one squadron of X-Wings can't destroy a Neb-B nor a CR90 without help.

2. TIE Fighter greatly used flights of three crafts (not exclusively, though).

3. A YT-1300 won't perform better than a whole squadron of X-Wings, not even the Falcon

 

Contra:

1. No one ever said that the S&Vs won't represent squadrons...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It meant exactly that - As has been discussed ad nauseam in this thread you cannot place numerical values on the number of craft a squadron represents because there are too many exceptions that throw out anomalies.

Playing the game isn't futile at all, that's a silly thing to say.

But trying to pin down exact numbers in a game that focuses on the higher command, the macro view of the battlefield, and a game that also uses a sliding scales is... well, it's futile. There is little to be gained from going over the same arguments over and over as it just results in the same conclusions.

As Einstein said... "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".

/lebowskiON That's just, like, your opinion, man. /lebowskiOFF

Einstein may not have been practicing breeding correctly. /wink

Edited by Versch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC in modern aviation parlance you have Flights, Sections and Singles.

It also depends on if you're talking about UK or US fighters. IIRC for one they did sections of 3, but in another they did sections of 4. But I can't remember which was which, I think the UK did 3, and so did Star Wars at first then they changed to the US version of 4.

 

I doubt that the Armada designers took into consideration what some video games did.

No it's quite clear in X-Wing that they took a lot of ideas from the Tie Fighter, X-Wing, X-Wing vs Tie Fighter and X-Wing alliance games. I'm sure they took some ideas from Empires at War and Rebellion for Armada as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 9 Rebel fighters and 12 Imperial. I also assume that the Rogues and whatever's pack is likely to be said craft with at least 2 wingman. Why? It just feels right to me. It makes it so their representation feels accurate: 12 TIE Fighters are certainly an annoyance to starships, and with assistance a threat, but are much more legit against say some Y-Wings. Conversely, the 9 Y-Wings certainly CAN take out said TIEs but not without resistance, and their torpedoes and ion weapons are just enough to seriously harass a Star Destroyer...with a commander directing them. I could list more examples but I feel I've made enough of a point. In any case, I think the fighters are well constructed pieces of the game. They do their own thing while the large ships conduct their business.

Edited by LeoHowler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to think of them as flights.

So, 3-4 ships per stand.

Then, 3-4 stands equals 1 squadron. You can then move your group of 3-4 stands around as a full strength squad, shich can be a significant threat to smaller capital ships like corvettes. 3-4 squadrons of x-wings would turn a corvette into thermonuclear paste with all those proton torpedoes they can launch on an alpha strike, well, in the novels, books, videogames, and ffg's own X-wing. But 3-4 flights of x-wings would be more logical on why the corvette is not thermonuclear paste after 1 round of attacking. It would be wounded, maybe severely, but could still get away. In X-wing? 12 x-wings would decimate a corvette, but if unlucky or attacking in waves, I can see it surviving a turn or two.

In the x-wing books it usually took their whole squadron to take out corvettes or larger, until they started with simultaneous strike shenanigans or some other exploit they developed later on.

Also that fixes the issue of having a Victory Star Destroyer not activating 5-6 squadrons (72 ties!) but a more reasonable 5-6 flights, which is 18-24 ties, much closer to the Canon of 24 ties.

Makes sense that they design the sensor suit to deal with what the ship could launch.

And thats with an upgraded VSD. A vanilla VSD can trigger 3, so about 1 of its own squadrons it can send into the fray, and leave the other one back as a screen/reserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to chime in:

I prefer them as 3 crafts. What other players think doesn't matter to the game, so this is ruleswise a moot point, but I'd like to explain why I prefer them as three crafts nevertheless. I base my opinion on the strenght of starfighters as presented in the X-Wing, TIE-Fighter and X-Wing Alliance games, as I have never played X-Wing miniatures. The novels I won't take into account, as it greatly depends on the author, what the crafts are capable of.

 

Pro:

1. 12 X-Wings would perform better on a battlefield, they will destroy a CR90 and a Neb-B without any difficulty, if they aren't hindered by TIEs. In Armada, one squadron of X-Wings can't destroy a Neb-B nor a CR90 without help.

2. TIE Fighter greatly used flights of three crafts (not exclusively, though).

3. A YT-1300 won't perform better than a whole squadron of X-Wings, not even the Falcon

 

Contra:

1. No one ever said that the S&Vs won't represent squadrons...

While I really liked this games, they made no sense in this point. A Cr90 was totally useless there. You could easly avoid its fire and one X-Wing was

enough a safe kill. A single TIE-Bomber or Y-Wing could safely kill 1,5. A whole squad of Y-Wings was enough to safely kill a Neb-B, and an ISD was much more easy to kill than a MC80.

Would this be right, nobody would build any capital starships, but just carriers. And I also doubt it was any smart to launch only 3 TIE-Fighters and 2 TIE-Interceptors even when under serious attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...