Jump to content
Norsehound

Is the Quasar Too Fragile?

Recommended Posts

I haven't had the chance for an Armada game recently, certainly not since the new ships came out. I'm concerned with how fragile the Quasar Fire Is... perhaps, too fragile to use without two Lambdas to keep it's activations out of harms' way?

So, anyone run Quasars? Do they die as soon as they enter combat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a lot of wave 6 experience yet (played once, watched a few games) and Quasars seem to be doing fine. Particularly with Boosted Comms they're not often the most immediate threat and can operate behind/nearby your more combat-worthy vessels.

I don't think anyone is claiming they're beastly tanks, but so far they seem like they hold up all right. Not great, but all right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Snipafist said:

Not a lot of wave 6 experience yet (played once, watched a few games) and Quasars seem to be doing fine. Particularly with Boosted Comms they're not often the most immediate threat and can operate behind/nearby your more combat-worthy vessels.

I don't think anyone is claiming they're beastly tanks, but so far they seem like they hold up all right. Not great, but all right.

I just explained exactly this to 2 Imperial players today after 10-1 wins (Classic Ben?).

Lambdas are possibly, but this ship was really made for Boosted Comms, and a larger more significant threat that is positioned forward of it can both draw fire away from it, make it very hard for the opponent to get at it, and/or make it too time consuming for the opponent to get at it.

One of the key points is that they are tradable.  You can afford to give it up late in the game, especially after its done its work with squadron activations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quasars are exactly as tanky as they need to be.  What I found about them that I liked is that they drew fire from other important targets, such as an ISD or Vic, which in turn meant those ships survived.  I lost it most of the time, but it served its purpose by then.  I just wouldn't recommend putting your commander on one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sturdy, reliable, do what is was ment to be. You pay maybe a little bit more than what 2 flotillas will cost you but at least that ship is able to go on the field (and not ran like hell to the border).

Put Flight Controllers on it with Hexpanded Hangars Bay or Boosted Com and this little things will sing :)

My best combo at this time is Squall, Flight Commander, Ruthless Strategists, Flight Controllers and Hexpanded Hangar Bay. 82 points (that's not cheap), but what a carrier ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for the cherry on the top of the sunday, for the squadron, put Howlrunner, Dengar and 2 Tie/Interceptor and Zertik. That's a bad Alpha strike to counter. And bring some friends after the first contact... Enjoyable :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their lack of defense tokens can be a problem.

In my last fight I popped a Quasar in 2 turns solely with fire from 2 interdictors. First turn at long range w/ DC, second turn at medium range.

It's important to keep the Quasar out of even moderate danger unless you have a plan to trade it up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17.7.2017 at 4:30 AM, BiggsIRL said:

Or you can do what I did and take Jamming Field / Salvage Run and park it behind a Dust Field the entire game.

Sound like the list i was playing a few times.

Interdictor and Quasar. And just moving the dust fields in a V position to hide the quasar behind it (in it). Reduce it down to speed 0 and just let it sit there for the rest of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember in a Motty list being a meduim ship makes a difference, 8 hull is plenty for a 70point second line ship. Also worth considering changing out the redirect for for an evade, as a good plan is keeping this ship distant and obscured if  you can. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, geek19 said:

They do give more reason to run ACMs again, that's for sure.

Why? 2 Acc and you lock down both defense tokens so you just push all your damage through. I was able to push 5 damage onto one to kill it after it took an average Demo APT which stripped its front shields. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Why? 2 Acc and you lock down both defense tokens so you just push all your damage through. I was able to push 5 damage onto one to kill it after it took an average Demo APT which stripped its front shields. 

Because it's not common to roll 2 accuracy results unless you're attacking with a large ship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Why? 2 Acc and you lock down both defense tokens so you just push all your damage through. I was able to push 5 damage onto one to kill it after it took an average Demo APT which stripped its front shields. 

Sorry, Rebel only mindset with a penchant for MC30s. Put ACMs on one with H9s and those shields evaporate even faster. Redirects don't work if you ain't got no shields to redirect to!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't used one but have faced them. If I have a reliable method of generating an accuracy, the QF goes down quickly and feels like easy pickings. If I don't, it feels fairly durable. 

 

Though the the last one I faced took 7 damage with an accuracy on the nose from my hammerhead. Then got rammed. So maybe it just wasn't the QF's game. 

 

And to reiterate what was mentioned above. Something about this wave has me revisiting ACMs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tokra said:

Sound like the list i was playing a few times.

Interdictor and Quasar. And just moving the dust fields in a V position to hide the quasar behind it (in it). Reduce it down to speed 0 and just let it sit there for the rest of the game.

Sneaky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to go a bit further than some people here- I feel the Quasar would be worse if it were more durable (at least, if the price was changed to reflect that increase in durability, of course). The Quasar is very min-maxed in its build. It does one thing really well, and all of its other attributes are designed to support that. Beefing up the Quasar would make it less efficient at pushing squadrons, and any significant increase in durability would make it expensive enough that people would take ISD Is or Victories as carriers instead.

Edited by Squark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2017 at 9:24 PM, Caldias said:

Quasars are exactly as tanky as they need to be.  What I found about them that I liked is that they drew fire from other important targets, such as an ISD or Vic, which in turn meant those ships survived.  I lost it most of the time, but it served its purpose by then.  I just wouldn't recommend putting your commander on one.

Ha! Losing your Quasar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, geek19 said:

Sorry, Rebel only mindset with a penchant for MC30s. Put ACMs on one with H9s and those shields evaporate even faster. Redirects don't work if you ain't got no shields to redirect to!

I've thought about this for a bit, and I still don't get why you would take ACM. I get it on Demo since you can move in and do it, but on an MC30 you have a limited window to use your black dice. APT would be the better option since you have H9, so they never have access to a Brace. 

Assuming a full health Quasar, it's 2/2/2 for shields. ACM drops it to 1/2/1, so they redirect one point, so it's still 3 damage on shields. 

Same for APT. 2/2/2 shields. APT happens dealing 1 face up, and they redirect for 2 points, so 4 damage on shields. 

You're spending 2 extra points to distribute your damage in a different way, but APT has more versatility with crit effects and being useful against other ships, especially when pushing for the last hull point to kill a ship.

For the same situation, assuming you went last/first with the MC30 and are attacking the same hull zone, ACM might be better since the shields are 0/0/1, which means you strip the last shield and put a damage card on. APT is 0/0/2, so they can redirect 2 damage, but you still put a card on face up. After 2 rounds of attacks, your crit effects have yielded: ACM - no shields 1 hull - APT - no shields 2 hull - assuming your opponent redirects the damage and you're attack the front hull. 

ACM does let other ships have an easier time attacking the target, but ACM is useless against flotillas. ACM is great against double redirect ship, but APT makes it easier to 1 shot small ships. 

I get why you would use ACM in general, but not why you would use it on a Quasar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

I've thought about this for a bit, and I still don't get why you would take ACM. I get it on Demo since you can move in and do it, but on an MC30 you have a limited window to use your black dice. APT would be the better option since you have H9, so they never have access to a Brace. 

Assuming a full health Quasar, it's 2/2/2 for shields. ACM drops it to 1/2/1, so they redirect one point, so it's still 3 damage on shields. 

Same for APT. 2/2/2 shields. APT happens dealing 1 face up, and they redirect for 2 points, so 4 damage on shields. 

You're spending 2 extra points to distribute your damage in a different way, but APT has more versatility with crit effects and being useful against other ships, especially when pushing for the last hull point to kill a ship.

For the same situation, assuming you went last/first with the MC30 and are attacking the same hull zone, ACM might be better since the shields are 0/0/1, which means you strip the last shield and put a damage card on. APT is 0/0/2, so they can redirect 2 damage, but you still put a card on face up. After 2 rounds of attacks, your crit effects have yielded: ACM - no shields 1 hull - APT - no shields 2 hull - assuming your opponent redirects the damage and you're attack the front hull. 

ACM does let other ships have an easier time attacking the target, but ACM is useless against flotillas. ACM is great against double redirect ship, but APT makes it easier to 1 shot small ships. 

I get why you would use ACM in general, but not why you would use it on a Quasar.

Double arcing is better. First shot, assuming the con fire, from the front locks down the brace and basically tells them not to redirect. So they take 2-3 straight to a hull zone, followed by more right into the same hull zone which doesn't have shields any more. If they DO redirect that first attack, the second one is putting damage right into the ship itself. So then you've got your entire side arc of the MC30 into the hull zone of the quasar without the ability to brace it down. 

It's not a guarantee of death, but it's gonna be in trouble under anything that's not Motti. And that's assuming you didn't roll up and hit the quasars side arc, guaranteeing one into the ship when you wipe the back shield from it first shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm. Double arc, ConFire, H9, OE, and ACM/APT. Assuming crits trigger on both shots.

Front arc avg: 3.75 (blue always acc)

Side Arc avg: 4.5 (one blue acc)

 

With APT:

1st shot is redirected. 1 to hull from APT, 4 to shields.

2nd shot redirected, 1 to hull from APT, 2 on shields. 2.5 on hull.

Final results: No shields except back, 1.5 average hull left. 2 crit effects.

 

With ACM (works out that redirect is irrelevant)

1st shot redirected: 5 damage to shields. 1 hull damage. 1 side shield left

2nd shot (redirect irrelevant): 5.5 damage to hull.

Final result: 1 shield in back, 6-7 hull damage dealt. Dead ship  

 

crit effects are are difficult to quantify. But in a nutshell, the ACM is more reliable Damage output. APTs swing wildly. They can exceed ACMs or fall short of ACMs.

 

Edited by Church14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, geek19 said:

Double arcing is better. First shot, assuming the con fire, from the front locks down the brace and basically tells them not to redirect. So they take 2-3 straight to a hull zone, followed by more right into the same hull zone which doesn't have shields any more. If they DO redirect that first attack, the second one is putting damage right into the ship itself. So then you've got your entire side arc of the MC30 into the hull zone of the quasar without the ability to brace it down. 

It's not a guarantee of death, but it's gonna be in trouble under anything that's not Motti. And that's assuming you didn't roll up and hit the quasars side arc, guaranteeing one into the ship when you wipe the back shield from it first shot.

The same thing happens with APT double arc. You guarantee 2 crits on top of your normal damage. 

My point is, with ACM, you are trading in a crit for less shields. With APT, you are trading a crit for more shields. The same amount of damage is being dealt, just in different places. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general it is better to use Assault Concussion Missiles on ships with high damage potential and Assault Proton Torpedoes on ships with lower damage potential.

 

Since you can only do one crit if you can overload the shields in that one shot you can still do a crit.

 

On ships that have an arc that do allot of damage like the MC30, Victory I or some such then ACM is a good choice, decent choice on a Gladiator. APT is obviously still a solid choice on a Gladiator as they are on MC30 and so on.

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...