mazz0
-
Content Count
5,133 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by mazz0
-
-
-
6 hours ago, Drasnighta said:What changes would you make TO make it a better fit stylistically? What is it’s “problem”, given it’s source description and background?
Because that’s the comment I can’t find any common ground with...
I dunno, the colours maybe? Something about the finish? I just can't picture it alongside an MC80 or Neb B without looking incongruous. In a way it's fine for rebel ships to look eclectic, that's kinda their thing, but they usually look eclectic in an in-universe way, not in a different-line-of-toys way. It's the same with all the cartoon based ships in X-Wing; the ships from the films and the games and the comics etc (all the old EU stuff) look like they're from one product line, while the cartoon ships look like they're from another. It could be the same thing I'm feeling here, but I'm not sure. I'm not even sure about my feeling on the aesthetics - sometimes when I look I quite like it. <shrugs>
By far the biggest reason I'm not excited is cos it's new. I'm most excited when something I already like is coming out, especially if I've liked it for a long time.
-
On 8/27/2019 at 10:52 PM, Ling27 said:Resistance Era... thats going to take another 10-15 years before that target audience gets there. Thats the only real reason it wont happen right away. XWING is different. You maybe need 4 fighters to play, so its FAR cheaper on the target audience (10-16 yo) with a short enough play time for their respective timeframe as well.
People have gotten more fond of the prequels over time. I don't think that's going to happen with the sequels. I think to a great extent they'll be forgotten/ignored, because they don't add anything distinct to the world. I could be wrong though. Are kids growing up today loving Last Jedi? If so then maybe it'll happen.
On 8/28/2019 at 7:29 AM, Norsehound said:Well, one way to look at it is that the clone wars are only good because of nostalgia glasses. The Clone Wars cartoon is good... in part because it is a medium to gloss over, or fix, the glaring deficiencies of the prequel movies.
That's why it took so long for Clone Wars to even be mentioned in any FFG products. If it was actually good, it would have been featured a lot sooner and a lot more than incidental mentions in something like the RPG. The Resistance era has been relatively seamless in its addition to high-turnaround content products like X-Wing and Destiny. But it took a major announcement (and concession) from LFL to do the Clone Wars because it was perceived as a risk.
You also have fans like me who easily support the Resistance arc, and the sequel movies, over anything and everything in the prequels. I'd easily watch DJ and the side-quest to Canto Bight over Hayden Christensen's creepy leering Anakin complaining about sand.
The Clone Wars era films may have been rubbish, but the Clone Wars era stuff was ace. The ships, the ground vehicles, the locations. So much awesome content for people to get excited about that. The sequel era doesn't have that, because its design style is an unimaginative take on Original Trilogy, with very little that's new and memorable.
Wintercross reacted to this -
I'm not really excited for it. It's never been seen before so I have no existing attachment to it, I don't especially like the aesthetic (and I don't think it's goes well, stylistically, with the rest of the faction), and jeez! The price!
-
On 8/29/2019 at 1:36 AM, LTD said:Why, when Leia is convinced the Imperials are tracking the Millennium Falcon, do they fly directly to the Rebel Base at Yavin?
This is the big one for me. It's huge! "We're being followed, better go straight to our base". Easily one of the biggest plot holes in all Star Wars. The fact that it doesn't jump out and detract from the film suggests to me that it's not plot holes that make a bad film, it's film awesomeness that makes us not notice plot holes. TLJ isn't bad because of all the silly plot nonsense, it's just not good enough to get away with all the silly plot nonsense.
On 8/30/2019 at 7:39 PM, RobertK said:A weird critique. The beauty of "A New Hope" was that the full richness of the story wasn't explicitly revealed but hinted at. What do we know about Obi-wan from the movie? He's just a crazy old man. We barely knew what a Jedi was. Han isn't even a scoundrel yet in that movie, but we know he can outrun the big Corellian ships (sounds good, but what are they?). Chewbacca is a walking carpet who growls with a little personality. In that movie, Han and Chewie receive about the same development as Chirrut and Baze. Somehow Chirrut and Base don't get the same love because they die, while Han and Chewie live on from their movie to get more development in a further 3 films (or more). Wouldn't it have been better to have Han and Chewie be long-time associates of Obi-wan with a fully-developed relationship that we could observe on screen? No?
I'm not tearing down A New Hope. I'm saying the characters in Rogue One are on par with those in A New Hope. In truth, every one of the characters in Rogue One is grittier than any similar character in A New Hope; closer to Solo and Chewie than to young Skywalker for sure.
Sure, there is not quite the wonder and freshness of storytelling in Rogue One as there is in A New Hope. But that has more to do with the viewer than the movie itself. I think a lot of people are working really hard to develop a reason why they didn't like Rogue One as much as the original trilogy, but the truth is you don't have to say why. Isn't enough for you that you just liked A New Hope better?
I like Rogue One, but I don't buy that. Han and Chewie have way more character in New Hope than the guy with the staff and the guy with the big gun in Rogue One. I don't think that's a case of us projecting personality back on them from later films, but if it is then maybe including such characters in a film they can't survive is a bad idea. But I genuinely don't think that's the case. Imagining Rogue One without those two takes next to no imagination - it would be almost exactly the same film (perhaps a slightly better one if other characters got more development instead). Picturing New Hope without Han would change the film completely (Chewie's a more complicated case, I'll grant you - he's kinda like a really awesome prop that adds to the mood and style of the film, like the Falcon).
AllWingsStandyingBy and NotBatman reacted to this -
3 hours ago, xanderf said:Wasn't following your second point as I was confusing it with 'scarred' (the campaign effect), which definitely DOES effect huge ships, but...you are referring to the special 'huge' ship status of 'crippled', which is half points for it, yes? If so, you're right, that appears to have no campaign effect in CC.
I think I'd house-rule those two things. IE., 'crippled' starts as a scarred ship does, although it doesn't risk the permanent loss if destroyed twice. And apply the single-upgrade limitation to round 1 buys (which basically only effects round 1, anyway). Nobody wants to face an SSD with gunnery teams when they have only single or no upgrades on their own ships...
It should maybe lose more than one defence token too, since it has so many.
-
4 hours ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:Weirdly, I found it felt less silly in the cartoon. I suppose silly things seem sillier portrayed in a realistic way. I mean really! She's used to carrying a solid staff around, suddenly the length of the solid part of a double-bladed lightsaber is so inconvenient that she's willing to compromise the structural integrity of the weapon just so it fits in a bag or something? Tsk.
-
-
31 minutes ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:
’I destroyed him’ at 1:42
Credit to Wil Pearson
What's "rl content"?
-
-
Not sure where to look for a ruling on this. What are people playing?
-
On 8/5/2019 at 7:41 PM, Ginkapo said:Nope. Simply adding extra weight.
Rigidity is based on the second moment of area in the direction of bending, so you need to being adding depth without weight. A flat bar on its side as a brace will help, but that isnt what is being referred to here.
Well yeah, it would add weight, but is that necessarily a bad thing? I like weighty models. Provided the pegs will support it anyway, that might be a concern I suppose.
Not sure what you mean "nope". Clearly a bar is less bendy the thicker it is. You can test this with your hands.
-
You don't really need a third party or anything - just exchange lists at the same time:
"Is your list ready?"
"Yes, is yours?"
"Yes, here"
"Here's mine"
Bertie Wooster reacted to this -
3 hours ago, Ginkapo said:Flat stock wont make it stiffer fyi
Doesn't that depend how thick it is? 3mm or thicker is surely pretty rigid?
-
Yeah, mine's pretty bent. Still awesome though!
-
12 minutes ago, Packerman29 said:I think that since it’s after the defense token step, it is whatever damage you took. So if you braced 12 damage to 6 then you salvo 6 back.
That was my reading of it too, for a moment, then another part of the article made me think otherwise. I reckon it's another instance of poorly written article. I don't think it can be an automatic "you suffer whatever I suffered", that would be too powerful.
-
Charged upfront though, hmm....
-
1 hour ago, Mad Cat said:I had a little search around the UK online stores that do Armada
Darksphere, Chaos Cards, Magic Madhouse, Darkstar so far have them, but the cheapest preorder I have found is
The Outpost, Sheffield.
https://www.the-outpost.co.uk/product/star-wars-armada-nadiri-starhawk/ £54.95
https://www.the-outpost.co.uk/product/star-wars-armada-onager-class-star-destroyer/ £43.95
There is upcoming economic uncertanty, what with Trump's trade war(s), Borris about to crash us out of the EU and the Pound weak & ready to plummet.
So I nailed my wallet to the mast and preordered one of each for £98.90 with free UK shipping as the order total is over £75.
Disclaimer prices can change, yada yada yada...
That's pretty tempting, thanks for doing the legwork!
-
3 hours ago, Ling27 said:Not generally, and especially not after WW2. At least in the U.S. Military, seized equipment has to be processed, cataloged, then destroyed. The only time we keep equipment is in rare circumstances. Example would be my father, who served in Iraq both times. The second time, after the invasion the Iraqi Army (officially the Iraqi Ground Forces) had a hard time trying to do a rebranding. They went through something like 6 names they ultimately didn't go with for various reasons. Most of them being that the acronym would have been the same as an old name or people they didn't want to be equated to... (like Israel)... For the longest time they also refused to use United States Armored vehicles or Armor (tanks) as many citizens - while not actively fighting us - were still not happy we were there. They also stormed multiple warehouses and found weapons stockpiles they had to destroy. HOWEVER, one time they found an old french Hotchkiss M1922 LMG... they called the French embassy and it was taken to France to be put on display in a war museum.
There is also small places like, Chile, that back in the day... they updated their military by hiring Prussian military officers to train their officers. This has remained in effect for the Chilean Army and if you google it you'll see their wonderful, WW2 style dress uniforms. Pre-1945 Most thought that Germany made the best military equipment and soldiers (even with the defeat of WW1 due to various circumstances). So dozens of small countries bought MILLIONS of Mausers, Arty, ect. On the flip side of the Chilean army thing... after WW1, they remained a neutral country (IF I RECALL CORRECTLY @GiledPallaeon might be able to correct me if I'm wrong) and thus were generally allowed to maintain their uniform after the war.
But for the most part, no. You don't keep the stuff you claim unless it is generally accepted from the populace. After the Senate was reinstated it was likely put to a vote and then shot down. I'm sure Naval commanders would have loved to use the ISD, they were likely told to scrap the entire line much like the Empire scrapped the Venator. This could have also been along the same line as the Empires silly naming system to get around the Senate. The New Republic Navy might have said, "Okay, we'll scrap them... but can we build our own ships? We'll make sure it doesn't cost TOO much..." and got away with using the ISD parts that way.
You wouldn’t really expect the US to need to keep its opponents equipment I suppose - it’s in a league of its own militarily, it doesn’t need the equipment of smaller, poorer nations it invades. I’m surprised about Iraq though. Are you saying after the invasion the new Iraqi regime scrapped all of the old regimes equipment?
-
1 hour ago, kmanweiss said:The ISD is a symbol of oppression. The Republic using them would be dicey. The people fear the sight of these. It's not a reassuring thing. Imagine the rumors spreading around when ISDs come out of hyperspace into orbit around a world that was recently freed of the Empire. ISDs were effective, but also a symbol of terror.
It would be like telling Rebel forces to start policing worlds in Stormtrooper uniforms. It would be like flying the Imperial banner over a planet because they didn't have any of the new Republic flags yet. You don't use the enemies stuff out of convenience, especially if you are trying to portray a different image to the people.
Stripping them for parts? Yes. Using a few in deep space or in places that people won't see them, sure. Just taking and using all Imperial equipment even if people are afraid of it? Not a good idea.
You can see similar issues play out in human history. Should we use Nazi medical research or is that immoral and unethical? People of a war torn country being just as scared of their liberators as from the occupiers because they just traded one group of people with guns for another. Often times logic and well reasoned arguments lose out to emotion and passion.
People feared ISDs, stormtroopers, ATATs, and ATSTs. The Republic decided not to use these things as they didn't want to scare people.
Tell me more about how this works in human history (I don't know much about it). I would assume that following rebellions and revolutions that the victors do indeed use the seized equipment of the former oppressors. Does that not happen? What about in France after the revolution, America after independence, more recently Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Tunisia, etc? Did the winners not use seized equipment? Not a rhetorical question, I genuinely don't know. I always though using seized ships was standard practice though (it certainly is in computer games).
-
11 minutes ago, LordCola said:The SSD might have been a test run on this. After release the very expensive SSD FFG saw that enough people are willing to pay more for a single expansion, especially if there aren't very many expansions per year for Armada. So the decided they could raise the prices.
Yes, but the SSD is the SSD. What's this thing?
-
2 minutes ago, Norell said:All true. But let's wait for the upgrade cards. The new salvo defense token may be very valuable as well, especially for ships like the MC30.
Man, that would be amazing on an MC30! I think a lot of people would be quite peeved if this pack has such very useful upgrades in it and there's no cheaper way of getting them though!
Speaking of things I want to put on MCxx ships - is there any way of getting Fleet Commands on an MC80? It feels so wrong that they're coming from a little Pelta and not Home One.
-
16 minutes ago, Tokra said:Well, first it is not this bad when you only have to buy two ships each year.
And second: i just bought the SSD, these are cheap compared to it 😁So have I, and I don't think it actually is.
1 minute ago, Norell said:Personally I don't think that's too overpriced for such a huge model. Don't forget that the fancy piece of plastic is the most expensive part of every expansion, so the bigger the model, the pricier it gets.
The SSD is several times bigger but only twice the price.
As others have said an important thing when deciding whether to buy it is the value you get from it, and I don't think I see this model adding value proportionate to its cost.
I wonder if we'll see card packs as with X-Wing, so there's no pressure to buy it for upgrades.
-
1 minute ago, kmanweiss said:I've been thinking about the price point and I wonder if it's not tariff related. These would have been in development during the tariff talk. Boardgames and toys got jacked up to a 25% tariff. $50 large ship upped by 25% is $62.50. Drop a couple bucks and stick it at $60 for the Onager which isn't really any larger than the ISD. The Starhawk, due to it's size was likely going to come in at $65 (they have some variability in prices due to size in previous expansions), but they upped it to $80 to cover the tariff.
The administration pulled back the boardgame/toy tariff, but if FFG is unsure of that stability (which who can blame them), or already had a lot of stuff ready (promo art, advertisements, websites, etc) with the tariff price point, they may have decided to just not readjust to the non-tariff price. Assuming these pieces sell though, I'd expect all the new clone wars content to come in at higher price points. Squad packs and small ships will likely be seen at $25 from now on.
In that case I hope they *don't* sell! I'll be wanting quite a few CW ships, so it would be quite bad for me if it's £75 for a Venator!
UNDER RATED Rogue one
in Star Wars: Armada
Posted
Fine by me, I was just accepting the premise somebody else had made and pointing out that if your characters aren't going to have other films to develop in then you either need to develop them in this film or they're going to be pointless forgettable non-characters.