Jump to content

Grumbleduke

Members
  • Content Count

    499
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from eliteone in Time to name our new pet Starhawk   
    It's already got a nickname: Starhawk.
    It's not like it's got a boring name like an MC30c Torpedo Frigate, or Assault Frigate Mk II B, or Imperial-class II Star Destroyer.
    Starhawk is pretty short on its own - only way to make it shorter is to go down to one syllable; but hawk is already taken.
  2. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from starbat861 in And here is the Starhawk   
    Except it turns out the ISD was cheating on the Hammerhead with the Nebulon-B. And that got us the Starhawk.
  3. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from LostFleet in The New Expansions   
    According to Leland Chee on Twitter, FFG didn't design the Starhawk. Lucasfilm "had an existing design" (which is presumably code for "has a design ready for something new, perhaps Rise of Skywalker, but can't tell us what") and FFG used that.
  4. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from benskywalker in A New Age of Battle - Starhawk and Onager Preview   
    I think the brackets and timing are also important.
    While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle, the attacker does not remove a die (even if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect), and may add 1 red die to the attack pool. Part one tells us the timing for this effect. When does it happen? While a friendly ship is attacking a ship.
    Part two tells us the condition. When can this happen? "...if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle." This condition does not cover EWS, Cracken etc.
    Part 3 tells us what the effect is. What happens? The attacker doesn't remove a die.
    Part 4 puts a qualifier on that. It is in brackets (so an aside like this, not the main rule). It tells us that we do this even if some second criteria is met. The key word there is "also." And the placement is important. It isn't "also if the attack is obstructed by a card effect", it is "if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect." It is two ways of being obstructed, not two conditions. The "even if" is also important - it means this is an addition to the main rule, not replacing it. So we still need Part 2 to be true.
    Part 5 then adds a second effect.
    ------------------
    Even if the card text wasn't clear (which it is), the intention would be really clear. If it was meant to cover all obstruction in all circumstances, it would simply need to read "While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed the attacker does not remove a die and may add 1 red die to the attack pool." Which is much, much simpler (and how things like Jaina's Light are worded).
    They've deliberately restricted it to ship or obstacle obstruction in part 2, and explicitly covered the situation where an attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle and a card effect in part 4. Which means they're not covering when an attack is just obstructed by a card effect.
  5. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from ianediger in Isn't anyone else gobsmacked at the price of the new large ships?   
    It's worth remembering that X-Wing prices went up by ~30% in the move to X-Wing 2 - which was after the last normal Armada release.
    As far as I know, Armada hasn't experienced a price increase in the 4-5 years it has been around. I wonder if what we're seeing is FFG finally catching up on 4-5 years of changes in costs across the board with the miniatures. Maybe if we'd had an expansion in the last 18 months it might have been a more gradual increase.
    It might be they're also trying to get some advance funding to cover the large investment into the Clone Wars stuff, or they're trying to recover some of the extra costs of developing the SSD.
    Or they're trying to make more money and know we will pay.
  6. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from ArmaggedonPSA in The New Expansions   
    According to Leland Chee on Twitter, FFG didn't design the Starhawk. Lucasfilm "had an existing design" (which is presumably code for "has a design ready for something new, perhaps Rise of Skywalker, but can't tell us what") and FFG used that.
  7. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from GrandAdmiralCrunch in The New Expansions   
    According to Leland Chee on Twitter, FFG didn't design the Starhawk. Lucasfilm "had an existing design" (which is presumably code for "has a design ready for something new, perhaps Rise of Skywalker, but can't tell us what") and FFG used that.
  8. Sad
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from ChavoGuerrero in Isn't anyone else gobsmacked at the price of the new large ships?   
    We understand, more than you know. UK.
  9. Haha
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from DScipio in Isn't anyone else gobsmacked at the price of the new large ships?   
    We understand, more than you know. UK.
  10. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from axe238 in A New Age of Battle - Starhawk and Onager Preview   
    I think the brackets and timing are also important.
    While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle, the attacker does not remove a die (even if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect), and may add 1 red die to the attack pool. Part one tells us the timing for this effect. When does it happen? While a friendly ship is attacking a ship.
    Part two tells us the condition. When can this happen? "...if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle." This condition does not cover EWS, Cracken etc.
    Part 3 tells us what the effect is. What happens? The attacker doesn't remove a die.
    Part 4 puts a qualifier on that. It is in brackets (so an aside like this, not the main rule). It tells us that we do this even if some second criteria is met. The key word there is "also." And the placement is important. It isn't "also if the attack is obstructed by a card effect", it is "if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect." It is two ways of being obstructed, not two conditions. The "even if" is also important - it means this is an addition to the main rule, not replacing it. So we still need Part 2 to be true.
    Part 5 then adds a second effect.
    ------------------
    Even if the card text wasn't clear (which it is), the intention would be really clear. If it was meant to cover all obstruction in all circumstances, it would simply need to read "While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed the attacker does not remove a die and may add 1 red die to the attack pool." Which is much, much simpler (and how things like Jaina's Light are worded).
    They've deliberately restricted it to ship or obstacle obstruction in part 2, and explicitly covered the situation where an attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle and a card effect in part 4. Which means they're not covering when an attack is just obstructed by a card effect.
  11. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from Formynder4 in Isn't anyone else gobsmacked at the price of the new large ships?   
    It's worth remembering that X-Wing prices went up by ~30% in the move to X-Wing 2 - which was after the last normal Armada release.
    As far as I know, Armada hasn't experienced a price increase in the 4-5 years it has been around. I wonder if what we're seeing is FFG finally catching up on 4-5 years of changes in costs across the board with the miniatures. Maybe if we'd had an expansion in the last 18 months it might have been a more gradual increase.
    It might be they're also trying to get some advance funding to cover the large investment into the Clone Wars stuff, or they're trying to recover some of the extra costs of developing the SSD.
    Or they're trying to make more money and know we will pay.
  12. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from ovinomanc3r in A New Age of Battle - Starhawk and Onager Preview   
    I think the brackets and timing are also important.
    While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle, the attacker does not remove a die (even if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect), and may add 1 red die to the attack pool. Part one tells us the timing for this effect. When does it happen? While a friendly ship is attacking a ship.
    Part two tells us the condition. When can this happen? "...if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle." This condition does not cover EWS, Cracken etc.
    Part 3 tells us what the effect is. What happens? The attacker doesn't remove a die.
    Part 4 puts a qualifier on that. It is in brackets (so an aside like this, not the main rule). It tells us that we do this even if some second criteria is met. The key word there is "also." And the placement is important. It isn't "also if the attack is obstructed by a card effect", it is "if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect." It is two ways of being obstructed, not two conditions. The "even if" is also important - it means this is an addition to the main rule, not replacing it. So we still need Part 2 to be true.
    Part 5 then adds a second effect.
    ------------------
    Even if the card text wasn't clear (which it is), the intention would be really clear. If it was meant to cover all obstruction in all circumstances, it would simply need to read "While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed the attacker does not remove a die and may add 1 red die to the attack pool." Which is much, much simpler (and how things like Jaina's Light are worded).
    They've deliberately restricted it to ship or obstacle obstruction in part 2, and explicitly covered the situation where an attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle and a card effect in part 4. Which means they're not covering when an attack is just obstructed by a card effect.
  13. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from xero989 in A New Age of Battle - Starhawk and Onager Preview   
    I think the brackets and timing are also important.
    While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle, the attacker does not remove a die (even if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect), and may add 1 red die to the attack pool. Part one tells us the timing for this effect. When does it happen? While a friendly ship is attacking a ship.
    Part two tells us the condition. When can this happen? "...if the attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle." This condition does not cover EWS, Cracken etc.
    Part 3 tells us what the effect is. What happens? The attacker doesn't remove a die.
    Part 4 puts a qualifier on that. It is in brackets (so an aside like this, not the main rule). It tells us that we do this even if some second criteria is met. The key word there is "also." And the placement is important. It isn't "also if the attack is obstructed by a card effect", it is "if the attack is also obstructed by a card effect." It is two ways of being obstructed, not two conditions. The "even if" is also important - it means this is an addition to the main rule, not replacing it. So we still need Part 2 to be true.
    Part 5 then adds a second effect.
    ------------------
    Even if the card text wasn't clear (which it is), the intention would be really clear. If it was meant to cover all obstruction in all circumstances, it would simply need to read "While a friendly ship is attacking a ship, if the attack is obstructed the attacker does not remove a die and may add 1 red die to the attack pool." Which is much, much simpler (and how things like Jaina's Light are worded).
    They've deliberately restricted it to ship or obstacle obstruction in part 2, and explicitly covered the situation where an attack is obstructed by a ship or obstacle and a card effect in part 4. Which means they're not covering when an attack is just obstructed by a card effect.
  14. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from Realadmiralsdoitinspace in Isn't anyone else gobsmacked at the price of the new large ships?   
    We understand, more than you know. UK.
  15. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from mcworrell in Onager's and Starhawk's Unusual Target Points   
    It's still $10 more than the Chimaera or ISD. And the Starhawk is double the price of the MC80s. I think they've increased all their prices. I think it is less that the Onager is cheap and more that the Starhawk is so big (seriously big) that it is a lot more expensive.
  16. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from Dreadnowt in European Championship lack of info   
    There are some timings and details on the Facebook event page.
    Nothing about SSD legality yet, although people have been asking. Might be worth pestering them on the FFG Organized Play Europe page.
  17. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from noggin in Store Championship Battle Report/Vlog - Mothma MC30 v MC80s   
    This is from the Store Championship a couple of weeks ago at iBuyWargames - also my first attempt at putting together a video for this.
    Feedback on either the Armada play or the video itself is welcome; if people like it I'll try to put together more - although I don't know when I'll next get to play any Armada.
    MC80s everywhere...
     
  18. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from LordCola in Post your GenCon pics HERE!   
    The industry stuff is on Wednesday, so FFG's In Flight Report will be in a bit under 27 hours (7pm EDT). Here is a countdown to that.
    The Exhibit Hall opens at 10am EDT on Thursday onwards, so a bit under 42 hours. Here is a countdown to that.
  19. Thanks
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from Kani Kantai in Any Europeeps/Britpeeps get an SSD yet or a dispatch notice?   
    Just spoke to them to check up on things. Apparently they haven't received their SSDs yet, but are anticipating them being with us by the end of this week (so Friday or Saturday).
  20. Thanks
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from ISD Avenger in Any Europeeps/Britpeeps get an SSD yet or a dispatch notice?   
    Just spoke to them to check up on things. Apparently they haven't received their SSDs yet, but are anticipating them being with us by the end of this week (so Friday or Saturday).
  21. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from thestag in Super Star Destroyer Rules Sheet   
    No, you can't have an SSD in a normal RitR game, but they also said it could be extended to start at 400-points.
    Speculating wildly, perhaps the SSD appears in the final round of a RitR campaign (if you have it) as an objective of some kind. Perhaps it is under construction (as in the Assault Prototype art) and the Rebels have to sabotage it while the Empire defends it. I vaguely remember a mission in Empire at War along those lines (but with the Eclipse).
  22. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from Aahz 1 in SSD Coming August 1st   
    ... and Rebellion in the Rim!
  23. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from drumtier in Article Predictions. Mostly General Discussion. But there's definately some Predictions scattered throughout.   
    Article about GenCon: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2019/7/29/ffg-at-gen-con-2019/
    Mostly confirming what we already knew, but this bit stood out:
    So... Rebellion in the Rim early release on Thursday? I'm guessing that means someone will pick up a copy and less us all know what's in it?
  24. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from Darth Sanguis in Super Star Destroyer Rules Sheet   
    No, you can't have an SSD in a normal RitR game, but they also said it could be extended to start at 400-points.
    Speculating wildly, perhaps the SSD appears in the final round of a RitR campaign (if you have it) as an objective of some kind. Perhaps it is under construction (as in the Assault Prototype art) and the Rebels have to sabotage it while the Empire defends it. I vaguely remember a mission in Empire at War along those lines (but with the Eclipse).
  25. Like
    Grumbleduke got a reaction from lunitic501 in Super Star Destroyer Rules Sheet   
    Have we seen the expanded 400-point rules for RitR? And in RitR you don't need the points for a commander, so starting with 400-points you should be able to fit in an SSD, even the Executor I.
×
×
  • Create New...