Jump to content

Forgottenlore

Members
  • Content Count

    8,485
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Forgottenlore

  1. Nobody is talking about eliminating trademarks. Well, except you, of course. The entire point of defining what is and is not canon is to prevent the brand from getting diluted. Once we know what is and isn't canon, nothing that contradicts the new canon will get mentioned in new material. Now, as far as tech like star fighters goes, the existence of a particular ship from a no longer canon source probably won't directly contradict anything new, which would allow authors and designers to reinsert some of those things into the new canon, but the original source won't be mentioned.
  2. Yes, but once disney's canon committee decides what is and isn't official anymore, licensees such as fantasy flight are not going to be able to add things to the game that come from outside the new canon. For example, if Disney decides that shadows of the empire is no longer part of the official canon, we won't see the virago added to the game. Hopefully that won't be a big deal because Disney gives us a bunch a really cool new stuff that just blows the EU out of the water, but only time will tell.
  3. But we don't have those. Enabling those in the game would require new templates, which we know we aren't getting. Using the templates that actually exist results in 22 possible maneuvers (plus the shuttle's stand still, 23). Of those 22 maneuvers, most ships have a selection of 15-16 maneuvers they can take, with the bottom end ones, like the shuttle and hawk only having 12 of those maneuvers on their dial What?! The shuttle added one maneuver (stationary) to the 22 possible ones that existed in the game previously, making the total number of theoretically possible maneuvers a ship could normally draw from 23. Of those 23 concievable maneuvers the shuttle actually uses 12. There are 23 potential maneuvers a ship could have, any of those could, in theory, be any one of 3 colors. So when FFG says the Defender has a "maneuver never before seen on a dial" are they talking about making it 24 potential maneuvers, or do they consider the maneuver to be the move+color and are simply picking one of the 69 combos we haven't seen yet?
  4. What are you counting as a move? I get 22 possible moves, 23 if you count the shuttles stationary maneuver, any one of which could be 1 of 3 different colors.
  5. And what will make the most money for them is going to be trashing old stuff they can't do anything more with and developing new things. Just the fact that they are making new movies after Jedi means that the bulk of the EU is out the window. As far as the game goes, a lot of designs for tech may be able to be reused, but the stories that occur are basically going to have to be completely trashed.
  6. Yes that is true. The rule is in the rules pamphlets that come with the large ships.
  7. Yeah, I love that one of the characters is a graffiti artist, what I can't stand is that, because she's a girl, they had to put her in a pink helmet. I don't understand? This paragraph you wrote itself sounds like it is defending the character concept.
  8. Yeah, this. I put R2 on Biggs once and he kept 4 TIEs busy and away from my Falcon for 6 turns before they finally downed him.
  9. Nothing at all, but there is potential for interesting rules directions if they would be willing to open the occasional ship up to both sides. When I first started playing, I did ask (on another forum) about the idea of cross faction squads for scenarios and such and got pretty well shouted down over the idea, but fortunately I don't care. It would just be nice for some official recognition that an outer-rim smuggler can work for the empire, the rebellion might hire a bounty hunter to "extract" a key imperial scientist, or a grand moff might be traveling on a CR90.
  10. I don't know why they don't include both rebel and imperial cards for a couple of these ships. The YT-1300, Firespray and HWK are all ships used by fringe elements that would have worked for both sides, the Tantive IV was the official counsular vessel of an IMPERIAL senator, one who was secretly a rebel but still, official imperial transport that almost certainly was used by other senators and officials who were still loyal, so why not the option to have it used by both sides? And coincidentally increasing the number of players that might want to buy it.
  11. I don't get in to Underhill's all that much, but some of us have been starting to play at JAC Games down in the valley
  12. I also would love a ground pounder system, preferably in the same scale so there can be some cross compatibility, but I agree with mege, it would require a significantly different system to work right. That said, I have seen several war games, most notably epic scale 40k, that involve secretly assigning orders to units (charge, advance, first fire) at the start of the turn, then revealing those orders one by one and executing them during the turn. Sound familiar? If FFG could come up with a good, diverse set of possible actions for ground units to take they could still use the "maneuver" dials and the basic turn framework in a ground based game and still have it feel like x-wing. If they were in the same scale, that would also allow for the possibility of the 2 games interacting directly, TIE bomber runs vs ground targets and such.
  13. Some guy on...board game geek I think, said he had hashed out an excel spreadsheet for making your own pilots. He said that if you tried making most of the existing pilots with it the points came out right, so it was probably pretty accurate. Here it is. I haven't actually looked at it or anything, just saw that it exists. http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/86960/ship-stats-vs-points-balancing-system
  14. Right.... which is why we can't draw any conclusions from the transport preview about what the purple number on the upgrade cards means. I kinda get the impression we are either talking in circles, or talking past each other or something. Doesn't matter. We'll find out what all the purple numbers mean sometime this year (hopefully).
  15. The Transport preview didn't show any upgrade cards with a purple number. All it talked about was the ship card.
  16. Which is fine, but you shouldn't accuse someone of dishonest behavior just because they and their friends enjoy tweaking the rules, especially when it is patently clear that he ISN'T being dishonest. Now, if he did something like that (taking chewie and chewie) without discussing it and getting his opponent's OK before the game started, that would be cheating, but he has made it quite plain that that isn't what he is doing. Another example. In chess it is against the rules to take back a move once your hand has left the peice, but in casual, friendly games that happens all the time, people take their hand off and go "oh, wait! I missed something, is it OK if Itake that back and do something else?", and if the opponent says sure, then it is fine. That isn't cheating. It may be encouraging bad play and stunting the person's growth as a chess player, but it isn't cheating.
  17. Yeah, the upgrades with a purple number would seem to work simplest if that is an amount that can be stored in them, you charge up the weapons from your ship's reactor. I have seen people speculating that maneuvers for the huge ships cost energy, but I haven't seen anyone point out that you can clearly see a bit of purple on the maneuver dial in the picture for the Tantive, which would seem to confirm that speculation.
  18. Yes, they are. And that reason is to make it easy for everyone playing to agree on how they are playing. The rules facilitate the social contract between the two players in a way that helps them both to have fun, and that is all. If two (or more) people want to go to the effort of changing that contract in a mutually agreed manner because they think they will have more fun that way, that is totally acceptable, and is called house ruling. Cheating means being dishonest about what you are doing, he is certainly not doing that and it is incredibly rude of you to accuse him of it. If you don't like house rules, that's fine. I think you are denying yourself a lot of fun, but whatever, just don't accuse someone of being decietful just because they like to engage in some amateur game design, something pretty much every professional game designer I have ever spoken to encourages. Game rules are not some holy writ handed down from on high, they are just the result of a bunch of people just like us sitting around and trying to think of new ways to have fun.
×
×
  • Create New...