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

I very much doubt that we'll ever see the majesty of the Executor as it's 21 times the length of that ship in the starter. I think anything less than a scaled representation wouldn't do the ship justice.

So if that ship is 2 to 3 inches long that puts it either 1m ish or 1.6m ish... so yeah.

 Medium of Death wrote:
I very much doubt that we'll ever see the majesty of the Executor as it's 21 times the length of that ship in the starter. I think anything less than a scaled representation wouldn't do the ship justice.

Well they did make that capitol ship for X-Wing, and that would be an equivilant. I can't see it moving much on the board, though. You set it down and it just shoots every turn while unleashing wave after wave of fighters.

It would be very cool. Moving into nerd dreamland.

Does anybody have a rough idea of the size of those ships in the starter?

kestral wrote:
Seeing the game pieces makes me think about getting into this, simply because the fighters are reasonably small, if not really close to in scale. The only point to playing miniature games instead of computer games is the visual aspect, and fighters half the length of capital ships is a big downer.

After reading this, and you saying fighters, all I can wish for now is Star Blazers. This may just scream for Star Blazers to be in there. Battleships with fighter supports.

Now on a different note, I wonder if we will eventually have a Death Star Ray rule so the Imperials can pick of the capital ships.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wolfstan wrote:
Dear Mr Kirby and GW Shareholders,

With reference to there being no competition, or in fact any need for market research...

Nuff said

I exalted this. Not sure what it does, because I never see if anyone ever exalted a post. Wonder why, do we have Exalts if the tall is never shown?

I wonder, what is your limit on expansion or separate ship prices? Lets use the 3 ships in the box? For me I think no more than $30 for the destroyers and $20 for the Rebel 2 ships. Maybe even $15 for the Tantive IV ship. $20 may just be too much. Speaking of the Tantive, imagine if the Rebels had ship that big in size if we use the Tantive IV from X-wing. Would that be the Rebels version of the Superstar Destroyer? I think it would be a great time for a fun game.

Seeing The Flurry as a ship would be pretty damn neat.

No guns of any note but... All the Fighter Squadrons. All of hem!

I'm not as concerned with scale (so long as the Executor is an out-of-scale 17.6km instead of an out-of-scale 8km) as I am with the firepower. The ISDs better have Saxton's petaton broadsides or I'm out.


Honestly, I'm going to give the game a year to get out the ships I really want to buy, and then a little longer for Miniature Market to price them just right, and then, BAM! They will be mine. I'm glad that FFG is focusing on the OT era and the extended universe ships, which were probably the least-crappy not-Zahn parts of the EU. I suppose some of the Clone Wars cap ships are nice, too, but the Trade Federation doughnut ship just brings back too many awful feelings.

Great looking ships.

looks like I got more trays to make.

I think the only way to Portray a ship that size would be to make it the table and have the fighters carrying out their runs on top of it. You'd have to use a drift like dynamic where the imperial player decides how the ship/table moves and then all the ships on the table are moved opposite of that on the table. It could make for some interesting moves for the big ship as the imperial player could "drive" an opposing player off the map if he is too close to the edge.

 Medium of Death wrote:
I don't think the Captial ships are out of scale, that Star Destroyer isn't the one we see in the opening of A New Hope.

We know that. The Victory I is 900 metres long, which is 6 times the length of the CR90. Is the Victory miniature 6 times longer than the Corvette? The Neb-B is twice the length of the CR90, and the mini for the Neb-B is only slightly longer.

Totalbiscuit is getting pretty heavily into X-Wing, talking about it (and ragging on GW/40k) with 2 other british ex-pats for half an hour on the last co-optional podcast. Also tweeted about Armada and talked about it for a while during a dota stream. Can't hurt FFG to get some free advertising in the ~30 yr old white male gamer demographic that TB has.

He showed his X-Wing Corellian Corvette on the podcast and damn that thing is big and sexy.

I was going to post a time-stamped link to that particular Podcast in the GW financial's thread just to show how even people outside of the GW realm know about these things.

And yeah, that Corvette is huge!

His perspective on the big/small GW games was interesting, and the reverse of what you see here in the dedicated tabletop stuff. GW killing off their small games like that basically killed of his (and those like him) participation in tabletop gaming. FFG releasing games like X-Wing and Armada is getting him back in. Him playing FFG Dark Heresy (before his health problems) is also telling. Man has an eye for good rules and good companies - who would have thought a game critic known for honest critique would have such good taste ; p

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Yonan wrote:
Flawed game (mainly due to ground combat) but I agree very much about the feeling of the space combat in Empire at War. Sins of a Solar Empire has the potential for that too but I don't think the Star Wars mod pulled it off too well but it's been a while. I hope the ceiling isn't too low - for their sake. A lot of us will buy ISD's and Mon Cal's if they're available :p

Ground combat is always iffy in Star Wars because the Imperials have tons of stuff and the Rebels have... Snow Speeders and infantry. Great. That's why the Clone Wars makes for a better war game - the two sides have loads of different units. Same could be said about space combat as well, unless they want to really go digging into the EU for some very obscure Rebel ships.

And yes, ISDs and Mon Cals would be very popular, but it's got to be a case of ISD vs Corvettes = dead Corvettes, and not equal points of Corvettes = fair fight with an ISD.

Oops missed this. Yeah while the scale doesn't bother me so much, the relative power has to be very close and should be pretty doable imo.

The Clone War era definitely had a lot more thought put into the whole "realistic" military, both in space and on ground. I still find the original space stuff "cooler", but the sequel ground stuff is better. More jedi, clone troopers looking half competent unlike stormies and most importantly - droidekas. I fething love me some droidekas!!

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I'm not as concerned with scale (so long as the Executor is an out-of-scale 17.6km instead of an out-of-scale 8km) as I am with the firepower. The ISDs better have Saxton's petaton broadsides or I'm out.


Honestly, I'm going to give the game a year to get out the ships I really want to buy, and then a little longer for Miniature Market to price them just right, and then, BAM! They will be mine. I'm glad that FFG is focusing on the OT era and the extended universe ships, which were probably the least-crappy not-Zahn parts of the EU. I suppose some of the Clone Wars cap ships are nice, too, but the Trade Federation doughnut ship just brings back too many awful feelings.

The issue I have with all this is that there are *a lot* of ships larger than an ISD (and smaller than an Executor), they have already shown a disregard for scale with the three ships in the starter, I can only imagine that future releases will feature a similar sliding scale. The alternative is that the ISD is the largest they go, and costs so much to seriously limit the number one can use in a game. Hell the Lucrehulk-class battleships (i.e. 'the Trade Federation doughnut ship') is 3km in diameter.

 Yonan wrote:
The Clone War era definitely had a lot more thought put into the whole "realistic" military, both in space and on ground. I still find the original space stuff "cooler", but the sequel ground stuff is better. More jedi, clone troopers looking half competent unlike stormies and most importantly - droidekas. I fething love me some droidekas!!

I always liked the Hailfire Droids. Man a Dropship Commander-scale Clone Wars game would be great!

As much as I appreciate the hard work FFG has put into X-wing to be scale, I'm not a scale fanatic. I'll happily play the Star Trek Attack Wing, with it's wonky scale because a) I like Trek and b) it's a pretty good game. If the models for Armada look nearly as fantastic as they do for X-wing and the game plays great, I'll take it over it being in scale any day.

And honestly, after the poor WotC version of a couple years ago with it's crappy-bent models, stand-and-fire gameplay and collectability scheme, I'll take this any day of the week.

So long as relative scale stays consistent in Armada, it'll be fine.

The problem with Attack Wing was that things weren't even in relative scale, stuff was just random sizes.

While I understand people want things to be in scale, these aren't highly detailed scale models. They're gaming pieces first and foremost.

Do we actually have grown men saying certain play things are not long enough?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

Honestly, I'm going to give the game a year to get out the ships I really want to buy, and then a little longer for Miniature Market to price them just right, and then, BAM! They will be mine. I'm glad that FFG is focusing on the OT era and the extended universe ships, which were probably the least-crappy not-Zahn parts of the EU. I suppose some of the Clone Wars cap ships are nice, too, but the Trade Federation doughnut ship just brings back too many awful feelings.

Doughnut ships were simply plain boring - now, World Devastators, they were truly stupid in both concept and execution.

chaos0xomega wrote:

The issue I have with all this is that there are *a lot* of ships larger than an ISD (and smaller than an Executor), they have already shown a disregard for scale with the three ships in the starter, I can only imagine that future releases will feature a similar sliding scale. The alternative is that the ISD is the largest they go, and costs so much to seriously limit the number one can use in a game. Hell the Lucrehulk-class battleships (i.e. 'the Trade Federation doughnut ship') is 3km in diameter.

Even putting ISD on scale with Victory is bit challenging, as it is several times the bulk:

I don't see any scaling issues in Attack Wing. If you take any starship mini and place it next to a Bird of Prey you'll see that they're always in scale as established in the show.


Edit: By the transitive property, Attack Wing is in perfect scale. QED.

Said it once, will say it again. Something is wrong when grown men have to talk to other grown men about a play thing that is not long enough.

For me, I don't need proper scale. I want clear, sharp and beautifully painted minis. If one is longer than another, or one is shorter compared to someone else, WHO CARES.

It's how you use it.

Davor, the Bird of Prey is a grower, not a show-er.

And Attack Wing's minis are not exactly clear, sharp and beautiful. Well, maybe the newer minis. Still, they are very fun to fiddle with.


I have no doubt that FFG's Armada minis will be better painted and better sculpted. The fighter tokens, on the other hand, are a bit plain.

Davor wrote:
Said it once, will say it again. Something is wrong when grown men have to talk to other grown men about a play thing that is not long enough. .

Something is wrong when someone is so insistent that their way is the only way and other peoples concerns are unjustified imo.

Davor wrote:
Said it once, will say it again. Something is wrong when grown men have to talk to other grown men about a play thing that is not long enough. .

Yes, you've said it repeatedly. You can stop saying it now.

Davor wrote:
Said it once, will say it again. Something is wrong when grown men have to talk to other grown men about a play thing that is not long enough.

For me, I don't need proper scale. I want clear, sharp and beautifully painted minis. If one is longer than another, or one is shorter compared to someone else, WHO CARES.

It's how you use it.

No, there's nothing wrong. Just people making informed decisions not to buy products, because they don't quite work for them. Of course, if you want to want to repeatedly try to reraise the issue to get a reaction from someone, because you feel like calling someone a 'nerd' today, go right ahead.

I don't need proper scale either. What I do need is a better representation of the relative scales between the ships that what this offers us. For that reason, I won't be buying it. I might buy a big-box Executor as a standalone display piece. So yeah, I care. What I don't particularly care about is your opinion that there's 'something wrong' with that, because quite frankly, who the hell are you? You can write ALL CAPS as much as you like, I don't agree with your opinion, and won't suddenly start placing pre-orders just because you think scale issues are something worth berating other people over the internet over.

If (for example's sake) you had a Space Marine army, and GW mandated replacing all your Rhinos with 6mm Epic scale equivalents, would this not concern you? I mean, they're the same thing... just not as long. Would you be okay with it, or would it perhaps ruin the visual spectacle of the army to have ten 28mm guys dropped off by a 15mm long APC?

Aren't space marines already an example of a scale issue in 40k? True-scale marines are a thing because so many people do care about scale. Not enough to cost GW any real money, but certainly enough to create a small garage industry. I expect Shapeways will see true-scale not-corvettes and the like before too long.

40k is much larger than this game will be though which is why those spin offs crop up. I'd much rather pester them about what we want changed now so they can think about modifying it before release. If there's still room for that... not sure.

Well, they will probably find out that a lot of people care one way, a lot of people care another way, and most people don't care as long as they feel like they're getting their money's worth.

Personally, I prefer for an elastic scale, as it presently is. I like having the minis as toys, where utility is more important than scale. I can use my imagination to provide for the scale. I can't use my imagination to make a teeny toy or a behemoth toy into a comfortable size. And if they are all roughly the same size then all the ships should have similar amounts of detail, a serious problem for Attack Wing, where many of the ships look like vending machine toys.

But if it turns out more people care about scale than not, FFG should damn well make their ships to scale.

What are the bets there'll be an appropriately scaled VSD on Shapeways soon?

Davor wrote:
Said it once, will say it again. Something is wrong when grown men have to talk to other grown men about a play thing that is not long enough.

For me, I don't need proper scale. I want clear, sharp and beautifully painted minis. If one is longer than another, or one is shorter compared to someone else, WHO CARES.

It's how you use it.

Okay, you don't care. Good for you.

Other people do, and there's nothing wrong with it. Also, no one cares if you care or not.

 Ketara wrote:
What are the bets there'll be an appropriately scaled VSD on Shapeways soon?

Better to go the opposite route: Make the Corvette and Neb-B smaller.