Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
iamfanboy

So WHY is it that we Imperials are the weakest?

Recommended Posts

 

So what's the problem? Why can't we do well at the top tables in Worlds, and Regionals often represent Rebels/Scum higher than Imperials? I want to hear what you guys think, but my thought is pretty simple:

 

It is simple, High variance.

 

I dont really see high variance from the faction of palp and x7 so this post must have traveled through time to arrive here in november 2016. spoilers, guy from early 2015: the star of the apprentice is our president now, in the future

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you build to counter three agility dice, focus/evade defence then you pretty much have a good chance at anything that isn't bringing that to the table.

 

If you can push damage through that, which is essentially the hardest defence the game has to offer, what chance does a single agility ship with a focus token have?

 

The only deciding factor after that is your personal skill and countering how they are getting those stats in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So what's the problem? Why can't we do well at the top tables in Worlds, and Regionals often represent Rebels/Scum higher than Imperials?

 

Because FFG hasn't given us the XG-1 "Star Wing" Assault Gunboat  (...yet...)

 

I don't think I'll ever understand the hype. Such an ugly ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you dont beat Palp then you wont go far.  So your list needs to counter Palp Defenders/ Palp Aces (aka lots of green dice and evade tokens), otherwise going far in the tournament will be unlikely. That means homing missiles, conner nets/bombs for instant damage, Zuckuss to say "FU green dice", token strippers like Wes, Palob, Old Terry, and double tappers: Corran, TLT, Gunner, etc. So, you counter the Imps and then deal with the other lists. If you know 1/3 of all lists in a tournament is going to have Palp, then you counter Palp. 100 lists, that means 33 are Palp. Maybe 10 dengaroos, and everything else is 5 or less. If 1/3 of the lists are Palps, that means in 6 rounds of swiss, you will be seeing two Palp lists, and may not even play a Dengaroo. So...counter Palps. If you happen to come across a Dengaroo and your list sucks against Dengaroo, a 5-1 record can still get you to next round. Two or three losses to Palps though? Early ride home for ya.

 

I actually think, if Palp was not available, imps would actually be better, as there wouldnt be a "Gotta beat Palp to advance in tourney" mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is the Empire has one very powerful card and really only one way to use him. Excluding that powerful card for another list leaves those lists wanting in comparison. The new shuttle coming out will do nothing to limit the power of Palp but it will give the Palp driven lists a little variety at least. At least until it is decided which shuttle is best, then back to the inbred list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is the Empire has one very powerful card and really only one way to use him. Excluding that powerful card for another list leaves those lists wanting in comparison. The new shuttle coming out will do nothing to limit the power of Palp but it will give the Palp driven lists a little variety at least. At least until it is decided which shuttle is best, then back to the inbred list.

I disagree a little bit.

 

It's not that the Empire has only ONE powerful card, it's that the ONE powerful card dominates everyone's thinking while list building. Competitive players get into a mindset of "Must include Palpatine, must have Palpatine somewhere in here, that means Lambda or Decimator..." and ignore other options.

 

It's that same predictability which means that people looking to go against Imperials only need to worry about two basic archetypes: Palpatine and swarm, and swarm doesn't seem to cut it any more.

 

But we DO have other choices. Unlike the Rebels, which don't really get viable ships at the sub-25 point cost, we've got a plethora of options from the 16-35 point range, perfect for building 4-ship lists with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the major problem with this argument is that we don't have any gunboats.

I know you're being facetious, but...

 

Statwise, how would the gunboat differ from, say, the Punisher? It's the same basic idea - a heavy bomber with shields - and look how well that turned out.

 

I just... I dunno. It seems like the design space for X-Wing is closing sharply.

 

But that's a bit off-topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the major problem with this argument is that we don't have any gunboats.

I know you're being facetious, but...

 

Statwise, how would the gunboat differ from, say, the Punisher? It's the same basic idea - a heavy bomber with shields - and look how well that turned out.

 

I just... I dunno. It seems like the design space for X-Wing is closing sharply.

 

But that's a bit off-topic.

 

 

3 primary, system slot, EPT, 1 crew, two torps, two missiles slots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the major problem with this argument is that we don't have any gunboats.

I know you're being facetious, but...

 

Statwise, how would the gunboat differ from, say, the Punisher? It's the same basic idea - a heavy bomber with shields - and look how well that turned out.

 

I just... I dunno. It seems like the design space for X-Wing is closing sharply.

 

But that's a bit off-topic.

It was closed along time ago. Punisher is a heavy bomber, and in most respects FFG failed to bring it to life with the exception of Deathrain.

Gunboat is the original Imperial snubfighter and assault craft. It basically is a slower, cheaper TIE Defender or a non turreted Imperial Y-wing. Not counting that it can carry cannons and beam weapons, but most of the designs stopped being innovative a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think the major problem with this argument is that we don't have any gunboats.

I know you're being facetious, but...

 

Statwise, how would the gunboat differ from, say, the Punisher? It's the same basic idea - a heavy bomber with shields - and look how well that turned out.

 

I just... I dunno. It seems like the design space for X-Wing is closing sharply.

 

But that's a bit off-topic.

It was closed along time ago. Punisher is a heavy bomber, and in most respects FFG failed to bring it to life with the exception of Deathrain.

Gunboat is the original Imperial snubfighter and assault craft. It basically is a slower, cheaper TIE Defender or a non turreted Imperial Y-wing. Not counting that it can carry cannons and beam weapons, but most of the designs stopped being innovative a long time ago.

 

 

It may have been closed along time ago but we'll continue to bring it up in nearly every post. 'The beach is beautiful? Is it because they have gun boats?'

 

 

Regardless, I thought the gunboat was far larger than a Snub-Fighter. Perhaps I don't know what that term is supposed to imply.  Taste wise I don't know if I'm fond of a shuttle with missiles in the context of this game. I would think a missile boat would be a stand off weapon platform and should die in the first turn of engagement.  This gets back to me not, conceptually, seeing it as a snubfighter. I am however a little bias since I'm also not fond of freighters and transports being better than most assault or superiority fighter craft.

 

I do think the Punisher, however poorly, fills the roll. It looks the part of a heavy bomber better than the gunboat. Perhaps if we played three maps wide with the 'missile boat' and other stand off ships at one end, then it might work. But then things like Yorr's range 1 limitation still doesn't make much sense or use.

 

[Edit] Since we are on the topic of why don't we have a gun boat the imperials are weak, I hope they faq Yorr to give it at least to range 3. Range 5 would be awesome.

Edited by Ken at Sunrise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "problem" with Imperials is simple - the war of attrition is big in the Empire. Spending their starfighters, stormtroopers and pilots against terrorists and Rebels is just standard procedure. Heck, it's actually quite an honor for an Imperial pilot to sacrifice himself in service to the Emperor (Ever get rammed head-on by a TIE Advanced while flying an A-Wing? Yeah, that encounter completely relieved me of my thankfully fully charged forward shields...).

 

This battle philosophy doesn't gel so well with a tabletop game where a single TIE/ln still costs $15. I think FFG tried to balance for this to make it so that Imperial players didn't have to spend a Death Star's worth of money just to assemble a decent fleet. How successful they were I suppose is debatable, but overall I believe the reason why the Imperials might seem weaker is because I think they were intended to feel different to play. You don't want both sides having the same feel, do you? Unfortunately, asymmetrical game design is rather hard to pull off, from what I've heard.

 

As for the Assault Gunboat... the reason why we don't have it I believe is quite simple: The ship has already sailed. It's too late.

 

According to the X-Wing PC game strategy guide, the XG-1 Star Wing assault gunboat was created basically as a hard counter to the success of the flexible T-65 X-Wing. In fact, the Imperials were actually starting to use hit-and-fade attacks similar to the Rebellion's. The XG-1 was actually introduced into service before the events of Episode 4 - specifically, midway through the second X-Wing tour of duty campaign. This campaign ends immediately before Episode 4 starts.

 

Having both flown and flown against the XG-1, I can understand the sentiment of wanting it in the game - heck, I share the sentiment. I know how it performs; it's a slightly slow dogfighter that has great deployment flexibility. Its armament in X-Wing - shielding, hyperdrive, dual laser cannons, dual ion cannons and dual warhead launchers gives it ideal loadout for a variety of situations. They were usually deployed in flights of three, if I recall. It was used as both a strike craft and a response fighter in lieu of a larger capital ship arriving to launch TIEs.

 

But it's distinctly possible that the metagame has advanced to the point where the XG-1 would not be competitive anymore - basically, it's not worth creating. First of all, now we already have T-70s, E-Wings, and all the other powerful ships that could and most likely would rip an XG-1 to shreds without really trying very hard. We already have much better ships - the TIE Defender was originally supposed to be an overpowered beast reward for players reaching the last few missions of the TIE Fighter PC game. Yes, the XG-1 was in TIE Fighter as well as a flyable craft, but when everyone has Defenders zipping around on their tabletops, why would you bring an XG-1? I suppose the answer is "the same reason you'd bring a T-65"; filling up a squad. But it's probably easily argued that one could use newer swarm fighters instead. Personally I don't care that it would be "old," since I don't care about competitive play - but I can't blame FFG for deciding to make ships they (gasp!) think will sell.

 

I would sorely like to see an XG-1 released by FFG. But I honestly don't think they'll do it... they will probably feel the need to release new ships that are competitive with the newer ones, not ones that were designed to fight T-65s and Y-wings.

 

Now if a new model of the XG-1 shows up in the next movie, on the other hand, that might change things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Regardless, I thought the gunboat was far larger than a Snub-Fighter. Perhaps I don't know what that term is supposed to imply.  Taste wise I don't know if I'm fond of a shuttle with missiles in the context of this game. I would think a missile boat would be a stand off weapon platform and should die in the first turn of engagement.  This gets back to me not, conceptually, seeing it as a snubfighter. I am however a little bias since I'm also not fond of freighters and transports being better than most assault or superiority fighter craft.

 

 

The Gunboat is close to the ARC-170 in size. It's a little shorter with less wingspan and is just under twice as high (because of the big dorsal fin). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's distinctly possible that the metagame has advanced to the point where the XG-1 would not be competitive anymore - basically, it's not worth creating. First of all, now we already have T-70s, E-Wings, and all the other powerful ships that could and most likely would rip an XG-1 to shreds without really trying very hard. We already have much better ships - the TIE Defender was originally supposed to be an overpowered beast reward for players reaching the last few missions of the TIE Fighter PC game. Yes, the XG-1 was in TIE Fighter as well as a flyable craft, but when everyone has Defenders zipping around on their tabletops, why would you bring an XG-1? I suppose the answer is "the same reason you'd bring a T-65"; filling up a squad. But it's probably easily argued that one could use newer swarm fighters instead. Personally I don't care that it would be "old," since I don't care about competitive play - but I can't blame FFG for deciding to make ships they (gasp!) think will sell.

I mean, FFG could just balance the XG-1 around strong ships like the Defender, whether in stats, points, or gimmicks. Nothing stopping them from that. The Jumpmaster 5000 was hardly the best ship in Star Wars lore, and that ended up the best ship in the game.

 

Plus, the Punisher and Jumpmaster provide good lessons for FFG in how to balance an ordnance-based ship. 

 

If anything, the main obstacle for the XG-1 right now is that because Star Wars media is in overdrive right now, there's a continuous stream of new ships that have more exposure and marketability. But Imperial Veterans should give hope that FFG still sees value in the old EU. 

Edited by WingedSpider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the major reason we don't see - and won't see! - the Gunboat is simple: It doesn't fit the aesthetic.

 

The Empire has a monolithic, uniform aesthetic, and the ships are chosen to contrast with the aesthetic of the Rebellion (and Scum's) ragtag mishmash of different ships from different species and different designers. An X-Wing looks nothing like a B-Wing, and an HWK only superficially resembles the Y-Wing, to say nothing of the difference between a Starviper and a Z-95.

 

However, all the Imperial small ships are tied together visually with the TIE pod and solar panels. That makes it look more like a unified army instead of a rebellion, and is a conscious choice on the part of the FFG designers. Putting the gunboat in there would wreck the aesthetic they're trying for. Yes, it matches the Lambda, but that's a large ship versus a small ship.

 

It's why we won't see Skipray Blastboats or Imperial X-Wing prototypes, either; they don't have the visual aesthetic of a unified army in control of the galaxy.

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...