I like the 3/3/3/2 stats, I don't think those are unreasonable. You wouldn't think Tractor Beam would have a movement effect instead, like the Ion Cannons?

I would love to see the Arc-170, I think it's still likely to be in use even if it's archaic by the time of the rebelion. I would personally just build the back arc into the core ship. I hope to see it in a Clone Wars edition.

You say that, but it will come out "huuguughghg, aguhwwgggghhh uughghhhgh huuguughghg uugggh wrrhw hnnnhrrhhh."

As they say on the internet: "TIE/D, or GTFO" (something like that?) TIE Defender is my only request, everything else is secondary

You're maybe thinking of the TIE Predator? TIE Phantom is Galactic Civil War-era.

I think I'll have to make a post about this every wave... Just to make the Wookie upset. A lot of people have seen various models of the A-Wings and have in their head they're smaller then the FFG models. So it makes sense you'd see this come up every so often. Most of the OP's of these kinds of threads have low post counts so they are new here, and perhaps to X-Wing in general. Let him have it. It's not wise to upset a Wookiee.

FFG got the official dimensions from LFL. LFL presumably got the dimensions from the film models in the archives. My understanding is that many of those craft for the films were created at a certain scale, but with no real-world analogue, the end result is questionable. The A-Wing scale argument is an old one. It really just comes down to which authority you use. If it's LFL's word (which makes a good deal of sense from a publishing standpoint) then FFG did the right thing, and I think they're okay for that. But based on what we can get from the film screenshots, using pilots' head/helmet as a metric, the craft should be closer to 5-6m on screen.

Excellent work so far.

Probably you already know a few. FFG - Fantasy Flight Games EU - Expanded Universe BGG - Board Game Geek MM - Miniature Market PS - Pilot Skill LOS - Line of Sight TL - Target Lock APT - Advanced Proton Torpedos BH - Bounty Hunter HLC - Heavy Laser Cannon APL - Anti-Pursuit Laser ORS - Outer Rim Smuggler HSF - Han Shot First (fairly common list featuring Solo and a couple of rooks) Let us know if there are any in particular you're wondering about. Someone will be quick to spell it out.

It's a courier, not a freighter.

Also worth noticing around 7:20 and again a few seconds later: Jan Ors' head framed by the open cockpit.

Nope.

It's worth pointing out—similar to the X-Wing/Z-95 argument—the idea that the Defender has better [insert stat here] than [insert craft here] doesn't need to be represented 1:1 by the game mechanic. Let's say a Rebel ship has a shield strength of 500 megaunits (totally made-up) and an Imperial counterpart has a shield strength of 450 megaunits. The Rebel ship can be said, in fluff text, to have better shields than the Imp. But if it has a shield value of "2" in this game, the Imp will probably have the same value. The Z-95 has worse "everything" than the X-Wing, except cost. That doesn't necessarily mean subtracting whole integers from Attack/Agility/Shield/Hull. The Defender is, according to fluff, better than most starfighters. That doesn't necessarily mean adding 1 to every highest stat in the game. They can make it a 3/3/2/3 or something, make it expensive, and still not cause any disservice to the existing EU fiction.

That's exactly the design I hope they go for. The appearance in the 90's Decipher CCG and again in Star Wars: Empire at War are probably my favorite depcitions.

I know they have said this, but tournaments have already ended up having Rebel vs Rebel and Imperial vs Imperial matchups. And there are only so many of the cool ships they can shoe horn into one side or another. A Pirate/Black Sun/Consortium faction would make a lot of sense, even if quite a few of their ships could be use by one side or another. We can hope they come to their senses. There is definitely enough interest on this board or others to suggest that people would like a 3rd faction. It comes up at least once or twice every week. There are other things they said they wouldn't do that they did anyway. I think it's possible we'll see more factions at some point.

Just under $600 so far.

Likewise—nothing against whomever enjoys it. No hard feelings here. There's a lot to be said for gameplay experience, and I admit being the type that has a huge interest in scale and quality. You can absolutely go nuts with AW if it makes you happy. My problem is that they had the opportunity to do something on the level of X-Wing, but made something... less... instead. "You don't have to buy it if you don't like it," I'm sure a few of you are thinking. Absolutely true, but I would have preferred to have something Trek-related to like. FFG set the bar high, and the Trek universe is rich with potential.

Granted, but it's all relative, isn't it? Compared to the models you paint, sure, X-Wing is probably far from quality work. There isn't any point in splitting hairs from your perspective. From mine, though, and many others, there is a significant-enough disparity between X-Wing and Attack Wing. And you, at least, having relegated all pre-paints to the same "lump", certainly can't claim that the Attack Wing minis are better. Agreed, in that it's probably better than nothing. I would still like to see something better come along.

I think Star Trek deserves better than this. Granted the aesthetic is different from Star Wars, but the Trek concept art and production models were really works of art. Yes the Trek ships have smoother hulls and curvier lines, where the Star Wars counterparts are beaten-up and angular, but the Attack Wing mini quality just looks awful. It doesn't look sleek and futuristic, it just looks cheap (not to mention the scale issues). As the repaints have indicated, Trek ships would benefit immensely from the same care that went into X-Wing (excellent work, by the way, to those who have linked their repaints here). FFG's minis, occasional quality assurance issues notwithstanding, are incredibly detailed, and true to their film counterparts. I would love to see a Trek game, FlightPath or not, with larger capital ships (allowing for smaller NX, TOS-era, and Defiant craft), with a level of detail much closer to X-Wing. The potential, with Trek's legendary ships of the line, is awesome. Attack Wing just isn't the game Star Trek deserves right now. I hope something better comes along soon.

I don't have any commentary on balance and cost, but thematically this list is great; very well thought-out. Sticks right to the spirit of the game(s). Great work.

Just incredible.

Their depiction of it in the other properties they own should be a decent indicator. The fluff text from the card says the Z-95 is "clearly outclassed" by the T-65 but supports the idea that there's still a valuable place for it in the fleet. I'm going to guess 4 engines with a significant canopy bulge.

It's a canon encyclopedia, it uses canon sources. If the Dark Forces game guide had given dimmensions for the Moldy Crow, or the in game included a databank for the Moldy Crow and said it was 16m then it would be no problem. You don't seem to understand how canon policy works, because its a nasty policy in any franchise. Let me give you a few examples across different, well known, science fiction. In Star Trek - Paramount canon policy states that only what is on screen is canon, no video-games, no books, no expanded universe, things can be MADE canon by being shown on screen, but that is all. (Example, while a book originally published that Uhura's first name was "Nyota" it wasn't until the 2009 Star Trek movie that it became Canon) Stargate - According to their canon policy, things said are more important than things SEEN, this is why according to many sources the Deadalus and the Prometheus are sister ships. Now I've been studying naval architecture and designs for YEARS (10+) and I will tell you in no uncertain terms that using the term "Sister Ships" for these two vessels is like saying the Titanic and the Radisson Diamond are sister ships. And now back to Star Wars - According to Canon policy what gets published is what is canon thanks to Lucasfilm Licensing (this makes awful, awful, badly written works like the Jedi Prince trilogy canon, though many parts of it have been retroactively modified to fit greater continuity) this is contrary to what we can put together VIA game visuals, this can make sense in certain aspects as certain things get lost in terms of realism vs. game mechanics, (can you imagine what the HALO universe would do if it were forced to reconcile the final level of Halo-Combat Evolved with what the dorsal surface of the Pillar of Autumn ACTUALLY looks like?), so back when a game guide published that it's length was 29m it became canon, regardless of what "made sense" or what people could discern by overlaying pixels and estimating based on game models. Yes it was an AssPull but it was a Canon pull. So now that FFG has made a model, which they state is to scale and have it judged by LFL to be canon, it is now canon and a conflicting canon source. This is called a Retcon, I assume you and many others know what that is. Now all that said if you didn't just go "tl;dr" if a game guide said it was 29m, it was 29m until it was contradicted by a published source regardless of anything discerned from in-game models. What FFG has done is vindicate the people who used in-game models to determine the size of the ship by stating that everything is "in scale" and their scale makes it 16m and they have backing from LFL (but do remember SO DID THE GUYS WHO MADE THAT ERRONEOUS GAME GUIDE). Son, the only information you bring to light here that I'm not already familiar with is Stargate canonicity. I know how canonicity and licensing works. I know how intellectual property and copyright work. It may be worth pointing out that there are different levels of canon in Star Wars, each having its own degree of "truthiness". It's likely you already know this, but it would have some relevance in a debate on canonicity. Are we having a debate on canonicity? We should consider the HWK to be successfully retconned (a concept I am also familiar with), and that's that—end of debate. In the 90's, some peripheral-but-licensed material made up a ridiculous figure that worked with what they were trying to do for an already-existing ship designed for something else, by someone else. Fast-forward to this year; FFG and LFL both cite a length of 16m. Wookieepedia, which can be EDITED BY YOUR MOM and therefore of questionable level of canonicity, and WEG sourcebooks from the distant past are no longer the "official" sources of that information. In fact, I am not having a debate on canonicty. Before you even get to canonicty there is a concept called "objective truth". Let me be clear: • The Moldy Crow is about 16m long in any of its measurable appearances in the source games. • FFG built a mini, some additional fluff notwithstanding, to represent that original ship, • Regardless of your adherence to ancillary, meaningless bullsh*t.

This bickering is pointless. The truth is clear-enough-cut no matter which wiki-derps decide to interpret it differently. The ship was designed for the Dark Forces series where it is absolutely no larger than 16 meters. Whatever intellectual properties that borrowed the ship afterwards and made up a bunch of ancillary and arbitrary bullsh*t (WEG), or websites that have no bearing on canon one way or another (Wookieepedia), the indisputable fact is that the source material is the source of the material. In the games where this ship originated, the length is measurable to within a few centimeters of accuracy due to the game models in comparison to measurable quantities (such as the height of the game characters). I have spent enough time editing Jedi Knight levels to be able to claim some authority on this. You know who else can claim some authority on it? Lucasfilm Licensing. You know who can't? Wookieepedia.

I understand your point, but I personally find it fun to see what people have to say. FFG has been doing a great job, and obviously has a nice master plan in place. None of this negates casual, fun speculation regarding upcoming releases. If the guesses are a little stale thats ok. Newcomers can catch up. I love the speculation threads. As long as at least 1 is going at any given time. Whomever has had enough of the speculation threads... there is an easy enough solution to your problem. I'll let you figure it out.