I've seen 3 Rookie Xwings take down an ISD. (Early mission, Rebel Assault 1) They were meant for capitol ship engagements not for fighting fighters, significantly reducing their point costs relative to X-wing as a game. Big ships were always vulnerable to Torpedo Strikes from manueverable ships. Hell, the empire built smaller anti fighter ships to combat the problem. So yes, what I described is a Star Destroyer trying to deal with nuke loaded gnats.

The Empire built smaller anti fighter ships to combat the problem of '3 rookie X-Wings' taking out their ISDs?

Are you really saying that an ISD in XWMG should be the equivalent of 75pts worth of rookie X-Wings?

You are right, an ISD would NEVER be deployed without a compliment of fighters in it's hangar deck; because that is just plain stupid.

Those accompanying fighters would just compound the point difference that VandorDM mentioned. To illustrate the point lets pretend that it will cost 200pts for a stock ISD(HA! Really? *Face-palm*) miniumum. 100pts TIE fighter escort(As if an ISD would ever have only 8 Tie fighters. There are that many Lamda Shuttles aboard alone.)minimum. We are at 300pts already.

A CR-90 is gunna be 150(ish)pts. Do you really beleive that an ISD would not be worth drastically more than a CR-90? Without dratically reducinging it's capabillities to the point that it is no longer an ISD?

What you are asking for is something that looks like an ISD, but would actually play like a Vigil.

Therefore, be contnent with a Vigil and leave the ISD "off camera."

Since when aren't the games canon?

Video games have never been canon, especially any and all mechanics in the game. The story-line was considered semi-canon, but is the lowest form of it. So it's superseded by everything.

So 3 X-Wings destroying a ISD is not canon.

So let me get this straight. It's ok for a Star Destroyer to be taken out by 3 X-wings in a game. But it isn't Ok for a Star Destroyer to be costed around the points range of 4 X-wings in a game?

Again. This is a game. It should be treated like every other game. That means maximizing the fun for the player over the "realism" Or do you really feel that destroying that Star Destroyer in Rebel Assault kicked you out of the game completely?

You can easily create the feel of a Star Destroyer without 400 points. For 100 points give me 8 2 dice Turbolaser batteries with 1 agility and 2 hull a piece, Give the ship 15 hull and 10 shields. I'm a less mobile Tie Swarm. From there give it a tractor beam so it can mess with enemy ships, the ability to slowly restore it's shields. Just a few things to make up for the complete lack of agility. It will certainly feel powerful. It will still be points appropriate for the game. And it will be fun to play, while still feeling like a Star Destroyer.

A CR-90 is gunna be 150(ish)pts. Do you really beleive that an ISD would not be worth drastically more than a CR-90? Without dratically reducinging it's capabillities to the point that it is no longer an ISD?

I just don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

I mean it should be a no-brainer, we know full well how much more powerful a ISD is then a CR-90, just watch the opening of ANH...

So there's only two options, either nerf the ISD.

Or the point cost is balanced for the firepower, defense and other capabilities of a ISD. Which would put it at around 500-750 points.

There's simply no way around this, it has to be one or the other.

It's ok for a Star Destroyer to be taken out by 3 X-wings in a game.

No it's in fact not ok for that to happen. The Video game should of never allowed that to happen.

That means maximizing the fun for the player over the "realism"

A massively nerfed and downsized ISD is not what I or many other would consider to be fun, or worth spending $200 on.

You can easily create the feel of a Star Destroyer without 400 points.

No, you actually can't, not and have it be a real ISD.

For 100 points give me 8 2 dice Turbolaser batteries with 1 agility and 2 hull a piece, Give the ship 15 hull and 10 shields.

That's not a ISD, that's a Corvette. Those Turbolaser batteries are worse then the single Turbolaser coming out with the CR-90.

If you're willing to field something nerfed to the degree you're talking about, then buy a ISD model and make up your own rules. But don't think for a moment something that pathetic is something anyone else would consider to be a ISD.

So let me get this straight. It's ok for a Star Destroyer to be taken out by 3 X-wings in a game. But it isn't Ok for a Star Destroyer to be costed around the points range of 4 X-wings in a game?

Again. This is a game. It should be treated like every other game. That means maximizing the fun for the player over the "realism" Or do you really feel that destroying that Star Destroyer in Rebel Assault kicked you out of the game completely?

You can easily create the feel of a Star Destroyer without 400 points. For 100 points give me 8 2 dice Turbolaser batteries with 1 agility and 2 hull a piece, Give the ship 15 hull and 10 shields. I'm a less mobile Tie Swarm. From there give it a tractor beam so it can mess with enemy ships, the ability to slowly restore it's shields. Just a few things to make up for the complete lack of agility. It will certainly feel powerful. It will still be points appropriate for the game. And it will be fun to play, while still feeling like a Star Destroyer.

Since FFG, the designers of the game, have decided that they want to be "real" as possible, both with the gameplay and with the scale of the miniatures we push around on the table.

What you described as suitable stats for an ISD, would actually be more like suitable stats for a Vigil.

Gameplay and "realism" intact.

Ninja'd: Danggit VandorDM, Im at work, it takes me longer!

I would hrmm and huff about a suitably down scaled ISD. Don't get me wrong I'd probably still buy it and use it, but not with the same level of acceptance that I would a ship like the Vigil - that to me ticks more boxes; about the right power level in game terms, and still close to 2 feet of wedge-shaped doom to dominate the tabletop.

What you described as suitable stats for an ISD, would actually be suitable stats for a Vigil.

Gameplay and "realism" intact.

Ehhh the stats are a bit off.

The CR-90 has a evade of 0, so anything that size or bigger should have a 0 as well.

Single Turbolasers have been listed, so we know how powerful they should be. A turbolaser Battery should be more powerful then a single one.

Also a ISD should have more then 2 hull sections.

But this all sort of becomes a matter of preference. I mean some people would be quite happy with a non-canon version of the ISD both in terms of size and power. Others of us would not be.

The question isn't if FFG could make something that works for 150-200 points, because a ISD that costs less then a CR-90 is simply ridiculous... The question is, how many people would spend $200 on such a thing.

I can tell you this much though. There's no way at all they're working on such a thing right now, not until they see how well the CR-90 sells. Because they'll be able to get a decent idea of how well a ISD at $150-200 will sell based on how well the CR-90 sells. It's a fact that the higher the price goes up, the fewer people who will buy it.

What you described as suitable stats for an ISD, would actually be suitable stats for a Vigil.

Gameplay and "realism" intact.

Ehhh the stats are a bit off.

So let me get this straight. It's ok for a Star Destroyer to be taken out by 3 X-wings in a game. But it isn't Ok for a Star Destroyer to be costed around the points range of 4 X-wings in a game?

Again. This is a game. It should be treated like every other game. That means maximizing the fun for the player over the "realism" Or do you really feel that destroying that Star Destroyer in Rebel Assault kicked you out of the game completely?

You can easily create the feel of a Star Destroyer without 400 points. For 100 points give me 8 2 dice Turbolaser batteries with 1 agility and 2 hull a piece, Give the ship 15 hull and 10 shields. I'm a less mobile Tie Swarm. From there give it a tractor beam so it can mess with enemy ships, the ability to slowly restore it's shields. Just a few things to make up for the complete lack of agility. It will certainly feel powerful. It will still be points appropriate for the game. And it will be fun to play, while still feeling like a Star Destroyer.

Yes it is a game.

Since FFG, the designers of the game, have decided that they want to be "real" as possible, both with the gameplay and with the scale of the miniatures we push around on the table.

What you described as suitable stats for an ISD, would actually be more like suitable stats for a Vigil.

Gameplay and "realism" intact.

Ninja'd: Danggit VandorDM, Im at work, it takes me longer!

Issue being that nobody(not really nobody, but far fewer players) wants to fly a Vigil. It completely and utterly lacks the "cool factor" and is just a ship. The E-wing is similar to this, but as a fighter it inherently has more draw. I wouldn't buy a Vigil. I would buy a Star Destroyer, and I know for a fact I am far from the only one. This game isn't made up of hardcore Star Wars realism fans, it's made up of Star Wars Fanboys and Gamers. The cool factor means so much more than the realism that I cannot even begin to describe it.

Issue being that nobody wants to fly a Vigil.

And you base this on what exhaustive research exactly?

I mean if you use these threads as a poll, it's clear that most people are against the idea of a ISD in the game. But the Vigil keeps coming up as a good answer to it. So clearly there are people who do want to fly it.

It completely and utterly lacks the "cool factor" and is just a ship.

Completely subjective opinion and not at all true for a lot of people. I think your issue is that you just want a ISD and you don't care if it makes sense or even if it breaks the game.

We have in the Vigil something that covers all the bases. It looks like a ISD, but has the capabilities that fit into the game. If they were to release one, I can tell you it would sell as well if not better then a ISD would. Because it would appeal to a much larger % of the X-Wing player base then a nerfed ISD would.

The cool factor means so much more than the realism that I cannot even begin to describe it.

This thread along with many others like it, or the many pages of posts about the proper scale of the A-Wing, HWK, ect... all say otherwise. The X-Wing community cares a great deal about things like proper scale and canon accuracy.

Since when aren't the games canon?

Video games have never been canon, especially any and all mechanics in the game. The story-line was considered semi-canon, but is the lowest form of it. So it's superseded by everything.

So 3 X-Wings destroying a ISD is not canon.

If you want to cite video games as an example of how difficult it is to take on an ISD, then the ORIGINAL X-Wing game probably has the most accurate description.

It took three individual missions to take down an ALREADY-CRIPPLED Star Destroyer.

The Intrepid's hyperdrive had been damaged. You needed to

1) destroy the frieghters delivering replacement parts and repair crews

2) destroy the reinforcements sent to protect the ship

3) attack the ISD itself

It took a little bit more than "three rookie x-wings" to accomplish this little lot.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_of_the_Circarpous_system#First_raid

I don't think this discussion is going anywhere.

In the end it comes down to personal preference, simplified as scaled vs usable iconic ISD, and everyone is allowed to have an opinion.

I doubt we get a global preference here, at least nothing that has statistical value either way.

FFG will go they way they think is the most productive, which by the way doesn't necessarily has to reflect the global preference.

The only real indication of their strategy (at least I hope they have one) is what they have already released and the direction of their announced stuff. The fact that the upcoming CR90 and transport are already quite big and that they chose those 2 ships.

My interpretation from that is, that for one they won't go much bigger in the ship sizes because than the announced big ships would probably have been smaller. The second point is the fact that none of the first two ships is a big iconic Imp ship like an ISD. There have been many questions, why two rebel ships and not one rebel and imp.. My guess would be, because the next big Imp. ship won't be one of the classic ISD or other iconic big Imp ships and they wanted the people to get into the big ships business and offered the best iconic cases they could fit even if they are both rebel.

If I would be FFG and would be planning to release an ISD for the epic/cinematic/whatever play at some point, I would have released it as the first of the big ones. The fact that they didn't leads me to believe they probably never will, but that's just me.

Since when aren't the games canon?

Like VandorDM said, its mostly the stories that are Canon and they only come in after G-Canon (the movies) and T-Canon (the TV shows). Here is Wookipedia's Description of C-Canon:

■C-canon is Continuity Canon, consisting of all recent works (and many older works) released under the name of Star Wars: books, comics, games, cartoons, non-theatrical films, and more. Games are a special case, as generally only the stories are C-canon, while things like stats and gameplay may not be;[7] they also offer non-canonical options to the player, such as choosing female gender for a canonically male character. C-canon elements have been known to appear in the movies, thus making them G-canon; examples include the name "Coruscant," swoop bikes, Quinlan Vos, Aayla Secura, YT-2400 freighters and Action VI transports.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Canon

The next step down from games is S-Cannon, which is Secondary Canon [from wookipedia] "that predate a consistent effort to maintain continuity; it also contains certain elements of a few otherwise N-canon [non-canon -emphasis mine]stories, and other things that "may not fit just right.""

Therefor games are not a strong case to cite as Canon.

FFG likely pursued the CR90 because it was relatively close to the established scale and players were already making their own CR90s to put in scenarios. FFG decided to take a crack at how they'd handle the CR90, and throw in the Rebel transport to flesh out the options. Depending on how well they were being received they would move on with Imperial counterparts and release two more large ships after testing.

I just can't fathom people's justifications for bringing in Star Destroyers. These desires simply hinge on just having them, and **** the consequences? Star Destroyers are among my favorite large warships but even I think X-Wing is simply not the place for them. X-Wing may not represent every gun or every bolt of ammunition but attacking watered down versions in the flight simulators was practically suicidal. In order for a Star Destroyer to be at the level I would find satisfying it would be too powerful for the game conventionally.

Now, someone could float a special event with a massive custom Star Destoyer and that could be fun to see. But this thing would have to have heavily abstracted fire rules and act more like interactive terrain than a playable starship.

Now, someone could float a special event with a massive custom Star Destoyer and that could be fun to see. But this thing would have to have heavily abstracted fire rules and act more like interactive terrain than a playable starship.

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/82084-star-destroyer-tabletop-done-in-mdf-detailed-in-cardboard-other-stuff-wip/

Awesome!

Yes, exactly like that

I don't think this discussion is going anywhere.

It never does, but there has been a few cases where people have come to a different opinion due to these discussions. Myself and others who share my opinion aren't saying that FFG can't put in a ISD, just that doing so isn't a good idea.

So who has the burden of this discussion then, those who say that it's impossible for FFG to do star destroyers or those who insist that Star Destroyers can and should be done?

I'm on the anti-SD side, so I'm waiting to hear a convincing argument about why specifically Star Destroyers should be here and how they could help the game evolve, over any other Imperial starship of similar size to the CR90.

So who has the burden of this discussion then, those who say that it's impossible for FFG to do star destroyers or those who insist that Star Destroyers can and should be done?

I'm on the anti-SD side, so I'm waiting to hear a convincing argument about why specifically Star Destroyers should be here and how they could help the game evolve, over any other Imperial starship of similar size to the CR90.

A ISD "miniature" on the table is too much of a stretch and asking too much of our suspesion of disbelief. So the burden falls to justifying the inclusion of ISDs in XWMG.

That is my opnion though.

over any other Imperial starship of similar size to the CR90.

Well there does seem to be a couple sides to this argument.

There's the side that want a ISD in the game, and don't seem to care if the size and firepower is correct to canon or not.

Then there's the people who want a Imperial cap ship, but want something that fits the established size and scale of the game as it is now. I don't think anyone is really against an Imperial cap ship, just that the ISD is a bad choice for one.

I'd say that's the main reason I campaign against it. I don't want them breaking a ISD in order to make it fit, when there's options out there already for a Imperial Corvette sized ship. The Vigil Corvette being I think the perfect ship to fill that roll. It has the classic look that people want, but is the right size and power for this game.

What it really comes down to is that from a marketing standpoint there is excellant reason to make a Star Destroyer. From the perspective of gamers a Star Destroyer could be insanely fun. The only reasons not to have one has nothing to do with anything FFG should be prioritizing. They worry about making a fun profitable game. If you can argue that Destroyers wouldn't be fun go ahead. But we won't know that until the Tantive hits. If you think aStar Destoyer won't make money you can argue that, but I would say you've missed what makes this game so great. It is only somewhat from the mechanics. Most of it is in the minis and the Star Wars name. And nothing defines the Empire more than a Star Destroyer. Not the Tie Fighters. Not the Death Star. And not Darth Vader. The first you see is that gleaming deathly triangle of doom. And it says everything you need to know about the empire. That's why the game should have a Star Destroyer.

What it really comes down to is that from a marketing standpoint there is excellant reason to make a Star Destroyer.

I could argue all day long about how that isn't true. Trying to market a completely broken in terms of Canon ship, or one that requires the other size to have 500-750 points worth of ships for $150 to 200 is a pretty big uphill battle.

From the perspective of gamers a Star Destroyer could be insanely fun.

To you perhaps, to many of us it would be insanely stupid and game breaking.

If you think a Star Destoyer won't make money you can argue that, but I would say you've missed what makes this game so great.

I can say as an absolute fact, that a ISD will not make as much money as the CR-90 will. Anyone who's taken Econ 101 can tell you that much. As the price goes up, the market gets smaller it's just that simple. Add to that, the number of people who play X-Wing and won't buy one that's been nerfed to oblivion and the market for a ISD goes down even further.

The first you see is that gleaming deathly triangle of doom.

Which is why the Vigil is the perfect model to use for a Imperial Cap ship, it has the correct look, and it has the correct scale and unlike the ISD actually could fit in the game as is.

I completely disagree with you... for the VERY reason you state... the iSD is such an iconic vessel ... why would you want to completely disrespect it by making it a puny... ineffective... less than iconic miniature.... to make it fit a table is to completely neuter the ship.. and make it a joke... how poeple can not see that is beyond me.. unless it's just fanboy nerdgasm issues.. seriously.. why would you wantnit if it cant be what it should be..

a destructive device of oppression...

why would you want it if it cant be what it should be..

Exactly... It would be like playing a game about Jedi's and have the lightsaber be as effective as a nerf bat.

If there were no good options out there, I might be a bit more inclined to accept a ISD... But that's just it, there are other options out there. In fact the only real difference between a vigil and a ISD is the lack of a bridge on the vigil.