Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Eduboy94

Episode 1-3 ships

Recommended Posts

You know, I still haven't seen the 'official' word from FFG that states the prequel ships are beyond the scope of this game. If there is, then the sequel ships appearing in the same game makes them appear to be hypocritical.

 

The CEO said, "More generally we're looking at the sort of game as it is, the Galactic Civil War going way forward".  So Episodes VII-IX aren't hypocritical.

 

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/114870-no-prequel-ships-settled/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not as good, but no where near as bad as you want to make it seem.

 

I'm not "trying to make it seem" anything; the prequel ships were poorly designed, not memorable, lacked a common and recognisable aesthetic and flopped in pretty much every way conceivable from a marketing point of view in comparison to the original trilogy designs.  This is an undeniable fact.

 

Hell, let's go Family Fortunes with this: ask 100 random people on the street to name a ship from any of the Star Wars films and how many do you think would name a ship from the prequels?

 

Survey says:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In my opinion, the ARC blows the Avenger and Gunboat out of the water, but opinions are opinions.

 

Do you know what's not opinion?  The prequel ships being total and utter commercial failures, and the original trilogy ships being commercial successes.  That's a certified, take-it-to-the-bank fact.

 

There's a reason this game is called X-Wing: The Miniatures Game and not ARC-170: The Miniatures Game.  The original trilogy ships have been iconic moneyspinners since they made their cinematic debut in the 1970's.  There's a reason why they've been sold in mass quantities worldwide in an incredible array of formats and still are, to this day.

 

Toys, board games, miniatures, video games, die-cast models, model kits.. so forth, and so on.  Billions of units shipped and sold, worldwide.  Across generations of consumers.  Immediately recognisable.  Household names.  Iconic.

 

The poorly designed, CGI obscenities in the prequel trilogy?  Never even came close, never stood a chance, never will.  Disney knew this, which is why they've quietly shunted the prequels into the background and gone back to the tried-and-tested formula with their new trilogy of films.

A completely pointless argument when the ARC-170 still was far more of a commercial success than the Assault Gunboat ever was. There's a reason LEGO and Hasbro are still making ARC-170 toys in 2015 and not Assault Gunboat toys. 

 

$_35.JPG

 

From what I can tell, almost all of the arguments against the prequel ships come down to "I don't like them". Which is a fine point of view. I don't like quite a few Star Wars ships (Like the butt-ugly Geonosian Starfighter). But don't act like they're "commercial failures" in the same breath as supporting the freaking Assault Gunboat. 

 

 

Not as good, but no where near as bad as you want to make it seem.

 

I'm not "trying to make it seem" anything; the prequel ships were poorly designed, not memorable, lacked a common and recognisable aesthetic and flopped in pretty much every way conceivable from a marketing point of view in comparison to the original trilogy designs.  This is an undeniable fact.

 

Hell, let's go Family Fortunes with this: ask 100 random people on the street to name a ship from any of the Star Wars films and how many do you think would name a ship from the prequels?

 

Survey says:

 

 

I can guarantee more of them will name a prequel ship than the Scyk, K-Wing, TIE Phantom, or Assault Gunboat. 

Edited by WingedSpider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not as good, but no where near as bad as you want to make it seem.

 

I'm not "trying to make it seem" anything; the prequel ships were poorly designed, not memorable, lacked a common and recognisable aesthetic and flopped in pretty much every way conceivable from a marketing point of view in comparison to the original trilogy designs.  This is an undeniable fact.

 

Hell, let's go Family Fortunes with this: ask 100 random people on the street to name a ship from any of the Star Wars films and how many do you think would name a ship from the prequels?

 

None, but thats because the OT is a set of 2 as close to perfect as you can get and one pretty good movie and the prequels are bad. That doesn't necessarily mean the ships themselves were bad. Lets face it you the answers you get would be: A Star Destroyer (because opening shot and later reinforcment of the name), the Falcon (because duh), an X-Wing and a TIE Fighter, with the former being more likly since it resembles its name. You will never hear (unless you talk to a Star Wars fan) about A-Wings, B-Wings, TIE Bombers, CR-90s, TIE Interceptors, SSDs specifically or Mon Calamari cruisers. The prequels made the mistake of not leaving any stage for their ships to shine, they always just were there. That doesn't make them bad. And again: LEGO did make a fortune with prequel designs, at least thats how i got to know most of them. They are even remaking the N1 this year! So please leave your edgy buzzer to yourself and put a bit more thought into your arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*snip* ...I can guarantee more of them will name a prequel ship than the Scyk, K-Wing, TIE Phantom, or Assault Gunboat. 

 

Kudos for missing the point on such an amazing scale.  In fact, you didn't miss it so much as you flew straight past it and into a parallel universe where Wookiees are pink and feathered.

 

 

None, but thats because the OT is a set of 2 as close to perfect as you can get and one pretty good movie and the prequels are bad. That doesn't necessarily mean the ships themselves were bad. Lets face it you the answers you get would be: A Star Destroyer (because opening shot and later reinforcment of the name), the Falcon (because duh), an X-Wing and a TIE Fighter, with the former being more likly since it resembles its name. You will never hear (unless you talk to a Star Wars fan) about A-Wings, B-Wings, TIE Bombers, CR-90s, TIE Interceptors, SSDs specifically or Mon Calamari cruisers. The prequels made the mistake of not leaving any stage for their ships to shine, they always just were there. That doesn't make them bad. And again: LEGO did make a fortune with prequel designs, at least thats how i got to know most of them. They are even remaking the N1 this year! So please leave your edgy buzzer to yourself and put a bit more thought into your arguments.

 

TL;DR - you're right, the general public don't have a clue about the prequel series ships.  But that doesn't matter at all because LEGO make them.  Cool rebuttal, bro.

 

Newsflash, kiddo - LEGO make a hell of a lot of money off a lot of things.  Jurassic Park, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones, Marvel, DC, Lord of the Rings, the list goes on.  That's the cool thing about having an inherently modular product that's easily adaptable to a wide range of source materials.  At this point, LEGO is essentially the Google of toy ranges.

 

LEGO however don't rely on the Star Wars prequels to make money; the Prequels however DID rely on their content to make money, and unfortunately for the prequels, their content was awful, ill-considered, CGI pap.

 

Again, there's a reason why Disney went back to the aesthetic of the original films, and have stayed the hell away from the prequels.  It's the same reason why video game developers, *cough* board game designers *cough* and many other merchandisers go to the license for the original trilogy and stay the hell away from the prequels as well.  And it's really quite simple as well:

 

The original trilogy = money.  The prequel trilogy = not.

Edited by FTS Gecko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

*snip* ...I can guarantee more of them will name a prequel ship than the Scyk, K-Wing, TIE Phantom, or Assault Gunboat. 

 

Kudos for missing the point on such an amazing scale.  In fact, you didn't miss it so much as you flew straight past it and into a parallel universe where Wookiees are pink and feathered.

 

Then what is your point? That the prequel ships are less recognizable than the ships that were already all released in the first 3 waves of X-Wing? Well no duh, so are all the other ships released in the last four waves of X-Wing until the Force Awakens core set. 

 

Why do you think that the prequel ships not being as recognizable as X-Wings or TIE Fighters is important? 

Edited by WingedSpider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

*snip* ...I can guarantee more of them will name a prequel ship than the Scyk, K-Wing, TIE Phantom, or Assault Gunboat. 

 

Kudos for missing the point on such an amazing scale.  In fact, you didn't miss it so much as you flew straight past it and into a parallel universe where Wookiees are pink and feathered.

 

Then what is your point? That the prequel ships are less recognizable than the ships that were already all released in the first 3 waves of X-Wing? Well no duh, so are all the other ships released in the last four waves of X-Wing until the Force Awakens core set. 

 

Why do you think that the prequel ships not being as recognizable as X-Wings or TIE Fighters is important? 

 

Honestly, these guys must have some memory problems if the prequel ships are "unmemorable", or whatever term they used. The LAAT and ARC-170 have, in large, been HUGE successes with many Star Wars fans - enough so that (as mentioend before) companies like Lego and Hasbro still make toys of them. N1 and Droid starfighters were rather prominent as well, and are immediately recognizable, as should both variants of jedi starfighter. All of them had plenty of clear screen time and participated in a number of pivotal scenes, so I don't see how they're "unmemorable".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

TL;DR - you're right, the general public don't have a clue about the prequel series ships.  But that doesn't matter at all because LEGO make them.  Cool rebuttal, bro.

 

The fedora levels are through the roof! The two points had nothing to do with each other. Read again, please. The ships are not not recognized because they are bad designs, but because they are in bad unmemorable movies.

 

I would urge you to go a bit easier on the snark, it doesn't exactly make you look good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 stupid and slow dialoge, the creepy romance (except for where she tells him she is pregnant, good acting!)

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought Padme and Anakin were kind of creepy, only it's hard to tell if it's just due to bad script and acting, or if Padme is legitimately just as bad as Anakin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 stupid and slow dialoge, the creepy romance (except for where she tells him she is pregnant, good acting!)

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought Padme and Anakin were kind of creepy, only it's hard to tell if it's just due to bad script and acting, or if Padme is legitimately just as bad as Anakin.

 

Anakin was only well acted in the mentioned pregnancy scene and when he goes nuts at the very end of episode 3. I always half expect Padmé to stand up, say "WTF is wrong with you?!" and leave the room in the weird dinner scene. The script does play a part in this, too, though. I heard someone edited this to make it actually convincing, but I haven't seen that, yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

None, but thats because the OT is a set of 2 as close to perfect as you can get and one pretty good movie and the prequels are bad. That doesn't necessarily mean the ships themselves were bad. Lets face it you the answers you get would be: A Star Destroyer (because opening shot and later reinforcment of the name), the Falcon (because duh), an X-Wing and a TIE Fighter, with the former being more likly since it resembles its name. You will never hear (unless you talk to a Star Wars fan) about A-Wings, B-Wings, TIE Bombers, CR-90s, TIE Interceptors, SSDs specifically or Mon Calamari cruisers. The prequels made the mistake of not leaving any stage for their ships to shine, they always just were there. That doesn't make them bad. And again: LEGO did make a fortune with prequel designs, at least thats how i got to know most of them. They are even remaking the N1 this year! So please leave your edgy buzzer to yourself and put a bit more thought into your arguments.

 

TL;DR - you're right, the general public don't have a clue about the prequel series ships.  But that doesn't matter at all because LEGO make them.  Cool rebuttal, bro.

 

Newsflash, kiddo - LEGO make a hell of a lot of money off a lot of things.  Jurassic Park, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones, Marvel, DC, Lord of the Rings, the list goes on.  That's the cool thing about having an inherently modular product that's easily adaptable to a wide range of source materials.  At this point, LEGO is essentially the Google of toy ranges.

 

LEGO however don't rely on the Star Wars prequels to make money; the Prequels however DID rely on their content to make money, and unfortunately for the prequels, their content was awful, ill-considered, CGI pap.

 

Again, there's a reason why Disney went back to the aesthetic of the original films, and have stayed the hell away from the prequels.  It's the same reason why video game developers, *cough* board game designers *cough* and many other merchandisers go to the license for the original trilogy and stay the hell away from the prequels as well.  And it's really quite simple as well:

 

The original trilogy = money.  The prequel trilogy = not.

Apparently toy companies didn't get the memo prequel toys don't sell, since they still keep making new ones in 2015. 

 

Also, Star Wars video games were basically dead in the water for a good period of the last decade following Battlefront II. Pandemic fell, Lucasarts fell after terrible games like The Force Unleashed, the Old Republic was a disappointing WoW clone, and the only significant games were the LEGO Star Wars games by Traveler's Tales. The new Battlefront will (hopefully) be the revival of Star Wars video games. Name five decent Star Wars games period released after Battlefront II and you will fail. 

 

 

 stupid and slow dialoge, the creepy romance (except for where she tells him she is pregnant, good acting!)

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought Padme and Anakin were kind of creepy, only it's hard to tell if it's just due to bad script and acting, or if Padme is legitimately just as bad as Anakin.

Natalie Portman's a fine actor. She just suffered from terrible direction, the same way a great actor like Samuel L Jackson gave such an awful performance as Mace Windu. 

Edited by WingedSpider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Goomba, your are running in a circle again, stawp. Do you even read what I say? I don't say prequel ships should be in the game! I am just making the case that there are people who do like them and that those people aren't wrong. And that Nickelback comparison is just tasteless. Nothing is as bland as Nickelback, especially the LAAT.

 

Edit: Okay, that picture makes it look more like the standart TIE Advanced, but you know that there are other versions. It still has ugly wings.

1.) But the prequel ship guys are wrong, and you're wrong for defending them.

2.) And the triplane X-Wing and CGI chrome banana fighter are tasteless and mediocre, just like Nickelback.

3.) Isn't the LAAT that dumb fat dropship thing? The height of bad taste right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't defend them, I defend ships that I like, and yes, that is the "fat dropship thing", responsible for some of the best looking (emphasis: looking) shots of episode two and TCW. The ARC is far from mediocre. It marries the classic feel of the X-Wing with the old Republic aesthetic. I especially think the nose looks elegant. But again, that is subjective, unlike Nickleback, which even someone who likes it has to admit that it is pretty bland and not saying anything.

Edited by Admiral Deathrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at the progression of ships from original SW and the new Ep 7 stuff, it makes me think that there would be less shields and hull per ship.  I look at the ships for the movies and those Jedi ships look like they would have 2 hull and 1 shield.   Some of the Clone ships would have alright shields and hull, but have a terrible dial.  The Clanker ships probably didn't have over 1 shield, either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of LEGO, did you know there was an official LEGO TIE Defender?  

 

LEGO_8087_PIC.jpg

And there was even a LEGO E-Wing... Or at least a ship that looked quite a lot like an E-Wing and was probably an E-Wing reference. 

 

brickpicker_set_75018-1_5.jpg

I did not know about the Defender, but I remember having a TIE/d somewhere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at the progression of ships from original SW and the new Ep 7 stuff, it makes me think that there would be less shields and hull per ship.  I look at the ships for the movies and those Jedi ships look like they would have 2 hull and 1 shield.   Some of the Clone ships would have alright shields and hull, but have a terrible dial.  The Clanker ships probably didn't have over 1 shield, either. 

Looking at the Jedi fighters, the Delta-7 Aethersprite is small, but still pretty solid. I see it having the same basic statline as an A-Wing: 2 hull, 2 shields, 3 agility. The dial would be slightly worse in exchange for an Astromech slot and maybe a Systems slot. The ETA-2 Actis Interceptor is extremely stripped down and unshielded, so 2 hull and no shields. Kinda hard to make it decent; 4 agility and an Astromech slot would somewhat help compensate the squishiness, but it would have to be very cheap or have something else to be on the same ground as the TIE Interceptor. Both ships use a hyperdrive ring, but I'm not sure how that could be incorporated into gameplay. 

 

The Clone ships are the Z-95 (Already in-game), ARC-170 (Bulky starfighter), and the LAAT Gunship (Bulky troop transport and gunship). The ARC-170 seems cool: Maybe a slightly worse dial than a X-Wing, but the rear-facing turret, higher bulk, and probable crew slot compensate. The LAAT would definitely have a bad dial, but I could see it having a slightly wider firing arc and several crew slots. 

 

For clanker ships... Vulture Droid Starfighters suck. It's hard to balance them because they would have to be incredibly cheap and vulnerable while still having a missile slot and at least okay firepower. Everything above that (Hyena Droid Bombers, Droid Gunships, Droid Tri-Fighters) is a lot easier to incorporate because they're more heavily armed and armored and not as expendable. 

 

Another issue with the prequel ships is size; the Jedi Interceptor and Vulture Droid are tiny by Star Wars ships standards. Models of them would be the smallest ships in the game. 

Edited by WingedSpider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather see the N1 than the gunboat if we only got one of them. The gunboat looks like the lambda with extra wings. There I said it. I guarantee more people could Identify the N1 than the ARC-170. Sorry that some people are able to acknowledge a few good things came out of the prequels and the elitist "purists" can't take themselves out their frothing fanboy hysteria and move on from 1983.

 

The prequels sucked.

They made some cool looking ships.

Prequel ships are cannon and more recognizable to a wider range of people than ships that showed up in a handful of video games last decade.

And while you have your nose turned to the sky here is a coupon for kleenex in case you get a nose bleed.  :)

https://www.kleenex.com/Promotions.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather see the N1 than the gunboat if we only got one of them. The gunboat looks like the lambda with extra wings. There I said it. I guarantee more people could Identify the N1 than the ARC-170. Sorry that some people are able to acknowledge a few good things came out of the prequels and the elitist "purists" can't take themselves out their frothing fanboy hysteria and move on from 1983.

 

The prequels sucked.

They made some cool looking ships.

Prequel ships are cannon and more recognizable to a wider range of people than ships that showed up in a handful of video games last decade.

And while you have your nose turned to the sky here is a coupon for kleenex in case you get a nose bleed.  :)

https://www.kleenex.com/Promotions.aspx

Yeah but there's a 52 page thread asking for the starwing assault gunboat.

 

You'll notice no such thread asking for the N-1.

 

That's because the overwhelming majority of players like the OT and EU faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more than the prequels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 stupid and slow dialoge, the creepy romance (except for where she tells him she is pregnant, good acting!)

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought Padme and Anakin were kind of creepy, only it's hard to tell if it's just due to bad script and acting, or if Padme is legitimately just as bad as Anakin.

 

Anakin was only well acted in the mentioned pregnancy scene and when he goes nuts at the very end of episode 3. I always half expect Padmé to stand up, say "WTF is wrong with you?!" and leave the room in the weird dinner scene. The script does play a part in this, too, though. I heard someone edited this to make it actually convincing, but I haven't seen that, yet.

 

I've seen it, and it's pretty okay.  They fixed the whole love story part of the movie by removing 95% of the dialogue.  

I know that sounds like snark, but that's exactly what they did and it totally works.  They also put a cut scene from the DVD back into Episode II where Anakin and Padme have dinner with her family, and it's the most grounded, relatable scene for either of them in the entire trilogy.  It's actually kind of charming, and should never have been cut.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of how someone personally feels about prequel ships, they are part of the public conscious and have sold more than the Gunboat, K-wing, Decimator and the HWK. Sadly, Jar Jar has sold more merch than all four of those ships combined. The movies and the Clone Wars cartoon put these things in the public consciousness. "I don't like" is not the same as "is bad" or even "no one likes", which should be obvious by the oft complained about return of these threads. As far as Disney disowning the prequels... not so much. They have officially disavowed the EU (unless they want something from it) whereas they have shown they are willing to dip into the Clone Wars to bring back Ahsoka and marketing other clone wars characters.Sure, that is focusing more on the Clone Wars series than the prequel movies, but guess what ships show up in the Clone Wars...

 

If the K-Wing didn't ruin the game for me, the N1 won't ruin the game for anyone else. Personally, I like the arc. It has the classic design of the old WW2 fighter-bombers like the P-38 Lightning. Some of the other ships are cool, some aren't. Same is true for the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but there's a 52 page thread asking for the starwing assault gunboat.

 

You'll notice no such thread asking for the N-1.

 

That's because the overwhelming majority of players like the OT and EU faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more than the prequels.

 

That argument doesn't really hold water, considering how the first few pages of this thread are mostly people complaining about how often people post threads asking about why there's no prequel ships.  I'm sure if you counted up the number of posts in threads asking for prequel ships, it would give that Gunboat thread a real run for its money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...