Jump to content



Photo

Chapter VII - Starships and Vehicles


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 ynnen

ynnen

    Member

  • Members
  • 197 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 10:32 AM

A sticky thread for editing and proofreading comments on Chapter VII - Starships and Vehicles.



#2 GoblynByte

GoblynByte

    Member

  • Members
  • 227 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 02:00 AM

On page 169 the TIE fighter should be a TIE In, not a TIE Ln ("I" as in Indigo, not "L" as in Lambda). There's no such thing as a TIE Ln.



#3 shmitty

shmitty

    Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 12:01 PM

 The Y-Wing either should have its ion cannon locked to Forward arc or have its model changed and room for a gunner added.



#4 EldritchFire

EldritchFire

    Member

  • Members
  • 327 posts

Posted 24 August 2012 - 01:54 PM

GoblynByte said:

On page 169 the TIE fighter should be a TIE In, not a TIE Ln ("I" as in Indigo, not "L" as in Lambda). There's no such thing as a TIE Ln.

 

Its TIE/LN, not TIE/IN. LN stands for "line."

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE/ln_starfighter

 

-EF



#5 Collinsas

Collinsas

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 25 August 2012 - 01:15 PM

There is and editing consistency error on Page 172, column 2, 18 lines down from the top, Under the ‘Electronic Countermeasures Suite’ Entry, in the section that says how many ‘Hard Points Required’ rather than saying "one" as in every other attachment entry, it reads “1”.



#6 GoblynByte

GoblynByte

    Member

  • Members
  • 227 posts

Posted 25 August 2012 - 06:25 PM

EldritchFire said:

GoblynByte said:

 

On page 169 the TIE fighter should be a TIE In, not a TIE Ln ("I" as in Indigo, not "L" as in Lambda). There's no such thing as a TIE Ln.

 

 

 

Its TIE/LN, not TIE/IN. LN stands for "line."

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE/ln_starfighter

 

-EF

 

Huh… go figure… then is should be lowercase!



#7 I. J. Thompson

I. J. Thompson

    Member

  • Members
  • 776 posts

Posted 26 August 2012 - 04:33 AM

GoblynByte said:

EldritchFire said:

 

GoblynByte said:

 

On page 169 the TIE fighter should be a TIE In, not a TIE Ln ("I" as in Indigo, not "L" as in Lambda). There's no such thing as a TIE Ln.

 

 

 

Its TIE/LN, not TIE/IN. LN stands for "line."

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TIE/ln_starfighter

 

-EF

 

 

 

Huh… go figure… then is should be lowercase!

Yep, definitely supposed to be lowercase. I thought it was 'in' for years, too. :)


IV  V  VI  I  III  II


#8 Daramere

Daramere

    Member

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 01 September 2012 - 01:11 AM

 On page 148 near the end of the text on Silhouette and Defense Zones, the book talks about how a Y-Wing that put both of its defense points aft would be vulnerable to an attack from the front. But on page 156 under assembling the dice pool, the rules state that for a ship of silhouette 4 or smaller (a Y-Wing is a 3) the defender gets to pick which defense zone an attack hits. It seems like a snubfighter can always just put all defense on one zone and then make all attacks hit that zone, which makes the example on page 148 seem misleading.



#9 Ferretz

Ferretz

    Member

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 04 September 2012 - 01:16 AM

The price in credits for the Firespray seems too low at 40 000.

E.



#10 MILLANDSON

MILLANDSON

    Playtester

  • Members
  • 3,356 posts

Posted 04 September 2012 - 08:03 AM

Ferretz said:

The price in credits for the Firespray seems too low at 40 000.

E.

I'd have gone with 80,000 - 90,000 personally, around the same as the Light Freighter, but slightly less than the YT-1300.


~Yea, Tho I Walk Through The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death, I Shall Fear No Evil~

 

Posts/views/opinions are in no way representative of FFG, and are entirely my own.


#11 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Member

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 04 September 2012 - 08:27 AM

Particularly as it's a KDY design, which are traditionaly more expensive (but better constructed) then their Corrilian counterparts.



#12 Fechik

Fechik

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 04 September 2012 - 06:09 PM

::Edited out my mistake::

I'm not sure if on page 157, Table 7-7, Row 3, first bullet point is correct. Is it supposed to say "The active player loses Initiative?" Something about the active player losing Initiative doesn't quite make sense.



#13 EldritchFire

EldritchFire

    Member

  • Members
  • 327 posts

Posted 07 September 2012 - 05:50 AM

 Page 148, Silhouette and Defense Zones states that ships with a silhouette of 5 or higher has 4 defense zones. However, all silhouette 5+ ships on pages 170-171 have only 3 numbers for their defense.

-EF



#14 EldritchFire

EldritchFire

    Member

  • Members
  • 327 posts

Posted 15 September 2012 - 10:21 AM

 Pg153, past sentence of the left-hand column, it says that "each player may never take more than one maneuver during his turn." However, the very next column, Maneuvers, talks about how a starship with a silhouette of 1-4 can take a second maneuver. 

Also, the last two paragraphs of Maneuvers is a bit confusing. Am I right that if a starship of silhouette 1-4 wants to take two maneuvers, and has one pilot (a Z-95, for example) the ship and the pilot must both suffer 2 strain? Or if the starship has a pilot and co-pilot, they both can do one maneuver, and only the ship suffers the two strain.

-EF



#15 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 751 posts

Posted 16 September 2012 - 07:12 PM

Some timeline corrections…

The Firespray System Patrol Craft was designed prior to the Clone Wars, not at the end. Jango Fett flies one (the only one in existence at the time) in the movie Attack of the Clones. Originally, they were indeed designed for the Republic Correctional Authority; however, it would seem that Kuat Systems Engineering reintroduced them sometime after the Empire came into being (and therefore after Republic Correctional Authority ceased to be).

The Z-95 Headhunter predates the Clone Wars by at least a decade or two.

Also, the Skipray Blastboats were apparently designed by Republic Sienar Systems just prior to the Clone Wars, though this is slightly misleading since the design was scrapped and rebuilt to be introduced by Sienar Fleet Systems at the beginning of the Galactic Civil War.

 

Terminology Corrections…

I have never seen anything to indicate that CR90 is a "class" of corvette. It's just "CR90 Corvette." It's a model in CEC's corvette line. 

In the Nebulon-B escort frigate entry, it is an effective replacement of the Class-C (proper) frigate. 

YT-1300 and YT-2400 are not class designations. Their class is "light freighter." So it's "Corellian Engineering Corporation's YT-2400 light freighter."

As an aside, apparently the Ghtroc 720 is also referred to as the "Class 720."

 

Spelling/Grammar/Verbiage…

First sentence of page 170: "life's blood" should be changed to "lifeblood." Also, intergalactic means "between galaxies." You'll want "intragalactic" or "interplanetary" to talk about this type commerce. 

End of the second paragraph page 170, I'd change "in use in the galaxy" to "in use across the galaxy."

Action VI entry page 170: "…powered by once of CEC's…" should be, "powered by one of CEC's…"

Under CAPITAL SHIPS (page 171), the first sentence is confusing. "This broad category…bear enormous martial might." 

Under the EF76 Nebulon-B escort frigate, the last word of the first paragraph ("ships") should be changed to "Star Destroyers." Also, to make that last sentence cleaner you could write "…Victory- and Imperial-class…"

 

Minor Quibbly Bits:

I always thought that Ghtroc Industries (mentioned in the Ghtroc 720 writeup) was more of a failure and actually went out of business, though their light freighters remained in popular usage in the Outer Rim.



#16 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 751 posts

Posted 16 September 2012 - 08:25 PM

GoblynByte said:

 

On page 169 the TIE fighter should be a TIE In, not a TIE Ln ("I" as in Indigo, not "L" as in Lambda). There's no such thing as a TIE Ln.

 

 

The TIE/In designates the TIE Interceptor and has for years. So those of you that thought you were going crazy, fear not :) 

The TIE/Ln is, apparently, the official designation of the TIE fighter we all know and love to blow up with quad lasers (at least as of The Essential Guide to Warfare which was published last year). I'll admit I had never seen that designation either until reading the Beta Book.



#17 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 751 posts

Posted 16 September 2012 - 08:58 PM

Page 166, first paragraph: "reliable airspeeder composed of" should be "reliable airspeeder comprised of…"

Second column, first paragraph under A-A5 Speeder Truck: "among the Outer Rim" is not the right usage of the word "among." I suggest "throughout."

Under X-34 Landspeeder, "two passenger" and "coupe styled" should both be hyphenated. Also, "known for it's reputation" doesn't make sense. How about, "SoroSuub's X-34 is a two-passenger coupe-styled civilian landspeeder with a solid reputation for reliability." Or, "…landspeeder known for it's solid reliability." 

 

Page 167, first paragraph: "more advanced forms of transport" should be "more advanced forms of transportation."

Under the Corellian Mining Corportation Digger Crawler, "20 metres" should be "20 meters."

Under the Personnel Carrier, "self defence" should be "self defense," and I'd actually get rid of the word "self" as well.

Under WALKERS, first paragraph in the second column, "in the manner of animals or people" should be "in a manner similar to (or reminiscent of, or comparable to) that of animals or people."

Is the silhouette for the AT-PT a typo? I can't imagine a 4-meter by 3-meter walker having a silhouette of 1.

 

 Page 168, second paragraph: "Mass produced" should be "Mass-produced." 

Third paragraph: "one or two-man" should be "one- or two-man"



#18 Collinsas

Collinsas

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 20 September 2012 - 06:06 AM

awayputurwpn said:

…Spelling/Grammar/Verbiage…

…Also, intergalactic means "between galaxies." You'll want "intragalactic" or "interplanetary" to talk about this type commerce…

…Under the Corellian Mining Corportation Digger Crawler, "20 metres" should be "20 meters."…

I am sorry sir, but I do not believe that either of those are mistakes, as for the first count the Star Wars Galaxy has about 7 or so ‘Companion Dwarf Satellite Galaxies’ (Kamino is supposed to be situated in one of these called the Rishi Maze), so that would make Intergalactic the correct wordage (starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_galaxy). As for the second count qouted above, Metres is acceptable; as it is the English (UK) spelling of the work. By enlarge very nice catches in the editing sir. :-)



#19 EldritchFire

EldritchFire

    Member

  • Members
  • 327 posts

Posted 23 September 2012 - 05:30 AM

 Page 155, Gain the Advantage action lists as size 1-4. Should be silhouette 1-4.

-EF



#20 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 751 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 06:31 AM

Collinsas said:

awayputurwpn said:

 

…Spelling/Grammar/Verbiage…

…Also, intergalactic means "between galaxies." You'll want "intragalactic" or "interplanetary" to talk about this type commerce…

…Under the Corellian Mining Corportation Digger Crawler, "20 metres" should be "20 meters."…

 

 

I am sorry sir, but I do not believe that either of those are mistakes, as for the first count the Star Wars Galaxy has about 7 or so ‘Companion Dwarf Satellite Galaxies’ (Kamino is supposed to be situated in one of these called the Rishi Maze), so that would make Intergalactic the correct wordage (starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_galaxy). As for the second count qouted above, Metres is acceptable; as it is the English (UK) spelling of the work. By enlarge very nice catches in the editing sir. :-)

Thanks! 

My thoughts on intergalactic vs. intragalactic were certainly complicated by the companion galaxies, but the reason I posted what I did is that, by and large, those "galaxies" are outside the scope of the Empire and of the text at hand. Note in the same sentence (page 170, first paragraph): "transports and freighters are the ships that carry the … bounty of the galaxy to all of its people."  That was primarily what made me think it should be changed. "Intergalactic" is not really a term we see in Star Wars until there are actual intergalactic visitors (such as the Yuuzhan Vong).

Furthermore, when they enter the narrative of Star Wars, the companion galaxies have always seemed to me to be considered more a part of the galaxy than separate from it…much like Endor/the forest moon of Endor are used fairly interchangeably. Satellites are distinct from the whole, but not wholly so, do you see?

And regarding the English spelling, I definitely did notice that it was British (in addition to many, many instances of "defence" instead of the more common "defense"). Having an English wife myself, I'm no stranger to the disparities of our two lexicographies (here is where I start making up words), but my thought is that a work should adopt a single standard of spelling, syntax, and punctuation (as opposed to 'spelling, syntax and punctuation'). The Beta book appears to be edited using both an American lexicon and a British (slash/Canadian) one, so yeah. It's helpful for the readers to be presented with a consistent reading experience. 

 






© 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