Why the Raider doesn't work (I + II) and won't.

[Norsehound 2,740]

Here's a thought, can the Raider do anything But be a punchy cruise missile or the best (but most fragile) close-range AA platform?

 

Even the outdated VSDs can still have some flexibility. Sure they're slow and XI7s really hurt them, but they can still be carriers or gunships serving as understudies for whatever stars you have in your list (like ISDs or Demolisher). I mean, until I see some reports otherwise about the RDR doing well someplace else, I think what dooms this ship is that it's really niche. A one trick pony.

 

Because when you commit to using a Raider in your force you're pretty much committing to, at some point or another, charging it in with huge dice pools to do all the punching it can, hopefully killing ships before its inevitable death. Compare this to every other ship in the Imperial lineup, which handle themselves well enough against most other kinds of lists.

 

While I'm glad the RDR seems to have a clear function I can use to build with them now, I find I'm not ecstatic about this revelation. I'm still being asked to fly them into harms' way where there's a great chance they'd be shot down, and I'm handing points to my enemy. There's no guarantee they will last the entire game to net me a large MoV in a tournament. There's really that one strategy that I could use with them, it's a gamble, and requires particular things out of my list construction.

 

Compare this to ISDs, which are great all around as carriers, gunships, or both. Also compare this to the Rebels, which have a large amount of flexibility with many of their ships. *shrug*

[Pilot no55389 120]

Compare this to ISDs, which are great all around as carriers, gunships, or both. Also compare this to the Rebels, which have a large amount of flexibility with many of their ships. *shrug*

 

Those are not fair comparisons: they're literally in different leagues. Raiders cost 44/48 points; an ISD costs 110/120 - there is, of course, going to be an enormous difference in what they do.

 

While they certainly are niche, what their niche is depends on how you build them. I can think of several different roles they can play:

• AA platform (Ordnance Experts, Instigator/Impetuous)
• Missile Barge (Ornance Experts, Expanded Launchers)
• Vultures (Ordnance Experts, APTs/ACMs)
• Flank Picket (RDR-II, SW-7's)

For all of these placement is a key component to using them well. They are not built to tank a lot of damage. Their evades are there to keep them ticking at long range, then use their Speed and Yaw to get into the right position to use what you gave them: for AA Platforms, that's getting into the middle of an enemy squadron formation; for Missile Barges that's getting into the weak arc of an enemy ship, hitting them and then jumping far away/into another weak arc; for Vultures it's plinking relatively reliable hull damage on a weakened target to finish them; for Flank Pickets it's keeping them positioned to keep enemy fast ships in check and holding them off from jumping into an ISD/VSD's weak side/rear arcs, so that those heavier ships can perform their job relatively unmolested.

 

Basically, you can't try to use a finesse ship in a brute role, it's simply not built that way. Play to its strengths: speed, manoeuvrability and good power when designed for a role.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Why do people forget the Pocket Carrier build. . . or the tractor beam ship?

[Strikesback 147]

I just placed 2nd in a 8 man tournament last weekend with two in my list. They work if you use them right.

[Norsehound 2,740]

I tried three RDRs as tractor beamers and they all died whenever they got engaged with the enemy in a tournament. While there were some opponents with small ships, I faced a lot of assault frigates and a few MC80s which were immune to Raider Tractor Beams.

 

And if you pocket carrier, what are you commanding? The most optimistic you can get is Fighter 2, with a Fighter command and a token. Is it really worth sticking Yualren on such an explosive ship?

 

 

 

Compare this to ISDs, which are great all around as carriers, gunships, or both. Also compare this to the Rebels, which have a large amount of flexibility with many of their ships. *shrug*

 

Those are not fair comparisons: they're literally in different leagues. Raiders cost 44/48 points; an ISD costs 110/120 - there is, of course, going to be an enormous difference in what they do...

 

Well ok, how about the CR-90? CR-90s are not really range dependent, can be configured for a support role (Tantive IV Raymus), traditional gunships (TRCs), or special attacks (Dodonna's Pride, Engine techs). Under Mon Mothma they're comfortable at any range, and redirect allows them to weather several attacks.

 

Again compare to the Raider, which MUST race into close range to maximize an attack. You can't coast in slowly, which is what I've been doing with Raiders up until that last test, because you take hits from several ships you can't tank. CR-90s can, and for similar point cost.

[Drasnighta 26,831]

 

And if you pocket carrier, what are you commanding? The most optimistic you can get is Fighter 2, with a Fighter command and a token. Is it really worth sticking Yualren on such an explosive ship?

 

 

3

 

Its Offensive Retrofit slot can take Expanded Hangars.

[Norsehound 2,740]

Hmm, forgot about that.

 

Well with fighter 2 without taking Yularen it could be worth using it to tow a couple of TIE Bombers across the board into a flanking position, then throw them into range. With Yularen towing three you could bring Bombers into close range, be there to clear out any defenders, and then when you die you leave bombers behind to passively attack whatevers' left.

[Snipafist 7,536]

I think the idea behind the pocket carrier is generally to abuse it with Tarkin for effectively Squadrons 3 when necessary (1+token+Expanded Hangar Bays).

How exactly it fits into a top-tier list, I'm not really sure; it is, however, a use. I figure the best conceivable way to use it is with Raider-IIs with Expanded Hangar Bays and Ruthless Strategists with a huge cloud of Rhymer+bombers, where you're just Strategist flakking the bejesus out of whatever tries to shoot down your omega blob. Janky for sure, but potentially pretty amusing.

I also don't have a lot of sympathy for all this goalpost-moving. First it was that the Raider is absolutely worthless, then when people reported success it was the Raider isn't competitive or only works against bad opponents, then when clontroper5 won a big Vassal tournament against people who knew what they were doing the goalposts have been moved once again to complaining about how its not very flexible in the number of roles it can fill. The Gladiator isn't terribly flexible in the number of roles it can fill (it... flies up and throws black dice at things, preferably with the Demolisher title - the main decision is whether you want to pimp it out with Engine Techs and an officer) but I've never seen all this kvetching about it.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Snipafist

[CaribbeanNinja 6,207]

I believe this horse is dead but we continue to beat it.

[Green Knight 9,731]

Take this dead horse!

[MoffZen 760]

How exactly it fits into a top-tier list, I'm not really sure; it is, however, a use. I figure the best conceivable way to use it is with Raider-IIs with Expanded Hangar Bays and Ruthless Strategists with a huge cloud of Rhymer+bombers, where you're just Strategist flakking the bejesus out of whatever tries to shoot down your omega blob. Janky for sure, but potentially pretty amusing.

 

 

I used that on a Gladiator 2, I can't see why that wouldn't work with a Raider You'd have to be a lot more on the flanks however so you don't get gibbed too easily.

[reegsk 742]

I think the idea behind the pocket carrier is generally to abuse it with Tarkin for effectively Squadrons 3 when necessary (1+token+Expanded Hangar Bays).

How exactly it fits into a top-tier list, I'm not really sure; it is, however, a use. I figure the best conceivable way to use it is with Raider-IIs with Expanded Hangar Bays and Ruthless Strategists with a huge cloud of Rhymer+bombers, where you're just Strategist flakking the bejesus out of whatever tries to shoot down your omega blob. Janky for sure, but potentially pretty amusing.

 

I actually might try to fit this into my Tarkin list. I was taking three VSDs, two with Ruthless Strategists, but I couldn't play my bombers aggressively enough because they would outpace my slow VSDs and thus wouldn't get the protection of Ruthless Strategists. But if I drop a VSD and add in two Raiders with RS and Expanded Hangars, they would actually have a higher squadron command value (4 without tokens, 6 with), be more flexible since they choose their dial every round, AND the bombers could engage much faster because they would have some backup. And the remaining ships would transition from carriers to gunships, and could use those squadron tokens for late-in-the-game emergency activations or to trigger Defense Liaisons for emergency repairs.

Edited February 23, 2016 by reegsk

[MoffZen 760]

 

I think the idea behind the pocket carrier is generally to abuse it with Tarkin for effectively Squadrons 3 when necessary (1+token+Expanded Hangar Bays).

How exactly it fits into a top-tier list, I'm not really sure; it is, however, a use. I figure the best conceivable way to use it is with Raider-IIs with Expanded Hangar Bays and Ruthless Strategists with a huge cloud of Rhymer+bombers, where you're just Strategist flakking the bejesus out of whatever tries to shoot down your omega blob. Janky for sure, but potentially pretty amusing.

 

I actually might try to fit this into my Tarkin list. I was taking three VSDs, two with Ruthless Strategists, but I couldn't play my bombers aggressively enough because they would outpace my slow VSDs and thus wouldn't get the protection of Ruthless Strategists. But if I drop a VSD and add in two Raiders with RS and Expanded Hangars, they would actually have a higher squadron command value (4 without tokens, 6 with), be more flexible since they choose their dial every round, AND the bombers could engage much faster because they would have some backup. And the remaining ships would transition from carriers to gunships, and could use those squadron tokens for late-in-the-game emergency activations or to trigger Defense Liaisons for emergency repairs.

 

 

Keep in mind that while Ruthless Strategists is nice, it won't deal with fighter wings except TIE and A-Wings on its own with TIE Bomber dice. Throwing a few anti-squadron squadrons like the TIE Advanced will probably be a safe bet as well.

[Snipafist 7,536]

Keep in mind that while Ruthless Strategists is nice, it won't deal with fighter wings except TIE and A-Wings on its own with TIE Bomber dice. Throwing a few anti-squadron squadrons like the TIE Advanced will probably be a safe bet as well.

 

Correct. The basic idea being for Ruthless Strategists to really pay off you need to have both:

1) Many more total squadron HP than the other guy's fighters have (TIE Bombers are very cost-effective for this being 9 points for 5 hull points)

2) Several Ruthless Raiders able to flak engaging fighters to make the hits pile up and trigger Ruthless Strategists as much as possible in order to trade your squadron HP (which you should have a lot of, see point 1) for enemy squadron HP to free the bombers up as quickly as possible with minimal dogfighting to slow you down.

 

I'd also recommend the Impetuous title to keep those Ruthless shots coming (under ideal circumstances you can get a double-arc shot and an Impetuous shot on one unlucky squadron).

 

You'll still want some kind of a mop-up crew and/or Escort and/or Intel. The perfect combination is unknown to me, as the super-janky idea hasn't yet made it into the "actually putting this nonsense on the table" stage for me.

[Drasnighta 26,831]

Although do remember that Ruthless Strategists triggers on attacks, not necessarily on hits.  

[Snipafist 7,536]

Although do remember that Ruthless Strategists triggers on attacks, not necessarily on hits.  

Correct. I was speaking more casually than I should have been. It is very important that you can trigger it on attacks rather than only on hits.

[reegsk 742]

I'm toying with a list build, and this is what I have so far:

 

Ozzel

 

Raider-II

• Impetuous
• Ruthless Strategists
• Expanded Hangar Bay

Raider-II

• Ruthless Strategists
• Expanded Hangar Bay

Major Rhymer

4 x Firesprays

3 x TIE Advanceds

 

124 points in Squadrons with 44 hull and 22 blue dice plus one black die versus squadrons, eight blue and one black bomber dice against ships, plus three more black dice against ships. The two Raiders clock in at 118 points, so all told plus a minimum admiral tax of 20 points leaves you with 138 points to kit out an ISD or try to squeeze in two more ships (a pair of Glads, perchance?) The Raiders can caddy the four non-Rogue squadrons with the Firesprays taking care of themselves. Your anti-squadron capabilities should be an average twelve damage from your own fighters plus at least one more per enemy squadron from the raiders, plus a freebie from RS. That should be an easy three X-Wing squadrons popped in a single activation. Your next activation the fighters wouldn't even have to do the heavy lifting, as the raiders should be able to RS everything else to death. With 44 hull, you can spread that around - put it on the Advanceds to keep your bombers safe from flak later in the game, or put it on the Firesprays so that the Advanceds can stay alive and continue to take any incoming enemy squadron fire.

 

I might have to test this out.

[heatherm 0]

The raider was designed was an anti fighter ship, so you use it to lock up squadrons so those star destroyers can do there thing.

Simple? you don't use a anti fighter ship in a ship to ship battle.

[Trizzo2 419]

Ruthless on Raider isn't great because Ordnance is superior overall, you miss out dealing damage to evades squadrons potentially but two black dice with reroll is insane vs squads.

The pocket carrier is pretty good for fighting squadrons with Expanded Hanger bay. It gives you a lot of reach/damage when you you can squadron command, shoot a target two different arcs, then a Impetuous an arc of choice. I tried the Pocket Carrier in a tourney and placed 3rd (23 person tourney). Bossk killed one off the command, Denegar softens another, double arcs and Impetuous. Killed 5 Tie mixed squadrons in one sitting.

This thread is pretty confusing to me. What did people expect in a 44 point ship exactly? 44 for Imperial is worth it just for activations. It just so happens you are able to build it in many different ways.

It's a great ship.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Trizzo2

[Norsehound 2,740]

But again, not intuitive. Every other ship is more or less okay being at any other range... the only exception really is the CR-90 not being that great at close range. Even then, Mon-Mothma helps it out. Because the Raider can't really protect itself multiple times at longer ranges, and can't afford to take more than one turn closing with the target to start hitting it.

 

When the Rebels pay that much for a ship they can get the CR-90A. it can hang back and plink at long range and still use all of its defense tokens. In those 8 points you'd upgrade a RDR-I to a RDR-II the CR-90A can equip TRCs and be a more credible threat to anyone without an evade at that long range.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

I don't understand the problem with o lys activating 2 squadrons at a time. It is standard for most Nebulon-B ayers and those do just fine. Sure Yavaris adds to the punch but not by too huge of a margin.

[GiledPallaeon 2,873]

I'm going to echo a sentiment that has appeared in this thread again and again: Raiders make great light ships, or as someone above called it, vultures. My favorite list is rapidly shaping up to be an ISD and a pair of Raiders, either I or II in both ships, plus a mixture of squadrons. The trick with the Raiders is, as with every other ship, to carefully understand what you want the ship to do and how it can accomplish that task. For example, as pocket carriers, you must accept that you can only shuffle two squadrons at a time with EHB (as Lyraeus pointed out, the same as a Neb-B). That said, a well timed Rhymer strike, aided by for example an Advanced, can be exceptionally useful and Command 1 means quick delivery thereof. If you are using them as picket ships, time movement to best correspond to armament. If they're Raider-Is, use OEs and the ability of a Raider to dance at slow speed to lay on ACMs, APTs. or EL dice. If they're Raider-IIs, use your Ion Cannons to stay in Evade range. As detractors are fond of pointing out, they are far and away not the most durable Imperial ship, but they're not supposed to be. They're supposed to be flanking units, never leading, and never drawing the bulk of the attention. As anti-squadron support, run a handful of TIEs to keep the Raiders in the clear. They may not be as obvious or as simple as a Victory or an Imperial (point and shoot generally cuts it there), but they can be very effective ships for rounding out a list. They can and do do work, you just can't abuse them. Use all that brainpower the Imperial and Victory cleared up to run these little buggers with vicious effectiveness. I promise they are worth it.