Liked the game but the release schedule has killed it for me and my group of players its actually killed the game for us.
3 and 4 months between a very small amount of releases is dreadful to the point no ones willing to play it again or even bother to get any of the new stuff when it comes out so thanks ffg you have killed the game in its infancy :(
10penceman wrote: Liked the game but the release schedule has killed it for me and my group of players its actually killed the game for us.
3 and 4 months between a very small amount of releases is dreadful to the point no ones willing to play it again or even bother to get any of the new stuff when it comes out so thanks ffg you have killed the game in its infancy :(
Sorry you feel that way, but I've enjoyed it greatly and I quite like the release schedule.
Only one person I know took the plunge and bought the starter (so far) and when we played the game it didn't really inspire.
Trouble is, the starter price is making a lot of the X Wing players wince, and the guy with the starter was too underwhelmed to invest further (as was I.)
Consequently, X Wing has surpassed 40K as the most widely played game, and Armada has died with barely a twitch.
Still haven't scratched my fleet based itch, so now looking at Halo, DFC when it comes out or possibly scraping some BFG together.
Only one person I know took the plunge and bought the starter (so far) and when we played the game it didn't really inspire.
Trouble is, the starter price is making a lot of the X Wing players wince, and the guy with the starter was too underwhelmed to invest further (as was I.)
Consequently, X Wing has surpassed 40K as the most widely played game, and Armada has died with barely a twitch.
Still haven't scratched my fleet based itch, so now looking at Halo, DFC when it comes out or possibly scraping some BFG together.
We have a pretty healthy Armada scene where I live. We have at least three stores hosting monthly tournaments and two leagues (one going and another starting next week). Our X-Wing scene is huge as well.
Cant blame FFG on this one. The dock worker slowdown on the west coast delayed the 1st wave and hurt the game by leaving the core sets as stand-alones for an excessive amount of time.
The third wave probably consists of a ton of Episode VII stuff, which will all be announced sometime in September.
As for wave 2? Yeah, annoyed with how long it's taking to release. I specifically made a $60 per month budget for all of the wave 2 stuff, but have since spent it on some old Star Trek Fasa and vintage SFB stuff.
Core set buy in cost has definitely been a problem for people starting up in my area. Those of us who have bought into it and been playing every week since day one are feeling a bit choked out for options pre-Wave 2 and have started drifting away into other games. I know FFG releases are vague and fluffy things but this one could really be shooting itself in the foot, as I think Armada is a brilliant game.
I loved armada but it has no life in it a fleet game needs capital ships lives and dies on this fact currently fighter types outnumber amount of capital models currently 8 fighter types and only 5 capital classes nextvwave adds 4 capital classes but another 8 fighter/token types . that's fecking dumb.
There should have at least been 6 capital class each side at the start before any one says there is two types each because you can flip the card over its the same class of ship just retrofitted versions.
How can armada have a large gameing group when there is only 2 and 3 ships out must be the most mindnumbing group of people on the planet.
10penceman wrote: I loved armada but it has no life in it a fleet game needs capital ships lives and dies on this fact currently fighter types outnumber amount of capital models currently 8 fighter types and only 5 capital classes nextvwave adds 4 capital classes but another 8 fighter/token types . that's fecking dumb.
You do realize that Armada as a whole is only five months old, right? If this game had been around as long as X-Wing as been (which still isn't that long), you might have a valid point. It makes sense that there are lots of different fighter classes, as they are some of the most easily recognizable ships in the the Star Wars Galaxy and are a very important part of space battles in the movies (especially Return of the Jedi, which I get the feeling was FFG's primary thematic inspiration when making this game). Regardless of your opinion, Armada has five capital ship models and eight fight group models for a total of thirteen unique models in the game.
There should have at least been 6 capital class each side at the start before any one says there is two types each because you can flip the card over its the same class of ship just retrofitted versions.
...that offer different stats, so yeah, each model can represent two different ships. Be realistic though; if there were really that many ships available at release, people would have complained even louder about the cost of the game.
How can armada have a large gameing group when there is only 2 and 3 ships out must be the most mindnumbing group of people on the planet.
You're right, we're all just a bunch of brain dead idiots.
What an utter wasted chance and wasted money.
Again, this game has been out for five months and has a healthy following. There were also supply issues that were beyond the control of FFG at the beginning of the game's life.
Some perspective: X-Wing Miniatures was released on September 14, 2012 with a grand total of four ships (X-wing, Y-wing, TIE fighter, TIE Advanced). Wave 2 was released seven months later at the end of February 2013 and upped the ship count to eight. Wave 3 for X-Wing wasn't released until almost a year to day after the initial release of the game (it was announced eight months after the release of the game).
Armada on the other hand, is five months old and there are five capital ship models and eight fighter squadron models. Wave 2 will be probably be in our hands sometime in September, bringing the count to nine capital ship models, eight fighter squadrons, and eight irregular (single ship) 'squadrons.' Armada is in just as good a place as X-Wing was release-wise.
The idea that thr number of capital ship models relative to fighter models somehow translates into a "better" game is pretty silly IMO. As for xwing, I didnt take any interest in the game until wave 3 myself.
I guess at my older age and the generation I grew up in I don't need instant gratification. The game is only 5 or 6 months old give it sometime. It was ranked third in the best selling TT game in the U.S. in the first half of the year so people are buying it. FFG can't control if there is a strike on the shipping docks so if your going to be upset write a letter to the longshoremen Union.
It's early days yet. The first year of X-Wing had fairly little variety - it's just the reality of new miniature wargames. It's okay to shelve it for a few months and pick up playing again after a couple new waves are released.
I'm happy that the 2nd wave hasn't released yet! This give plenty of time for people to play with what they have and for good tactics before new stuff comes out. I will buy wave 2 when it gets here but for now I am perfectly content with what we have. x wing has made a lot of waves obsolete and I don't want that to happen to armada.
Some perspective: X-Wing Miniatures was released on September 14, 2012 with a grand total of four ships (X-wing, Y-wing, TIE fighter, TIE Advanced). Wave 2 was released seven months later at the end of February 2013 and upped the ship count to eight. Wave 3 for X-Wing wasn't released until almost a year to day after the initial release of the game (it was announced eight months after the release of the game).
The variety was way better when X-Wing launched. You had 20+ different pilots right with the starter and wave one, which allowed for quite a few different builds, playstyles and tons of synergies. Armada was rather one-dimensional in that regard, with ship types within a class being not as different from each other as the different types of X-Wing pilots for example. When Armada was released in March, it became boring very, very fast with battles beoming simple copies of each other due to the lack of options. Most players that were enthusiastic at the beginning shelved their starters and quite a few haven't picked them up ever since.
Again, this game has been out for five months and has a healthy following. There were also supply issues that were beyond the control of FFG at the beginning of the game's life.
Cant blame FFG on this one. The dock worker slowdown on the west coast delayed the 1st wave and hurt the game by leaving the core sets as stand-alones for an excessive amount of time.
Yes, FFG can be blamed. Those kinds of delays and misplanning have been consistent with FFG, no matter which product you look at for the past years. Everything from Armada, to X-Wing, Descent or the CCGs have had delays due to some outside scource or were sold out at one time or another. Many other companies were able to anticipate the dock worker strike, for example, and got their product out through other means. If it happens once, it can be credited to bad luck or inexperience, if it happens more than once, such in the case of FFG, it's due to their incompetence, either of their own department that handles shipping or that of their choice of carrier/forwarder.
Some perspective: X-Wing Miniatures was released on September 14, 2012 with a grand total of four ships (X-wing, Y-wing, TIE fighter, TIE Advanced). Wave 2 was released seven months later at the end of February 2013 and upped the ship count to eight. Wave 3 for X-Wing wasn't released until almost a year to day after the initial release of the game (it was announced eight months after the release of the game).
The variety was way better when X-Wing launched. You had 20+ different pilots right with the starter and wave one, which allowed for quite a few different builds, playstyles and tons of synergies. Armada was rather one-dimensional in that regard, with ship types within a class being not as different from each other as the different types of X-Wing pilots for example. When Armada was released in March, it became boring very, very fast with battles beoming simple copies of each other due to the lack of options. Most players that were enthusiastic at the beginning shelved their starters and quite a few haven't picked them up ever since.
You're comparing apples to oranges, mate. However, if you would like to compare card counts, we can. The X-Wing core set shipped with ten different pilots and five different upgrade cards (a total of eighteen cards). The Armada core set comes with eighteen upgrades and ten ship cards (including the squadrons). Each expansion pack for Armada also has more cards than any of the Wave 1 X-Wing releases.
You also don't follow Armada very much if you are claiming that it is "one dimensional" especially compared to X-Wing (which is one dimensional, but still vastly fun). There were two early X-Wing lists that just about everyone played: Howlrunner + six Academies and Wedge + Biggs + Red Squadron x2. Every once and a while you'd see a list with a Y-wing or Vader (the 2012 World Champion used Vader with a TIE swarm), but it was rare (especially Vader because it was well known at the that the TIE Advanced was too expensive). Armada has more options and every upgrade and ship is viable, unlike X-Wing (both presently and in the past).
Again, this game has been out for five months and has a healthy following. There were also supply issues that were beyond the control of FFG at the beginning of the game's life.
Cant blame FFG on this one. The dock worker slowdown on the west coast delayed the 1st wave and hurt the game by leaving the core sets as stand-alones for an excessive amount of time.
Yes, FFG can be blamed. Those kinds of delays and misplanning have been consistent with FFG, no matter which product you look at for the past years. Everything from Armada, to X-Wing, Descent or the CCGs have had delays due to some outside scource or were sold out at one time or another. Many other companies were able to anticipate the dock worker strike, for example, and got their product out through other means. If it happens once, it can be credited to bad luck or inexperience, if it happens more than once, such in the case of FFG, it's due to their incompetence, either of their own department that handles shipping or that of their choice of carrier/forwarder.
Wow, that is some reaching right there. I've never seen someone blame a company for a labor dispute that they had no part in.
Wow, that is some reaching right there. I've never seen someone blame a company for a labor dispute that they had no part in.
It's not reaching, it's common sense and common practice. If you're running a company and you're supposed to be getting goods to your customer on time, it's your fault when don't get there and you'll be liable for that. No matter weather it's dock workers in Hong Kong and either of the US coasts, the German postal service, French railroad or an icelandic volcano. There are some you or your carrier can't anticipate (e.g. Eyjafjallajokull) and then there are some that are more easily predicted, especially if you're working with a competent carrier and if it hasn't been the first time a whole product line has been delayed for months due to strikes.
Wow, that is some reaching right there. I've never seen someone blame a company for a labor dispute that they had no part in.
It's not reaching, it's common sense and common practice. If you're running a company and you're supposed to be getting goods to your customer on time, it's your fault when don't get there and you'll be liable for that. No matter weather it's dock workers in Hong Kong and either of the US coasts, the German postal service, French railroad or an icelandic volcano. There are some you or your carrier can't anticipate (e.g. Eyjafjallajokull) and then there are some that are more easily predicted and worked around, especially if you're working with a competent carrier and if it hasn't been the first time a whole product line has been delayed for months due to strikes.
Wow, that is some reaching right there. I've never seen someone blame a company for a labor dispute that they had no part in.
It's not reaching, it's common sense and common practice. If you're running a company and you're supposed to be getting goods to your customer on time, it's your fault when don't get there and you'll be liable for that. No matter weather it's dock workers in Hong Kong and either of the US coasts, the German postal service, French railroad or an icelandic volcano. There are some you or your carrier can't anticipate (e.g. Eyjafjallajokull) and then there are some that are more easily predicted, especially if you're working with a competent carrier and if it hasn't been the first time a whole product line has been delayed for months due to strikes
First of all, there was no strike, there was a labor dispute; those are entirely different things. Second of all, do you have inside knowledge of FFG's shipping contracts? If you do, please share it with the class. However, I'm willing to bet that it's a little more complicated than carrying your boxes down to the dock and picking a nice looking ship to sail them across the Pacific Ocean.
Wow, that is some reaching right there. I've never seen someone blame a company for a labor dispute that they had no part in.
It's not reaching, it's common sense and common practice. If you're running a company and you're supposed to be getting goods to your customer on time, it's your fault when don't get there and you'll be liable for that. No matter weather it's dock workers in Hong Kong and either of the US coasts, the German postal service, French railroad or an icelandic volcano. There are some you or your carrier can't anticipate (e.g. Eyjafjallajokull) and then there are some that are more easily predicted, especially if you're working with a competent carrier and if it hasn't been the first time a whole product line has been delayed for months due to strikes
First of all, there was no strike, there was a labor dispute; those are entirely different things. Second of all, do you have inside knowledge of FFG's shipping contracts? If you do, please share it with the class. However, I'm willing to bet that it's a little more complicated than carrying your boxes down to the dock and picking a nice looking ship to sail them across the Pacific Ocean.
Labour disputes that had strikes following in the years before, and if you're not a complete mongrel you could easily read that those disputes were far from being settled and that a strike was likely. Also there is no need to see any details from their shipping contracts as it doesn't matter, it's a matter of "simple" logistics. You usually pick a shipping company, forwarder, carrier or whatever it's called in your country to handle those matters. If you pick an incompetent one, or if you want to take the additional risk, it's your fault. When you, as a company, need to make delivieries that are important to your business line, as the whole Armada line probably is to FFG, you make damn sure they don't get stuck, especially if it's happened to you before. Other companies were able to handle it, no reason whatsoever why FFG or it's carrier couldn't have handled it either.
Let's get this straight you beleive that 4 ships then nothing then 4 ships in 6months is good get va grip its a game of fleet battles not a skirmish game even a skirmish game has more with in 6 months than this by a factor of at least 10.
Comparisoning it to crappy release of xwing as a defence is a bit messed up if gw done it every one would be burning the shops down. Ffg is not a small company not as big as gw by any means but not small like mantic or Spartan or countless others. There is no excuse for the long long wait and low model count .
As for blameing them for not getting models out yes you can you blame the ones that took the money for it as at the end of the day you pay for them to take responsibility for it but that's irrelevant because even if they did release on time they would still have the exact same model count they do now but with a longer gap between if wave one was there earlier.
As for gives you time to get used to the ships I think everyone got used to it in about what 3 games 4 at most and its not that long a game considering an hour a game say.
Bottom line is this the games good but it is a trinket game to be played and forgotten about for months or year at a time which is an utter shame but not supported by its own company its all it can amount to. The very reason people are annoyed is because it was a very expensive buy in for a trinket game.
Sorry but it is unacceptable and very poor business to do what's been done they get away with it because its star wars and people can't see the Forrest for the trees.
Labour disputes that had strikes following in the years before, and if you're not a complete mongrel you could easily read that those disputes were far from being settled and that a strike was likely. Also there is no need to see any details from their shipping contracts as it doesn't matter, it's a matter of "simple" logistics. You usually pick a shipping company, forwarder, carrier or whatever it's called in your country to handle those matters. If you pick an incompetent one, or if you want to take the additional risk, it's your fault. When you, as a company, need to make delivieries that are important to your business line, as the whole Armada line probably is to FFG, you make damn sure they don't get stuck, especially if it's happened to you before. Other companies were able to handle it, no reason whatsoever why FFG or it's carrier couldn't have handled it either.
Bull, I am a CSR that works for a corrugated box plant, in the Midwest, that handles multiple global accounts. We produce anything from standard brown box's, to full graphics store displays, and highly engineered packaging including foam, corrugated and wood. We had almost 10 Million in orders canceled by our customers during that labor dispute because our customers could not get their product. A lot of these customers have time sensitive contracts with their end customers, for instance Walmart. If they do not have product to them by a certain date the order is canceled. They did not have the luxury of shipping late, they had to lose the order and the business. We are just one plant in the Midwest that was affected by this labor dispute and you are going to tell me that all these customers were mongrels that are to stupid to figure out how to get their product through a closed port? You have no idea what you are talking about, or what the logistics are for shipping something to or from china. Please stop posting your uneducated opinion as fact.
Does anybody remember when the teamsters at UPS went on strike back in the 90's. It pretty much shut everything down, companies that relied on UPS for shipping where in big trouble and their products sat in their warehouses. It's not as easy as you think just to find another shipping company. FedEx and usps could not handle the amount of products that need shipped. It was a total mess
10penceman wrote: Let's get this straight you beleive that 4 ships then nothing then 4 ships in 6months is good get va grip its a game of fleet battles not a skirmish game even a skirmish game has more with in 6 months than this by a factor of at least 10.
Comparisoning it to crappy release of xwing as a defence is a bit messed up if gw done it every one would be burning the shops down. Ffg is not a small company not as big as gw by any means but not small like mantic or Spartan or countless others. There is no excuse for the long long wait and low model count .
Yes, it's pretty much the exact same way FFG has handled X-Wing. With X-Wing, every wave has between five and seven months between them with the exception of wave five and six (Wave 5 was two ships, which probably had something to do with the short turn around time).
It's not a "defense," it's the way FFG has always done Star Wars games.The fantastic RPG games are even more separated... the Edge of the Empire core rule book came out in June 2013, the Age of Rebellion core rule book came out in July 2014, and the Force and Destiny core rule book came out this month (August 2015). So to act like Armada is unique in terms of gaps between releases is bull gak.
As for blameing them for not getting models out yes you can you blame the ones that took the money for it as at the end of the day you pay for them to take responsibility for it but that's irrelevant because even if they did release on time they would still have the exact same model count they do now but with a longer gap between if wave one was there earlier.
Blame who for taking money?
As for gives you time to get used to the ships I think everyone got used to it in about what 3 games 4 at most and its not that long a game considering an hour a game say.
I know no one that is an Armada expert that can use every combination of ships already. Even the best guys I know are continually tinkering with lists, which is awesome because unlike X-Wing, every ship in Armada is viable.
Bottom line is this the games good but it is a trinket game to be played and forgotten about for months or year at a time which is an utter shame but not supported by its own company its all it can amount to. The very reason people are annoyed is because it was a very expensive buy in for a trinket game.
Forgotten about? I can't wait to prove you so very wrong:
Spoiler:
Sorry but it is unacceptable and very poor business to do what's been done they get away with it because its star wars and people can't see the Forrest for the trees.
No, you just don't recognize that this is the way it's always been and you're upset because you can't have all your toys when you want them.
Labour disputes that had strikes following in the years before, and if you're not a complete mongrel you could easily read that those disputes were far from being settled and that a strike was likely. Also there is no need to see any details from their shipping contracts as it doesn't matter, it's a matter of "simple" logistics. You usually pick a shipping company, forwarder, carrier or whatever it's called in your country to handle those matters. If you pick an incompetent one, or if you want to take the additional risk, it's your fault. When you, as a company, need to make delivieries that are important to your business line, as the whole Armada line probably is to FFG, you make damn sure they don't get stuck, especially if it's happened to you before. Other companies were able to handle it, no reason whatsoever why FFG or it's carrier couldn't have handled it either.
Bull, I am a CSR that works for a corrugated box plant, in the Midwest, that handles multiple global accounts. We produce anything from standard brown box's, to full graphics store displays, and highly engineered packaging including foam, corrugated and wood. We had almost 10 Million in orders canceled by our customers during that labor dispute because our customers could not get their product. A lot of these customers have time sensitive contracts with their end customers, for instance Walmart. If they do not have product to them by a certain date the order is canceled. They did not have the luxury of shipping late, they had to lose the order and the business. We are just one plant in the Midwest that was affected by this labor dispute and you are going to tell me that all these customers were mongrels that are to stupid to figure out how to get their product through a closed port? You have no idea what you are talking about, or what the logistics are for shipping something to or from china. Please stop posting your uneducated opinion as fact.
You pretty much just made my point. Orders weren't recieved on time, subsequently cancelled and money lost on your part. Either the risk was taken (a high one in case of the impending strike) in getting the cargo stuck in the ports or you/your carrier took precautions and worked around the strike. I'm willing to bet that your company lost a good deal of money on those cancelled, timed orders, while you yourself made your suppliers bleed in reparations if they weren't able to deliver and didn't take "...but the strike..." for an answer. The "mongrel" was clearly aimed at carriers/customers not being able to anticipate and be warned that the ports could be locked down. If they were surprised by the strike, then yes, they were clearly stupid and the delivery getting stuck was their fault, if they knew and took (or had to take) the risk of it getting stuck, it's unfortutane, but still their fault.
Labour disputes that had strikes following in the years before, and if you're not a complete mongrel you could easily read that those disputes were far from being settled and that a strike was likely. Also there is no need to see any details from their shipping contracts as it doesn't matter, it's a matter of "simple" logistics. You usually pick a shipping company, forwarder, carrier or whatever it's called in your country to handle those matters. If you pick an incompetent one, or if you want to take the additional risk, it's your fault. When you, as a company, need to make delivieries that are important to your business line, as the whole Armada line probably is to FFG, you make damn sure they don't get stuck, especially if it's happened to you before. Other companies were able to handle it, no reason whatsoever why FFG or it's carrier couldn't have handled it either.
Bull, I am a CSR that works for a corrugated box plant, in the Midwest, that handles multiple global accounts. We produce anything from standard brown box's, to full graphics store displays, and highly engineered packaging including foam, corrugated and wood. We had almost 10 Million in orders canceled by our customers during that labor dispute because our customers could not get their product. A lot of these customers have time sensitive contracts with their end customers, for instance Walmart. If they do not have product to them by a certain date the order is canceled. They did not have the luxury of shipping late, they had to lose the order and the business. We are just one plant in the Midwest that was affected by this labor dispute and you are going to tell me that all these customers were mongrels that are to stupid to figure out how to get their product through a closed port? You have no idea what you are talking about, or what the logistics are for shipping something to or from china. Please stop posting your uneducated opinion as fact.
You pretty much just made my point. Orders weren't recieved on time, subsequently cancelled and money lost on your part. Either the risk was taken (a high one in case of the impending strike) in getting the cargo stuck in the ports or you/your carrier took precautions and worked around the strike. I'm willing to bet that your company lost a good deal of money on those cancelled, timed orders, while you yourself made your suppliers bleed in reparations if they weren't able to deliver and didn't take "...but the strike..." for an answer. The "mongrel" was clearly aimed at carriers/customers not being able to anticipate and be warned that the ports could be locked down. If they were surprised by the strike, then yes, they were clearly stupid and the delivery getting stuck was their fault, if they knew and took (or had to take) the risk of it getting stuck, it's unfortutane, but still their fault.
Actually, he didn't make your point.
Again, if you have some sort of inside information about FFG's shipping contracts, please share it with the class.
Labour disputes that had strikes following in the years before, and if you're not a complete mongrel you could easily read that those disputes were far from being settled and that a strike was likely. Also there is no need to see any details from their shipping contracts as it doesn't matter, it's a matter of "simple" logistics. You usually pick a shipping company, forwarder, carrier or whatever it's called in your country to handle those matters. If you pick an incompetent one, or if you want to take the additional risk, it's your fault. When you, as a company, need to make delivieries that are important to your business line, as the whole Armada line probably is to FFG, you make damn sure they don't get stuck, especially if it's happened to you before. Other companies were able to handle it, no reason whatsoever why FFG or it's carrier couldn't have handled it either.
Bull, I am a CSR that works for a corrugated box plant, in the Midwest, that handles multiple global accounts. We produce anything from standard brown box's, to full graphics store displays, and highly engineered packaging including foam, corrugated and wood. We had almost 10 Million in orders canceled by our customers during that labor dispute because our customers could not get their product. A lot of these customers have time sensitive contracts with their end customers, for instance Walmart. If they do not have product to them by a certain date the order is canceled. They did not have the luxury of shipping late, they had to lose the order and the business. We are just one plant in the Midwest that was affected by this labor dispute and you are going to tell me that all these customers were mongrels that are to stupid to figure out how to get their product through a closed port? You have no idea what you are talking about, or what the logistics are for shipping something to or from china. Please stop posting your uneducated opinion as fact.
You pretty much just made my point. Orders weren't recieved on time, subsequently cancelled and money lost on your part. Either the risk was taken (a high one in case of the impending strike) in getting the cargo stuck in the ports or you/your carrier took precautions and worked around the strike. I'm willing to bet that your company lost a good deal of money on those cancelled, timed orders, while you yourself made your suppliers bleed in reparations if they weren't able to deliver and didn't take "...but the strike..." for an answer. The "mongrel" was clearly aimed at carriers/customers not being able to anticipate and be warned that the ports could be locked down. If they were surprised by the strike, then yes, they were clearly stupid and the delivery getting stuck was their fault, if they knew and took (or had to take) the risk of it getting stuck, it's unfortutane, but still their fault.
Actually, he didn't make your point.
Again, if you have some sort of inside information about FFG's shipping contracts, please share it with the class.
Clearly reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, so please stop replying to me.
I have pretty much 2 of everything so yeah, I am maxing my options here.
The "long" release dates or "waves" I really do not know what to say. Try different scenarios, make your own "special" ships based on lore. Heck, I played around with the rules a bit (move fighters but cannot attack?? madness.)
Yes it sucks to wait. Well this Friday is a new release for X-wing: bounce around between games as you wait for new waves.
I really cannot develop any rage about it, I would say it is a "missed opportunity" for them to not keep the excitement up with a trickle of releases going. The extra fighter packs were nice that little while ago.
Heck, make some rules of an Armada battle then turn it into an X-wing one at some point.
It is not like you put in your money for a kickstarter of this stuff so use your money elsewhere in the meantime.
Star Wars has been a big thing since I was 6 when I saw the first release in the theatres. It has been a long time coming to get a game like this, I waited this long, I can wait for the rest.
BRB wrote: Clearly reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, so please stop replying to me.
Do you or do you not know the intricacies of FFG's product shipping contracts?
I will assume that you don't and I will also assume that you don't understand what happened at the West Coast ports during the labor dispute. The Los Angeles and Long Beach ports combined account for 40% of all container shipping into the United States. During the dispute, those two, plus 27 other West Coast ports and 20,000 longshoremen were affected so there was no "just ship to another port" solution to the problem. Also, there were major changes to the logistics of trans-Pacific shipping that saw shipping companies changing the way in which they moved products across the ocean. It should also be noted that just about every major company was impacted by this labor dispute because it affected so many ports and so many workers. The automotive and agricultural industries were hit particularly bad, and even Nike saw a pretty substantial hit to their economic growth. But I guess a company like Nike is too dumb to just put their shoes on another boat to get them to America.
Let's see what happens in September. FFG may not have mentioned Armada at GenCon thanks to the blackout on Episode VII licensing announcements, which ends on September 4. FFG did all but say they have Episode VII stuff incoming even now.
I'm somewhat agreeing. Rebels are OK for early variation. But the imperials are badly, badly lacking. OK the VSDs fell like they play differently. There is little outward difference between the 2 gladiators so it feels dull to me right now.
Compel wrote: I'm somewhat agreeing. Rebels are OK for early variation. But the imperials are badly, badly lacking. OK the VSDs fell like they play differently. There is little outward difference between the 2 gladiators so it feels dull to me right now.
That and I'm terribly at the game.
I think it helps that the Rebels have 50% more ships than Imperials . What FFG should have done is release the Raider wave 1.
I kind of like the fact it was spaced out so much, it allows my wallet to recover and buy one of each right off the bat, insead of scrambling to buy before supplies are gone.
I am with the OP. Have high hopes for this game and it seems to do well but incredibly bored with the lack of variety. There needs to be a release a quarter. There are hundreds of ships in the EU plus crap from the prequals. They will not run out. I picked this game and some extras up early on and haven't pulled it out of its box after playing a half dozen games. It was the same thing over and over even if we did swap out ship cards for other ship cards.
I know they are having labor issues but when the thing that pays the bills isn't going anywhere, you come up with alternative methods to get it there. You don't just ho hum and blame it on someone else. Contract a cargo plane. Hire scabs. You make it happen. Nike isn't going away. Players moving on to another game system is a real thing.
Col. Dash wrote: I am with the OP. Have high hopes for this game and it seems to do well but incredibly bored with the lack of variety. There needs to be a release a quarter. There are hundreds of ships in the EU plus crap from the prequals. They will not run out. I picked this game and some extras up early on and haven't pulled it out of its box after playing a half dozen games. It was the same thing over and over even if we did swap out ship cards for other ship cards.
There probably isn't going to be ships from the prequels introduced to Armada or X-Wing, as FFG seems pretty firm that these games take place in the Rebellion Era.
As far as "lack of variety" goes, this game is in a better spot then X-Wing was at the same point in its life. I don't get the need for instant gratification and wanting to have tons of ships all available at the release of a brand new game. The single largest complaint people had at the launch of this game was the price. If there were twice the amount of ships available, people would be complaining twice as loud about how much money they have to spend to play the game. Even worse, what if it failed and now they had all of these products just sitting in warehouses and on FLGS shelves collecting dust?
I know they are having labor issues but when the thing that pays the bills isn't going anywhere, you come up with alternative methods to get it there. You don't just ho hum and blame it on someone else. Contract a cargo plane. Hire scabs. You make it happen. Nike isn't going away. Players moving on to another game system is a real thing.
Again, like the other guy, you don't seem to understand how cross ocean shipping, ports, and labor works.
For starters, you can't just "contract a cargo plane" to move dozens and dozens of shipping containers worth of products; the real world just doesn't work that way. Not only would be incredibly expensive, you would risk breaking shipping contracts just to do it (not to mention the logistical nightmare of trying to unload ships that were already loaded, moving freight from the port of departure to an airport, etc. plus all of the products already on the boat, both crossing the ocean and sitting at the port waiting to be unloaded). There are no "scabs" to hire at the ports because the longshoremen weren't on strike so there is no one to replace at the ports. The shipping conglomerates were accusing the longshoremen of not negotiating in good faith while cutting their hours and longshoremen were accusing the shippers of slowing down the flow of container ships into port... and by "port," I mean every West Coast port. Plus, if you really think firing all of the longshoremen who weren't on strike and then hiring 20,000 scabs was the solution for you get your toys faster, I don't even really know what to tell you...
You guys act like small company like FFG had the capital and clairvoyance to not be affected by a labor dispute that crippled West Coast shipping. The dispute caused economic ripples across the world, why is FFG the only company you people think could have been immune from it if they just tried harder?
ChrisRR wrote: I'm happy that the 2nd wave hasn't released yet! This give plenty of time for people to play with what they have and for good tactics before new stuff comes out. I will buy wave 2 when it gets here but for now I am perfectly content with what we have. x wing has made a lot of waves obsolete and I don't want that to happen to armada.
Precisely. Slow and steady wins the space race for me with armada -- I play a lot of systems and also paint, so rapid release schedules actually hurt our scene, not help it.
Well, for some variety we have been going into the following:
I am toying with the idea of a possible repaint or at least a touch-up to differentiate between models which can add some eye-candy to the mix.
My friend has managed to paint all his fighters: very impressive looking.
He is even more crazy and cuts off bits and adds little bits, messes with the mind when he did not say anything till I noticed they were physically different in minor ways.
We have been focusing on a variety of fighters with a few named piliot/squadrons which has made some nail-biter games.
Luke is brutal for ignoring shields.
I want to bash together a station of some kind but the overlapping with it for repair seems a little too indy-pit-stop to me.
We field quite a few asteroids on the table. Ouch they hurt if you hit them: you fear those things more than being shot at.
I have been putting together an Excel sheet of the various stats for the ships and upgrades, it is nice to be able to identify and match what can be used on what ship.
Buy a felt mat and paint your own background on it... handy for X-wing too.
Just some ideas to make the slow releases from FFG seem not so long.
I love the longer release windows FFG tends to have. My biggest concern is being able to keep the pegs full between those windows. X-Wing in particular is flying at one of my local shops and they say they can't get any more in. There is literally one copy of Imperial Aces and 2 or 3 of the most recent big Imperial ship. For Armada, there's a starter set or two.
Apparently Disney has confirmed that the Rebels use prequel ships such as left over Trade Confederation vessels and so forth so there is no reason they cant be included.
Note that aside from them putting out new movies, I am absolutely against everything else Disney has done regarding SW and the existing true story line. So I guess it depends on if you take Disney or the EU as true canon.
Col. Dash wrote: Apparently Disney has confirmed that the Rebels use prequel ships such as left over Trade Confederation vessels and so forth so there is no reason they cant be included.
Yeah, but there is new movies coming out and from a marketing standpoint, fancy new ships are better than ships from movies that no one likes.
Note that aside from them putting out new movies, I am absolutely against everything else Disney has done regarding SW and the existing true story line. So I guess it depends on if you take Disney or the EU as true canon.
They didn't do anything to the story line because the only story line that really matters is the six movies. The EU books and comics were never on the same level of cannon as the movies to begin with, on top of most of being horrible. Don't be surprised if the handful of good EU stuff is mined to make the new movies,
Also, if Lucas had decided to make the new movies himself, there is no way he would have followed the EU stories because he didn't write them. He would have done the same thing as Disney.
Is the scale dramatically different from the old Star Wars Battles vessels? Aside from some being quite bendy, you could put those to good use. Houserule a few of the ships and have a space doughnut fleet.
Neither game kept a consistent scale between ships, so that shouldn't be an issue. The Armada ships might be bigger than the equivalent model from the Starship Battles line, though.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: Is the scale dramatically different from the old Star Wars Battles vessels? Aside from some being quite bendy, you could put those to good use. Houserule a few of the ships and have a space doughnut fleet.
I think most things from SFB will be very small next to the Armada ships, with the Imperial Star Destroyer being smaller than the Armada Victory Star Destroyer. However, some of the medium ships might work, such as some of the Clone War era ships.
chaos0xomega wrote: My disappointment with Armada will likely be identical to my disappointment with XWing - No prequel era ships.
Seriously, that is the best thing about both of these games. FFG has made it perfectly clear that these games take during the Rebellion Era and afterward. Aside from being totally uninspiring, the Prequels are too divisive for FFG to introduce to the game without pissing off legions of fans.
The trouble SPJ is some people actually liked the Prequels and thought the ships were neat even if they thought jar-jar was a tool.
So they might actually want to play with those era boats.
I get that FFG has said this is supposed to be Hope-Jedi era. But they are now adding the Post Hope/ new Era ships.
I bet they would make some cash though if they made a Prequel era expansion. It wouldn't be that expensive either, just do the Naboo fighters, the Jedi attack ships from Revenge and 2 different Droid types and there you go. Ohh and throw in Jango's firespray upgrade card and some update cards for one of the small base S&V boats and there you go.
Whoops forgot we were talking about Armada.
That makes it easier, Do a Trade Fed control ship and a Republic cruiser. Then toss in a couple of bases of fighters.
Nicorex wrote: I get that FFG has said this is supposed to be Hope-Jedi era. But they are now adding the Post Hope/ new Era ships.
They're adding Episode VII and beyond stuff (possibly) because they are new.
I understand that some people, for whatever reason, like prequel-era ships... but lots of people don't. There is no reason to introduce something that is so divisive to the game that on top of that, isn't in the era that the game takes place in.
chaos0xomega wrote: Most people I know dont have any issue with the prequel era ships, just the characters and films.
Quite the contrary. Lots of people dislike prequel-era ships, and for good reason: they're boring and uninspired, lacking the dirty lived-in feel of the original trilogy (gakky dialogue and filmmaking aside, that was one the worst parts of the prequels).
Everyone knows The Clone Wars animated series was the best thing Lucas made since RotJ
Which isn't saying much, considering Return of the Jedi had ewoks. The saving grace of RoTJ is the Battle of Endor (which is probably the single biggest influence in Armada) and Luke v. Vader, round 2.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: Which isn't saying much, considering Return of the Jedi had ewoks. The saving grace of RoTJ is the Battle of Endor (which is probably the single biggest influence in Armada) and Luke v. Vader, round 2.
Hey, I thought that the Jabba's palace scenes were pretty cool (outside of the awful CGI "musical number" in the special edition). It functioned as a good "cold open" to the film. Granted, now that we know what actually happened after The Empire Strikes Back thanks to Shadows of the Empire, it makes a lot more sense than it did at the time. Here's hoping Shadows is still canon...
Honestly, Armada looks to be doing fine in a lot of places that already had significant X-Wing scenes. The main factor putting people off appears to be the high entry price compared to X-Wing, but X-wing already has a fairly low price of entry as tabletop games go (at least by the 40k standard). Another problem I see is that the complexity of the game, while making for a solid overall foundation, puts off people who would otherwise be interested in the game. I'm not talking about regular tabletop gamers, but people who are just getting into the hobby and want something relatively easy to grasp.
Like I said in the thread I made, Armada is a great game and I hope it sticks around and improves by the time I'm finally able to devote myself to it.
For whatever reason, FFG have done nothing* with the prequel era across all their Star Wars games - X-Wing, Armada, Imperial Assault or the RPGs. The reason for that can only be speculated on. Perhaps their licence doesn't cover it. Perhaps they're simply not fans of that setting and don't wish to cover it. Perhaps they will cover it, in separate products at some point in the future.
Trying to claim that your preference one way or the other is the majority or "correct" view isn't going to get the conversation very far.
*OK, there's a few things, like Geonosians, Zabraks and B1 battle droids turning up in the RPG, and a painting of what looks like Asohka Tano in the Force And Destiny rulebook.
I think, much like a certain poster in this thread *cough*scootypuffjunior*cough* they're probably elitist nerds that think the prequel era stuff is all universally crap, and that everyone universally agrees with their opinion, and thus its not worth doing.
chaos0xomega wrote: I think, much like a certain poster in this thread *cough*scootypuffjunior*cough* they're probably elitist nerds that think the prequel era stuff is all universally crap, and that everyone universally agrees with their opinion, and thus its not worth doing.
So now we're going to resort to name-calling?
It has nothing to do with being elitist, the prequels are all around bad movies. The acting, the dialogue, the pacing... they're all bad. Are they still Star Wars? Of course. Did I faithfully go each one in the theater when they came out? You bet, and I'd do it again in a heartbeat. Where there some parts that were pretty cool? Sure, especially in Revenge of the Sith. The prequels are what they are and I've defended them to more than enough people who like to pretend they don't exist (including here on Dakka).
That doesn't change the fact that all three of those movies lacked everything that made the original movies special.
AndrewGPaul wrote: For whatever reason, FFG have done nothing* with the prequel era across all their Star Wars games - X-Wing, Armada, Imperial Assault or the RPGs. The reason for that can only be speculated on. Perhaps their licence doesn't cover it. Perhaps they're simply not fans of that setting and don't wish to cover it. Perhaps they will cover it, in separate products at some point in the future.
Trying to claim that your preference one way or the other is the majority or "correct" view isn't going to get the conversation very far.
*OK, there's a few things, like Geonosians, Zabraks and B1 battle droids turning up in the RPG, and a painting of what looks like Asohka Tano in the Force And Destiny rulebook.
I can just about promise you that the don't do the prequel era is because, as a whole, it is nowhere near fleshed out as the Rebellion Era. On top of that, if you're a game company that wants to sell games to people, why would you use stuff from a bunch of movies that the majority of fans decry (which is the truth, whether you guys want to admit that or not)? It's a lot safer to stick with what they know people want.
Besides, take a random person off the street and ask them what they know about Star Wars, and it's almost a guaranteed that they will answer with some combination of Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, C-3PO, R2-D2, or Yoda. The reason is because that is what the public thinks of when it comes to Star Wars.
I intended for that to come across more humorously than it did, so apologies if I offended you.
Also, ironically enough, now that Disney owns the rights, the prequel era is more fleshed out than the rebellion/gcw era due to the EU stuff being rendered irrelevant, leaving the Prequel era with the only non-theatrical film source of canon.
Also, ironically enough, now that Disney owns the rights, the prequel era is more fleshed out than the rebellion/gcw era due to the EU stuff being rendered irrelevant, leaving the Prequel era with the only non-theatrical film source of canon.
Except FFG doesn't really care about canon (G-canon or otherwise), the EU has always been irrelevant compared to the films (and anything made directly by Lucas), and much, much more of the EU stuff takes place during and after the Rebellion Era than before meaning FFG has more stuff to pull from.
FFG clearly does care about the canon (they would have to as everything they do now has to go through the canon approval process in addition to licensor approval), hence their creation of the Imperial Raider as a canonical vessel classification, as well as their excuse that there are no prequel-era ships because the game is set within the canon of the Rebellion era of the Galactic Civil War (which was always a BS excuse because even in the old EU there were prequel era starfighters and capital ships turning up in Imperial Remnant and rogue Imperial Warlord fleets decades after the Battle of Endor, not to mention the fact that they're now doing ships pulled from a point in the canon set 30 years after their stated focus point).
The "canon vs non-canon" debate brings up an interesting point: Ships like the IG-2000, Mist Hunter and Punishing One didn't appear in the films, did they? How are they now affected?
Right, they aren't... So I'd say perhaps those may be the last ships we see from the pre-Disney EU but only time will tell. Surely, the Disney deal had already gone through before those were designed and at the factory to be produced? There can't be that much lead time for FFG?
At the end of the day, I'd like to see interesting ships. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything from the prequel films that sticks out. Venator-class Star Destroyers, maybe. Droid control doughnuts, maybe. Nothing else sticks as being cool like the OT-era ships.
chaos0xomega wrote: FFG clearly does care about the canon (they would have to as everything they do now has to go through the canon approval process in addition to licensor approval), hence their creation of the Imperial Raider as a canonical vessel classification, as well as their excuse that there are no prequel-era ships because the game is set within the canon of the Rebellion era of the Galactic Civil War (which was always a BS excuse because even in the old EU there were prequel era starfighters and capital ships turning up in Imperial Remnant and rogue Imperial Warlord fleets decades after the Battle of Endor, not to mention the fact that they're now doing ships pulled from a point in the canon set 30 years after their stated focus point).
Okay, you misunderstood what I meant by "FFG doesn't care about cannon."
Nearly every character and most of the ships are all from sources that aren't G-canon (video games, books, comics, etc.), and G-canon overrides everything else. The pull from every level of canon for their games and have no issues mixing things for the sake of the game; they are not bound by the different levels of canon.
The "canon" thing doesn't seem to be that important. As well as the ships Lord Corellia mentions, the RPG has mention of planets, locations and species only referred to in the "old, non-canon" EU, such as Bakura, Byss, the Deep Core and Corporate Sector*, Verpine, etc, etc.
Depending on how seriously you want to take all of this, it could be claimed that their appearance in books published since the Disney takeover means those entries are canon again, if that's important.
As for variety, put it this way; the original trilogy had the Star Destroyer and Super Star Destroyer, as well as five varieties of TIEs and the shuttle for the Imperials, and five starships, four fighters and the Falcon for the Rebels. You could bump that up a bit by including the odd "off-model" ship prop.
In the prequels, you've got the Acclamator and Venator capital ships, the diplomatic shuttle and four starfighters on the side of the Republic (plus the Naboo's own ships ifyou want) against three capital ships and two droid starfighters for the Confederate side. It's not that lacking in designs compared to the original trilogy, and that's only counting what appeared in the films; the Clone Wars added some more.
"Cool" is in the eye of the beholder; I'd much rather have had the Naboo royal yacht or a BTL-B Y-Wing than a lot of the stuff that's appeared recently. A lot of the Eu ships, in my opinion, suffer from poor design compared to the films (a problem common to other works such as Star Trek and Babylon 5).
Right, they aren't... So I'd say perhaps those may be the last ships we see from the pre-Disney EU but only time will tell. Surely, the Disney deal had already gone through before those were designed and at the factory to be produced? There can't be that much lead time for FFG?
Debatable. The factory that FFG uses to produce/pre-paint the minis used for X-Wing is fully booked on FFG products alone for something like the next 3 years. I know this because a friend of mine is a game publisher and had inquired about the possibility of utilizing their services. Mind you, this doesn't necessarily mean that the models are designed and paid for 3 years in advance as FFG could simply be reserving their services under forecast product or whatever the term is, and we also have to consider the effect of 2nd waves on production schedules, but it is still possible that the models jsut released were in effect designed and ready to roll out 3 years ago if it weren't for production backlogs.
At the end of the day, I'd like to see interesting ships. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything from the prequel films that sticks out. Venator-class Star Destroyers, maybe. Droid control doughnuts, maybe. Nothing else sticks as being cool like the OT-era ships.
And arguably the Venator (beside being a cool design shape) was mostly great to see because it made you think "Star Destroyer".
Still probably going to get into Armada when Wave Two comes out, if mostly for the full-size star Destroyer (duh!), and because the Raider allows for some mix-up in the normally "all large" Imperial Fleet. Although I would still like to paint up an Imperial Nebulon-B, even if it just uses the Rebel stats. I like my Imperial Wedges, but I also like design variety that's also canon.
It's also hard to be convinced that Armada is "idiotically expensive" when the Imperial-Class Destroyer can be pre-ordered from Miniature Market for 35 bucks. I used to willingly pay that for an unpainted plastic Space Marine Dreadnought 10 years ago.
And arguably the Venator (beside being a cool design shape) was mostly great to see because it made you think "Star Destroyer".
Still probably going to get into Armada when Wave Two comes out, if mostly for the full-size star Destroyer (duh!), and because the Raider allows for some mix-up in the normally "all large" Imperial Fleet. Although I would still like to paint up an Imperial Nebulon-B, even if it just uses the Rebel stats. I like my Imperial Wedges, but I also like design variety that's also canon.
It's also hard to be convinced that Armada is "idiotically expensive" when the Imperial-Class Destroyer can be pre-ordered from Miniature Market for 35 bucks. I used to willingly pay that for an unpainted plastic Space Marine Dreadnought 10 years ago.
But that translates to around $50 at your FLGS.
I do think that expense is still a valid concern in regards to Armada, especially when you're buying both factions like I am.
I'm wondering if our preference for the original trilogy doesn't stem from our age bracket, more than anything else. I much prefer episodes IV to VI, but in frequent conversations with kids in school (between 2010 and 2014, ages 16 and under), they couldn't care less about that trilogy. To them, it was all dialogue, fake-looking space fights and ridiculous lightsaber battles. The fact that they were narrative devices and hinted at a deeper universe was mostly lost on them. FFG may be secure in our segment of the market, but they might be able to cash in on a younger segment (that will soon have disposable income).
It would also tide them over between movies to release prequel-era ships.
Just my two cents. I could barely believe it myself. They generally hate the original trilogy. Well maybe dislike/are indifferent to.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: Just my two cents. I could barely believe it myself. They generally hate the original trilogy. Well maybe dislike/are indifferent to.
That's heresy!
As I said before, I wouldn't mind some prequel era ships. Trade Federation Battleships would at the very least be vastly different, visually, than anything else on the table and thus add some diversity. I definitely didn't hate a lot of those ships, and even the Naboo fighter would be awesome in a more weathered, less banana colour scheme.
It was the script that let the prequels down. The acting didn't help (there was great and horrible acting in all three films) but the ships were definitely cool, imo.
Oh, the prequel films were absolutely terrible (funny, a year ago I thought otherwise and that everyone who hated the films did so to be cool, then a friend made me watch the Red Letter Cinema review and I realized just how gakky they were), but aside from the (lack of) characters and the (lack of) plot, everything else about the movie was pretty good.
I tried watching the prequels over again just trying to like them. There is not to much to like about them.. The acting is some of the worst I have seen. The young Anakin is the worst, that young kid did a terrible job. The pod race was the biggest waste of 20 minutes of a movie trying to much to be like Ben Hur. Guess growing up in the 70's and 80's those movies (besides return of the Jedi the worst out of the original) set the bar to high for me. Hopefully the next movie won't let me down.
I have heard that before Matt. My wife read about a study that came to the same conclusions. They liked the newer special effects and the glitz as opposed to roughing it with what we grew up with.
Personally I hold the EU as canon. Doesn't count for much but Mara Jade continues to be the most awesome female character in the series, if not all sci-fi literature.
Prequal stuff I can easily see happening in the future. It would surprise me greatly if a year or two(provided the game continues) or after the initial blitz of Episode 7 stuff, you will see Prequal factions coming out. On the RPG side of the house it is canon now for the Rebels to be using salvaged and left over prequel era ships. So even if they do not create new factions, we should in theory see at least some of the older ships.
The RPGs already have stats for B1 Battle Droids, and certainly artwork if not stats for ARC-170s and the like, so they're not averse to using the designs from the prequels.
I'd think the advantage being in space would have to be pretty minimal. Especially when you consider the size of them things. I could almost understand the big ones on the X-wing...
... I just checked images. Uh. They are much bigger than I remember.
From Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith Incredible Cross Sections (via Wookiepedia):
The ARC-170 also possessed an S-foil system, which helped to radiate heat, something that aided the fighter's shielding. This also provided additional stability during atmospheric flight.
It wouldn't radiate back onto the wings, due to the lack of atmosphere, there really isn't much to radiate *to* to begin with, so any heat that is radiated would quickly be lost to the vacuum of space rather than building up in the vicinity of the wings.
A more apt statement would be that the S-foils wouldn't be nearly large enough to dissipate all the heat generated. The ISS for example has something like 8 radiator wings, each of which is something like 50-75 ft long. The ISS really isn't generating all that much heat when you think about it, not compared to, say, a starfighter with an advanced ray shielding system firing particle beam weapons and riding the thrust of a set of fusion engines and packing *another* engine capable of bending space-time to achieve faster than light travel through an alternate dimension.
AndrewGPaul wrote: That attempt at justifying it still doesn't make sense; they'd just end up radiating the heat right back onto the wings.
Greater surface area allows greater heat dissipation.
When you're in an atmosphere, most of your cooling comes from convection, so yes you would want to maximize surface area. The ARC-170's s-foils would work better in their open position if the ship were flying in an atmospehre. But in a vacuum, radiators work only through radiative heat transfer, where you want the radiator to be basically perpendicular to the ship (otherwise it's just radiating heat right back onto the ship). Opening the ARC-170's s-foils doesn't help them radiate heat any better, because the undersides are just toasting the wings anyhow.
The panels on a TIE fighter are a good example of how to build good radiators (presuming that the inside surfaces are not also radiating, in which case you would just cook the cockpit). The TIE Advanced v1 is an example of how not to design radiators - you want the radiating surface on the outside!
Granted, I don't think the artists give this much thought when they're coming up with ship designs.
TIE fighters have no obvious radiators. What you are mistaking for radiative panels on their wings are in fact the opposite, solar/photovoltaic panels.
I would like to see the Lancer frigates and Cacarrack Cruisers brought back, as well as the release of cards in both x-wing and Armada allowing for the use of the Nebula-Bs and the Correllian Corvettes as imperial ships... which is where the rebellion got them in the original cannon.
I feel it is worth mentioning that thanks to the new retcon of the universe, the Rebel Alliance is more of a out gunned military than a guerilla movement. The Star Wars Commander mobile game is considered Cannon by Disney, thus granting the Rebellion access to larger military hardware. So the Rebellion is actually very well funded. just a thought.
I feel it is worth mentioning that thanks to the new retcon of the universe, the Rebel Alliance is more of a out gunned military than a guerilla movement.
This has always been true. Granted, some writers of the EU interpreted it slightly differently, but for the most part this was the assumption that the EU operated on.
chaos0xomega wrote: TIE fighters have no obvious radiators. What you are mistaking for radiative panels on their wings are in fact the opposite, solar/photovoltaic panels.
I've seen them variously described as radiators or solar panels - again, I don't think the artists who created the model were applying much logic beyond the Rule of Cool. They would make much more sense as radiators, since photovoltaics could never provide significant energy to propel a starship. And in any case, the Inquisitor's TIE would STILL be a stupid design even if they were solar panels.
I feel it is worth mentioning that thanks to the new retcon of the universe, the Rebel Alliance is more of a out gunned military than a guerilla movement.
This has always been true. Granted, some writers of the EU interpreted it slightly differently, but for the most part this was the assumption that the EU operated on.
New Hope era alliance was more guerrilla-esque, but by the time of the Battle of Endor they were manufacturing capital ships. They were legit enough that we have a large-scale space battle game for them
They were so outgunned it wasn't funny even by the Battle of Endor. The rebels generally tried to avoid open fleet engagements and stuck to guerilla actions. The fleet present was most of the ships in the Rebel fleet and only represented a much smaller percentage of the Imperial fleet. The corvettes were an ancient design and everyone and their mother used them, from traders to military and were relatively easy for the rebels to acquire, the normal ones were not dedicated warships. Those would be the Corellian Gunships which were made by the same company and the rebels got their hands on a few of them as well. Neb Bs were military and were being phased out of the Imperial Navy, not sure if the Rebels had access to the shipyards building them, they were fairly obsolete, compared to the Assault Frigates which were updated and pretty nasty warhsips. Armada has changed it but they aren't supposed to be a whole lot bigger than Nebulon Bs since if I remember, they used the same chassis. Mon Cal cruisers were built in the open as cruise ships and were modified after leaving the yard and the eyes of the Imperials stationed there. Be willing to bet that if Endor had gone differently Sullust and the Mon Cal planets would have been high on the list of planets for the Death star to blow up.
Unfortunately I do not think we will see Lancers. They were developed after DS1 to counter that massive rebel threat of fighters that the Navy was suddenly gunshy about. But with the Xwing release and the Armada release of that little ship whenever this next release finally arrives, that little ship has the same role as a Lancer. While Lancers were a cool concept, I think the reality of them did not meet expectations of the Navy when the threat of rebel fighters ended up not being the boogey man they thought they would be.
The Mk II (like the Mk I) were actually twice the length of a Nebulon B, as they were based on the Dreadnought Class design, the Mk I being a stripped down version, whereas the Mk I was a further evolution of the Mk I created by re-arming and re-fitting the stripped down Mk I.
The likely cause of the belief that the Assault Frigate is related to the Nebulon B is likely the result of the exposed internal structure protruding out from below the MK IIs hull. Thats simply what the 'guts' of a starship looklike once you peel away the armor and external plating. The Nebulon B (in Rebel use) is similarly stripped down, and one would presume Imperial variants would look a bit sleeker, I think a good comparison would be the Y-Wing, during the Clone Wars it was sleek and aerodynamic, by the time of the Rebellion the fairings and external plating has been removed to expose its inner workings.
Automatically Appended Next Post: also, Im not certain the Rebel Fleet at Endor was their entire military spacefleet, its been my understanding that it was only what they were able to muster under the circumstances, as other elements of the fleet were involved in other operations elsewhere. Also worth noting that certain sources of fiction have the Rebel Fleet at endor being considerably larger than the hodgepodge collection of a half-dozen ships shown on-screen.
I've never seen any evidence that Imperial Nebulon-Bs were more armoured than Rebel ones.
As an aside, FFG's Age of Rebellion has an adventure featuring a freighter that looks like an upside-down Nebulon-B; it carries cargo pods along the spine.
It's mentioned in some works (in passing only from what I recall) that the Nebulon B's had their internal structures exposed due to the removal of armor plating and fairings to reduce weight or something along those lines. Granted, its not stated explicitly *who* removed those platings, for all I know it was a decision made during the ships design process that resulted in both Rebel and Imperial ships looking the same way, but I'd like to think that between the Y-Wing and the Assault Frigates modification by the Rebellion that the Neb B probably underwent the same process.
also, Im not certain the Rebel Fleet at Endor was their entire military spacefleet, its been my understanding that it was only what they were able to muster under the circumstances, as other elements of the fleet were involved in other operations elsewhere. Also worth noting that certain sources of fiction have the Rebel Fleet at endor being considerably larger than the hodgepodge collection of a half-dozen ships shown on-screen.
Yeah, that was by no means their whole fleet, it was what they could assemble to take advantage of the apparent weakness of the Death Star, and there was even Garm Bel Iblis with his own fleet battling the Empire independently, after he broke with the Rebellion over disagreements with Mon Mothma.
Even in the original fluff it did not carry as much firepower or go toe to toe with a Star Destroyer due to weaker armor. But then capital ships, especially kind of fragile ones like Mon Cal cruisers went nowhere without escorts and fighters where as the ISDs had completely different design philosophies and were supposed to be as independent as possible.
My favorite prequel ship is the V-19 Torrent, the one that is a cross between a b-wing and the lambda shuttle.
I really wish FFG would bring in the prequel ships - at least from the clone wars. I'm not overly fond of the naboo starfighter or the droid ships, but most of the others I did like. And having a droid faction would give us a 3rd party in Armada, as I don't think there's any scum & villainy capital ships.
S&V do, assuming that FFG buys into the silly Zann Consortum nonsense. No reason to suspect they dont, since theyve already given us the TIE Punisher, Assault Frigate Mk II, & Mc30 from the same game.
I wouldn't be surprised if they do, its really the only scum faction with a fully fleshed out fleet, and, as mentioned, they are already borrowing heavily from the game.
Though the faction in the game was annoying, some of their ships would be very interesting to see in Armada, such as the Aggressor-class destroyer with its massive forward facing plasma and ion cannons, and I did like the designs of the Mandalorian ships...
Col. Dash wrote: Apparently Disney has confirmed that the Rebels use prequel ships such as left over Trade Confederation vessels and so forth so there is no reason they cant be included.
Yeah, but there is new movies coming out and from a marketing standpoint, fancy new ships are better than ships from movies that no one likes.
Note that aside from them putting out new movies, I am absolutely against everything else Disney has done regarding SW and the existing true story line. So I guess it depends on if you take Disney or the EU as true canon.
They didn't do anything to the story line because the only story line that really matters is the six movies. The EU books and comics were never on the same level of cannon as the movies to begin with, on top of most of being horrible. Don't be surprised if the handful of good EU stuff is mined to make the new movies,
Sorry, just popping over here to say this. EU gave us Thrawn, Soontir Fel, the X-Wing booke series (Rogue and Wraith squadrons) and Bobba Fett coming back. So don't say that the EU sucked please, it's your opinion, but they had some cool stuff.
Col. Dash wrote: Apparently Disney has confirmed that the Rebels use prequel ships such as left over Trade Confederation vessels and so forth so there is no reason they cant be included.
Yeah, but there is new movies coming out and from a marketing standpoint, fancy new ships are better than ships from movies that no one likes.
Note that aside from them putting out new movies, I am absolutely against everything else Disney has done regarding SW and the existing true story line. So I guess it depends on if you take Disney or the EU as true canon.
They didn't do anything to the story line because the only story line that really matters is the six movies. The EU books and comics were never on the same level of cannon as the movies to begin with, on top of most of being horrible. Don't be surprised if the handful of good EU stuff is mined to make the new movies,
Sorry, just popping over here to say this. EU gave us Thrawn, Soontir Fel, the X-Wing booke series (Rogue and Wraith squadrons) and Bobba Fett coming back. So don't say that the EU sucked please, it's your opinion, but they had some cool stuff.
Fine. A statistically significant portion of the EU, especially the later stuff, sucked.
To be honest, I wasn't that impressed by Thrawn as a character. And Boba Fett? Prior to the EU, he was just one of many bounty hunters; perhaps he was a little more cunning than the others (because he figured out what Han was up to), but I can't take seriously as a villain, let alone some sort of antihero, a man who even Darth Vader has to tell to stop shooting people and who gets done in by a blind man with a spear. As far as I can tell, fans loved him because he has a nifty helmet.
Also, if we're going to resort to the "waa, that's only your opinion (because unless I preface every statement with "IMO", people might get confused), then right back at ya; it's ScootyPuffJunior's opinion that the EU sucked, it's saithor's that it didn't.
Is there a correlation with age? As a first hypothesis, I'd suggest that older fans - thirties and up - would be more likely to be primarily fans of the original trilogy, then people in their mid to late twenties fans of the post-Endor EU, and the younger fans more likely to like the Prequel trilogy and the Clone Wars era.
However, no-one's going to give me a grant to study that, so I can't really take it any further. In any case, I'm pretty much an OT purist, although the flight sim games and Rebels sneak in too, and a friend of mine is a big fan of the Old Republic setting, so perhaps I'm havering.
AndrewGPaul wrote: To be honest, I wasn't that impressed by Thrawn as a character. And Boba Fett? Prior to the EU, he was just one of many bounty hunters; perhaps he was a little more cunning than the others (because he figured out what Han was up to), but I can't take seriously as a villain, let alone some sort of antihero, a man who even Darth Vader has to tell to stop shooting people and who gets done in by a blind man with a spear. As far as I can tell, fans loved him because he has a nifty helmet.
Also, if we're going to resort to the "waa, that's only your opinion (because unless I preface every statement with "IMO", people might get confused), then right back at ya; it's ScootyPuffJunior's opinion that the EU sucked, it's saithor's that it didn't.
Is there a correlation with age? As a first hypothesis, I'd suggest that older fans - thirties and up - would be more likely to be primarily fans of the original trilogy, then people in their mid to late twenties fans of the post-Endor EU, and the younger fans more likely to like the Prequel trilogy and the Clone Wars era.
However, no-one's going to give me a grant to study that, so I can't really take it any further. In any case, I'm pretty much an OT purist, although the flight sim games and Rebels sneak in too, and a friend of mine is a big fan of the Old Republic setting, so perhaps I'm havering.
Yeah, I'm not that big a fan of Thrawn either. Don't even get me started on Boba Fett... he's definitely cool and all, but I've never understood the obsession over him.
I'm in my mid thirties and also an OT purist. The only PT movie I own is Episode III and I bought it right after it came out and have maybe watched it once since then. My kids have never seen the Prequels and as far as they know, they don't even exist (though we have watched a little bit of Rebels and enjoyed it). I'll grant that some EU stuff is okay, but most of it stinks on ice.
i really liked the prequels!!!
that's one vote against your "movies that no one likes" assertian, Scooty...
it was cool to see different ships and droids in that trilogy...
there was some really cool tech in those films...
i don't know what age has to do with it...
i'm 40, grew up with the originals, and i still like the updated first trilogy better than the originals, and really enjoyed the prequels...
maybe because visuals are the most important thing to me, and i am a sucker for CG...
all of the EU stuff in the Wookiepedia is a fun read, too...
holding fiction and films sacred is strange to me...
it seems very self-limiting, but to each there own...
just be glad we oh-so grown-ups have cool new toys to play with..
jah-joshua wrote: i really liked the prequels!!!
that's one vote against your "movies that no one likes" assertian, Scooty...
I've never said that no one likes the Prequels. I have said that lots of people don't like them and listed reasons why people don't. They're bad movies on a technical level, but there is nothing wrong with liking or enjoying bad movies (or TV shows, or music, or whatever).
38 here, love the originals, but I would put the Thrawn trilogy neck and neck with the original movies. Timothy Zhan was an amazing writer for Star Wars. The Jedi Academy was a pretty good series as well, not up there with the OT and Thrawn but pretty good and better by far over the prequals. Big Boba fan although I cant think of any of the earlier EU stuff he was involved in except for a short story set 25 years after Endor where he encounters Han again. Long before the Vong reared their literally ugly heads. I know he was involved in the Vong invasion series but really didn't like those books and never read anything post Vong. I cant stand the prequals, too much CG, characters and acting sucked. About the only thing I am glad about for these new movies is they are going back to the OT style of filming with more actors and less CG. Still going to greatly piss me off if Luke isn't married to Mara Jade. I am hoping that's a secret for the movie they are keeping quiet about.
I doubt it. Episodes 1, 2 and 3 ignored everything that had been written about up till that point, I don't see Episode 7 being any different.
On the other hand, "canon" isn't important. If the Thrawn trilogy is a good story now, then it'll still be good in January, even if Luke's married to Sy Snootles in the film.
I am in my 20s, and have always been a big fan of the EU, with Zahn being my favorite living sci-fi author (both for his Star Wars stuff and his original works), and Thrawn one of my favorite Star Wars characters. However, there is quite a bit of mediocre to bad writing in the EU, with the Vong and anything by Kevin J. Anderson being especially bad in my opinion, but some of the post-Vong stuff is actually pretty good.
Anyways, have people read any of the new books yet? I skimmed Aftermath and read a interview with its author, and I was put off by his seeming lack of knowledge about even the original movies (he thinks the entire Imperial fleet was at the Battle of Endor, and was destroyed there) and the ill fitting present tense he wrote the book it, but I would like to hear the opinion of someone who has read it, as this book is vital for establishing the new canon.
I have kept my X-Wing collection to purely IV-VI. I have no problem with EU - from Splinter of the Minds Eye 37 years ago to any amount of computer games in the interim, but on the tabletop I just want to recreate the battles from the first three films, which remain 'proper' Star Wars to me. Will do the same with Armada.
General Seric wrote: Anyways, have people read any of the new books yet? I skimmed Aftermath and read a interview with its author, and I was put off by his seeming lack of knowledge about even the original movies (he thinks the entire Imperial fleet was at the Battle of Endor, and was destroyed there) and the ill fitting present tense he wrote the book it, but I would like to hear the opinion of someone who has read it, as this book is vital for establishing the new canon.
I don't think that is contradicted by the events in Return of the Jedi.
I'm a pretty low bar for sucky sci-fi, but even I couldn't stomach the Yuuzhan Vong loooooooong arc. Save one book. And I still don't understand the last book.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: I'm a pretty low bar for sucky sci-fi, but even I couldn't stomach the Yuuzhan Vong loooooooong arc. Save one book. And I still don't understand the last book.
Apparently, Outbound Flight is a good book.
Now I'm curious about Aftermath...
Yeah, Outbound Flight is quite good, it provides an interesting look at the Chiss and Thrawn's earlier life, while presenting the reader with new characters, locations, and species.
Wait, in Aftermath the entire Imperial fleet was present? That wasn't even a quarter of the fleet. They couldn't send the whole fleet or else the rebels might have noticed that it was odd they all disappeared from their assigned patrol routes and sectors right before they were supposed to be making a "surprise" attack on a Deathstar.
jah-joshua wrote: i really liked the prequels!!!
that's one vote against your "movies that no one likes" assertian, Scooty...
I've never said that no one likes the Prequels. I have said that lots of people don't like them and listed reasons why people don't. They're bad movies on a technical level, but there is nothing wrong with liking or enjoying bad movies (or TV shows, or music, or whatever).
i wouldn't have put quotation marks around "movies that no one likes", if you hadn't written that...
it is right in a quote in the middle of this page, where you were postulating that FFG would not give the Rebels some old Trade Consortium ships, because the "fancy new ships are better than ships from movies that no one likes"...
i don't see how they are "bad movies on a technical level", as they looked beautiful...
the story flowed well, and had the arc that i was most interested in, i.e. the making of Darth Vader...
the new droids, ships, Clone Troopers, Jedi, aliens, Wookies, and planets looked awesome to me, which is what i care about the most in a film...
i'm all about the visuals...
this whole "there is nothing wrong with liking or enjoying bad movies" thing doesn't make any sense to me...
if i like something, why would i think it is bad???
your subjective opinion is different than mine...
i don't think they are bad at all, and if i did, i wouldn't watch them...
i don't enjoy things that i think are bad, whether it is books (Twilight), music (Miley Cyrus), TV shows (Survivor), or movies (Sharknado)...
those are things that are bad, in my opinion, and i don't enjoy them or waste my time on them...
Star Wars is not in the same league as those examples, but there are still plenty of people who love them...
who is the definitive judge of what is objectively bad in creative pursuits???
i would say no one is, and it all comes down to personal taste...
so yeah, i am completely missing how the Star Wars prequels are "bad movies on a technical level"...
. What 
