Gladiator X3!

[mrmaddogg 10]

I played this fleet last night and did quite well, but would like to hear from others about how they might tweak this build. 

 

Flagship: (72 pts)

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)

Admiral Screed (26 pts)
 

Ship 1: (64 pts)

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer(56 pts)

 

Ship 2: (64 pts)

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer(56 pts)

Engine Techs (8 pts)
 

Squadrons (100 of 100 pts):

1 - Major Rhymer Tie Bomber Squadron (16 pts)

5 - Tie Bomber Squadron (45 pts)

1 - Tie Advanced Squadron (12 pts)

1 - Tie Fighter Squadron (16 pts)

1 - Tie Interceptor Squadron (11 pts)
 

Objectives:

Most Wanted

Hyperspace Assault

Intel Sweep

[jcopersito 5]

I am highly partial to the Gladiator II instead of the I.  Any chance you can fill me in on what made you pick the I instead?  

Also, I love running double advanced, especially with the bombers behind.  I am a huge Rhymer fan.  Normally I run Rhymer, 2 advanced and another bomber.  I sneak in Sontier or some interceptors as well. 

 

If you run all three as Glad II - I would run Screed on one ship, and Engine Techs on another.  You can also fit in the concussion missiles on the 2 ships that are not flagships. Screed ability mixed with those missiles can make gladiators deadlier than they already are.

You can beat it up if you want, but try this:

 

Flagship: (88 pts)

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)

Admiral Screed (26 pts)
 

Ship 1: (77 pts)

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)

Engine Techs (8)

Assault Concussion Missiles (7)

 

Ship 2: (69 pts)

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)

Assault Concussion Missiles (7)

 

Squadrons (66 of 100 pts):

1 - Major Rhymer Tie Bomber Squadron (16 pts)

2 - Tie Bomber Squadron (18 pts)

2 - Tie Advanced Squadron (24 pts)

1 - Tie Fighter Squadron (8 pts)

Edited June 22, 2015 by jcopersito

[ficklegreendice 34,362]

needs more gladiators

 

I would recommend the mark 2 if running naked or mostly naked (ACM are hilarious on an GSD with skreed), 2 anti-squadron is a massive asset

 

personally would not bother with techs outside of demolisher, ****'s expensive and you're not going to be able to secure its use without being purpose built for it

 

with the points freed, would recommend more advances over bombers (rhymer excepted, for obvious reasons**) because they can both hold and deal damage to squadrons, keeping them locked while GSD-2 anti-squadron batteries blow them to kingdom come. With Rhymer, their non-bomber black die still gives you a squadron force with very respectable long range firepower to complement the GSDs' lack of reds relative to rebel ships

Edited June 22, 2015 by ficklegreendice

[Darth Lupine 1,556]

Stick to GSD I. Demolisher with engine techs on one. ACM on all three. Ditch the bombers just take as many TIEs as possible for screening. Start at speed three, and don't slow for nothing. Close as fast as possible. Unload black dice. Profit.

[jcopersito 5]

Sigh - I totally forgot demolisher....

needs more gladiators

 

I would recommend the mark 2 if running naked or mostly naked (ACM are hilarious on an GSD with skreed), 2 anti-squadron is a massive asset

 

personally would not bother with techs outside of demolisher, ****'s expensive and you're not going to be able to secure its use without being purpose built for it

 

with the points freed, would recommend more advances over bombers (rhymer except more obvious reasons) because they can both hold and deal damage to squadrons, keeping them locked while GSD-2 anti-squadron batteries blow them to kingdom come. With Rhymer, their non-bomber black die still gives you a squadron force with very respectable long range firepower to complement the GSDs' lack of reds relative to rebel ships

[ficklegreendice 34,362]

for shame !

Demolisher first. Tech are quite powerful, but they can't compare to the rule-bending ability of demolisher

[Boardy 79]

As with many of the other posters, I think you should focus on anti-fighter with your squadron builds. I think Gladiators have more than enough punch to remove other capital ships from the table, but you'll need something to keep the enemy fighters off your back, especially since you're using Gladiator I's, which if I recall have only one die for anti-squadron. I would switch out for more TIE Fighters and/or Interceptors.

[coastcityo 324]

This many TIE Bombers and so few Fighters is screaming for one or two A-wings tying the Bombers up, while the rest of the enemy Squadron engages your fighters. If nothing else, swapping out some Bombers for TIE LN's is a good swap.

[DarthBadger 53]

Great to see a GSD list without the cliche Demolisher

[BlakLanner 33]

Having fallen in love with the GSD, I am working on a 3x list as well.  This is my version

 

Gladiator II-class Star Destroyer, 95 pts
Admiral Screed
Assault Concussion Missiles

Gladiator I-class Star Destroyer, 73 pts
Demolisher
Assault Concussion Missiles

Gladiator I-class Star Destroyer, 66 pts
Insidious
Assault Concussion Missiles

Soontir Fel, 18 pts
4 TIE Advanced Squadron, 48 pts

Most Wanted
Hyperspace Assault
Dangerous Territory

 

I take the Insidious because, with Hyperspace Assault available, I can often get into the rear arcs very easily and the extra range helps quite a bit.  There isn't much else to do with the 3 points unless I want to force initiative.  Engine Techs can be nice when fighting corvette swarms but I find that the ship is maneuverable enough without them and it gives me room for the 5th fighter squadron.

[BindiZanz 0]

When you play with this line up, I'd love to read an AAR. I've been toying with something similar, but not sure if I'm ready yet to buy two more Glads.

[kac 146]

Great to see a GSD list without the cliche Demolisher

Although I'm a Rebel player, Demolisher is a cliché for a reason.

[DarthBadger 53]

Great to see a GSD list without the cliche Demolisher

Although I'm a Rebel player, Demolisher is a cliché for a reason.

I totally agree. But sadly it's one that has the potential to weaken the game as a whole, particularly at the moment when the Empire only has the two capital classes available.

Luckily Demolisher isn't a game killer - a rebel killer, yes, but it can be countered.

Whilst you rebels have several powerful options there is not ONE that will be encountered in 80 to 90% of lists.

Roll on Wave 2!

[kac 146]

Everything you said is pretty true, but Demolisher is just part of the normal give and take in a game, IMO.

 

It comes out, has a definite twist that shakes things up. It has a bit of an upper hand for a while.

 

Rebel players figure out the appropriate counters, and then things settle down (this is the stage I believe we're in now). Of course Wave 2 will change things, but even before then I'm predicting you'll see a swing back to various combinations being tried on the Imp. side.

[ficklegreendice 34,362]

Demolisher is aokay in my book, and I'm a rebel player

 

every game has pieces that out and out contradict the core game mechanics, some to the point where it's just laughable (x-wing primary turrets) but the Demolisher is very restrained relatively speaking

 

It only unloads half of its total attacks and is tied to a ship that needs to be in close range to be effective

 

 

the ability can have amazing things accomplished through it, but the restrictions present (not to mention the associated cost of the ship) give opponents plenty of counter-play options

[Perakkir 108]

It is inappropriate to hold a player responsible for something being very valuable as a choice in a list builder game.  Getting that right is the company's job.

[DarthBadger 53]

It is inappropriate to hold a player responsible for something being very valuable as a choice in a list builder game.  Getting that right is the company's job.

Who is holding a player responsible?

[Perakkir 108]

Calling the Demolisher card "cliche`" - which is intended entirely to be perjorative - is an attempt to discourage its use.  Its appending to the player a negative connotation to his or her list choices.  I find that behavior unacceptable, and point it out when I see it.  Gamers should game they way they want to game.  Anyone trying to discourage a gamer from playing any legal way they want to play is doing our hobby a disservice.  If there is something about the demolisher card you do not like - esp. perceived balance or the potential need for errata, tell the company.   Don't lay your negativity on our fellow gamers.

[DarthBadger 53]

Calling the Demolisher card "cliche`" - which is intended entirely to be perjorative - is an attempt to discourage its use. Its appending to the player a negative connotation to his or her list choices. I find that behavior unacceptable, and point it out when I see it. Gamers should game they way they want to game. Anyone trying to discourage a gamer from playing any legal way they want to play is doing our hobby a disservice. If there is something about the demolisher card you do not like - esp. perceived balance or the potential need for errata, tell the company. Don't lay your negativity on our fellow gamers.

I'm sorry you feel like this.

I hasten to add that I mean no slight to those who use Demolisher and/or to Ffg!

cliché

ˈkliːʃeɪ/

noun

noun: cliché; plural noun: clichés; noun: cliche; plural noun: cliches

1.

a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought.

My reference to cliché was intended to reflect the fact that it is frequently an automatic choice. I am in no way suggesting that there is anything wrong with the title, the system or anyone who chose to use it.

I do not need to apologise for my comments - but choose to anyway.

I was actually encouraging the OP for creating a different list.

Check my Likes on the responses!

Edited July 10, 2015 by DarthBadger

[Spellbound 27]

But to say it denotes a lack of original thought takes credit away from the gamer.  I never got on these forums until well after Wave 1 released, and as soon as I saw that card, I thought "wow!  That changes a core mechanic of the game!  And with....wow, engine techs!  And look at these options for extra damage!  I better put wulff so I always have a navigation token on him....

 

.....oh look, everyone online did the same thing."

 

I don't feel any less original because of it.  I noticed the synergies myself.

[Perakkir 108]

First, I agree with spellbound.  You have no idea which thoughts are original...I love the scene where I go to a tourney - does not matter the game system - and I get out my forces and some dude I have never met walks by, looks at what I have and turns to a friend and says, 'hey look at that guy, he is taking Bob's list'  And I am like 'who the f is Bob?' lol

 

Second, I have yet to hear the word "cliche'" used in a positive way or as a compliment, including on this thread.

 

Third, when i make a list, I am not looking for original.  I am looking for effective and effective as a match for my play style and the tools at hand.  We imperials have been given two ships, a big slow one whose location in space is entirely predictable and a small fast one which has to fire at close range to be effective.  The smaller one is the only unit in the game with an upgrade that breaks the fire/move sequence.  I would expect to see it a lot, and do. That it was made so effective for the points and unique to the  most effective of the only two ships exacerbates its frequency of use.

 

There are a lot of upgrade combos someone could put on a gladiator that would be dumb but also "original."  I would not make them just to please someone who wishes FFG would give us more useful options from which to choose.  

[DarthBadger 53]

For the final time, I was COMPLEMENTING the OP.

I used cliché in the context of "over used".

Which in MY OPINION it is as stated earlier.

I am not denigrating anyone who uses it, I occasionally use it myself, I am not intentionally insulting anyone who uses it, I am not claiming to be superior to anyone, have better insight, knowledge or judgement than anyone else.

If anyone really feels the need to continue to make sanctimonious comments and/or try to put words into my mouth or just feels the need to have the final word then please feel free to flame on!

[Bitharne 175]

 

I played this fleet last night and did quite well, but would like to hear from others about how they might tweak this build. 

 

Flagship: (72 pts)

Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)

Admiral Screed (26 pts)

 

Ship 1: (64 pts)

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer(56 pts)

 

Ship 2: (64 pts)

Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer(56 pts)

Engine Techs (8 pts)

 

Squadrons (100 of 100 pts):

1 - Major Rhymer Tie Bomber Squadron (16 pts)

5 - Tie Bomber Squadron (45 pts)

1 - Tie Advanced Squadron (12 pts)

1 - Tie Fighter Squadron (16 pts)

1 - Tie Interceptor Squadron (11 pts)

 

Objectives:

Most Wanted

Hyperspace Assault

Intel Sweep

 

 

I'll echo the squadron comments. People who run all-ship lists often lament that squadrons are wasted points since if the opponent, too, doesn't take squadrons they just fart around. This leads them to take tons of bombers, "so that they are effectively spent" points in the squadron section...yet, ironically enough, doing this ACTUALLY wastes the points you were trying to avoid wasting. A single interceptor-class fighter can lock down 71 of your squadron points...not good stituation to be in. Combine this with extremely powerful, and fast brawlers, those bombers are not a great use of points.

 

Either go advance heavy with rhymer so you can pseudo-bomb against those all-ship lists, yet still engage fighter-heavy lists. Of course if you like playing paper and dont mind geting rolled by scissors at times then go bomber heavy

 

As for the ships. I prefer Glad1s since I want my fighters to do the fighting, and since I run a single "cliche" demolisher, I pretty much always shoot both shots at a ship...so Glad2 is wasted points. However, if you roll along with rhymer and 4-6 advances as your squads (very reasonable imo), you might want 2 glad2s nearby to help against heavy-fighter lists so while you're dogfighting with advances, you can supplement they're meh offensive punch to win the fight and hopefully toss some bombs with the left over ships. I think non-engine tech naked glad's is suficient in this setup.

(296 of 300 pts)

Flagship: (88 pts)

• Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)
  
• Admiral Screed (26 pts)
  

Fleet Ship 1: (69 pts)

• Gladiator II-Class Star Destroyer(62 pts)
  
• Assault Concussion Missiles (7 pts)
  

Fleet Ship 2: (63 pts)

• Gladiator I-Class Star Destroyer(56 pts)
  
• Assault Concussion Missiles (7 pts)
  

Squadrons (76 of 99 pts):

• 1x Major Rhymer Tie Bomber Squadron (16 pts)
  
• 5x Tie Advanced Squadron (60 pts)
  

Objectives:

• 
  

[DarthBadger 53]

What are your results like with it?

[Bitharne 175]

What I posted? A suggestion for the OP...I've no interest in trip glads...too little room for toys, and no massive anvil to push around and instill the fear of the emperor in people!