Welcome back to The Ship Files!
We’re almost at the end now. Parts 1 and 2 covered the Empire, Parts 3 and 4 the Rebels, and today we move on to the Galactic Republic. After this, only the Separatists remain — and then we’ll zoom out and look at the big picture.
I’ll start with a small confession: I love the Clone Wars factions. Both of them. Maybe with a slight bias toward the Clankers, but Jedi and clones absolutely have their charm. That said, neither CW faction ever really got the chance to be fully fleshed out before Armada was cancelled. They’re functional, interesting, and in places very clever — but also clearly incomplete.
In terms of experience, I’ve played quite a few competitive games with CIS, fewer with GAR, and probably more games against CIS than GAR. Campaign play is a different story; I’ve logged a ton of games with both factions on smaller maps. That context matters, because it shapes some of my biases — for example, I think the Munificent looks fantastic, and having played it extensively on 3×3 maps, I’m much more forgiving of speed-2 ships that can actually turn as opposed to those that can't. Which, as we’ll see, is a recurring theme.
Alright. Let’s get into it.
Acclamator-class Assault Ship
The Acclamator looks great. It should be the GAR workhorse: a reasonably priced medium base that forms the backbone of the fleet. In practice, it sits in an awkward middle ground that plagues many medium ships.
It’s not especially tanky, and it can be deleted surprisingly quickly. Yet to function properly, it wants many of the same upgrades a large ship does, which makes the total package expensive. As a result, most Acclamators are run lean, often stripped down to a single purpose.
Stat-wise, this ship is very clearly derived from the Victory. If you compare the firing arcs in VASSAL, the resemblance is uncanny. Similar dice pools, similar forward focus, better flak, but also very similar turning problems. Yes, it goes speed 3 — and that’s huge — but the yaw feels like a legacy tax inherited directly from the Victory. The weight of old design decisions pressing down on new ships.
The Acclamator-I almost never sees play as a carrier anymore; it’s primarily a Boarding Troopers delivery system. And in that role, it’s genuinely excellent. Its value comes from that one explosive moment, after which it can soak fire or disengage.
The Acclamator-II can be made tankier, but turning it into a credible damage platform requires heavy investment — on a ship that struggles to stay on target beyond the first engagement. Forward-centric firepower without turn performance is far harder to leverage than what an AFII or Munificent brings.
What if: Give it I-I yaw at speed 2. That alone would make the ship dramatically more interesting.
Verdict: Neither variant is really “fine” in a holistic sense, but I also can’t justify price cuts. Although at 64, the Acclamator-I feels awkward when the Munificent Comms sits at 65.
Arquitens-class Light Cruiser (GAR, ARC version)
We’re only talking about the ARC version here. The Legacy versions were covered earlier.
Chassis-wise, this is the same Light Cruiser as the Imperial version, and all my issues with the nav chart still apply. Admiral Coburn helps turn. Ki-Adi-Mundi provides enough firepower to make it worthwhile. But overall, I’m still not a fan.
Now, here’s where things get weird.
The GAR Light Cruiser is not unique, which makes sense thematically. Unfortunately, ARC then gave it perhaps the strangest upgrade bar in the game: two Officer slots and two Weapons Team slots. In practice, this strongly incentivizes running exactly one Arquitens. Zak + Clone Gunners alone almost justify the ship — but that means multiple Arqs step on each other’s toes.
There’s no Turbolaser slot because the dice output would be absurd. The ship has double Evade instead of Redirects (hello, Luminara), which also means any attempt to “fix” it by adding said turbolaser risks stapling TRC onto it — something ARC clearly wanted to avoid. The end result is a ship boxed in by its own design constraints.
Legacy has since released two far more flexible versions, which only highlights how narrow this one feels.
What if: ARC didn’t voluntarily paint themselves into a corner by over-restricting design space? This isn’t the last time this problem shows up.
Verdict: Very niche. At 52 points, it doesn’t look outrageous on paper, but compared to the flak and Salvo offered by the Legacy variants (48/54), it feels expensive. ARC wanted to give GAR a generic long-range option and ended up with a ship that’s technically usable, but deeply constrained.
Consular-class Cruiser
The Consular is what happens when you cross a CR90 with a Hammerhead, keep the downsides of both, and then add some new problems.
Both variants have individual strengths — but also glaring flaws. The biggest shared issue is the lack of double Evades, which became painfully obvious once the GARquitens entered the picture.
The Charger was clearly designed around Linked Turbolaser Towers, and nothing else. Black flak (to restrict reach), mostly red dice. Once LTT was changed, the ship lost its identity. Yes, it’s cheaper now. Yes, you can try TRC or Dual Turbos. No, it’s not the same.
The one place it still shows up reliably? Anakin lists. Being cheap and getting dice mods from your commander goes a long way. Outside that bubble, the Charger struggles.
The Armed Cruiser is similar. Short-range focus, no dice mods unless Anakin is involved, and excellent flak — but that’s not a reason to take the ship. The Defensive Retrofit slot is largely wasted; there just aren’t many good options for a hull like this.
What if: No Contain. Double Evade. Or maybe the Charger not being built around a single card that was later changed with a sledgehammer. Lots of “what ifs” here.
Verdict: I honestly don’t know. Making them cheaper mostly benefits Anakin, who already loves them. Maybe the answer is to accept that they’re niche and move on.
Pelta-class Transport / Medical Frigate
Everyone’s favorite GAR support ship — and for good reason.
The Pelta proves that mediocre firepower and low speed can be acceptable, even good, if the cost and upgrade bar are right. Speed 2 is offset by solid Engineering, a great defense token suite, and excellent support options.
Both variants are distinct and viable. The question is mostly one of efficiency.
The Transport is extremely good for what it does. The Medical Frigate has slightly better battery reach and +1 squadron, but once the ship is actually in the fight, black dice are often better than blue. Flak is significantly worse on the Medical, which matters for a ship that wants to be near squads.
In practice, you’re often paying nine points (with Expanded Hangars) to go from 1 to 3 squadrons — and then stacking Fleet Support, Support Team, and maybe a title on top. At that point, the Medical starts to feel a bit overpriced compared to the Transport.
What if: Don’t. Touch. My. Peltas.
Verdict: Reduce the gap between the variants by 1 (maybe 2) points. Otherwise, Peltas are perfect.
Venator-class Star Destroyer
The GAR’s only large ship, now with three variants: Venator-I, Venator-II, and the ARC Imperator Refit.
Conceptually, it’s to the Acclamator what the ISD is to the Victory — bigger, tougher, better. But the comparison breaks down quickly. The Venator lacks the ISD’s brutal forward arc and struggles badly at range, never throwing more than four red dice at long range with a double arc. For a 100+ point ship, that’s almost comical.
This is not a generalist. It’s a specialist. And yes, it can take Tranquility.
The Venator-I looks appealing at first: cheaper, Fleet Command access, SPHA-T. Unfortunately, it lacks a Defensive Retrofit slot, which kills its ability to brawl — the very thing it looks like it wants to do. It’s also not a Bombard, so LTT says “no”.
The Venator-II fixes most of that. Thermals, strong squad support, or SPHA-T flexibility — it’s simply the better ship.
The Imperator Refit turns the Ven-I into a Kuat-style brawler. Effective, yes. Creative? Not at all. Ordnance Experts, Thermals, ordnance upgrades, Tranquility, done. Compare that to some of the playtest variants (double Weapons Team!) and imagine the possibilities. Overpowered? I don’t think so — but ARC clearly didn’t want to go there.
What if: Never design a ship around a single card. SPHA-T is the textbook example of why.
Verdict: Ven-I could come down a bit. If the Munificent Comms can drop 5, this can drop 3-5 points. Ven-II and Imperator are fine where they are.
Victory-class Star Destroyer (GAR)
I don’t like the Victory.
This one I hate less than the Imperial Vic-I — it has Salvo, at least — but it still suffers from the same fundamental issues. No LTT. No Ion slot. Designed to brawl with Ordnance Experts and SPHA-T… on a hull that’s slow, awkward, and expensive once fully kitted.
You can make it work. You can also take a Venator and be happier.
What if: The Victory didn’t suck to begin with.
Verdict: Leave it alone. I have no desire to see this ship spammed.
Closing Thoughts
Looking at GAR ships in isolation, a few themes stand out:
Maneuverability is a problem. Speed is usually fine; yaw often isn’t.
Firepower, especially at range, is underwhelming, particularly on larger platforms.
None of this is unworkable, but it demands careful planning and acceptance of constraints. GAR fleets tend to win by synergy, not raw numbers.
GAR also lacks a flotilla option, but that discussion is outside of scope in this post.
Next up: Separatists, the sixth and final part of The Ship Files. After that, we’ll zoom out, take stock of everything, and then zoom back in for my personal “most wanted” changes.
Almost there.
