ARC-170 Squadron (Refit)

Added
Jul 28 2016 - 23:19 UTC by Wes Janson
Edited Jul 29 2016 - 01:07 UTC by Wes Janson
Designer
Wes Janson
Art
FFG
Rating
Point Value
15
Faction
Rebel Alliance
Squadron Class
ARC-170 Starfighter
Special Text
Keywords
Speed & Hull
2
6
Armament
Defense Tokens
(none)
Based on FFGs X-wing ARC-170 Overhaul as an assault fighter.

Comments

Administrator
Feb 16 2017 - 02:11 UTC
The arrival of the Z-95, with Swarm and Lt. Blount no less, would seem to be a strong case for returning three red anti-squad to the ARC-170, but that is entirely opinion as these are personal custom designs.
Administrator
Jan 1 2017 - 02:59 UTC
This fighter will warrant continued development in the face of newer official FFG releases.
Administrator
Sep 3 2016 - 22:23 UTC
A good thought for sure. Its hard to swallow when it nukes a TIE Defender flight in one pass.
Administrator
Aug 10 2016 - 18:28 UTC
Further thought has also pointed out to me that the GAR ARC-170 rarely faced an opponent where being able to one-shot a five or six hull enemy was an issue, whereas one in either Rebel or particularly Imperial hands would regularly find such targets. With that in mind, neutering the AS damage potential may be a very good idea after all
Administrator
Aug 8 2016 - 22:30 UTC
I hadn't thought of that. The original ARC-170 was only ever tested in concert with the other prototype GAR units, and I only ever used our versions of the Arquitens and Venator as large mult-role carriers to move the ship around. Flotillas might change the calculus some.
Administrator
Aug 8 2016 - 18:07 UTC
In theory the way it works out is 14 pts. But we rounded it out a bit for testing.In the meantime, I have also just put together a B-wing heavy list with 7 squadrons for next weeks game. With the arrival of the medium transport I am excited to see that the Bs will no longer have to rely on the big ships as pushers.
Administrator
Aug 8 2016 - 02:06 UTC
If that's the case these might be fairly costed then. They are more reliable than the Clone Wars version against fighters, and more effective at anti-ship. The slight expense increase seems suitable then, if you guys really can make Speed 2 viable. (I know a couple guys who would be very interested in learning from your masters then.)
Administrator
Aug 7 2016 - 23:09 UTC
We have a couple guys here who make magic happen with their B-wings. They won't leave home without at least 4 groups of them.
Administrator
Aug 5 2016 - 16:40 UTC
My meta is quite different then, usually discarding the B-wing to the wayside for speed reasons. When the Rebels here break out fighters, they much prefer anything else, save the YT-1300 for the same reason. And while the ARC-170 at 3 red can theoretically one-shot all but a couple opponents, we have found it still relatively balanced, especially when attacked by more numerous opponents. We discovered because of Heavy, it couldn't defend ships to save its life, and was often relegated to offensive duties, both striking enemy fighters and enemy starships.
Administrator
Aug 5 2016 - 14:36 UTC
I meant to add that the potential for massive damage with the red dice was exactly why people around here hated it.
Administrator
Aug 5 2016 - 14:28 UTC
I havn't found speed 2 to be a boon in the game really. B-wings for instance are the most popular Rebel squadron flown here in our meta.
Administrator
Aug 5 2016 - 13:32 UTC
As someone who is very fond of the Clone Wars version currently rattling around KDY, and has thus flown it on several occasions, the ARC-170, even with your boost to anti-ship, is pretty useless at Speed 2. What we discovered very quickly is that the Speed 3/Hull 6 was very much offset by the expense of a 14 point squadron that rolled all red anti-squad, and thus tended to be even more fickle than regular squadrons. Burst damage was higher, but average damage was between equal to less than a equivalent number of blues. That's my 2 cents.