Jump to content
Piratical Moustache

Any Last Requests for the Empire and Rebels before the Clone Wars?

Recommended Posts

Should I give up hope on the wingless liberty?  I'd love it as an alternate ship card and mini for the MC80 home one (so as not to crowd out the design space)...

 

Also want the brahtok- definitely need this and the wingless to complete a respectable battle of endor! (and maybe some DSII rules somehow in a special mission...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Im tired of this entrenched claim that the Tector HAS to look identical to an Imperial Class Star Destroyer. I go by what we see onscreen and we get just a partial section of one angle.

There is plenty of room for creativity in imagining a ship that shares similarities to the Imperial but with significant differences such as size and various distinctive and diverging features like we get with the Victory.

Visually take the Imperial Class and redesign it with the idea that it’s meant purely as a tank/sponge. Make it bigger, cover it in thick armor. If the Victory is visually the step before the Imperial, make the Tector the step ahead, the future of the Imperial Fleet that loses some of the benefits of the Imperial but removes many of its vulnerabilities. 

Gameplay wise give it a powerful hull, poor shields, mediocre weapons, and no fighter support. Lots of blue dice. This is a bruiser but in a support way.

—-

I guess my point is there is potential for something very cool here.

All we know is that it’s a Star Destroyer, of which there are visually many kinds. It’s never been explicitly said to be a hangerless Imperial.

Edited by Forresto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sixpack said:

 

Sure. That is a way to do it.

 

But that would take the chance away of getting a ship with 0 squadron value as well as the new defense token being introduced as a standard option on the good ol triangle hull.

 

Now, I can understand people that don't want another big triangle ship after the ISD and Chimera pack.

But the way I see it it is a good option to get out a new large ship for the empire with a lower production cost if most of the ISD hull type can simply be reused. (Then again I do not know about how ffg does it)

Right. So, for your top-down model of the ISD, use a Kuat cardboard base. There! A Tector, surely.

Squadron 2 isn't low enough? Well, it's not like the Arquitens is known for it's fighter capacity and it's fighter 2.

 

Thing is, the "tector" is not worth the effort. Why should FFG spend effort essentially making a nearly identical ISD model? Moreover, if you're going to the effort of presenting us a new large ship, why release one that is only different on the bottom?... the angle we don't see during gameplay? The Tector is represented best by a generic title for the ISD, since it's about as different as the BTL-B, BTL-S3, and BTL-A4 from one another.

Now, if LFL used their concept art resources and designed something that looks wildly, entirely exciting and different from the ISD (while re-using the one angle we get on something that is stated to be a Tector)... then we're talking. Otherwise it's not like the "Imperial Star Destroyer Kuat Refit" really exists outside of Armada- just plate up the model's bottom hangar with plasticard and use the Kuat base.

 

The Secutor and the Venator are much better options for large-based ships, because they are clearly and distinctly different. New firing arcs, new upgrade slots, etx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Norsehound said:

Right. So, for your top-down model of the ISD, use a Kuat cardboard base. There! A Tector, surely.

Squadron 2 isn't low enough? Well, it's not like the Arquitens is known for it's fighter capacity and it's fighter 2.

 

Thing is, the "tector" is not worth the effort. Why should FFG spend effort essentially making a nearly identical ISD model? Moreover, if you're going to the effort of presenting us a new large ship, why release one that is only different on the bottom?... the angle we don't see during gameplay? The Tector is represented best by a generic title for the ISD, since it's about as different as the BTL-B, BTL-S3, and BTL-A4 from one another.

Now, if LFL used their concept art resources and designed something that looks wildly, entirely exciting and different from the ISD (while re-using the one angle we get on something that is stated to be a Tector)... then we're talking. Otherwise it's not like the "Imperial Star Destroyer Kuat Refit" really exists outside of Armada- just plate up the model's bottom hangar with plasticard and use the Kuat base.

 

The Secutor and the Venator are much better options for large-based ships, because they are clearly and distinctly different. New firing arcs, new upgrade slots, etx.

It wouldn't be for me.

And I am sure you would agree if I were to say that there are still more options with how a ISD like triangle can be set up via firepower dice, shields, hull, and upgrade slots as well as the speed and manouver chart.

The thing is we know very little about the Tector, as such it is more of a blank card.  And actually making a new type of ship (it is a Tector, not an Imperial, just like a Victory and Gladiator are not an Imperial) gives the options for new titles. Simply adding a Tector title does not seem fitting to me.

 

From what I can see your issue is more with it being just another hull that looks similar to already existing ones (and Forresto did point out that there are still options to visually change it). An argument I can understand but do not agree with myself.

 

As for the Secutor and Venator. Sure, they can be added (and the Venator will deffinetly come with the clone wars, so it's already out for this thread). The Secutor would basically be a beefed and based up Quasar with more upgrade card options. So a ship made for Sloane. The question will be if it can work just as well as a Avenger titled ISD variant for Sloane. Or maybe we will get another squadron Admiral with the Secutor that works very well with it.

Edited by Sixpack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember my obscure Star Wars trivia correctly the Tector was supposedly just an ISD model that missed the ventral hanger bay. So it seems like an ISD that is more purpose build for ship to ship combat and leaves the fighter screening to other vessels. But there is already a ship (in legends) that fills that exact roll. The Allegiance-class battlecruiser. 2.2 km of pure anti capital ship firepower. A true purpose build warship with no squad capacity. A specialized and beautiful ship. I would love it in the game though it would be pretty similar to the ISD model (with more guns and no hangars and a bigger reactor bulge). The problem is that it would be much stronger out of the front than an ISD but FFG really build themselves into a corner with the SSD here. The cheapest SSD only shoots 8 dice from its front so how can you ever justify any other smaller ship to have more dice in its front than an SSD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, LordCola said:

If I remember my obscure Star Wars trivia correctly the Tector was supposedly just an ISD model that missed the ventral hanger bay. So it seems like an ISD that is more purpose build for ship to ship combat and leaves the fighter screening to other vessels. But there is already a ship (in legends) that fills that exact roll. The Allegiance-class battlecruiser. 2.2 km of pure anti capital ship firepower. A true purpose build warship with no squad capacity. A specialized and beautiful ship. I would love it in the game though it would be pretty similar to the ISD model (with more guns and no hangars and a bigger reactor bulge). The problem is that it would be much stronger out of the front than an ISD but FFG really build themselves into a corner with the SSD here. The cheapest SSD only shoots 8 dice from its front so how can you ever justify any other smaller ship to have more dice in its front than an SSD.

That part is easy. Because the SSD is so dang long and Star Wars has inexplicably short ranged “lasers” that the SSD can’t really bring most of its firepower to bear on anything. That’s why it can have 6 zones with lotsa dice but no individual zone is overwhelming. It’s quite possible given the lore to have a ship outgun a hull zone of the SSD while not having anywhere near the total overall firepower

 

when it comes down to it, the front end of an SSD is basically an ISD. 

Edited by Church14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Again, Tector is never confirmed as an Imperial class, just a Star Destroyer.

There could be the same level of design deviation in the standard design that we see in the Victory. 

I think it’s boring and uncreative to assume it’s simply the same ship. 

In fact i’d go so far as to say it would be silly if a missing hanger is the only difference when the hanger bay is the least exploited weakness in the design of the Imperial Class. No one has ever assaulted the hanger bay.

Edited by Forresto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always imagined the Tector as a broadsides ship for the Imperials in much the same way as the Liberty is a forward weapons ship for the Rebels.

The custom one I use is based on the Imperial 2 with a squadron value of 1, shields of 4-4-2, and weapons of forward: 3R,2B side: 4R,3B rear: 2R,1B with everything else (firing arcs too) the same. 135 points.

Actually in use, it's probably worth a little less but I wanted to build in a penalty to make it more acceptable to opponents. Works great with Arquitens.😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Forresto said:

Again, Tector is never confirmed as an Imperial class, just a Star Destroyer.

There could be the same level of design deviation in the standard design that we see in the Victory. 

I think it’s boring and uncreative to assume it’s simply the same ship. 

In fact i’d go so far as to say it would be silly if a missing hanger is the only difference when the hanger bay is the least exploited weakness in the design of the Imperial Class. No one has ever assaulted the hanger bay.

This is the only way I'd accept a Tector. Yet seldom people add this caviat when discussing the ship, all the time it's always the presumption that it's going to look like an ISD from the trench up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not really sure where a potential Tector would fit in the game. If you drop squadron value & up-gun and/or shields you could likely make some of the previous classes irrelevant.

If it was a broadside variant, that would likely reduce the chance of ever seeing an imperial Venator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, ISD Avenger said:

I’m not really sure where a potential Tector would fit in the game. If you drop squadron value & up-gun and/or shields you could likely make some of the previous classes irrelevant.

If it was a broadside variant, that would likely reduce the chance of ever seeing an imperial Venator.

If they wanted to add the Tector, I think the best opportunity would have been instead of including the Chimaera, and make the ISDC and ISDK Tector variants instead. I feel like we have enough triangles at the moment, especially big ones. I like the Onager because, while it still is undeniably Imperial, It has a distinct and unique look. With a new ship for the Empire, I'm not sure what role could be filled  as the Empire pretty much has one of everything and I'm not too sure of what role could be filled. I like the idea of the Tartan patrol cruiser because it fits in more with the aesthetic of the Gozanti which I quite like, but the Empire already has a small flak boat so I'm not sure what purpose it would serve. I've never been a fan of the Dreadnought although I don't mind fractalsponge's take on it, though I'm not sure what role it could fulfill. 

As for the Rebellion, Its a bit easier. A medium base ship is desperately needed and we have a few options such as the AFMK1, MC40 etc. The DP20 and Braha'tok are both glaring absences but the Rebellion isn't exactly short on small ships. Maybe the two could be included together in a box like the Hammerheads? As for a medium ship. A nice front arc could be interesting on the AFMK1, make it like a big Nebulon-B, or maybe a slow-moving, black dice-chucking ship that tanks on hull and has something unique like two weapons team slots or a weird arc set up?

Maybe FFG will produce an "Upgrade kit" style box once the Clone Wars has been out for a while, to retrofit your CW ships into Imperial and Alliance versions. Maybe this stuff could be included in a campaign box like RitR. 

At the moment, I feel as if the Empire has pretty much most types of ship, and the Rebellion is still missing a few so I'm unsure of what GCW we will get in the future. Possibly after the CW has been out for a while we get an Imperial Venator and something new for the Alliance? Who knows.

Edited by Atromix
Tired me can't write...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ISD Avenger said:

I’m not really sure where a potential Tector would fit in the game. If you drop squadron value & up-gun and/or shields you could likely make some of the previous classes irrelevant.

If it was a broadside variant, that would likely reduce the chance of ever seeing an imperial Venator.

I personally doubt we would get and don’t want to get an imperial Venator. There will be a lot of overlap between GAR and the Empire as it is. Imperials getting to have the GAR flagship model reduces that difference even more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Church14 said:

I personally doubt we would get and don’t want to get an imperial Venator. There will be a lot of overlap between GAR and the Empire as it is. Imperials getting to have the GAR flagship model reduces that difference even more. 

I actually tend to agree here. If there is going to be overlap then I’d prefer an imperial acclamator as it happens. I think that ship could have interesting variations if done properly. The I class being more an assault ship & the II being a more straight up combat ship.

If they were to do an imperial Venator I think the differences could come in a few interesting ways. For example, if the GAR Venator had engineering value of 3, I would drop the imperial to 2 to simulate it being an older ship by the civil war period. Could do the same with shields. You end up with a big imperial ship that can still push fighters but is not so tough anymore that you can be complacent.

And it would make for more interesting matches in GAR vs Empire if 2 versions of Venators were facing off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2019 at 7:47 PM, JauntyChapeau said:

A medium base ship for the Rebels that fills literally any slot.

That’s the assault frigate...jack of all trades, master of ummmmm, the Ackbar conga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Would love to see the imperial as a med generalist, another escort for imperials, still feels like they need one. Maybe something like the Tartan. For rebels something like the corrilian gun ship, or dornian gun ship. The assault frigate mk1 at this point think is a must or some New Republic ship the fill the heavy cruiser roll.

Edited by Spectre8174

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...