Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Okay guys, I dropped something my local meta was not expecting and it changed my view on the TIE Bomber. It was absolutely ruthless (at least it felt ruthless). It was;

Gamma Squadron Pilot x4
-Extra Munitions
-Guidance Chips
-Homing Missiles

It has torn apart everything so far, most guys come ready to be able to focus fire another ace ship into oblivion, but have not been ready for the 24 hull points that the list drops. It has been really fun to shake up the meta. What I want to know is how to make it better. So far what I have found is that with Homing Missiles and Guidance Chips, is that the Bomber can be scary accurate by itself without Jonus. It has allowed me to run them by themselves and not have to be in a formation. That has allowed me to stagger their K turns to be able to keep plowing Missiles into my targets since the Homing Missiles don't force you to spend your Target Lock. I don't care about Pilot Skill since I am almost always the lowest against their aces, even with the Gamma Squadrons. What I wonder, is it worth going down to Scimitar Squadron pilots so that I have the options of running them with either Seismic Bombs against swarms or Flechette Torpedoes against their aces to force them into white or green maneuvers, making them more predictable for me to launch more Missiles or range one shots into them.

I really want to make an all TIE Bomber list work, I think it can be good. But is dropping to PS2 too risky, I haven't seen somebody use Predator as an EPT in about a year, and want to exploit that.

I really want to make an all TIE Bomber list work, I think it can be good. But is dropping to PS2 too risky, I haven't seen somebody use Predator as an EPT in about a year, and want to exploit that.

I've seen it used but it in itself isn't too big a deal. A far, far bigger deal is that changing from a Gamma Squadron (PS4) to a Scimitar Squadron (PS2) is that PS3 goes from firing last to firing first. When the PS3 ships in question are likely to be 2-3 Jumpmasters binning guidance chip-guided torpedoes of their own at you, it's the difference between one of your bombers getting to shoot or dying with all his missiles still in the tubes!

Fair enough, my group is fairly small (6-7 people after the closest local store open later closed about a year and a half ago since some of us work full time, it shrank from on a good day close to 20, not everybody can fit in my one bedroom apartment to play at once). I have yet to even face a Jumpmaster, they look really tough though. I would love to face off against one, just nobody has bought one yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only thing I see regularly PS4 or below is Green Squadron A-Wings with; A-Wing Test Pilot, Crack Shot, Adaptability, Autothrusters and Chardaan Refit.

Them Green Squadrons have become a fad with them though, and normally in builds just less than 100 points.

It isn't released yet, but 4 gamma squad veterans with extra munitions, plasma torpedoes, guidance chips, and crack shots. That crack shot turn could be absolutely deadly.

Getting a lot of damage and killing jumpmasters before they can counter with their torpedoes is a must.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually, you could fit in Jonus if you downgrade the homing missles to Plasma Torpedoes:

Gamma Squad + Extra Munitions + Guidance Chips + Plasma Torpedoes

Gamma Squad + Extra Munitions + Guidance Chips + Plasma Torpedoes

Gamma Squad + Extra Munitions + Guidance Chips + Plasma Torpedoes

Jonus + Extra Munitions + Guidance Chips + PLasma Torpedoes + Crack Shot + Tracer Threads + Seismic Charges

This would make that alpha strike truly horrible to defend against.

Or instead of Crackshot you take deadeye so you can fire...

I'll second the Deadeye, it's great for getting shots off (also allows you to change your target at will)

I love 4 bomber lists. I haven't tried your list yet, but I love it.

One of my friends has decided on guys using long range scanners and making long passing runs. Taking your 5 k-turn followed by a green 1 keeps you at range 3+ 80% of the time, so targeting is never an issue. He then has a focus and a TL to modify with.

I like: 4 gamma squad vets with deadeye, g chips, extra munitions, and plasma torpedoes. Makes 4 mini jumpmasters. That 4th man can help cover for the dice modification the scouts get.

But my personal favorite:
3x scimitar squad pilots with chips, extra munitions, plasma torpedoes, thermal detonators
Jonus with chips, thermal detonators, plasma torpedoes

Just play smart and safe with your poor defense and dial, but HOLEY COW why aren't more people taking thermal detonators?? 1 point more grants seismic charges with added stress. Its INSANE pulling 5 K-turns while dropping bombs and laughing as you have an extra turn to set up and shed stress.

Deadeye is unecessary - the thread tracers will give the target locks while deadeye only helps on Jonus (untli the expansion comes out that is). besides, deadeye would only help on one shot from Jonus assuming you are facing an aces list. If you are facing Jumpmasters, you won't ever need deadeye as you will always move after your opponent.

The problem with this list (and other ordnance spam lists) is that it's very binary in its outcomes. You either win the game on the first or second turn or you lose, and there are a lot of ways that you can lose. Bump and lose your alpha strike? You lose. Get out-maneuvered? You lose. Had to waste your missiles on the support ships instead of Soontir Fel? You lose. Let your PS 5+ opponent jump directly from out of range to range 1? You lose. Roll badly? You lose. You might be surprised at how fast those 24 HP can disappear against Corran double taps, TIE/D Vessery, etc, and then you lose.

Where bombers (and missile Z-95s, etc) shine is in a support role alongside other ships. Having other threats on the table makes you a lot less one-dimensional and keeps your opponent from just ganking the bomber immediately. If Soontir Fel/Vessery/etc are around it's a lot more likely that your bomber is going to get its missiles off, and failing to do so means that your opponent went for the decoy and turned their back on the real threat.

Agreed on support ships. TIE bombers are cheap enough to 'throw one in' with a spare 25-30 points and get a well-equipped, pretty tough ship.

Especially with the TIE shuttle card, they become quite nice support ships with stuff like tactician, fleet officer, systems officer, etc, etc - plus they're quite nice cheap wingmen for Colonel Vessery (tough, cheap, have access to target lock).

I love TIE bomber lists, please share more tech! It's what got me into X-wing and still my favorite type of list

I could see mixing it up for one of the ships, but love what's been posted above, too!

 Peregrine wrote:
The problem with this list (and other ordnance spam lists) is that it's very binary in its outcomes. You either win the game on the first or second turn or you lose, and there are a lot of ways that you can lose. Bump and lose your alpha strike? You lose. Get out-maneuvered? You lose. Had to waste your missiles on the support ships instead of Soontir Fel? You lose. Let your PS 5+ opponent jump directly from out of range to range 1? You lose. Roll badly? You lose. You might be surprised at how fast those 24 HP can disappear against Corran double taps, TIE/D Vessery, etc, and then you lose.

Where bombers (and missile Z-95s, etc) shine is in a support role alongside other ships. Having other threats on the table makes you a lot less one-dimensional and keeps your opponent from just ganking the bomber immediately. If Soontir Fel/Vessery/etc are around it's a lot more likely that your bomber is going to get its missiles off, and failing to do so means that your opponent went for the decoy and turned their back on the real threat.

Tell that to all those people running double or triple Jumpmasters - those lists do extremely well and they are very tough to beat.

Azeroth wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
The problem with this list (and other ordnance spam lists) is that it's very binary in its outcomes. You either win the game on the first or second turn or you lose, and there are a lot of ways that you can lose. Bump and lose your alpha strike? You lose. Get out-maneuvered? You lose. Had to waste your missiles on the support ships instead of Soontir Fel? You lose. Let your PS 5+ opponent jump directly from out of range to range 1? You lose. Roll badly? You lose. You might be surprised at how fast those 24 HP can disappear against Corran double taps, TIE/D Vessery, etc, and then you lose.

Where bombers (and missile Z-95s, etc) shine is in a support role alongside other ships. Having other threats on the table makes you a lot less one-dimensional and keeps your opponent from just ganking the bomber immediately. If Soontir Fel/Vessery/etc are around it's a lot more likely that your bomber is going to get its missiles off, and failing to do so means that your opponent went for the decoy and turned their back on the real threat.

Tell that to all those people running double or triple Jumpmasters - those lists do extremely well and they are very tough to beat.

Because the triple-Jumpmaster list has potential after firing everything- First couple rounds wreck your opponents list, then you rely on Turrets, white SLoops, better dials and greater bulk to clean up. Also, if Jumpmasters bump, they can SLoop to get behind their opponent and fire their Torpedoes, while the opponent is forced to K-turn (Denying them actions, and probably making it a range 3 shootout). In contrast, once bombers have fired they are extremely mediocre ships.

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

Azeroth wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
The problem with this list (and other ordnance spam lists) is that it's very binary in its outcomes. You either win the game on the first or second turn or you lose, and there are a lot of ways that you can lose. Bump and lose your alpha strike? You lose. Get out-maneuvered? You lose. Had to waste your missiles on the support ships instead of Soontir Fel? You lose. Let your PS 5+ opponent jump directly from out of range to range 1? You lose. Roll badly? You lose. You might be surprised at how fast those 24 HP can disappear against Corran double taps, TIE/D Vessery, etc, and then you lose.

Where bombers (and missile Z-95s, etc) shine is in a support role alongside other ships. Having other threats on the table makes you a lot less one-dimensional and keeps your opponent from just ganking the bomber immediately. If Soontir Fel/Vessery/etc are around it's a lot more likely that your bomber is going to get its missiles off, and failing to do so means that your opponent went for the decoy and turned their back on the real threat.

Tell that to all those people running double or triple Jumpmasters - those lists do extremely well and they are very tough to beat.

Because the triple-Jumpmaster list has potential after firing everything- First couple rounds wreck your opponents list, then you rely on Turrets, white SLoops, better dials and greater bulk to clean up. Also, if Jumpmasters bump, they can SLoop to get behind their opponent and fire their Torpedoes, while the opponent is forced to K-turn (Denying them actions, and probably making it a range 3 shootout). In contrast, once bombers have fired they are extremely mediocre ships.

I would say that they are equal in many ways once you get past the ordinance - there are three Jumpmasters to 4 bombers, total damage is the same at 24. They both have 2 manuever and two damage attack. It really comes down to their dials and turrets and one extra ship for the bombers (and Jonus rerolls). I would think that head to head, the bombers would win simply because the bombers could fire off their ordinance first. Most likely killing one jumpmaster before it could even fire.

Azeroth wrote:

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

Azeroth wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
The problem with this list (and other ordnance spam lists) is that it's very binary in its outcomes. You either win the game on the first or second turn or you lose, and there are a lot of ways that you can lose. Bump and lose your alpha strike? You lose. Get out-maneuvered? You lose. Had to waste your missiles on the support ships instead of Soontir Fel? You lose. Let your PS 5+ opponent jump directly from out of range to range 1? You lose. Roll badly? You lose. You might be surprised at how fast those 24 HP can disappear against Corran double taps, TIE/D Vessery, etc, and then you lose.

Where bombers (and missile Z-95s, etc) shine is in a support role alongside other ships. Having other threats on the table makes you a lot less one-dimensional and keeps your opponent from just ganking the bomber immediately. If Soontir Fel/Vessery/etc are around it's a lot more likely that your bomber is going to get its missiles off, and failing to do so means that your opponent went for the decoy and turned their back on the real threat.

Tell that to all those people running double or triple Jumpmasters - those lists do extremely well and they are very tough to beat.

Because the triple-Jumpmaster list has potential after firing everything- First couple rounds wreck your opponents list, then you rely on Turrets, white SLoops, better dials and greater bulk to clean up. Also, if Jumpmasters bump, they can SLoop to get behind their opponent and fire their Torpedoes, while the opponent is forced to K-turn (Denying them actions, and probably making it a range 3 shootout). In contrast, once bombers have fired they are extremely mediocre ships.

I would say that they are equal in many ways once you get past the ordinance - there are three Jumpmasters to 4 bombers, total damage is the same at 24. They both have 2 manuever and two damage attack. It really comes down to their dials and turrets and one extra ship for the bombers (and Jonus rerolls). I would think that head to head, the bombers would win simply because the bombers could fire off their ordinance first. Most likely killing one jumpmaster before it could even fire.

Jumpmasters have 9hp each. This means a total of 27HP, including 12 Shields. Also, head-to-heads are terrible for telling how good lists are overall.

Ah, those days when someone else writes your posts for you...

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
Because the triple-Jumpmaster list has potential after firing everything- First couple rounds wreck your opponents list, then you rely on Turrets, white SLoops, better dials and greater bulk to clean up. Also, if Jumpmasters bump, they can SLoop to get behind their opponent and fire their Torpedoes, while the opponent is forced to K-turn (Denying them actions, and probably making it a range 3 shootout). In contrast, once bombers have fired they are extremely mediocre ships.

This. Also, having deadeye on the u-boats makes it considerably easier to get your alpha strike off since you don't have to worry about getting a target lock on a high-PS target.

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
Jumpmasters have 9hp each. This means a total of 27HP, including 12 Shields.

And this. U-boats have more total HP, and it's much harder to kill a u-boat before it can fire.

Also, head-to-heads are terrible for telling how good lists are overall.

Finally, this. Head to head matches are relevant if you're comparing your list to a popular one in the metagame, but they don't show anywhere near the complete picture. For example, how does your bomber swarm do against a well-flown Palp aces list? Crack swarm? Etc.

Wow, some great replies guys. It has been a real experience to try and make such a disliked ship do good. Yes, has to do with flying as well, but looking at the dials for a lot of common ships in squadron builders. I can see just some of the glaring weaknesses that the Bomber has.

I am comparing what they are capable of versus a lot of the aces lists I run and it is hard to see how I could out maneuver them or try and split them apart to focus fire on them. Especially with how quickly ordnance runs out even with extra munitions. The only reason it has really been winning is good dice rolls late in the game against other agility two ships. And, just sheer surprise factor.

Would it be worth mixing in something else besides Bombers to try and balance out the lists? I can see that with how expensive a Bomber with Ordnance is, it is a slow points sink. I get the feeling that trying to use one if the Bombers as a blocker is a terrible idea, not having something that can keep with arc dodgers is hurting it as well.

Finally, this. Head to head matches are relevant if you're comparing your list to a popular one in the metagame, but they don't show anywhere near the complete picture. For example, how does your bomber swarm do against a well-flown Palp aces list? Crack swarm? Etc.

I guess ordnance-versus-ordnance is about the only case where it's a fairly relevant one, to give it its due. A TIE fighter is fast enough to try and jump from out of range to range 1, and trying to get a TIE interceptor in arc is an art form in itself, but a TIE bomber also has to go head-on at you and be in range 2-3.

I think four PS4 bombers can probably take out a trio of contracted scouts, because having the pilot skill advantage and numerical advantage with a list consisting entirely of missile trucks makes that opening turn a turkey shoot. The problem isn't contracted scouts - it's everything else.

The reason contracted scouts get such a good rep is access to deadeye - meaning they can get a 'target lock' shot easily on a PS8+ ace who moves after them. TIE bombers can do the same with Long Range Scanners.....but give up the dice modification of Guidance Chips to do so, which dilutes the point of wanting ordnance in the first place.

I'm not a fan - purely on aesthetic grounds - of Imperial squadrons which look 'patchy' - one interceptor, one phantom, one advanced or some similar bizzare combination. But I'll happily accept that a 'mix' is good - a mini-swarm of fighters and a couple of bombers, or a mini-swarm of fighters led by an ace in an interceptor, or whatever, often give you options a 'pure' squad doesn't have.

I'm leaning towards a kind of durdly stress list, with a couple of Shuttle-Bombers with Tacts and (insert whatever I haven't thought of yet), not convinced an Ordanance Alpha attempt will be that consistent

What about in formats like Hanger Bay (which seen to be more popular) where you have two lists? Then you can see what the other person has and decide from there. For instance, yes, if I saw my opponent has an aces list, I wouldn't run 4 bombers against them. I could run an ordinance list and a list that is good against aces.

I would agree that a head to head comparison isn't good because you'll be facing other lists, BUT the double or triple jumpmaster lists at one tournament I was at was literally half the lists in the tourney (roughly 24 total people). That is how broken they made the contracted scout (they never should have given it elite).