Jump to content

Gottmituns205

Members
  • Content Count

    1,526
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Gottmituns205

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 01/25/1989

Recent Profile Visitors

1,322 profile views
  1. Honestly the MC75 shoulda had U-wings with it, much like Thrawn had the two Mando ships with it. Truth be told, I'm kinda struggling to comprehend where this game goes from here. The trickle of new product is like...one drop here...two years later...another drop...it's pretty bad IMHO. If anything they should do a Dreadnaught for the IMP's and an AF MK1 for the Rebs...
  2. I'm on the fence about cashing out since I haven't heard much, but are people still playing?
  3. Lets just drop in the Eclipse, and end the game on turn one.
  4. I really sounded like a **** there, I apologize. Thing to understand...when making a new unit you have to ask "does this unit power creep, does it replace big ticket items, does it fill a specific role." The role is a carrier that isn't a glass cannon, but doesn't outgun or come close to outgunning an ISD.
  5. Everyone who makes a Venator forgets the first rule: The Venator is the carrier, the Victory is the gunship, combine them you get the ISD. Cannon all points to this concept, whilst the Resurgent focused more on being a starfighter carrier...but then again I think the Resurgent is straight up BS and the numbers are inflated. More or less you'd see a Venator basically with weaker guns, weaker hull, slow (outdated by the GCW) but with a powerful anti-fighter and powerful fighter control abilities. This is a quasar you can take into a fight and push a tie swarm with...you engage ships AFTER your fighters did their job.
  6. I'm already sick of the speculation threads...so I sit here and look at this thing and it tells me one thing...we need some funny names for it! Palpatine's Boudoir The Palp Wagon Lucille Tyranny in Style Palpi's Pimp Ship Super Swag Destroyer
  7. Lets just nip this in the bud... I'm betting they drop the MC85 to go with this bad boy.
  8. Gunnery Teams and an accuracy build will outright tell the small ship swarm to ***K OFF right away. My guess, it's gonna be an anchor ship with a bunch of pickets...you slow people down and smash them with red dice. I'd run this with a dictor and titus to slow people down...then smash them with reds.
  9. Guessing the three titles: Lusankya (whatever...) Ravager and Executor. Isard shoulda been an admiral for sure.
  10. I'm gonna call it now, you'll see people literally take this with like...4 squadrons or a decent tie swarm and depending on the points low bid like crazy...it's gonna be a tar ship for sure. "Come at me bro." CR90's will get roflstomped, and I suspect the Reeikin nurf to them ramming was directly SOLELY AT THIS.
  11. Oh christ...it finally happened. As much as I want to have this, and display it, it's 200 bucks that just isn't worth it for me. I've learned over the years that the "big bad boy" in the yard gets taken down by the ants it tries to crush. Unless the stats for this thing make it so that it can take on multiple ships at once and not get swarmed, game over. Granted I could very well be wrong.
  12. I mean tbh...900 for the Victory, 1130 for the Venator, and 1600 for the Imperial. 1200 for the MC80 and 1300 for the Home One type. The reasoning I think the Venator should be scaled smaller, a tad longer than the Victory but on a medium base...because it's a medium sized warship that is older than the MC80's. Besides a large base is gonna make the game designers buff it to the point it makes it cheaper/better to use than the ISD...which is something we wanna avoid. Scalewise it's a large ship, but game play it should be a medium...a true carrier counter to the Victory.
  13. The Venator as a large ship is silly when the Victory is a medium. These ships were more or less combined to make the Imperial. Plus this goal is to make the Venator not an overall defacto better choice than the Imperial.
×
×
  • Create New...