Jump to content
AllWingsStandyingBy

If you believe Squadrons represent 12 fighters...

Recommended Posts

Then you have to accept that the entire Battle of Scarif (the second largest confrontation of the Galactic Civil War (third if you count Jakku, I guess)) only featured a few squadrons.

In my opinion, the Battle of Scarif was the closest on-screen representation we've seen to the standard Armada 400pt game.  Three ISDs with an armed station against an MC75, three Nublon Frigates, 13 Corvettes (CR90s, Hammerheads, and Brah'tok Gunships), and nine GR075s.  The Scarif Rebel fleets is probably closer to 850 points (without fighters), but still, if we assume each "movie squadron" is one stand of "Armada" squadrons, than the entire Rebel Fleet only had four stands of squadrons in its 900 point fleet:

Dutch (Gold Squadron)
X-Wing (Red Squadron)
X-Wing (Blue Squadron)
Hera Syndulla (Ghost)

This means if you've ever flown a Rebel fleet with more than three "squadron bases" that you're flying a fleet more grand in nature than the combined fleet at Scarif.  It means that Jan + Biggs + Eight X-Wing list you've seen has something like 110 X-Wing starfighters (Red Squad, Blue Squad, Green Squad, Gold Squad, Rogue Squad, Wraith Squad, uhh Turqoise Squad, .... and ... uhhh, Orange Squad?). It's almost more granular: we know Gold Squadron was only 7-8 Y-Wings at the time of Battle of Yavin, and in Rogue One whenever we see Gold Squadron, they only look to have a half dozen Y-Wings.  This would be well represented by two stands of Armada Y-Wings if we assume each stand is roughly three fighters, but if we assumed each stand is a dozen fighters than we'd need like one stand set to 3 HP to be movie Gold Squadron.

Now, again, if you assume each stand represents 3-4 fighters in Armada (as has been argued for with multiple supporting reasons here: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/194223-heres-why-squadrons-reprsent-three-fighters-just-for-fun/, then the Battle of Scarify would look a little more reasonable:

Dutch + Y-Wing Squadrons = Gold Squad
X-Wing Squadron x4 = Red Squadron
X-Wing Squadron x3, U-Wing Squadron = Blue Squadron (since Blue Squad contained a couple U-Wings, which couldn't even be included if we assumed Blue Squad = one stand of X-Wings in Armada).
Hera Syndulla = Ghost


Now we're able to include about 12 stands or Armada Squadrons into the Rebel Scarif Fleet, and that feels a lot more accurate.  Because you've got points where some members of Red Squadron are probing the shield generator, some are strafing the ISD's deflectors, and others are dog-fighting TIEs.  This is possible if Red Squad is four stands of squadrons that can be currently doing different tasks.  If Red Squad was just one stand of fighters, they could only ever done one of those things at a time, even though we see them on screen tackling different tasks simultaneously. 

Also, how you gonna put Wedge, Luke, and Biggs into the same squadron in Armada if they each represent a full squad of about a dozen fighters?  Now, if they each represented about three or four fightes...Luke + Wedge + Biggs + X-Wing Squadron would be a way to bring Red Squadron to a battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, a single CR90 stand in Armada represents several actual CR90s, so your fleet numbers are a bit off. 

Secondly, we need the DVD to check how many fighters were actually present by counting the number that were destroyed and adding the number of survivors. That will give us a minimum. Plus, it appears that the majority of fighters never made it through the shield. 

Also, just because a squadron is nominally 12 fighters, it could be any where close to that, such as 8 or 10. As most squadrons are never at full strength. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a counter, you could say that if the Rebels were 12 stands, then the Imps must have launched about 30 stands of TIEs out of the gateway hangar in seconds.

The real answer is an Armada stand represents no fixed number of vessels, and all attack values, point costs, and ship squadron values are driven by game balance based losely on thematics.

Edited by TheCallum
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, TheCallum said:

As a counter, you could say that if the Rebels were 12 stands, then the Imps must have launched about 30 stands of TIEs out of the gateway hangar in seconds.

The real answer is an Armada stand represents no fixed number of vessels, and all attack values, point costs, and ship squadron values are driven by game balance based losely on thematics.

Umm, why?  30 stands of TIEs at 3 Fighters a stand = 90 TIEs.  That's certainly not an inconceivable number, but it really didn't look to be that many in the film.  I'd say maybe closer to thirty fighters seemed to pour out, which would be ten stands. I'm not opposed to Imps having 30 stands of fighter, but it just didn't look like that many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hedgehobbit said:

Firstly, a single CR90 stand in Armada represents several actual CR90s, so your fleet numbers are a bit off. 

Secondly, we need the DVD to check how many fighters were actually present by counting the number that were destroyed and adding the number of survivors. That will give us a minimum. Plus, it appears that the majority of fighters never made it through the shield. 

Also, just because a squadron is nominally 12 fighters, it could be any where close to that, such as 8 or 10. As most squadrons are never at full strength. 

I'll never understand the obsession some internet posters have with the idea that IF A SQUADRON IS 12 THEN IT MUST ALWAYS BE 12, FOR EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, AT ALL TIMES.

There is just no precedent for that, historically or anything, beyond their specific type of OCD.

As you note - even in a military where someone might observe that a typical squadron of superiority fighters is 12...you'll USUALLY have different numbers.  Survivors from other battles get integrated into your own units until you all get back to base, you'll lose fighters over time, etc.  Never mind that different types of squadrons likely have different 'typical' numbers, as well.  Bomber squadrons are generally going to be a fraction of the number of aircraft that an 'air superiority' squadron would have.

The point is that "squadron" is an organizational unit, that reflects the right number of aircraft for a particularly military to achieve the objectives it would need for that mission type.  WHICH VARIES.  A "squadron" is very specifically NOT a unit of measurement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, xanderf said:

I'll never understand the obsession some internet posters have with the idea that IF A SQUADRON IS 12 THEN IT MUST ALWAYS BE 12, FOR EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, AT ALL TIMES.

There is just no precedent for that, historically or anything, beyond their specific type of OCD.

As you note - even in a military where someone might observe that a typical squadron of superiority fighters is 12...you'll USUALLY have different numbers.  Survivors from other battles get integrated into your own units until you all get back to base, you'll lose fighters over time, etc.  Never mind that different types of squadrons likely have different 'typical' numbers, as well.  Bomber squadrons are generally going to be a fraction of the number of aircraft that an 'air superiority' squadron would have.

The point is that "squadron" is an organizational unit, that reflects the right number of aircraft for a particularly military to achieve the objectives it would need for that mission type.  WHICH VARIES.  A "squadron" is very specifically NOT a unit of measurement.

But I looked up squadron on Wikipedia and it said different.

#IAmInternetPoster

/argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at Rogues and Villains, those bases seem to only be one ship, at least I assume Dash isn't leading a squad of YT-2400s and Han isn't flying with a squad of YT-1300s. From that it makes sense that the other squad bases are just a couple fighters due to the hull points/damage output. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come to peace with the sliding scale and the "number of fighters" issues with this:

 

The play surface is an admiral's threat display.  Each fighter stand is "a bunch" of fighters currently flying together.  It could be a squadron, it could be a flight, it could even just be an element (for example, the ghost being sturdier than a CR90 is only really explainable if there are a couple fighters flying escort).  

 

Also, the squadron = 12 always under all circumstances has bugged me just a little about Star Wars for a long time.  A fighter squadron is nominally 4-6 flights, while a bomber squadron is going to be 3ish depending on the airframe being used.  That's USAF organization, you go just across the pond and who knows how the RAF sets it up.  It's absurd to think that the Rebels and the Imperials would value X-Wings, B-Wings, TIE Fighters and ARC 170s exactly the same way at an organizational level. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squadron != 12

It has to be relative to the shop on the stand - look at the Defender or Phantom. They're both wildly expensive (thematically) but for the purposes of the game they're reasonably costed relative to their stats.

Frankly, I'm tempted to change both ships to single sprues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't understand why we keep having this argument. 

Under both actual military doctrine and the old canon, a squadron is 12-24 fighters. 

However, a squadron is made up of multiple 'flights' of 3-4 fighter craft. 

Is there a problem with assuming that the bases each represent a 'flight'?

For example: Luke is leading a flight of the squadron, Wedge is leading a different flight, and Biggs is leading a third flight?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Eggzavier said:

However, a squadron is made up of multiple 'flights' of 3-4 fighter craft. 

Is there a problem with assuming that the bases each represent a 'flight'?

For example: Luke is leading a flight of the squadron, Wedge is leading a different flight, and Biggs is leading a third flight?

 

Nope, and in fact that's exactly how I view the squadron stands in Armada.

In fact, it's the only way that makes any sense.  But the dominant view is still that a squadron stand in Armada represents an entire squadron, be it 10-24 craft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Old Canon isn't Canon.

Its Legends.

 

Its canon only when its made canon again.

 

Not always. I mean you're right, not disputing that, but there are weird grey areas now. For instance Pablo Hidalgo recently said something along the lines that the old canon galaxy map in the EU guide book the Essential Atlas is still correct and that all the planets indicated (except Zenoma Sekot) are canon until specifically changed (Korriban to Moraban). Its just the stories attached that are not.  

So I agree that there is no way of claiming canonically the size of a squadron I think such a detail will not change either. 

Edit: Sorry its maybe an unnecessary response since I essentially agree. I've just written so much i'd rather not erase this :P 

Edited by Forresto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Forresto said:

So I agree that there is no way of claiming canonically the size of a squadron I think such a detail will not change either.

And we have canon sources that now place most Rebel Squads roughly around a dozen fighters.  For instance, the Visual Guide to Rogue One runs down all of Blue Squadron at Scarif, including the two U-Wings, for example.  We we get a pretty decent run-down in other guides about other squads (e.g. Red Squadron, Blue Squadron, and Black Squadron in the TFA era).  We know from the Poe comics and other comics more and more about the Endor Squadrons (e.g. Norra was Gold 7 and in the Death Star superstructure, NOT Salm's Gray 1) and we get a better picture of Green Squadron (Lt. Lulo, Sharra, Pick, etc.) and all of these glimpses are consistent with standard Legends stuff that puts most Rebel Squadrons around 10-15 fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

And we have canon sources that now place most Rebel Squads roughly around a dozen fighters.  For instance, the Visual Guide to Rogue One runs down all of Blue Squadron at Scarif, including the two U-Wings, for example.  We we get a pretty decent run-down in other guides about other squads (e.g. Red Squadron, Blue Squadron, and Black Squadron in the TFA era).  We know from the Poe comics and other comics more and more about the Endor Squadrons (e.g. Norra was Gold 7 and in the Death Star superstructure, NOT Salm's Gray 1) and we get a better picture of Green Squadron (Lt. Lulo, Sharra, Pick, etc.) and all of these glimpses are consistent with standard Legends stuff that puts most Rebel Squadrons around 10-15 fighters.

I sit corrected thank you sir! So it didnt really change at all.

Honestly i'm okay thinking my Squadrons represent full squadrons. It makes it far more epic in scope to have lots more ships fighting then literally only three or four. It also doesn't make sense to only have detachments of only four ships in the more epic format of Armada games.

BUT that's up to the individual to decide. You prefer each squadron base to represent three, or thirty, it doesn't really matter. Its whatever you feel you want to imagine to enjoy the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FatherTurin said:

It could be a squadron, it could be a flight, it could even just be an element (for example, the ghost being sturdier than a CR90 is only really explainable if there are a couple fighters flying escort).

The ghost isn't sturdier than a CR90, even if you view the Ghost by itself. Squadron hull isn't the same as ship hull. If it was, you'd expect squadrons to be able to use their AA dice against ships, but they can't because it's ineffective.

 

I personally view the big single-ship stands as single entities and the three-figure stands as full squadrons. The hull is a measurement of how damaged the squadron is, where 1 tick could be anywhere from 1-3 fighters down. It's not a hard simulation though, because I really don't think a YT-2400 is capable of taking on two squadrons of TIEs. \_(ツ)_/

 

Edit: Think about it further, I think a flight is more appropriate for the three-figure squadrons. I guess I hadn't thought about it much before today. Ha. Their damage output feels more accurate that way.

Edited by WuFame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Critias said:

I am baffled as to why this is even a serious point of contention.  It seems to be a to-the-knife Armada fight going back years, but the whole thing confuses me. 

Yeah, this is just one of those pointless Nerd Street Cred, "I'm right, you're wrong, because reasons," arguments that only serve to bolster somebody's tenuous ego.

Nothing to see here.

(Note: I'm not singling anyone out here.)

Edited by Deathseed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will concur with several others above that each stand represents however many you want them to be, aside from the single pieces like yt1300. The sliding scale is also the reason why devs chose 2 ships to a flotilla, because it looks nice on the table. If you feel like one stand does not look nice representing 3 pieces physically you can always mod the stand to show 12 fighters(not tournament legal ofc)

If it is really killing you to know the exact number of fighters, try comparing the amount of average damage they can do to a ship. I.e. how long will a bwing stand take to wreck an isd. :)

Edited by Muelmuel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we are back on this subject though, I will add fuel to the fire by asking this: for those stands representing more than 1 fighters, why does the firepower not decrease with casualties taken? I.e. if my tie fighter stand takes 2 damage, i should roll 2 less die next time i attack. :D

Edited by Muelmuel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Muelmuel said:

Since we are back on this subject though, I will add fuel to the fire by asking this: for those stands representing more than 1 fighters, why does the firepower not decrease with casualties taken? I.e. if my tie fighter stand takes 2 damage, i should roll 2 less die next time i attack. :D

Serious answer: Because it's not a hard simulation
Non-serious answer: The squadron doesn't all attack at once in an attack run. One flight descends for a bombing run while the others cover. When the fighters start dropping, there's just less cover for the runs.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...