Jump to content



Photo

starship classes and the Millennium Falcon


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 MarthWMaster

MarthWMaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,110 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 07:10 PM

I'll admit I'm pretty purist, but it bothers me a little bit that the game classifies the Millennium Falcon as a Fighter. It's usually referred to as a Light Freighter or the like, with the "starfighter" classification being restricted to the smallest ships, typically those that can hold only one or two crew members.

I realize this is a gameplay consideration and the Falcon functions much in the same way that starfighters do, being among the fastest ships and more than able to hold its own in a dogfight. But I feel like it would be very good for it and other ships of its type (the Outrider, other YT-1300's, etc.) to have an additional, "Transport" keyword following Fighter, as a nod to the ship's intended role. Cards that deal with smuggling operations might occasionally look for this keyword.

Does anyone else think something could be gained by this, even if only from a flavor standpoint?


"To play a wrong note is insignificant. To play without passion is inexcusable."
– Beethoven

#2 borithan

borithan

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,147 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 10:05 PM

Do we know that it is classed as a fighter?

And even so the Falcon is basically a fighter. It has demonstrated fighter or near fighter manoeuvreability several times, and worked alongside fighters quite capably. In battle it does seem to basically operate as a heavy fighter (maybe not quite as nimble, but heavier weaponry and greater durability to compensate). But, yes it is a freighter, even if a small one, so if being a freighter has any relevant in game effect then background wise it should be granted that. However, it might be that there is no relevant rules associated with being a freighter, or that it is classed as being too small for the in-game definition, or even there is an in-game effect and it isn't considered suitable for card for balance reasons or it just doesn't fit with its role in the game. Maybe it is meant for the "Space" (or "Battle" or whatever) area and freighters are used in the "Reserve" area.



#3 Darksbane

Darksbane

    Member

  • Members
  • 620 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:51 AM

borithan said:

Do we know that it is classed as a fighter?

Going by the Falcon in the demo decks yes.

Personally I'm not bothered by it. The bold traits on cards aren't meant to represent everything a card is. While they do often have a flavor aspect to them they are used mostly for gameplay purposes in FFGs other games. They could add Transport to the traits but would it matter if they never plan to print any cards which interact with it?


Cardgamedb.com - The source for Game of Thrones, Star Wars, Android: Netrunner, Lord of the Rings, Call of Cthulhu, and Warhammer: Invasion deckbuilders and spoilers. Now with 100% more FFG!

#4 PWBrian

PWBrian

    Member

  • Members
  • 84 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:36 AM

 I don't know if the modifications on the Millennium Falcon are enough to re-classify it, but the YT-1300 is a transport ship.



#5 MarthWMaster

MarthWMaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,110 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 11:24 AM

Darksbane said:

 

They could add Transport to the traits but would it matter if they never plan to print any cards which interact with it?

 

 

True, I don't see "Transport" being a money keyword by any means. It could have about the same relevance as the Conspirator keyword in CoC, which is to say very little, save for a few cards here and there that refer to that keyword. Plus there's the fact that Conspirators are very cool. Similarly, what makes the Falcon cool is its reputation as a successful smuggling vessel, which it can only be if it boasts a cargo hold larger than that of, say, an X-wing or B-wing. :P

I also want to re-clarify my meaning here. I do think that it's reasonable for the ship to retain the Fighter keyword as seen on the demo card. It functions very similarly to starfighters from a tactical standpoint, and IIRC Han Solo had previously flown smaller ships, so his ability to pilot "Fighter" vessels need not be changed. I just see the Millennium Falcon as having its own special niche in the Alliance fleet, and I would love to see that reflected here. :)


"To play a wrong note is insignificant. To play without passion is inexcusable."
– Beethoven

#6 TK4208

TK4208

    Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 14 August 2011 - 06:33 AM

It is possible that the base set has no need for the Transport trait but in future expansions we could see another version of the Falcon with the Transport trait. Raise your hand if you really think there will only be one Falcon... nope me either. It may take a set or two but there will be more then one version of all the fan-favs.



#7 MarthWMaster

MarthWMaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,110 posts

Posted 14 August 2011 - 09:17 AM

But you didn't even give me a chance to raise my hand! :P

No, I would very much like to see alternate versions of the iconic vessels in the saga, especially the Millennium Falcon, given how many changes it undergoes throughout the continuum of its service. (Heck, it wasn't even named the Millennium Falcon from the beginning.) But I notice a difference between unique characters and unique ships which, to me at least, implies some difference between how they intend to handle each. That is, the characters have a sort of "descriptor" bar immediately above their text box, which appears to be this game's equivalent of a version name (e.g. Han Solo, Scoundrel; Admiral Ackbar, Rebel Commander). The Falcon and Red Five do not share this feature. To me this suggests that the ships are considered to be unchanging, and will not be receiving future versions that exhibit different abilities.

Now, I don't think this is how it should be by any means. For one thing, ships like the Millennium Falcon act a lot like characters do in the way they are treated in the Star Wars canon. Even for ships that never undergo modifications, different versions of the same ship ought to appear, representing different aspects of that ship's "personality," in the same way that one version of Han Solo might be "in it for the money," while another might protect Princess Leia in some way. But if the intent is to do the same thing with ships (namely, produce additional versions of them), I'm curious as to why they would not include similar version bars on each.

Then again, this is all based on what we've seen in the demo decks, so we very well might not actually see version bars on anything. Personally I hope that's not the case; I find card versions helpful for deciding which one(s) I should use in decks, and they remove an unnecessary headache in deciding what to call them when conversing about cards with fellow players. (Saying "Yoda, Luke's Teacher" is a lot easier than saying "The Yoda who gives a bonus to other Jedi," for example.)

Another thing that I find worrisome with keywords, also from a primarily flavor perspective, is that Chewbacca is a Wookiee, which appears to actually have gameplay relevance on at least one card ("Let the Wookiee Win,") whereas Admiral Ackbar is not a Mon Calamari. I just feel that it keeps things more open for future card printings if non-Human beings were granted a keyword to designate them. Many aliens gravitate toward the Rebel Alliance because of the Empire's comparative prejudice in favor of Humans. Without keyword traits there is no rigid way to specify what qualifies as non-Human, other than somehow making it possible to use the card's illustration and common sense to determine whether a card counts as Human. Plus, and this is where flavor comes in, it's a lot more consistent to have the keywords present on all aliens if you have one on Chewbacca. The exception, of course, is Yoda and others of his species (none of whom are around during the Rebellion era anyway), since his species is left unknown.


"To play a wrong note is insignificant. To play without passion is inexcusable."
– Beethoven

#8 Xenu's Paradox

Xenu's Paradox

    Member

  • Members
  • 154 posts

Posted 14 August 2011 - 07:38 PM

Technically, the Falcon is a light freighter.

However!

The modifications Han, Lando, etc. made allow it to handle like a fighter.  A fighter with way more firepower than any ACTUAL fighter can pack.

So it makes sense to treat it as a fighter, rules-wise.



#9 MarthWMaster

MarthWMaster

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,110 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 10:43 AM

Xenu's Paradox said:

Technically, the Falcon is a light freighter.

However!

The modifications Han, Lando, etc. made allow it to handle like a fighter.  A fighter with way more firepower than any ACTUAL fighter can pack.

So it makes sense to treat it as a fighter, rules-wise.



No argument! I'm just saying that, since they continue to use it for smuggling operations, it should have rules that allow it to, well, smuggle.


"To play a wrong note is insignificant. To play without passion is inexcusable."
– Beethoven

#10 Natesroom

Natesroom

    Member

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 11:28 AM

 In all games and RPG's the Millenium Falcon have always been classified as a Starship Scale... The millenium falcon is only 26 meters long and the xwing is 12.5.






© 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