Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SomeDudeWhoMostlyLurks

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

285 profile views
  1. The "Corvus" title allows docking. Is this going to be a new sculpt with docking clamps like the Gozanti?
  2. I think you were "doing it wrong" if you found Epic boring. Try something like this.... Mission Specs.docx
  3. This..... is what I've been waiting for since roughly 1980. I just didn't know it until now. What ships can be in wings??? I HAVE TO KNOW!!!! And I need ALL THE X-WING PILOTS!! I need Corran in an X-Wing and Ibtisam in an X-wing, and Tycho in an X-Wing, and Hobbie needs to come back, and Plourr and D'llr and Nrin and Asyr and Nawara Ven and Inyri and Myn Donner and Face Loran..... Give me ALL the X-Wing pilots and let me put them on the board in formation. Then I can die a happy man!
  4. This is probably the first wave... EVER... that I'm not getting at least 1 of everything. Falcon- NO. I have 3 YT-1300s already. I can't think of any scenario where I would put more than 3 on the board at once. And it contains nothing new. (thank goodness - if I had to buy another YT-1300 for carboard, I'd be quite cross, and I would write a strongly-worded post to tell FFG that.) Decimator- NO. I have one already. I can't think of any scenario where I would put more than 1 on the board at once. In fact, It's very challenging to think of a scenario where I'd put more than ZERO of them on the board at once. It does have some cards that weren't previously available to Imperial-only players. If you are such a player, you might need this. It doesn't apply to me. N-1, Res Trans, Flappy B, Hyena: ALL THE YES!!!! (1 Trans, 2 N-1 and Hyena, probably 4 or 5 B's eventually: I've always used B's heavily, and I can't have SOME of them be flappy and the rest be static, that just wouldn't be fair.) Tie/SF: Yes. I have two from 1st Ed. But I could justify getting more. Definitely a ship I could see spamming, or using in squadrons in Epic scenarios. Tie/Vn: Maybe. New model seems sized more appropriately, but really nothing wrong with the old one, and no new content here.
  5. Yes, indeed, the Flappy B-Wing F!T!W!
  6. I mean.... the franchise is called STAR WARS not STAR MINOR SKIRMISH
  7. Do You Own Huge Ships Already? ALL OF THEM. Did You Play Epic in 1.0, or Were They Dustables? Yes. Do You Plan to Play Huge Ships in 2.0 (in Standard/Huge/Epic battles)? **** Yes Do You Plan To Play Epic Missions? **** yes. What is Your Biggest Draw to Epic 2.0? BIG BATTLES! BIG FLEETS! COMPLEX OBJECTIVES!!! PEW PEW!!! I actually play almost exclusively 400-600 point games with a group of friends. I write up scenarios for 4-6 players and every couple months we have a Sunday afternoon bash creating cinematic fan-fic on the table top. I have no interest in competitive play. I just want to live the Star Wars fleet battle experience. I love having themed squadron builds.
  8. Well, there is one other reason: Anyone who has been introduced to Star Wars in the last 7-8 years is not reading/playing/buying the source material for those pilots. If you didn't know about Tycho Celchu's role in the Bacta War by 2010, you probably haven't discovered him since. We got Dash and Soontir, because there are no viable canon pilots for those awesome models. I won't hold my breath for many more legends pilots in ships where canon pilots are a-plenty, even though the only thing I want is Corran Horn in green CorSec X-wing.
  9. Yeah, I think you've gone out of your way to find the cloud around the silver lining here.
  10. YES. PLEASE. With Corran in his green Cor-Sec X-wing. This is the only thing I've ever wanted from this game: to be able to field a LEGIT Rogue Squadron. ....and maybe the Pulsar Skate. I think the rebels need one more freighter-class vehicle.
  11. Simple physics here.... Ships which fly in atmosphere have to deal with aerodynamic effects even if they don't use bernoulli's principle to generate lift. Some of those ships are shaped in such a way that they can slice through atmosphere with relatively little interference. (RELATIVELY being the operative word here.) Other are nightmares. NONE of these ships would be good candidates for taking a trans-Atlantic flight. The more a ship is shaped like an actual airplane, the more likely it is to be functional in atmo. The more it has big, flat, sail-like panels that are likely to be perpendicular to any plane of movement, the more likely you are to get spanked by the wind. So yeah, ships with solar panels, strike foils, or other "wings" that are parallel to the horizon, and can "slice" through the air (X, Z, A, Fang, Gunboat, Striker, Reaper, Misthunter), will do better than blocky ships, and blocky ships (if they don't present a large face to the wind anyway: B, Y, YT-1300) will do better than ships with awkward protrusions (most ties) or wide faces (Firespray). And even the TIEs, will do fine, as long as they fly STRAIGHT FORWARD. The minute they start any turning maneuver, those big flat sails get perpendicular to the wind and the results could be disastrous. I suspect there would be a distinct hierarchy of suck even with the TIE subcategory, with the Interceptors and Aggressors coming out OK, and the basic TIE/LN - TIE/Fo shape just being the absolute worst possible thing you could put in the air.
  12. 100% Nope. Nothing about what I said suggests that the fight would be 2D. NOTHING. Even in ww2 combat, planes could go above or below other planes: they still oriented to the same horizon. I mean, really dude - you can climb a staircase - down is still down. The point is, all the pilots' feet were pointing the same direction. That only happens if one direction is objectively DOWN. Even the terms you use: "firing at ties both ABOVE and BELOW the Falcon" make my point. THERE IS NO SUCH THINGS AS "ABOVE" AND "BELOW" unless there is an objective "Down". In a REAL (non-Star Wars) space battle, there is only "over here" and "over there" because ALL directions are arbitrary. (In WW2, that's because the earth is a gravity well. In Star Wars, the lore does not give us a reason. The meta-reason is that Lucas wanted it to look that way, and simply gives no fk*cs about Physics.) Whenever people complain about the science of Star Wars I point out that the VERY FIRST THING any of us ever learned about the Star Wars galaxy is that Space has a "Down". Once you accept that, you forget about any consistently rational physics. Things we learned about Star Wars in May 1977: 1 - Space has a DOWN! (2 ships oriented unambiguously to the same plane) 2 - It is NOT aligned to the local gravity well! (WTF) (2 ships on the same plane NOT perpendicular to the planet Tatooine's normal.) 3- Correlian Corvettes shoot red laser-beams PEW! PEW! 4 - Imperial Star Destroyers shoot GREEN laser-beams PEW! PEW! 5 - Imperial Star Destroyers are .... holy F!!! a LOT bigger than Correlian Corvettes! Then we go inside and once C3PO starts talking, we learn a lot more things. But from the very first frame of this franchise. EVERY space battle has been shot with an unambiguous DOWN. Every space battle since that first one has reinforced this. Some of them are not useful as evidence, because they occurred to close to a gravity well (I.E. x-wings over Death Star) so OF COURSE there is a down. But even the deep space fleet actions have always adhered to this, right up to the slow-motion chase in TLJ.
  13. In real space, there is no down. But in THAT galaxy, far, far away... there IS a down. From the first moment of the first Star Wars film this has been codified, in that ALL SPACECRAFT fly relative to the same plane. For some reason, that is never explained in the lore, it is preferable for space ships which have artificial gravity and inertial dampeners and light speed to all fly aligned to the same horizon. Another bit of evidence - you don't have any need for a gyroscopic cockpit unless the is a DOWN for the pilot to care about.
  14. Yeah... you should just.... not. If you can't stand mature Asohka, then juvenile Asohka will just give you flashbacks of Jake Lloyd. These aren't for you.
  15. Armada gets a damned EXECUTOR! Canonically, this is 11.8 times longer than Imperial-II Star Destroyer. The model should be 12-feet long! FFG be like, "Eh, just chop it down to 18% of it's actual size and call it a day". But we can't have a Nebulon-B in X-wing? Because it's too long?
  • Create New...