Raider-Class Corvette cost calculated with conjecture

[Admiral Schiear Kaan 38]

The most apt comparison we have is against a CR90B.

 

We only have the most complete stats for the Raider-I Corvette, the base shown is an Raider-I.

Known vs. CR-90 B

1. It has two black dice in front rather than 1 blue.
2. It replaces a blue dice on the sides with a black dice.
3. It two extra black dice against squadrons rather than 1 blue.
4. It has an extra shield on the rear and a Brace instead of a redirect.
5. It adds an ordnance slot

 

Conjecture:

-It loses a defensive retrofit slot, possibly gaining a weapons team in return

This is a perfectly reasonable conjecture as all (3) Imperial ships have weapons teams.  Also the Mc30 has a weapons team which, though we cannot read in its entirety, relates to black dice and ordnance.  It is not without merit to imagine that the Imperial raider has this upgrade as well and the capacity to use it.

-It loses a support slot for balance and some to a great deal of maneuverability to keep its cost down.

This is the most questionable conjecture, but it is a possibility that we have to entertain.  I would be very surprised to see both.

 

Point cost:

To calculate this, I looked at our best comparison for exchanging blue dice for black, the victories and the best comparison for losing a blue dice, the AFMkII.

 

I believe that the bulk of that upgrade cost from a VSD-I to VSD-II of 12 points is roughly 3 points per blue dice to black dice on the front, the two on the sides contributes to only 1 point each and the ordnance vs ion cannon upgrade slot is a point, which would be moot in our comparison.  This is corroborated by the fact that rapid reload costs 8 points and gives 2 black dice on the sides, whereas expanded launchers is 13 for two extra black dice on the front.

 

My belief regarding the 8 point upgrade cost from an AFMkII B to an AFMkII A is the following breakdown guesstimate, 5 points for the extra blue dice in front, 1 point for the extra blue dice in the rear, 4 for the extra Anti Squadron blue dice and another 1 for the blue in the rear with a discount of 3 for losing a squadron to bring it back down to 8.

 

Using these values we can arrive at what I believe to be the Raider-I’s cost.  39(CR90B) +13(Expanded Launchers) –2(Blue to Black on the sides)-5(Loss of a blue dice in the front) = 46.

 

I believe that the tangential points such as losing medium range anti-squadron but gaining two black dice, redirect into a brace, losing the defensive retrofit, gaining an ordnance slot, etc., will balance out on the whole.  There’s only 7 points between a CR90A and a Nebulon-B Support Refit.

 

The variance in my calculations probably has a deeper valley.  45 is just as likely, 44 or even 43 points is possible as well.  This may be a function of the Raider I lacking an ordnance or an ion cannon upgrade slot, or the raider I has an ordnance slot whereas the raider-II has an ion cannon slot, or I may have grossly overestimating its potential.  My counter argument for the last point is that the Gladiator is probably a bargain for its abilities and possible upgrades and is made so to gloss over some Imperial weaknesses in Wave I.

I could not see this vessel being costed more than 47 points.  At that point you have a vessel that is orders of magnitude less survivable than a gladiator that needs to get in close to do its work, has only 1 good arc and it needs expensive upgrades to be effective.  It wouldn’t last a moment against Dodonna’s pride, or Luke Skywalker, or really anything else at medium range with blue dice.  It will be incredibly vulnerable to focused fire at one arc due to its absence of redirects.  Given the ease at which shielding may be avoided or stripped away from these vessels, low health and subsequent vulnerability to crits, we may need a title called General Dodonna's Brunch.
 

Well that’s the end of my treatise on the possible point cost of the Raider-I.  Even if it is 48 points, I could see myself running one with ruthless strategists for anti-squadron and activation stalling purposes.  Given how much thought I put into this, the preview will come out tomorrow at 6AM.  And yes, you’re welcome if that happens.

Edit:  Blatant grammar and spelling mistake that I only just noticed, "we may need ta title called for this General Dodonna's Brunch...".

Edited September 18, 2015 by Admiral Schiear Kaan

[clontroper5 4,156]

Nice break down, my personal prediction with admittedly less math, is:

raider-1 will be 42-43

raider-2 will be 47-48

[Lyraeus 4,759]

This is actually around what I place it as.

If the Raider 2 has red dice I can see it hitting the 48 point level.

The Raider has a brace which is worth more than a redirect. So I would place the Raider 1 at 41 to 42.

[Rythbryt 704]

Sounds about right to me, as well. Anything above 50, and I'm not sure it's better than paying six points more for a glad I, unless you want something very particular out of it (anti-squadron dice, ion cannons on a fast ship, some variation in your monotonous imperial fleets...).

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Well that's why I don't think it will go above 50 it might not be higher than 46. It is missing 10 points I think compared to the GSD 1

[Tvayumat 3,497]

If one of the Raider variants doesn't have an Ion Cannons slot I'll eat my socks.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

If one of the Raider variants doesn't have an Ion Cannons slot I'll eat my socks.

One of them very likely will. I expect the Raider 1 to fill that roll

[Grand Moff Kaine 95]

Well, looks like you were pretty spot on. You said 44 and 47, but would get it at 48

Turns out they are 44 and 48, good job!

[Rythbryt 704]

If one of the Raider variants doesn't have an Ion Cannons slot I'll eat my socks.

 

Your socks are safe.

 

Nice job by the OP. And by FFG. Definitely see a niche for this that's different from the Gladiator, and a cost difference that reflects this.

[beefcake4000 370]

Well... to tide me over for the next week what do your reckon the MC30c will come in as... You guys did a great job on the Raider so I'm interested in your thoughts.