Jump to content
Kingsguard

Not too happy with this Starwing stuff.

Recommended Posts

ROFL! I cannot bask in this glory! I am merely a servant of the Five Pointed Star!

Just reading about Gunboat is oarsum! My eyes sort of glaze over when you guys start talking manoeuvres and tactics for X-Wing.

Can't wait to pick up a flight of GUN and some Rebel sacrifices for them! Hey! Gotta feed my hungry Gunboats somehow!

:D:D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/21/2017 at 11:38 AM, Kingsguard said:

Anyone else think it's kind of dumb that these Starwings have SLAM? I mean the K-Wings actually have a SLAM device in the lore. The whole thing about StarWings is that they packed a lot of firepower and tough shields but were sluggish enough that they could be outmaneuvered by X-Wings and A-Wings.

At first i saw their dial and thought "Oh, well no K turns or other ways to flip around. It's has a weakness to counter it's strengths."

Then I saw it has SLAM "Okay that doesn't make sense at all. The big fat gunboat can move around better than an A-Wing now...but at least it's sacrificing it's attack to zip around the battlefield."

Then I saw the titles "SLAMing and attacking.....Why am I not surprised? Starwing is everyone's Marry Sue. Of course it gets to cheat..."

Kinda breaks the immersion when you get stuff like this.

I agree the Turn 1 slam cruise missiles is gonna hurt if you don't get out of its way. But the difference between this and the K-wing..is turrets ..and to a lesser extent bombs.

The danger of a K-wing or a JM5K is that it can punch you with a torp, and then slowly swing around plinking turret shots. The sustained fire makes them effective. Bombs also prevent you from chasing them.

The gunboat doesn't have any of these countermeasures. Yes it's going to catch a few people out with a slam-to-missile or slam-to-tractor beam, but once you get behind it, it becomes more like a B-wing (that can't 2K on you). Its heavy firepower will be countered by arc-dodgers.

Black One Poe and Fenn Rau are going to eat these things alive. There are plenty of viable counters, and I personally think this ship will force players to run lists using a variety of ships (and more than 2) in order to have a balanced squad to counter them. Its good for the game in my opinion, and I'm a rebel player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

19 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

Man, most of this thread is an amazing reminder of why gameplay >>>>>>>>>>> fluff any **** day

 

 

May  I recommend chess or go then instead of a Star Wars fictional Space Fighter game in which nearly every drop of atmosphere comes from the FLUFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DScipio said:

 

May  I recommend chess or go then instead of a Star Wars fictional Space Fighter game in which nearly every drop of atmosphere comes from the FLUFF

No you may not, because xwing knows better than to choose fluff over interesting gameplay elements (see Gunboat). I like it just fine here 

**** every FFG product knows better. Armada skews scaling because the models would simply be ridiculously small or large. Destiny mixes prequel and OT and resistance stuff rather than impart arbitrary gameplay restrictions, just as Xwing allows OT and new trilogy stuff in the same game.

Now I would, however, recommend anyone that places fluff over gameplay to go watch the movies or read a star wars book or wiki entry. 

EDIT: come to think of it, not even movies get the fluff right. I don't remember seeing a TIE striker ever dropping a bomb.

 

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Yess, yessss.  No longer is the Empire at its nadir.  We are mean.  I'm sorry, Nadir, there can only be two; a master and an apprentice  <<the sound of a swinging lightsaber>>.

 

13 hours ago, Darth Nadir said:

Ha, ha, ha! A bold claim, but you are not Sith.

You wear the trappings of the Sith, you fight like the Sith, but this can be imitated. You lack a vital quality found in all Sith. Sith have no fear, and I sense much fear in you.

(Ignites Lightsaber)

[strafes in a Gunboat and torpedoes both force users to oblivion]

Here. This settles things down. 

(dang space wizards)

Edited by Odanan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Odanan said:

 

[strafes in a Gunboat and torpedoes both force users to oblivion]

Here. This settles things down. 

(dang space wizards)

Serves us both right I suppose. We were only proving Bane correct with all the infighting. 

 

"The dark side was strong in me, for I was Sith."

Edited by Darth Nadir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

No you may not, because xwing knows better than to choose fluff over interesting gameplay elements (see Gunboat). I like it just fine here 

**** every FFG product knows better. Armada skews scaling because the models would simply be ridiculously small or large. Destiny mixes prequel and OT and resistance stuff rather than impart arbitrary gameplay restrictions, just as Xwing allows OT and new trilogy stuff in the same game.

Now I would, however, recommend anyone that places fluff over gameplay to go watch the movies or read a star wars book or wiki entry. 

EDIT: come to think of it, not even movies get the fluff right. I don't remember seeing a TIE striker ever dropping a bomb.

 

Its the exact other way around, thats why competitive X-Wing, Armada or .... Warhammer 40k is not as much fun as just fluffy beer& pretzel games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2017 at 9:08 PM, Kingsguard said:

Anyone else think it's kind of dumb that these Starwings have SLAM? I mean the K-Wings actually have a SLAM device in the lore. The whole thing about StarWings is that they packed a lot of firepower and tough shields but were sluggish enough that they could be outmaneuvered by X-Wings and A-Wings.

At first i saw their dial and thought "Oh, well no K turns or other ways to flip around. It's has a weakness to counter it's strengths."

Then I saw it has SLAM "Okay that doesn't make sense at all. The big fat gunboat can move around better than an A-Wing now...but at least it's sacrificing it's attack to zip around the battlefield."

Then I saw the titles "SLAMing and attacking.....Why am I not surprised? Starwing is everyone's Marry Sue. Of course it gets to cheat..."

Kinda breaks the immersion when you get stuff like this.

Very nice very troll....well played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ficklegreendice said:

EDIT: come to think of it, not even movies get the fluff right. I don't remember seeing a TIE striker ever dropping a bomb.

So what you're saying is that the FFG TIE Striker is movie accurate, and the fluff is wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

So what you're saying is that the FFG TIE Striker is movie accurate, and the fluff is wrong?

I'm saying the cross section of the TIE Striker that showed us it had two blokes and bombs is from an ancillary product. A very well done and beautifully down ancillary product, but still ancillary.

uErijDm.jpg

But really what I'm saying is "who cares?" If not even Disney can be assed to have Strikers bombing entrenched rebel positions after their totally-not-AT-ATs got wrecked, then what does it really matter?

well, it would have been really fun to combo ailerons with bombs. That much is certainly true.

 

and hey, if it's a Tie/SK Fighter then why doesn't it work with Youngster!?

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 11:55 PM, Kingsguard said:

But any ship in lore can supposedly  do that.

I know of no other ship in X Wing mini's who's source material is based entirely on the mechanics implemented for it in the X Wing / Tie Fighter video games. 

Edited by Joe Censored

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2017 at 0:09 AM, JJ48 said:

Others have pointed out that it's clearly a blending of the Gunboat and the Missile Boat.  If it really bothers you that much that they're using the name "Starwing" to refer to a combination of the two, then I would point out that the official designation of the Missile Boat has never, to my knowledge, been revealed.  Call it the Alpha-class OS-1 Star Wing II, and we're good to go.

Sure doesn't look like a Missile boat.

 

On 10/22/2017 at 1:08 AM, Lobokai said:

78 > 75.. at least to me

What the frell’n lol. You’re gonna call out one of the most beloved ships as it’s being previewed, insist it’s modest and well built stats are OP, defend the K-Wing [but think a civil war ship ruins immersion but a Black Fleet Crisis ship doesn’t?!] and then think we’re rude. Sure, you can do that. And we can take you to task for it. 

Wow. Again, math. 22x33 > 19x28.  That’s from common lore. Dunno what to tell you other than git gud with numbers bud. 

Don’t come here to throw out factually wrong opinions. And don’t defend the K-Wing and call any other ship a Mary Sue. That’s like defending Wesley Crusher and calling out K2SO. 

Because if you do, shared lexicon has a word for that... trolling

With each reply it becomes more clear that you haven't bothered to really read the OP. You're arguing points I haven't made. And yeah, YOU have been rude. You come into this with a standoffish nature. You should learn to keep that in check. It'll get you farther in social interaction. Anyways I'm going to move on to people who are discussing the actual topics I have stated till you join the conversation.

 

On 10/22/2017 at 9:13 AM, ficklegreendice said:

Man, most of this thread is an amazing reminder of why gameplay >>>>>>>>>>> fluff any **** day

I know I'd much rather be having fun with a fun ship than arguing endlessly about what it could do in a completely different game or some boring wiki entry 

The Gunboat is an awesome ship with unique capabilities, the kind I wish we had more of in this game. Unique capabilities, from x7 to alliance overhaul, sharply differentiate ships from one another beyond their mathematical efficiency. It makes them distinct and interesting.

At that point, fluff is at best an acceptable sacrifice or at worse a bit of chewed gum stuck to the games proverbial shoe. Fluff inspires gameplay, it does NOT force slavish adherence 

 

With respect you sound kind of like you're saying. "Screw the lore, I want to have my cake and eat it too."
 

On 10/22/2017 at 9:03 AM, BadMotivator said:

Your joking right?

SLAM was originally an Imperial technology. On the Missile Boat.

 

Missile boat. Not gunboat. They're two very different ships despite similar wing configurations. And how does it make sense to say "Look I just invented technology that allows me to move super fast if I sacrifice my ability to attack. Except I can also attack. Soooo basically I can move super fast despite my ship supposedly having to sacrifice speed for firepower and defenses. because screw tradeoffs I want everything and don't want to have to lose anything to get it"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, BVRCH said:

I agree the Turn 1 slam cruise missiles is gonna hurt if you don't get out of its way. But the difference between this and the K-wing..is turrets ..and to a lesser extent bombs.

The danger of a K-wing or a JM5K is that it can punch you with a torp, and then slowly swing around plinking turret shots. The sustained fire makes them effective. Bombs also prevent you from chasing them.

The gunboat doesn't have any of these countermeasures. Yes it's going to catch a few people out with a slam-to-missile or slam-to-tractor beam, but once you get behind it, it becomes more like a B-wing (that can't 2K on you). Its heavy firepower will be countered by arc-dodgers.

Black One Poe and Fenn Rau are going to eat these things alive. There are plenty of viable counters, and I personally think this ship will force players to run lists using a variety of ships (and more than 2) in order to have a balanced squad to counter them. Its good for the game in my opinion, and I'm a rebel player. 

How can you stay behind it when it can 3 turn slam 3 turn and shoot you with cannon or missile?

 

6 hours ago, clanofwolves said:

Very nice very troll....well played.

I'll thank you not to make accusations just because you disagree.
 

28 minutes ago, Joe Censored said:

I know of no other ship in X Wing mini's who's source material is based entirely on the mechanics implemented for it in the X Wing / Tie Fighter video games. 

But in the X-Wing games you could be flying any of the flyable ships and utilize power levels to increase performance in those areas in the same way. It's not something unique to the Starwing.

Lol, I typo'd it "Starwang" at first. That's fitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no "cake and eat it too"

The Star wing is a game piece, therefore be should be fun even if someone tries to nitpick at its capabilities because "fluff". It's a very simple concept 

If you're confusing "fun" with "competitive",  The starwing is NOWHERE NEAR broken enough to worry about its mechanics being overpowered. It's conservatively priced, psed and comes with restrictions on its titles. It has no turret, no guaranteed defenses, and no guaranteed damage to boot!

This just leaves us with an interesting, balanced ship. No reason to unduly limit it, ESPECIALLY not because of some other (completely and utterly different) game or some random wookpedia article 

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2017 at 11:27 PM, Segmentvs said:

Ok, I will jump on the bandwagon.  This is how you say you don't like the Starwing.  :D;)

I don't care for this ship.  I never played the video games it comes from.  I personally don't like the design.  FFG has done some wondrous things with some not so great designs, but this one just doesn't appeal to me.  I think the paint job is boring and it appears to have a sphincter on the rear of the ship. EDIT.  I will henceforth refer to this ship as the chocolate starfish. ;)

This is all just personal opinion and I will still buy one, but I don't think I will put it on the table.  I also can't wait to see all the repaints.

 

I'm kinda in the same boat (pun intended). I did play Tie Fighter, however, and still don't like the ship.  It doesn't fit in Star Wars, or the Empire for me. More than anything it felt like the designers trying to fill a role in a video game. The missions that made you fly one always felt like filler while I was waiting to get back in a Tie. So I don't get the nostalgia.

I'll go one step farther and say that I'm kinda . . . upset is way too strong a word, I guess irked or mildly disappointed that a ship got into the game in the first place. It really feels like it's only here because of a real loud forum meme.

I won't be buying one, but I'll agree that I'm excited for peoples' repaints. If someone does something really cool, that might be enough to change my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Kingsguard said:

Sure doesn't look like a Missile boat.

Agreed.  That doesn't change the fact that mechanics-wise, it clearly drew some inspiration from the missile boat (especially the OS-1 title).  As much as I would love to see a separate Missile Boat, the OS-1 is clearly meant to fill that role, and personally, I'm glad that we got a mixture of abilities staying on a ship that looks like a Gunboat rather than the same mixture of abilities on a ship that looks like some hideous Gunboat/Missile Boat mash-up.  (Though perhaps people pushing for Uglies would have preferred the latter.)

28 minutes ago, Kingsguard said:

Missile boat. Not gunboat. They're two very different ships despite similar wing configurations. And how does it make sense to say "Look I just invented technology that allows me to move super fast if I sacrifice my ability to attack. Except I can also attack. Soooo basically I can move super fast despite my ship supposedly having to sacrifice speed for firepower and defenses. because screw tradeoffs I want everything and don't want to have to lose anything to get it"

Well lore-wise, it makes perfect sense because the SLAM system drained the laser, but didn't affect your ability to fire missiles, as I recall (did the Missile Boat have a beam weapon?  I don't think those were drained, either, which makes sense with the XG-1 title).  Also, no tradeoffs?  The only way the thing can do a 180 is by making a wide loop, and in order to make the most of its ability it is completely reliant on secondary weapons, making itself more costly.  Granted, I'm not the most experienced player, so it's tough for me to judge myself, but the prevailing view seems to be that the thing is pretty decent, but not meta-shattering, and you're wailing as if you expect the thing to single-handedly dominate every single other list!

20 minutes ago, Kingsguard said:

How can you stay behind it when it can 3 turn slam 3 turn and shoot you with cannon or missile?

3/3 would be a pretty wide turn, wouldn't it?  If you suspect he's going to do something like that, it doesn't seem like it would be too terribly difficult to get out of the way, especially since he'll be Weapons Disabled and will have to rely on whichever secondary weapon his title supports (which could throw off the range, or limit him to ships he has a Target Lock on).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2017 at 8:13 PM, HolySorcerer said:

Because they decided to turn the Gunboat and Missile Boat into one ship.

Personally I would have preferred the OS-1 added slam to the action bar so the XG-1 could be a little cheaper but yeah, this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kingsguard said:

But in the X-Wing games you could be flying any of the flyable ships and utilize power levels to increase performance in those areas in the same way. It's not something unique to the Starwing.

But what is unique to the Starwing is for all other ships in the X-Wing / Tie Fighter video games that have been released for X Wing mini's, there is a vast amount of other source material to pull from, including the movies.  The Starwing is unique in that the way it flies is pulled exclusively from those video games, so it makes sense that they would translate how you fly it in those games to the rules on the table.  Other prominent ships that were in those games, such as the Tie Interceptor, Y Wing, X Wing, Tie Fighter, etc, all could somewhat behave like the Starwing in those games, but FFG almost certainly wasn't looking at how Lucasarts implemented them in those few games when translating them to the table top. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2017 at 6:08 PM, Kingsguard said:

Anyone else think it's kind of dumb that these Starwings have SLAM? I mean the K-Wings actually have a SLAM device in the lore. The whole thing about StarWings is that they packed a lot of firepower and tough shields but were sluggish enough that they could be outmaneuvered by X-Wings and A-Wings.

At first i saw their dial and thought "Oh, well no K turns or other ways to flip around. It's has a weakness to counter it's strengths."

Then I saw it has SLAM "Okay that doesn't make sense at all. The big fat gunboat can move around better than an A-Wing now...but at least it's sacrificing it's attack to zip around the battlefield."

Then I saw the titles "SLAMing and attacking.....Why am I not surprised? Starwing is everyone's Marry Sue. Of course it gets to cheat..."

Kinda breaks the immersion when you get stuff like this.

df8b0cfc-5b48-4a03-bf41-226083dac0d1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JJ48 said:

3/3 would be a pretty wide turn, wouldn't it?  If you suspect he's going to do something like that, it doesn't seem like it would be too terribly difficult to get out of the way, especially since he'll be Weapons Disabled and will have to rely on whichever secondary weapon his title supports (which could throw off the range, or limit him to ships he has a Target Lock on).

Not to mention, there are no Koiogran Turns, no Segnors Loops, no Tallon Rolls.  Ships fly past each other in X-Wing.  A lot.  And if a Gunboat flies past it's target, the only way it's going to turn around quickly is with a SLAM.  Unlike a K-Wing, it can't continue flying away, dropping it's bombs and using a turret; it needs to get it's targets back in arc.

Other ships not only have K-Turns, S-Loops or T-Rolls, a lot also have Boost or Barrel Roll to help them reposition.  A clever player facing Gunboats will predict which way they plan to SLAM, and react accordingly.  It's going to be an uphill battle for a Gunboat player to get their targets quickly back in arc after the initial combat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kingsguard said:

Missile boat. Not gunboat. They're two very different ships despite similar wing configurations. And how does it make sense to say "Look I just invented technology that allows me to move super fast if I sacrifice my ability to attack. Except I can also attack. Soooo basically I can move super fast despite my ship supposedly having to sacrifice speed for firepower and defenses. because screw tradeoffs I want everything and don't want to have to lose anything to get it"

Would a fluff explanation, a gameplay explanation, or a technical explanation suit you more? How about a technical one just to start us off? The technology they "invented" was - and this is full of jargon now, so bear with me - a battery. They're these nifty things that store energy for use when you need it later. They're great for systems that have to divert power to other systems, while maintaining at least some power elsewhere. They're used in things like laser guns and... cars...
OH, also, they could have invented capacitors. They're kind of like batteries, but they work slightly differently. They tend to hold less power, but can dump all the power they have suuuuuuuper fast. They're used in things like laser guns and... eh, also cars. 

Actually, come to think of it, all of this technology was invented decades ago in real life and we haven't even had a manned trip to Mars yet. Which would imply that it's entirely plausible for a society capable of interstellar travel - and indeed building planet sized stations - would be capable of throwing a battery and a few capacitors into a cannon systems to allow a low power like a tractor beam be used (though perhaps not a more taxing unit like heavy cannon). 

 

Ok, lets try the gameplay explanation now; it's an arc locked ship that pays a premium to fire cannons that are restricted to 0-1 damage while it's trying to turn around because it has no other means to actually reengage, therefore balancing it's dial against it's capabilities. Similarly the ordnance upgrade pays a higher premium but forces you to not only maintain target locks in doing so, but also will require you to spend actions reloading at least every other turn, therefore balancing the opportunity cost of actions/firing stats against actual squad point costs. How effective either will be will determined in play, but both require investment.

 

And lastly, let's go for the fluff explanation; Someone in the place they make them thought it would be cool if they could SLAM and shoot. Someone with a pointy hat and some buttons on their chest agreed. Now they can SLAM and shoot. (That's probably true. I don't know. I don't even like SW. I'm the wrong person to ask unless you want a full explanation of part one).

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.


×
×
  • Create New...