And it becomes something everybody keeps their ships away from.

You just don't get it do you.

That's the whole point at the size you're talking about, there's pretty much no where on even a 3x6 foot board that you can get away from it.

Range 5 will be 500mm or 1.6 feet. You put a 2x1 foot ISD in the middle of the table and you're left with a 5 inch strip on the short edge where it can't reach. That means about 95% of the table is in range... How exactly do you keep ships away from that?

That, and think about who expensive a 2x1 foot ISD will be.

You just don't get it do you.

That's the whole point at the size you're talking about, there's pretty much no where on even a 3x6 foot board that you can get away from it.

Range 5 will be 500mm or 1.6 feet. You put a 2x1 foot ISD in the middle of the table and you're left with a 5 inch strip on the short edge where it can't reach. That means about 95% of the table is in range... How exactly do you keep ships away from that?

Weren't you paying attention? He clearly said that the base would only be 18 inches wide - not 24. So there's an EIGHT inch strip where it can't reach.

Sheesh, keep up with the reasonable!

</sarcasm>, just in case.

Sheesh, keep up with the reasonable!

Sorry... I'll go sit in the corner now with my dunce cap on.

Actually that's an issue for any ship they do. Even the CR-90 has a pretty massive range, put it in the right spot and it can cover 3/4th of the table. When you consider that it makes something much bigger then the CR-90 pretty less likely.

And it becomes something everybody keeps their ships away from.

You just don't get it do you.That's the whole point at the size you're talking about, there's pretty much no where on even a 3x6 foot board that you can get away from it.Range 5 will be 500mm or 1.6 feet. You put a 2x1 foot ISD in the middle of the table and you're left with a 5 inch strip on the short edge where it can't reach. That means about 95% of the table is in range... How exactly do you keep ships away from that?

Of course it can fire over most of the table.(ISH, as it should have relatively restricted firing arcs.) I'm talking avoiding crashing into it and getting stuck. As it is there's no reasonable space to hide from the Tantive either. You don't hide in this game, you avoid firing arcs. The tantive has one 360 arc and few side arcs. The Star Destroyer is likely to have a whole bunch of forward facing and side facing arcs and 0 rear arcs.

The real issue here is that people who want Star Destroyers are treated as if they want the game to die. I want the game to live. But the number of highly vocal eople saying NO! TOO BIG TOO OP! without a thought as to how to make it work have basically made everyone here who wants one shut up. I won't. I will answer the people saying it can't be done.

You put a Vigil class out for 100 bucks I won't buy it. I have no attachement to the ship itself. There can be no attachement to the Vigil, it's been in next to nothing. And I think it looks like a rip off. You put a Star Destroyer out for the same, or even 150, I'll buy it because I like the ship. And I am not the only one.

You just don't get it do you.

That's the whole point at the size you're talking about, there's pretty much no where on even a 3x6 foot board that you can get away from it.

Range 5 will be 500mm or 1.6 feet. You put a 2x1 foot ISD in the middle of the table and you're left with a 5 inch strip on the short edge where it can't reach. That means about 95% of the table is in range... How exactly do you keep ships away from that?

Weren't you paying attention? He clearly said that the base would only be 18 inches wide - not 24. So there's an EIGHT inch strip where it can't reach.

Sheesh, keep up with the reasonable!

</sarcasm>, just in case.

And I am not the only one.

Actually if you look at these threads you're one of the few who won't buy it. Even among the pro-ISD camp the vast majority of them would be happy with a Vigil, even if they'd prefer a ISD.

Piece of my soul just died

Watch and learn

If you put a "don't" in between "I want" you get the other side. Nice summary of this whole thread .

No not at all.

Myself and others give logical, consistent and in universe reasons why a ISD won't work in this game. We are not being illogical and emotional in our reasons why we don't want it.

Plus that I don't think there's many people other then Aminar who wouldn't accept something like the Vigil as the big Imperial ship for the epic format.

Lets consider the following two situations.

1) FFG makes a ISD that is massively out of scale, both in terms of firepower and size.

2) FFG makes a Vigil that is correct in terms of scale for size and firepower.

Both ships have the same stats, and capabilities in the game, they even look pretty much the same. The only difference between them, is one is called a Star Destroyer the other is called a Vigil.

So tell me, which one of those makes more sense? The one that is correct for sale or the one that isn't? I mean if someone could give a reason other then "because" why a Vigil isn't good enough then I'd be happy to listen and even debate it. But so far Aminar hasn't offered even a single bit of logical or reasonable argument for why a Vigil isn't good enough. Other then his clearly blinded by lust for a ISD emotional "it wouldn't be as much fun" type response.

Vanor, just pointing out that ultimately this is a conjecture thread with people pulling reason why they will/won't make an ISD based on their personal opinion and observations. So whole reason why a thread like this exists is because people don't know for sure. Some opinions are more educated and reasonable than others...

And I am not the only one.

Actually if you look at these threads you're one of the few who won't buy it. Even among the pro-ISD camp the vast majority of them would be happy with a Vigil, even if they'd prefer a ISD.

But we are not a quality sampling of the playerbase either. We are the most involved. The collectors, and the strategists. What we would buy in many ways doesn't matter, because most of us will buy anything. Including a Star Destroyer. My point is that for the average player, the Vigil is meaningless. Do you have a single story memory of a vigil? They appeared in what, One Video game and a source Book. With no associated characters. What's the fun in that? I don't get it. How is that emotional. It's part of the games design philosophy. Visual Memory of something matters. A lot.

You just don't get it do you.

That's the whole point at the size you're talking about, there's pretty much no where on even a 3x6 foot board that you can get away from it.

Range 5 will be 500mm or 1.6 feet. You put a 2x1 foot ISD in the middle of the table and you're left with a 5 inch strip on the short edge where it can't reach. That means about 95% of the table is in range... How exactly do you keep ships away from that?

Weren't you paying attention? He clearly said that the base would only be 18 inches wide - not 24. So there's an EIGHT inch strip where it can't reach.

Sheesh, keep up with the reasonable!

</sarcasm>, just in case.

I said 8 wide. 18 Long. There is a difference there. A significant one.

Not if you set it facing across the short edge of the board there's not.

Really, the fact that you think an 18" dimension cares one whit for what you name it shows how little thought you've put into what this thing would do on the board.

Piece of my soul just died

Watch and learn

Anybody notice that at 4:36 the scale seems to get kind of wonky? Nothing to do with this thread just wondering if anyone else noticed it.

Funny thing is, I'd buy it after the Star Destroyer came out. I just will not accept it as a substitute for a Star Destroyer.

But we are not a quality sampling of the playerbase either. We are the most involved. The collectors, and the strategists. What we would buy in many ways doesn't matter, because most of us will buy anything. Including a Star Destroyer.

You've got a ton of the most involved people in the game here telling you they WON'T buy a Star Destroyer, because of the scale, because of the balance issues you refuse to admit, because of the cost.

But I'm sure we're all lying just to cling to our unreasonable hate of the Star Destroyer. Or something.

Funny thing is, I'd buy it after the Star Destroyer came out. I just will not accept it as a substitute for a Star Destroyer.

But we are not a quality sampling of the playerbase either. We are the most involved. The collectors, and the strategists. What we would buy in many ways doesn't matter, because most of us will buy anything. Including a Star Destroyer.

You've got a ton of the most involved people in the game here telling you they WON'T buy a Star Destroyer, because of the scale, because of the balance issues you refuse to admit, because of the cost.

But I'm sure we're all lying just to cling to our unreasonable hate of the Star Destroyer. Or something.

I wouldn't say ton...

Funny thing is, I'd buy it after the Star Destroyer came out. I just will not accept it as a substitute for a Star Destroyer.

But we are not a quality sampling of the playerbase either. We are the most involved. The collectors, and the strategists. What we would buy in many ways doesn't matter, because most of us will buy anything. Including a Star Destroyer.

You've got a ton of the most involved people in the game here telling you they WON'T buy a Star Destroyer, because of the scale, because of the balance issues you refuse to admit, because of the cost.

But I'm sure we're all lying just to cling to our unreasonable hate of the Star Destroyer. Or something.

I wouldn't say ton...

Really? You've got seven pages with like two of you arguing for it, and almost universally otherwise against it. What would you say?

Funny thing is, I'd buy it after the Star Destroyer came out. I just will not accept it as a substitute for a Star Destroyer.

But we are not a quality sampling of the playerbase either. We are the most involved. The collectors, and the strategists. What we would buy in many ways doesn't matter, because most of us will buy anything. Including a Star Destroyer.

You've got a ton of the most involved people in the game here telling you they WON'T buy a Star Destroyer, because of the scale, because of the balance issues you refuse to admit, because of the cost.

But I'm sure we're all lying just to cling to our unreasonable hate of the Star Destroyer. Or something.

I wouldn't say ton...

Really? You've got seven pages with like two of you arguing for it, and almost universally otherwise against it. What would you say?

A fairly small (probably really small) representation of the X-Wing community with extra time...

-Edit-

You put a Vigil class out for 100 bucks I won't buy it. I have no attachement to the ship itself. There can be no attachement to the Vigil, it's been in next to nothing. And I think it looks like a rip off. You put a Star Destroyer out for the same, or even 150, I'll buy it because I like the ship. And I am not the only one.

The objection many people are raising is that an 18-24" Star Destroyer isn't really a Star Destroyer any more than a Vigil -class corvette is. You're attached to the iconic and imposing nature of the Star Destroyer--the ship that in the opening moments of "A New Hope" literally swallows the Tantive IV whole without pausing in its rush toward Tatooine--and I get that.

But you're making clear here that you're willing to accept a Star Destroyer only, with no acceptable substitutes; you've also essentially admitted that you're fine with the enormous compromises FFG would have to make in terms of not just the physical size of a Star Destroyer but to the scope of its weaponry, its complement of fighters and bombers, and the role it plays in the Imperial navy.

What you don't see, and what is apparently frustrating so many people, is the fundamental inconsistency there. You want something that's called a Star Destroyer, regardless of its distance from the actual depictions we have of Star Destroyers; you're willing to accept what to many people is an impossible degree of dilution and counterfeiting in order to get it. But you refuse to accept anything that's not called a Star Destroyer--precisely because it's a diluted, counterfeit version of what you know a Star Destroyer should be.

Again: you're saying that scale isn't important, but you're willing to carve out an exception in order to get something that looks a Star Destroyer even if it isn't really a Star Destroyer. The rest of us are just making one fewer exception.

You just don't get it do you.

That's the whole point at the size you're talking about, there's pretty much no where on even a 3x6 foot board that you can get away from it.

Range 5 will be 500mm or 1.6 feet. You put a 2x1 foot ISD in the middle of the table and you're left with a 5 inch strip on the short edge where it can't reach. That means about 95% of the table is in range... How exactly do you keep ships away from that?

Weren't you paying attention? He clearly said that the base would only be 18 inches wide - not 24. So there's an EIGHT inch strip where it can't reach.

Sheesh, keep up with the reasonable!

</sarcasm>, just in case.

I said 8 wide. 18 Long. There is a difference there. A significant one.

Not if you set it facing across the short edge of the board there's not.

Really, the fact that you think an 18" dimension cares one whit for what you name it shows how little thought you've put into what this thing would do on the board.

I understand that it dooms any shi foolish enough to run into its front or side to sudden and immediate obliteration. There are a lot of decisions in this game that go there. And it applies just as much to the Tantive. This is a game. It makes allowances for a whole lot of things. Why is a Star Destroyer too much? Why is a rip off looking ship with no screen time that most people will assume FFG made up when they see it at the store better? EMotional is the wrong word. Optimistic maybe. But this isn't a fanboy I want I want. It's an analytical, that would be amazing to fly approach.

Every time I see somebody say it won't happen due to scale I see a Kneejerk reaction.

Questioning the balance makes sense, but it's difficult to balance, not impossible. FFG has done an amazing job so far. I trust them to manage just fine.

Saying it seems out of character for FFG has a certain logic to it, but I see their approach differently. I see the visual significance of the SD as paramount to any other concern.

And saying it disrespects the Star Destroyer, Star Wars, or the game is silly.

This blows

You put a Vigil class out for 100 bucks I won't buy it. I have no attachement to the ship itself. There can be no attachement to the Vigil, it's been in next to nothing. And I think it looks like a rip off. You put a Star Destroyer out for the same, or even 150, I'll buy it because I like the ship. And I am not the only one.

The objection many people are raising is that an 18-24" Star Destroyer isn't really a Star Destroyer any more than a Vigil -class corvette is. You're attached to the iconic and imposing nature of the Star Destroyer--the ship that in the opening moments of "A New Hope" literally swallows the Tantive IV whole without pausing in its rush toward Tatooine--and I get that.

But you're making clear here that you're willing to accept a Star Destroyer only, with no acceptable substitutes; you've also essentially admitted that you're fine with the enormous compromises FFG would have to make in terms of not just the physical size of a Star Destroyer but to the scope of its weaponry, its complement of fighters and bombers, and the role it plays in the Imperial navy.

What you don't see, and what is apparently frustrating so many people, is the fundamental inconsistency there. You want something that's called a Star Destroyer, regardless of its distance from the actual depictions we have of Star Destroyers; you're willing to accept what to many people is an impossible degree of dilution and counterfeiting in order to get it. But you refuse to accept anything that's not called a Star Destroyer--precisely because it's a diluted, counterfeit version of what you know a Star Destroyer should be.

Again: you're saying that scale isn't important, but you're willing to carve out an exception in order to get something that looks a Star Destroyer even if it isn't really a Star Destroyer. The rest of us are just making one fewer exception.

I don't want a linear Star Destroyer. I don't see the canon of Star Wars as holy, and I think many people have a silly unrealistic view of Star Destroyers.

The ships that are "always in it" don't concern me either. If they did I'd be annoyed that I can't run 12 named X-wings in Epic Play as Rogue Squadron for the same reason. I want a good game. Not, as I've said before, a good simulation. Because the game is a godawful simulation. It's just an amazingly fun game.

Funny thing is, I'd buy it after the Star Destroyer came out. I just will not accept it as a substitute for a Star Destroyer.

But we are not a quality sampling of the playerbase either. We are the most involved. The collectors, and the strategists. What we would buy in many ways doesn't matter, because most of us will buy anything. Including a Star Destroyer.

You've got a ton of the most involved people in the game here telling you they WON'T buy a Star Destroyer, because of the scale, because of the balance issues you refuse to admit, because of the cost.

But I'm sure we're all lying just to cling to our unreasonable hate of the Star Destroyer. Or something.

I wouldn't say ton...

Really? You've got seven pages with like two of you arguing for it, and almost universally otherwise against it. What would you say?

A fairly small (probably really small) representation of the X-Wing community with extra time...

So you think Aminar is wrong about the forum community being the hardcore that will buy everything?

Because that's what I was responding to, and while I see what you're trying to do, you're obviously not understanding the argument.

Aminar made the point that the active forumgoing community is the hardest of the hard core, who will buy anything. His point, not mine, although I agree with it. Do you disagree that the active community here is more likely to buy bunches of stuff, including the very expensive stuff?

MY point was that even within that community, there's little to no interest in anything that big, as demonstrated in pretty much every discussion every time this comes up.

I don't think either of those particular points are debatable, but if you're inclined to disagree, you're welcome to. I guess it's entirely possible that average casual players who don't even know the forums exist will be more likely to drop $300 on an ISD than those of us who have all the extra time on our hands... but I'd be somewhat shocked if it turned out to be the case.

If you're going to make a "not representative" argument, you should probably understand what's being represented, and how that is being used.

This blows

I'm honestly sorry the inability to convince me bothers you so much. If that helps. I doubt it does. But you should probably not worry so much about somebody disagreeing with you on the internet. It happens a lot. I have a whole lot of people disagreeing with me at the moment. I think they're concerned with the wrong things. And I think some of them have raised good points. But the only reason to be really upset by this is if you really think FFG will dow what I think they will and screw it up badly, which I don't think they will. It's not really that huge a deal.

No. I've put thought into everything but the scale issue. And even that I dismissed simply because all in all, it's just not relevent to the game itself in comparison to what a Star Destroyer means. I get how big that is. It has to be big. I also get how small it is in comparison to the real scale. Those are sacrifices we should all be willing to make for the comparable level of awesome involved…

...Saying it seems out of character for FFG has a certain logic to it, but I see their approach differently. I see the visual significance of the SD as paramount to any other concern.

Just in these bits, there are two idiosyncratic value judgments: we should all be willing to sacrifice scale in order to get something awesome, and that the visual significance of the Star Destroyer is the most important thing.

So for you , it's worth getting a Star Destroyer into the game regardless of what the implications of doing so would be. I've tried to explain why that's logically inconsistent, as well as how FFG's past decisions about this game indicate that they're probably not on the same page you are.

But if you're not willing to accept any evidence contrary to your position; if you refuse to acknowledge that you're engaged in special pleading on behalf of the Star Destroyer; if you don't understand that the game you're describing is fundamentally different from the game FFG is publishing… then there's no chance you're going to change your mind and all of this discussion has been (and will be, since the discussion will undoubtedly continue) pointless.

A less powerful ISD, maybe, but you'd need to make it so small that Luke could swallow poor Piett whole. That I think is the problem. It being the Imperial Star Dinghy.

No. I've put thought into everything but the scale issue.

Really?

So if an 18-inch long model makes a 30-degree turn (which is what the new template banks seem to be), how far does the base move?