Jump to content



Photo

X-Wing Mini Alternates/Customs


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#41 Rob Jedi

Rob Jedi

    Member

  • Members
  • 488 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 10:27 AM

Yeah these are interesting please keep posting.

 

Also nice RoboRally board.


Edited by Rob Jedi, 10 August 2014 - 07:08 AM.

Rob_Jedi's Miniature Painting Blog   My Repaints   Armored Hull YT-1300   Imperial Transport

Rebels: Ax3  Bx3  Ex1  CRx1  GRx1  Hx2  Xx6  Yx3  YTx3  Zx6

Empire: FSx3  LSx1  TAx2  TBx2  TDx2  TFx7  TIx7  TPx1 


#42 lee337

lee337

    Member

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 10 August 2014 - 11:45 PM

CORRECTION: As has been pointed out in another thread, my estimate for 70m for the length of the Gozanti-class cruiser just won't work.  THAT IS TOO SMALL.  Clips from the new Rebels TV series show a very significant gap in between the TIE fighters when the ship is viewed from the front (just about wide enough to squeeze in another TIE in between if only there was another docking tube) -- so my build just doesn't cut it.  So, it's back to the drawing board for me.

 

Meanwhile, I took a few pictures of some other ships I've been considering as proxies for starfighter battles in my campaign.

 

ARC-170 Revisited:

2014-08-07-arc-170-comparison.png

 

Despite my earlier predictions, I actually got some push-back from the players on the Titanium ARC-170 on the table.  "Surely, it can't be THAT big, can it?"  Well, surely it can't.  If I had a proper model to represent the ARC-170 at 1:270 scale, it would be about 3.3" wide, and the Titanium ARC-170 is 4" wide.  There's a Shapeways model from Mel Miniatures that comes in at 3.36" wide, but I'm not keen on the "peach fuzz" and the surface detail from 3D printers for miniatures that small.  I'm trying out the Starship Battles ARC-170 (too small at 2.25" wide) as a substitute, since I think it does a bit better at passing the "eyeball test" on the table.  If I get any gripes, I'll fall back on, "Well, then *YOU* find me a better model!"   ;)

 

 

Virago / StarViper Comparison:

2014-08-07-virago-comparison.png

 

In my campaign, the PCs have had a few brushes with the Zann Consortium, and the "StarViper" is supposed to be a key starfighter for that group, so I figured I should fix up a few for the nigh-inevitable battle.  The Wookieepedia entry for the Virago/StarViper is pretty useless.  It gives a length as 24m.  24m measured from whence to where?  Those wings are supposed to move about, after all.  I'm guessing there's unlikely to be an official FFG Virago -- at least not anytime SOON -- so I figured I'd settle for a Micro Machine that "looks about right."  As luck would have it, the Starship Battles Virago, while having the wings in a wider configuration, happens to still be about the same size/scale.  This is especially evident if I put the two models together, cockpit to cockpit -- the cockpits are the same size.  (As for which model is BETTER ... well, the Starship Battles model has a little finer detail, but it's subject to lots of warping.)

 

 

Corellian Corvette Comparison:

2014-08-07-blockade-runner-comparison.pn

 

Lastly (for now), I picked up one of those old Collectors' Fleet "Rebel Blockade Runner" models.  The sound effects still work!   :D  It's a bit bigger than FFG's model (I can live with that), but the level of detail is ATROCIOUS by comparison.  Where FFG's model has a finely detailed vent, the Collectors' Fleet version just has, say, a bump if you're lucky.  I'm toying with the idea of using Instant Mold to get impressions of greebles on the FFG version, and then try to recreate them with putty on the Collectors' Fleet one.  Sure, the scale is different, but I think the added individual spot details would still constitute an improvement.

 

Right now, I can't really envision having much need for TWO Corvettes in a single starfighter encounter, but a long time ago I had wanted to get one of these so I could convert it to resemble the FarStar from the DarkStryder campaign.  (The variant had a hangar bay and some docking tubes for X-Wings, and I liked the idea of having a ship that could act as a roving base for a bunch of starfighters.)  If I ever settle on a proper size for the Gozanti-class Cruiser (with TIE support) and start actually building it, perhaps this could be the Rebel equivalent once I add on the docking tubes and fighter bay.  It's not something really called for in my current campaign, however, so it's a lower priority.

Would something this work in scale for you?..http://starshipmodel...nti-cruiser.cfm


 

Rebels: A Wing (2)   B wing (1) X Wing (4) Y wing (2) YT1300 (3) CR90 (1) GR75 (1) HWK290(1)

Imperial: TIE/ln (6) Tie/int (2) Royal Tie Int (2) Lambda (1) TIE/Bomb (2) Firespray31 (2)

 


#43 Jordan Peacock

Jordan Peacock

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 11 August 2014 - 06:56 AM

 

Would something this work in scale for you?..http://starshipmodel...nti-cruiser.cfm

 

 

Thanks for the link!  That looks like a beautiful model, but it says it's about 6" long, which wouldn't be much longer than FFG's Millennium Falcon / YT-1300 model.  (At 1:350 scale, that means they're going with the old 42m measurement.)  It sure makes me wish there were some marvelous scaling tool I could use to take a "master" at one scale and somehow sculpt an exact duplicate scaled larger or smaller.  :D



#44 Radarman5

Radarman5

    Member

  • Members
  • 597 posts

Posted 11 August 2014 - 01:54 PM

I was GMing Edge of the Empire just before getting into X-Wing. We had trouble with its more abstract space combat and I thought about using the X-wing rules instead but the diferances in the two systems didn't seem like they would mesh, so I never tried it. What's your aproach, do you alter the talents and skills from eote or change the ship stats from x-wing? Say a PC has training in pilot(space), how does thier ability score/skill ranks translate?


Since I'm doing this for RPG purposes, there's an awful lot of "winging it" going on, and I need to make some updates to my "cheat sheet" since the last game. For each ship being used by the players, I've been pasting together quick-ref sheets that have the Edge of Empire stats, and then a bogus (Photoshop patched) ship card for the X-Wing stats, along with paste-in equipment cards that seem appropriate (for ion cannons, proton torpedoes, etc.). In some cases, I don't happen to have both Edge of Empire *AND* X-Wing stats for a given ship, so I have to make something up. I don't yet have a smooth "conversion" process, so it mostly consists of my conjecture about stuff like, "Well, this ship is supposed to be a lowly mass-produced craft, so it's probably close to a Headhunter in stats,
I've seen folks posting stats for various ships, but quite often, when I examine the stats, they tend to be suspiciously powerful (as in, "Why would anyone ever want a mere X-Wing, when they could have THIS?!"). So for now I'm just eyeballing it and hoping the players don't think too much about WHERE I got these stats.
For game play ... it's still a work in progress, and I think my own balance is a bit broken and in need of further work. But with that in mind, here's where I am at the moment.
>>> Determine Piloting score by adding up the character's dice in Piloting (Space). Each green die = 1 point; each yellow die = 2 points. This puts the typical TIE fighter pilot (3 Agility + 1 rank Piloting) at a Piloting score of "4." This is used for purposes of determining order in which movements are made.

>>> Every PC who is a member of the crew of a ship (e.g., multiple PCs acting as gunners, etc.) acts at the same time as the ship's pilot. (Yes, this means a ship with awesome gunners and a lousy pilot will be severely disadvantaged in terms of action order, but I can live with that. And what player group will tolerate having a lousy pilot at the helm for very long? ;) )

>>> We go through rounds of X-Wing Miniatures combat like usual -- but if there is any non-starfighter-combat activity that's taking place at the same time (e.g., a fight taking place ON one of the ships right in the middle of the battle, or the "talkie" guy in the group is trying to negotiate in the middle of the shooting), then any die-rolling exercises related to that are handled at the "bottom" of each round.

>>> For the various Talents, I've been figuring out their impact on the game on an "as it comes up" basis. Being able to reroll a Piloting check isn't of much use if Piloting is just a fixed value determining your position in the action order each round ... but I can entertain the idea that it could be used to reroll anything involving dice that could reflect upon actual piloting (e.g., reroll the damage dice when you pass "through" an asteroid in hopes that it'll come up with no hits ... or reroll evasion dice in hopes of negating an attack). Once I make a house-ruling on that, I write it down for future reference, but I haven't exhaustively gone through ALL the Talents to see how they might apply.

>>> Having multiple players on, say, a YT-1300 to man the turrets, etc., means the ship can get in more attacks. A YT-1300 has two turrets, so if you've got one pilot and one gunner, the pilot could make an attack in his forward arc, AND the gunner gets to make one attack that can go outside the forward arc (because it's a turret). If you've got TWO gunners, then it can make two attacks, each one ignoring the forward firing arc (but it doesn't magically add a THIRD attack, because in-game there are still only two turrets.)

>>> I calculate a "score" for certain other skills that might impact game play, mostly in the form of allowing rerolls on dice. My current formula is similar to that for Piloting: Add up your dice (green = 1, yellow = 2), but then SUBTRACT TWO. If, SOMEHOW, after that, you end up with zero or a NEGATIVE score, you're just too incompetent at that skill to contribute, or there's some sort of penalty.

(Note: I don't apply this to the Piloting score because it would be kind of moot anyway, since there it's just used to determine turn order.)

>>> Gunnery: You get to reroll a number of attack dice equal to your "gunnery score." You must take the new result, whether better or worse. If you have a negative Gunnery skill, you get NO rerolls, and in fact you must pull out one attack die per negative score. (Note: I treat the typical space pirate as having a "Gunnery Score" of zero. This tends to mostly benefit the players and "major NPCs.") If "Lock On" is an option, a gunner can "lock on" separately from the pilot.

>>> Mechanics: For this, I listed a number of abilities based on the various Astromech cards, and then ranked them by how "powerful" I thought they were (e.g., the ones that let you flip a Critical over to be a regular damage, or let you restore a shield point if the pilot takes a green action). Each round, anyone who is acting as a Mechanic (i.e., not doing anything else!) can take a repair action, choosing from the list, as long as he meets the minimum Mechanics score for each option.

>>> Computers: For this, I think I went overboard: You calculate your Computers score, and then you can engage in "electronic countermeasures" or providing "targeting support" over the course of the round (rather than waiting until your "turn") ... which basically means that you get a limited number of dice you can reroll on any attack or defense die that round, for friends or foes who happen to be within 3 range. So if you've got 4 yellow in Computers (4 * 2 -2 = 6) then over the course of each round, you'd get to reroll up to 6 attack or defense dice, friend or foe, hoping each time that the new roll is better than the old.

The first time I did this, however, there was no range limitation. Having a Slicer in the group meant that he was probably the most versatile and engaged character in the entire conflict, since he could mete out help or hindrance as desired, over the course of the round. (And being able to pick and choose which dice to reroll on both sides of an exchange is a pretty big deal.) Next time, I'm going with the range limitation, at the very least.

Since I've got a Slicer in the group, I pretty much have to make sure he CAN do something, and the fact he's specialized means that he's got lots of dice in it -- while others in the group (those acting as gunners, pilots, etc.) tend to be more diversified in their skill sets (since they need to be competent not only at space combat, but when the action takes place on land as well), so I'm not sure on where to properly balance things.

...

Anyway, that's just an abstract overview, and I still need to do some edits to reflect observations from our last game. We don't go through THAT much starfighter combat in our campaign (as half the time the group keeps AVOIDING combat situations through trickery, fast-talking, etc., and they're smugglers, not soldiers), so it takes me a while to go through iterations of "playtesting" this properly. Hence, it's going to be a while before I there's even a hope that I'll have anything worthwhile to post over on the Edge of Empire forums.
Have you considered dropping the x-wing stats, actions, upgrades and maybe dials, and just using the ships, range ruler, and maneuver templates from x-wing along side the EotE/AoR rpg ship stats, actions, maneuvers, skills and talents? That way there's less conversion to worry about, and the PCs' abilities are consistent with the rpg rules. All you'd need to change is a couple talents and pilot actions/maneuvers.

Initiative could stay the same, so if you had for example a pilot, and 2 gunners:
Pc
Pc
Npc
Pc

Then the PCs could still have the normal options.
Pilot flys the ship
Gunner 1 attacks
Npc moves and attacks
Gunner 2 attacks

Or

Both gunner attacks
Npc attacks
Pilot flys the ship

- The Full Throttle talent could be the same as the boost action from x-wing, with supreme full throttle granting use of either a 1 or 2 straight/bank template.
- Ship speed would only be necessary for Chase scenes. With Gain the Advantage, you could either use the speeds of each ships chosen maneuver or with an opposed pilot skill check. Punch It and Accelerate/Decelerate wouldn't be used in combat anymore.
- Determining which section of a ship can be targeted could use the closest point to closest point rule.

The only thing I'm not sure on is the range issue. Standard ship weapons only work at close range, but missiles and such can be fire from short. Maybe range 1-2 for close and 3 for short.i think this would need some play testing.

Edited by Radarman5, 11 August 2014 - 01:57 PM.

EMPIRE: 5 TIE Fighters, 4 TIE Bombers, 4 TIE Interceptors, 1 TIE Defender, 1 TIE Phantom, 1 TIE Advanced, 1 Lambda Shuttle, 2 Firesprays

REBEL: 2 A-Wings, 1 B-Wing, 3 X-Wings, 1 HWK-290, 1 CR-90, 1 GR-75

SCUM & VILLAINY: 2 Firesprays, 1 HWK-290


#45 Jordan Peacock

Jordan Peacock

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 07:45 AM

For my Edge of Empire / Age of Rebellion / X-Wing campaign, I've had need for a few "generic" starfighters now and again -- for pirates, mercs, planetary law enforcement, etc.  Sure, I could just have Y-Wings and Headhunters and the occasional TIE squad AGAIN, but I thought I might see what I have in the garage that I could kitbash into "generic" ships that still have something of a Star Wars look for a change.

 

I have a whole bunch of Crimson Skies airplane Clix -- largely thanks to my local game store, Sci-Fi City, having RACKS of them (and "more in the warehouse," I was told) for 99 cents per blister.  So, that makes it 25 cents per plane for the 4-packs.  (I just wish that when they made the PEOPLE figures, they were in regular HeroClix scale, and I'd be all set for pulpy action heroes.  I haven't much need for *54mm* pulpy action heroes, alas.)

 

2014-08-27-crimsonskies-01-box.png

 

One pack is called the "Fortune Hunters."  Each pack contains 4 aircraft, in the typically dopey Crimson Skies style.  (I mean, if we're going to have "1930s aircraft overdrive," then, for crying out loud, I want battle Gee-Bees, Ford Tri-Motors and DC-3s bristling with weapons emplacements ... not VariEzes and canards and just taking all the props and sticking them on the BACK instead of the front.  But at least they have "flying wing" style craft.  I wish WizKids had released a "zeppelin" pack.  :)  But I digress.)

Of those 4 craft, there are just 2 styles.  First is the P21-J Devastator -- with a tubby fuselage, and in VariEze fashion it has its main wing and a pusher prop in the back, and a canard in the front.  But that's not all -- oh no!  It has to be a BIPLANE in the back WITH swept wings.  Well, I might do something with that later.

 

Instead, I focused on the Sanderson FB14 "Vampire" -- narrow fuselage, wings in the front, big pusher props up in the back, and a silly arrangement of six gun barrels of varying length from the wings.  I had it in mind to rearrange the parts and see if I could end up with something "StarWarsy" -- in the fashion of the Z-95 Headhunter, ARC-170, or X-Wing, in that it'd have a long nose up front, wings to the back, and rocket boosters, preferably with wing-guns some distance away from the fuselage (because in the Star Wars universe, we don't want our guns lining up with the pilot's line of sight for some reason).

 

2014-08-27-crimsonskies-02-pieces.png

 

Each aircraft model has a LOT of little pieces glued together.  Sometimes they come apart easily (and have already done so in the box).  At others, removing them is something of an ordeal, because a great gob of glue was used on a particular piece in the factory.  Here I've disassembled the craft into its constituent parts; the little bubble-like structures on the wings with two guns sticking out are actually separate parts that can SOMETIMES be popped off (I discovered this when one simply fell off in the box), and I experimented with prying them off in the hopes of positioning them further out on the wing, but I ended up just sticking with keeping them in place.

 

2014-08-27-crimsonskies-03-pinning.png

 

Now, getting the parts back TOGETHER in another arrangement is a bit tougher than just breaking the thing apart, naturally.  I used a hobby drill to make holes in the facing area of the wings (after using a hobby knife to make sure the surface was smooth), and then in the corresponding parts of the engines, with some wire to make the join.  I decided to keep the "gull wing" arrangement, but to lower the angle of the wings where they join the body so that the outer planes are aligned to the horizontal (more or less).  In the picture, the "gun bubble" has been temporarily popped off the wing (though I glued it back on later).

 

Note: The "engine" structure here with the "V" support in the middle is also pretty nice for kitbashing "dieselpunk" hero types -- giving someone an aero-pack versus a rocket-pack, for instance.

 

 

2014-08-27-crimsonskies-04-wingassembly.

 

And above is the "gull-wing" assembly.

 

 

2014-08-27-crimsonskies-05-headhuntersty

 

I then reattached the wing assembly to the back, using a bit of putty to fill the gap between the "V" of the center of the wing assembly and the horizontal tail/aileron arrangement.  I trimmed off the "spinning prop" (clear discs) on the backs of the engines, so I can paint them up in "ion engine blue" to represent thrusters.  There's a bit of putty on the front fuselage where I tried to smooth out the areas where the wings were originally attached.

 

I drilled a hole just behind the cockpit bubble to add a tiny piece of wire, then a bead of putty to make an astromech dome, and used a bit more putty to make a tail-gunner bubble (with wire for the gun) at a gap on the tail assembly.

Now, I just need to put this thing on a double-wide base (80mmx40mm), fix up a custom stat card for it, and do some touch-up work on the paint (to get puttied areas to match the original paint scheme, which I've decided to keep for now).

 

 

The result does not look like any PARTICULAR Star Wars craft (and I regret that I didn't have an easy way to give it "proto-X-wing" foils as on the ARC-170), but I figure it can work for generic starfighters when needed.  Stat-wise, I'll base it off of the Mel Miniatures stats for the ARC-170, but with some ion cannons, so it would be ideal either as a pirate raider ship (for theoretically disabling rather than destroying its prey*), or as planetary customs enforcer craft (for disabling rather than destroying law-breakers in orbit).  I figure I'll fix up 3 more like this, and do a little touch-up work to paint some color dots on the astromech domes (so they stand out as such, even if I don't go into great detail).

 

(* Yeah, I know, "disabling" versus "destroying" is an entirely moot point within the scope of any given X-Wing Miniatures battle, but I'm using the Edge of the Empire RPG as a framing element.)

 

As for the other craft in this pack, they're a bit chubbier and I think they might work better if I were to convert them into retro-style rocketships for games of Slipstream, than if I were to try to shoehorn them into a Star Wars campaign.

 



#46 Forgottenlore

Forgottenlore

    Midnight Dreary

  • Members
  • 1,771 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 09:26 AM

I would totally pick up some more crimson skies stuff at that price. It was actually a pretty decent game (some similarities to flight path system) and your idea of using them as conversion fodder for unique star fighters is great.

Thanks, Troy

 

Once Upon a Midnight Dreary....


#47 Jordan Peacock

Jordan Peacock

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 06:50 AM

I decided to dub the Crimson Skies "Vampire" conversions as "Stinger-1000."  This is an allusion to the "S-100 Stinger-class starfighter," which is about the closest I could find to a starfighter that this bore much resemblance to ... if only the wings were folded up at a 90 degree angle.  My notion is that it's a sort of "spiritual successor" to the old spacecraft, with wings that fold up when landing.

 

Stat-wise, I imagine it as comparable to the ARC-170, but minus the hefty sensor suite in the nose and missile tubes, and with just two crewmen and an astromech.  The ship would be for planetary customs and enforcement, so armed with ion cannons and standard lasers/blasters; the tailgunner serves as a deterrent when it's "escorting" an unlicensed craft.

 

Et cetera, et cetera.  The important thing is that I was lucky enough to have some "maroon" paint that blended well enough with the dark red of the existing paint job, so I cleaned up the lines just a bit.

 

2014-09-01-starwars-crimsonskies-stinger


Edited by Jordan Peacock, 02 September 2014 - 06:55 AM.

  • BaronFel likes this

#48 Jordan Peacock

Jordan Peacock

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:30 AM

A project of mine over the weekend was to take an Action Fleet "Republic Cruiser" toy, and turn it into a CR-20 Troop Carrier (as seen in the Tartakovsky Clone Wars cartoon):

 

CR-20_Troop_Carrier.jpg

 

The toy would serve as the base to start from, with some foam core illustration board to form the "shell" of the extended fuselage (fortunately mostly a bunch of flat surfaces):

2014-09-01-starwars-cr20-a-republiccruis

 

 

Given the thickness of the illustration board, I had to do a bit of beveling with a sharp hobby knife, and in some cases scraped away most of the foam interior to make way for extensions of the ship form underneath.  I had to pop off the plastic "landing gear" (keeping those as "bitz" for later), and also the top of the "cockpit" (which was hinged so a single figure could be fit inside, despite the ridiculous scale problem).

2014-09-01-starwars-cr20-b-illustrationb

 

 

Once the surface was assembled, I scored the surface among drawn panel lines, and used some epoxy putty to fill gaps.  I also used some epoxy putty to make larger "docking rings" for the sides (using a Snap-Tite "Millennium Falcon" toy's docking rings as a model, and some Instant Mold to make a temporary mold off of same).

2014-09-01-starwars-cr20-c-puttydetails.

 

 

Now, I really need to do something about smoothing those corners, and I'd do well to add some definition to the surface with some cardstock cut-out panels and such, but in the meantime I did a rough paint job so I have something I can put on the table at next weekend's game:

2014-09-01-starwars-cr20-d-basicpaint.pn

 

 

Aside from the aforementioned corner-smoothing and panel-adding, I also hope to do something about the cockpit windows.  I have some shiny black plastic that would work nicely for recessed "transparisteel" panels.  I'm not sure what to do about the "turbolaser" turrets that should be on either side; I have a few "turrets" in the bitz box, but they're all overly large for this; I may have to fashion something out of wire and putty at this rate.

The symbol on the side is the Star Wars universe equivalent of the "Red Cross" medic symbol; I'm using this ship to represent a medical ship for my "Edge of the Empire" campaign.  

 

At our next game, I plan on starting up with a good ol' starfighter scenario using the X-Wing Miniatures rules, with this model to represent a CR-20 modified to serve as a medical transport -- and one of the PCs is currently on it when the fighting commences.  It's not a particularly agile fighter, but the PCs also have a Headhunter, an ARC-170, and a YT-1300 at their disposal.

 

Since this sort of ship easily occupies two Large Ship stands, I figure it's something bigger than merely Large, but it doesn't seem quite up to Epic levels.  I'm using standard starfighter maneuvering for it (no Power ratings, no bulldozing through smaller fighters), but its custom dial is pretty much just straights and shallow turns.  No hard rights, and no K-turns.


  • BenderIsGreat likes this

#49 Jordan Peacock

Jordan Peacock

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 08:34 AM

Inspired in part by the "Uglies" thread (I already had something like this in mind to do anyway just to see if I could), I've tried making a Z-Ceptor "Ugly."

 

Putty Rough:

2014-09-15-starwars-ugly-zceptor-1.png

 

The bulk of this just consists of some epoxy putty put in temporary push-molds made from Instant Mold, using existing starfighter models to get portions of the appropriate ships (in this case, X-Wing and TIE Interceptor parts), plus a bit of extra putty and wire to make some reinforcing braces (particularly underneath).

 

 

Ugly WIP:

2014-09-15-starwars-ugly-zceptor-2.png

 

I applied a bit of grey dry-brushing to bring out some of the details more (as it's pretty hard for my poor eyes to pick out detail on that black epoxy putty), and tried making something to represent the truncated X-Wing cannons strapped to the nose.  (That seems to be a theme with this Z-Ceptor design: MORE GUNS!  Two TIE Interceptor guns on the wings, two X-Wing guns strapped to the nose, and then some sort of unwieldy turret on top for good measure.)

 

Stat-wise, I see this as having decent firepower, mid-to-low evasion, low hull, no shields, and a maneuver dial that isn't all that maneuverable (no K-turns, lots of red on the turns).  No wonder they stuck a turret on it!  I wouldn't know how to price this thing in terms of X-Wing Minis rules for fairness, but I'm planning on using this for campaign scenarios anyway.  

 

For the other "Uglies," I think I'm going to work more with what parts I have on hand, and not worry about trying to get it so close to an "established" ugly type.  Really, the idea of any force having squadrons of Z-ceptors, Y-TIEs, X-TIEs, et al., strikes me as kind of silly.  I figured the point of uglies is that you're cobbling together a ship from whatever you have; uniformity shouldn't be likely.  Even symmetry might be a luxury too far.

 

Now, due to the necessities of game abstractions, I may give several of these the SAME STATS, but they'll sure look a lot different from each other.


  • LordCole likes this

#50 LordCole

LordCole

    Member

  • Members
  • 273 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:22 PM

How have I missed this topic? This is brilliant work, good conversions and refits.



#51 Gosric

Gosric

    Member

  • Members
  • 567 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:57 PM

 

 

Would something this work in scale for you?..http://starshipmodel...nti-cruiser.cfm

 

 

Thanks for the link!  That looks like a beautiful model, but it says it's about 6" long, which wouldn't be much longer than FFG's Millennium Falcon / YT-1300 model.  (At 1:350 scale, that means they're going with the old 42m measurement.)  It sure makes me wish there were some marvelous scaling tool I could use to take a "master" at one scale and somehow sculpt an exact duplicate scaled larger or smaller.   :D

 

http://jbwid.com/scalcalc.htm

 

This might be handy for you


  • Jordan Peacock likes this

The Sea of Stars will be my home, Under the black flag of freedom

http://lorelei-shipy...blr.com/archive

https://www.shapeway...ric?sort=newest


#52 Rob Jedi

Rob Jedi

    Member

  • Members
  • 488 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 09:00 PM

Damn I wish i could grab Crimson Skies planes for that price, I have no interest in clix bases games but I loved the PC and Xbox games. 

 

You've created some interesting pirate ships from them can you put them next to regular ships for comparison.


  • BaronFel and Bakura83 like this

Rob_Jedi's Miniature Painting Blog   My Repaints   Armored Hull YT-1300   Imperial Transport

Rebels: Ax3  Bx3  Ex1  CRx1  GRx1  Hx2  Xx6  Yx3  YTx3  Zx6

Empire: FSx3  LSx1  TAx2  TBx2  TDx2  TFx7  TIx7  TPx1 


#53 LordCole

LordCole

    Member

  • Members
  • 273 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 01:49 AM

Damn I wish i could grab Crimson Skies planes for that price, I have no interest in clix bases games but I loved the PC and Xbox games. 

 

You've created some interesting pirate ships from them can you put them next to regular ships for comparison.

 

I seen these at CON recently and a huckster had them in the bin, "all the mini's you can grab with one hand for a dollar".



#54 Bakura83

Bakura83

    Member

  • Members
  • 583 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 01:57 AM

Damn I wish i could grab Crimson Skies planes for that price, I have no interest in clix bases games but I loved the PC and Xbox games. 
 
You've created some interesting pirate ships from them can you put them next to regular ships for comparison.

 
I seen these at CON recently and a huckster had them in the bin, "all the mini's you can grab with one hand for a dollar".

Like loose, or still in the packaging?

#55 LordCole

LordCole

    Member

  • Members
  • 273 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 01:59 AM

 

 

Damn I wish i could grab Crimson Skies planes for that price, I have no interest in clix bases games but I loved the PC and Xbox games. 
 
You've created some interesting pirate ships from them can you put them next to regular ships for comparison.

 
I seen these at CON recently and a huckster had them in the bin, "all the mini's you can grab with one hand for a dollar".

Like loose, or still in the packaging?

 

Loose forsure



#56 Gosric

Gosric

    Member

  • Members
  • 567 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 04:19 PM

I wish Crimson Skies would become popular again. Ive designed a bunch of my own alternate 1930s fighters but it would be nice to have easy access to more and an actual good reason for me to order mine *L*


The Sea of Stars will be my home, Under the black flag of freedom

http://lorelei-shipy...blr.com/archive

https://www.shapeway...ric?sort=newest


#57 Jordan Peacock

Jordan Peacock

    Member

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 05:15 PM

Damn I wish i could grab Crimson Skies planes for that price, I have no interest in clix bases games but I loved the PC and Xbox games. 

 

You've created some interesting pirate ships from them can you put them next to regular ships for comparison.

 

I happened to have a photo I took recently of several of the custom ships at once, in case this helps to give a rough idea of size:

2014-09-15-starwars-custom-ships.png

 

For context, the little square bases are 40mm x 40mm.  The converted Crimson Skies craft are on 80mm x 40mm bases.  The Micro Machines Headhunter is AWFULLY close to the size of the standard FFG starfighters, but I didn't have any FFG originals in this particular shot.  (I was just goofing off and took a photo of several of the ships I used in my last game session.)  I'll see if I can line up a more useful size comparison for the Crimson Skies modified models this weekend or thereabouts.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS