Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Forgottenlore

  1. Now there are some goofy looking ships (like the ARC fighter) but the Naboo fighter would look awesome.

    There, fixed that for you. ;)

    In seriousness though, it always bothers me when a company uses the same universe, the same mechanics, makes them 100% cross compatible, but calls them different games. That always strikes me as just a money grab so they can sell 2 copies of the rules to people, even though I know that isn't really the case.

    However, FFG has done this several times already with RPGs. The 40k RPGs came out as seperate but compatible games and now I believe they are doing the same with the Star Wars: Age of... RPGs. So something similar for the miniatures game is not unlikely.

  2. Those are the 3 large ships, whose packaging have space for a large rules inserts. The small ships, including what we see in wave 4, have rules cards. If they were going to do a rules insert then they wouldn't also be including cards.

    Edit: multi ninja.

  3. I like the idea of a "maneuver" that gives you a choice of 2 moves, but even that would require a rules card.

    Do you guys think it would require a rules card if the maneuver dial included the symbol for a barrel roll?

    Sigh, yeah it would, you would have to explain whether the ship could set its dial to that maneuver and then perform the action as well.

  4. There is also that they went out of their way to say never before seen 'on a dial', which pretty strongly indicates that it has been seen before on some kind of action or special ability, which makes me think speed 1 k turn, but then, wouldn't they have made the same claim about the b wing?

  5. Yes, that is a really big thing and it is entirely possible, which is what I have been saying and why I was responding to bearhug's optimistic belief that they aren't going to mess things up too much.

    They have formed this group that is going to decide what from the EU remains canon and what isn't. For me, I guess it comes down to the question of whether that group is going to pour through thousands of pages of material and render a judgement on each individual item..."this ship is canon, this one isn't, this character exists, this one doesn't"; or if they are going through and deciding based on titles... "Thus book is canon, this trilogy isn't" or if it's even more broad than that "we're making more sequel movies, so all the books that take place after Jedi are no longer canon, but we can still get some mileage from the video games so old republic era books can stay"

    I can see any of those options being the path they are taking, depending on what upper management has directed they do with the property.

  6. 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.

  7. If an EU ship or character currently in this game doesn't end up in the future Star Wars canon they still get to stay in this game.

    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.

  8. well if we would have 4 banks, 5 banks , 4 hard turns and 5 hard turns

    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


     didnt know the shuttle has 23 wow thats pretty impressive

    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?

  9.  as i sadi 22 out of 30 moves to chose from would be possible most green cause it has good breaks too.

    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.

  10. Disney will drive it from what makes the most money


    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.


  11. 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.

    Look I think Disney is an incredible company. I purposely quoted the word mature because I couldn't think of the proper term. Yes, star wars has teddy bears. But it also has people dying left and right, being force choked, fried from lightning, shot, slaughtering of children, cut in half, dismembered and you know, mass genocide of entire planets. To me, star wars has always been more grey or dark with the right amount of comic relief (teddy bears).

    Is anyone really going to defend that a spunky mandalorian that goes around spray painting fits this universe? Come on now.

    To each, his own..

    I don't understand? This paragraph you wrote itself sounds like it is defending the character concept.

  12. 2) Biggs dies in the second round.   What are you doing to poor Biggs!?!?

    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.

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. 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.


  17. 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).

  • Create New...