Jump to content
Admiral Calkins

In-Flight Report and Clone Wars Preview

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Revan Reborn said:

seperatistfleetstarter.PNG

The Munificent looks like it's a broadside ship! It looks like it has 3 Red dice on each side, and the side arc lines actually extend into the front part of the cardboard base, so it appears that the Munificent will be excellent at double arc-ing. The Munificent appears to have 2 Reds and 2 Blues for its front arc. It's difficult to see its rear arc, but it appears to be 2 Reds. Shields appear to be 4 Front, 3 Sides, and 2 Rear; and its Hull is 6. And the Munificent is only Speed 2. I wasn't able to see the points cost anywhere.

The Munificent is different than I expected. According to canon, Munificent has a pair of fixed-forward heavy turbolaser cannons, so I was expecting it to be a forward-arc ship. Its shields are stronger than I was expecting, but it's hull is exactly right.

The name on the ship card is "Munificent-class Comms Frigate". I'm guessing that means the second, presumably more expensive version, will be the "Star Frigate".

Regardless of surprises, I think multiple Munificents will be formidable.

I think the munificent will play more like an all arounder, it doesn hive big side arcs buy it also throws more dice out the front then the sides. And with that narrow front arc it shouldnt be to hard to double arc will flying straight toward the opponents. And your right it has the heavy turbolasers but like u said there fixed front so they woudlnt be contributing to any side shots so I think the narrow front arc is perfect for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Piratical Moustache said:

Is it just me or does the Acclamators look like better versions of VSD-1s?

In some respects, yes, the Acclamator-I appears to be better than the VSD1. The Acc-I has stronger front shields, it's Speed 3, it has 2 Offensive Retrofit slots that can enhance its squadron activating capacity, and it costs 7 points less.

However, the VSD has 9 Hull instead of 7, 3 Shields on the sides instead of 2, and a third Black die in its front arc.

It remains to be seen whether the Acclamator will be superior to the Victory in battle. I predict that a VSD1 with Harrow and Engine Techs will eat an Acclamator for lunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Revan Reborn said:

In some respects, yes, the Acclamator-I appears to be better than the VSD1. The Acc-I has stronger front shields, it's Speed 3, it has 2 Offensive Retrofit slots that can enhance its squadron activating capacity, and it costs 7 points less.

However, the VSD has 9 Hull instead of 7, 3 Shields on the sides instead of 2, and a third Black die in its front arc.

It remains to be seen whether the Acclamator will be superior to the Victory in battle. I predict that a VSD1 with Harrow and Engine Techs will eat an Acclamator for lunch.

VSDs have 8 hull, not 9 so it's a difference of one. And even a cheaper VSD1 with Harrow and Engine Techs is now almost 20 points more expensive.


EDIT - So yes, a Harrow/ET VSD1 will kill a naked Acclamator I, but at an additional cost of 18 points. With more combat upgrades, you're pushing Harrow to almost 100 points. There are many ships that could kill Harrow for cheaper, and you can only have one of them. If you REALLY wanted to, you could spam, like, 5 Acclamators into a single list.

Edited by reegsk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Also the Acclamator-I has 2 black flak vs 1 blue for the Victory-I.

I'd like to think that there's some way in which the Victory compensates for those 7 extra points to keep everything more or less balanced, but the Acclamator seems clearly better taking the cost into account.

Edited by Lemmiwinks86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lemmiwinks86 said:

Also the Acclamator-I has 2 black flak vs 1 blue for the Victory-I.

I'd like to think that there's some way in which the Victory compensates for those 7 extra points to keep everything more or less balanced, but the Acclamator seems clearly better taking the cost into account.

Very true. And it's probably going to have Ordnance Experts anyway, so it's rolling flak like a Raider-I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what could be kinda bonkers. With the reveal now live you can get HD look of part of a Hyena bomber unquie.

The contains the slight keyword modfication of AI: Battery 1 or (obstructed word) . On one end it could be slightly different and just change the dice you're throwing. But if its 1 then clear it adds dice like the other AI focus then we'll have to see what sort of cost and oppertunties increasing the value comes with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, lunitic501 said:

I think the munificent will play more like an all arounder, it doesn hive big side arcs buy it also throws more dice out the front then the sides. And with that narrow front arc it shouldnt be to hard to double arc will flying straight toward the opponents. And your right it has the heavy turbolasers but like u said there fixed front so they woudlnt be contributing to any side shots so I think the narrow front arc is perfect for it.

It's not the Munificent's narrow front arc that I'm concerned about -- it should have a narrow front arc because of its fixed-forward heavy turbolasers. It's the Munificent's surprisingly powerful side arcs that I'm concerned about. 3 Red dice per side are arguably better than 2 Reds and 2 Blue in front. That gives the Munificent the potential to inflict 6 damage at long range from its side, compared to only 4 damage at long range from its front, or 6 damage at medium range from its front. There's a reason why Red dice are prized so highly: They're the most often used dice.

The choice of making the Munificent a "broadside ship" goes against canon and I don't like that. If the Munificent's side had 2 Reds and 1 Blue, that would've been more balanced and closer to canon.

Ideally, the Munificent should have a Special Arc, similar to the Onager, but without the use of an Ignition token (so it couldn't fire at extreme range). I think the Munificent's Special Arc should've had 4 Red and 2 Blue, to represent its fixed-forward dual heavy turbolaser cannons; and its Special Arc would be even narrower than the Onager's, comparable to the Bullseye Arc in X-Wing. The Munificent should still have 2 Red and 2 Blue in its front arc, but its front arc should be wider, comparable to Nebulon-B or even a Star Destroyer; and it should only have 2 Red or 1 Red and 1 Blue in its side arcs, because the Munificent should be a front arc ship.

That's how I would've designed the Munificent, so it could be extremely deadly if it lined up an attack in its narrow Special Arc, which would be challenging, but certainly achievable given its maneuverability.

Share this post


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

VSDs have 8 hull, not 9 so it's a difference of one. And even a cheaper VSD1 with Harrow and Engine Techs is now almost 20 points more expensive.


EDIT - So yes, a Harrow/ET VSD1 will kill a naked Acclamator I, but at an additional cost of 18 points. With more combat upgrades, you're pushing Harrow to almost 100 points. There are many ships that could kill Harrow for cheaper, and you can only have one of them. If you REALLY wanted to, you could spam, like, 5 Acclamators into a single list.

That's right, my mistake. I run Interdictors a lot more often than VSD's, so I thought the Hull was 9 instead of 8.

Virtually everyone would agree that equipping a Gladiator with the Demolisher title and Engine techs is absolutely worth the 18 extra points, so I think equipping a VSD1 with Harrow and Engine Techs is well worth the 20 extra points. Not only could Harrow keep up with an Acclamator, it could outmaneuver it.

Yes, only 1 VSD can equip the Harrow title, so it doesn't apply to all VSDs. Harrow definitely helped the VSD but the Victory really needs a revision.

Don't get me wrong, I'm eager to use the Acclamator and would like to try spamming 3 or more Acclamators. I'm just saying that the VSD shouldn't be under-estimated and it wouldn't be wise for the Republic player to go head-to-head versus a VSD1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rmcarrier1 said:

I can't say that I'm surprised, but I am a bit disappointed that FFG didn't give the Munificent an Ignition arc. I mean, look at those front cannons. They must be 75m in length!

latest?cb=20081102181038

Maybe in second edition lol 😜 I mean, bullseye arc got strapped to everything in X-wing for it's second edition. ISD with ignition almost makes sense for some odd concentrate fire command mechanic to be useful. Triangles and all that.

Besides, there's WAY more news to come. Only just begun, the Clone Wars have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Rmcarrier1 said:

I'll allow it if it means we get the Subjugator as a Huge-base with left and right Ignition arcs! ;)

That would be awesome!

Although, technically only the Malevolence had the Ion Pulse Cannon superweapon, whereas the other Subjugator-class heavy cruisers that existed, in canon or Legends, didn't have the experimental superweapon.

I predict that if and when the Malevolence/Subjugator huge ship expansion is released, one of the cardboard ship bases will be for the Malevolence, which will have port and starboard Special Arcs for its superweapon, and it will probably be unique so it won't be possible to put more than one in a fleet -- even if it's a Sector Fleet. The second cardboard ship base will probably be an ordinary Subjugator without the Special side arcs, and multiples of that version will be permitted -- although it might be too expensive to fit more than one Subjugator into a 400-point build, similar to the SSD.

Regardless, bring on the Malevolence!

Edited by Revan Reborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Revan Reborn said:

It's not the Munificent's narrow front arc that I'm concerned about -- it should have a narrow front arc because of its fixed-forward heavy turbolasers. It's the Munificent's surprisingly powerful side arcs that I'm concerned about. 3 Red dice per side are arguably better than 2 Reds and 2 Blue in front. That gives the Munificent the potential to inflict 6 damage at long range from its side, compared to only 4 damage at long range from its front, or 6 damage at medium range from its front. There's a reason why Red dice are prized so highly: They're the most often used dice.

The choice of making the Munificent a "broadside ship" goes against canon and I don't like that. If the Munificent's side had 2 Reds and 1 Blue, that would've been more balanced and closer to canon.

Ideally, the Munificent should have a Special Arc, similar to the Onager, but without the use of an Ignition token (so it couldn't fire at extreme range). I think the Munificent's Special Arc should've had 4 Red and 2 Blue, to represent its fixed-forward dual heavy turbolaser cannons; and its Special Arc would be even narrower than the Onager's, comparable to the Bullseye Arc in X-Wing. The Munificent should still have 2 Red and 2 Blue in its front arc, but its front arc should be wider, comparable to Nebulon-B or even a Star Destroyer; and it should only have 2 Red or 1 Red and 1 Blue in its side arcs, because the Munificent should be a front arc ship.

That's how I would've designed the Munificent, so it could be extremely deadly if it lined up an attack in its narrow Special Arc, which would be challenging, but certainly achievable given its maneuverability.

Look at the arcs on the muni, it can nearly double arc from head on, that's a lot of forward firepower. Easy double arcs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rogue09 said:

Look at the arcs on the muni, it can nearly double arc from head on, that's a lot of forward firepower. Easy double arcs

Yes, I'm aware, because I was the first person to post on this thread about the Munificent's firing arcs and speculated that it would be excellent at double-arcing:

On 7/29/2020 at 8:42 PM, Revan Reborn said:

seperatistfleetstarter.PNG

The Munificent looks like it's a broadside ship! It looks like it has 3 Red dice on each side, and the side arc lines actually extend into the front part of the cardboard base, so it appears that the Munificent will be excellent at double arc-ing. The Munificent appears to have 2 Reds and 2 Blues for its front arc. It's difficult to see its rear arc, but it appears to be 2 Reds. Shields appear to be 4 Front, 3 Sides, and 2 Rear; and its Hull is 6. And the Munificent is only Speed 2. I wasn't able to see the points cost anywhere.

The Munificent is different than I expected. According to canon, Munificent has a pair of fixed-forward heavy turbolaser cannons, so I was expecting it to be a forward-arc ship. Its shields are stronger than I was expecting, but it's hull is exactly right.

The name on the ship card is "Munificent-class Comms Frigate". I'm guessing that means the second, presumably more expensive version, will be the "Star Frigate".

Regardless of surprises, I think multiple Munificents will be formidable.

However, the Munificent's presumptive propensity for double-arcing doesn't accurately reflect that its primary weapons are a pair of fixed-forward heavy turbolaser cannons, or its depiction in canon as a frontal attack ship.

Whereas if the Munificent had a narrow Special Arc in front, similar to the Onager or the bullseye arc in X-Wing, like I previously suggested, that would accurately represent the Munificent's primary cannons. Instead of double-arcing, the Munificent would need to aim its Special Arc at targets to utilize its maximum firepower, which would be faithful to the Munificent's ship design and weapons placement.

Share this post


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

Yes, I'm aware, because I was the first person to post on this thread about the Munificent's firing arcs and speculated that it would be excellent at double-arcing:

However, the Munificent's presumptive propensity for double-arcing doesn't accurately reflect that its primary weapons are a pair of fixed-forward heavy turbolaser cannons, or its depiction in canon as a frontal attack ship.

Whereas if the Munificent had a narrow Special Arc in front, similar to the Onager or the bullseye arc in X-Wing, like I previously suggested, that would accurately represent the Munificent's primary cannons. Instead of double-arcing, the Munificent would need to aim its Special Arc at targets to utilize its maximum firepower, which would be faithful to the Munificent's ship design and weapons placement.

Maybe it has an upgrade card. Heavy Prow Cannons or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Munificent has massive guns on its bow, the bulk of its heavy armor facing forward, and we only see it onscreen firing its forward batteries from a distance.

Meanwhile every other Seperatist ship closes in to engage enemies at point blank range with broadsides. 

So they made the Munificent a broadsider? Really? Ship of its talents? 

————

I am so so happy we have Clone Wars ships. I can live with whatever at this point. Doesn’t change that the choice is incredibly silly. 

Edited by Forresto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Forresto said:

The Munificent has massive guns on its bow, the bulk of its heavy armor facing forward, and we only see it onscreen firing its forward batteries from a distance.

Meanwhile every other Seperatist ship closes in to engage enemies at point blank range with broadsides. 

So they made the Munificent a broadsider? Really? Ship of its talents? 

————

I am so so happy we have Clone Wars ships. I can live with whatever at this point. Doesn’t change that the choice is incredibly silly. 

The Munificents Main Armament aside from the 2 heavy prow cannons are the 26 heavy dual turbolaser turrets though, that are located under the "wings" of the Munificent. As seen in TCW and the indredible cross-sections, they can only ALL fire forward when a target is below the ship, not when its directly in front of it. While the turrets (13 each side) can easily swifle sideways, so it kinda makes sense as a broadside ship. And the Frontarc still throws more dice while representing only the 2 heavy prow turbolasers and the 2 small longe-rage ion cannons, compared to the 3 red dice on the sides that represent 13 turrets each. So i would argue those massive prow cannons are represented fairly, although i agree that the idea of a special arc would suit the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Rmcarrier1 said:

Nobody (I believe) has mentioned the new squadron colors! I actually quite like them. I can't say I'm surprised, but at the same time, I didn't know how they were going to distinguish (or if they were going to bother) the new squadrons from old. I really dig the new colored plastics. I suspect if we ever get the sequel trilogy (I will never not hold out hope), we'll get black and brown (or perhaps orange) squadrons.

Sequel trilogy?  White (FO) and Orange (Resistance), surely, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I really want to see at this point is if the 12 mission cards are repeats, or if they are new missions; expanding the missions event further would rock.  Even if it's a mix (6 classics and 6 new ones), it's always nice having a bit more variety for missions; not that I am complaining about current variety, haha, as the campaigns brought in a lot of cool new missions themselves.  Given some of the keywords for transport, bombardment, etc, I assume these will have effects on missions.

Also, who suspects a new ship/fighter card box at some point, with the new sizing/styling and errata and tweaks?  Wave 2, put out a card pack for each of the classic Armada factions to replace and update all of their old ship cards and rebalance?  That is what I would do, rather than a whole 2nd edition X-wing style round of re-releases (Although that also works; but it'll go over like a wet-fart in a track meet for all of us who have huge collections and played all these years).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I originally wasn't enthused about the Hardcells, but the info that the second version of the Harcell has a Fleet Support slot makes me a lot more interested in it. I was wondering when and how flotillas and Fleet Support would be introduced to the Clone Wars factions, and it appears that the Separatists will get Fleet Support from Day 1 thanks to the Hardcell. I wonder if that means that the Separatists won't get a flotilla in the future?

Also, I wonder if the Republic will have a Starter ship with Fleet Support? Perhaps the second version of the Consular Cruiser that we haven't seen yet?

Or, I think more likely, the Republic Pelta will have the Fleet Support slot -- instead of the Fleet Command slot on the Rebel Pelta. That's probably why the Pelta was chosen for the next wave of ships, instead of a Republic warship that would be more suited at going up against a Recusant light destroyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chemosh667 said:

What I really want to see at this point is if the 12 mission cards are repeats, or if they are new missions;

On the stream they said they were the original 12 objective cards - so the Core Set ones, not new ones or the Campaign Expansion ones.

Quote

Given some of the keywords for transport, bombardment, etc, I assume these will have effects on missions.

For now they said the ship Traits only affected upgrade cards, but they did say in future they might interact with Objectives. That's probably difficult for now as only the new ships will have them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chemosh667 said:

What I really want to see at this point is if the 12 mission cards are repeats, or if they are new missions; expanding the missions event further would rock.  Even if it's a mix (6 classics and 6 new ones), it's always nice having a bit more variety for missions; not that I am complaining about current variety, haha, as the campaigns brought in a lot of cool new missions themselves.  Given some of the keywords for transport, bombardment, etc, I assume these will have effects on missions.

Also, who suspects a new ship/fighter card box at some point, with the new sizing/styling and errata and tweaks?  Wave 2, put out a card pack for each of the classic Armada factions to replace and update all of their old ship cards and rebalance?  That is what I would do, rather than a whole 2nd edition X-wing style round of re-releases (Although that also works; but it'll go over like a wet-fart in a track meet for all of us who have huge collections and played all these years).  

With ships having 'transport' and 'bombard' it seems likely that new missions to make use of these new abilities would appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, flatpackhamster said:

With ships having 'transport' and 'bombard' it seems likely that new missions to make use of these new abilities would appear.

Perhaps in a CW campaign for campaign-specific (green) objectives. That could be kinda cool. However, to make new objectives using these traits backwards-compatible with existing GCW ships would require reworking all the existing ships and giving them traits, which they weren’t designed around.  That’s a lot of work for established expansions. I don’t see them giving all existing ships traits any time soon. For Organized Play especially, you aren’t going to want to have objectives that won’t work with 2 out of 4 factions. 

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...