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'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.

chaos0xomega wrote:

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.

I just hope that at the end of this month there is a post that says wave 2 is sent and that the mon cal is awesome.

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.

Whats the Zann Consortium? That ones not ringing any bells.

Play Empire at War: Forces of Corruption.

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:Whats the Zann Consortium? That ones not ringing any bells.

chaos0xomega wrote:Play Empire at War: Forces of Corruption.

Or read this; it's a much simpler way to get an answer to your question:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Zann_Consortium

Didn't someone also convert a stolen Star Destroyer into a flying casino, painted it bright red too?

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
Didn't someone also convert a stolen Star Destroyer into a flying casino, painted it bright red too?

That would be booster Terriks errant venture.

At various points it was harmless up to fully armed and operational

At one point, iirc, it had a prototype superlaser ala the death star strapped to it.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

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.

 saithor wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

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..

cheers
jah

 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.

Apparently, Outbound Flight is a good book.

Now I'm curious about Aftermath...

 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.

I hate retcons.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 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"...

cheers
jah

Topic, folks.