Please don't hate me. I know there has been a long, long, long, long, long, long discussion about Star Destroyers. There has also been a topic about possible Empire ships that won't break the game or be super shrunk. But I just can't help wondering if we might see one based on this...

...picture on FFG's latest transport announcement. Go on, take a good look at what you can see of the Star Destroyer. Image how the rest of it would look in comparison to the transport. I can't help feeling that if scaled such, or a little bigger, I'd have no problem seeing and fielding one. In fact, at that size I might have more than one.

If you feel anger towards me right now I suggest you go away. I'd like this to be a civil and friendly discussion.

Perspective may make the SSD appear smaller than it actually.

An SSD is MASSIVE, but is just very far away in the pic!

Really the only way a star destroyer would work is if they released a version of the game where a corvette was the size of our current X-Wings and called a small ship. And honestly, I wouldn't be too opposed to playing it. I myself enjoy the massive ship on massive ship action, and could be caught surfing through star trek episodes looking for ones with said action involved just to see it...

Would probably be much less about maneuvers and more about formation and tactics, but that could be fun too. However for even epic play, a star destroyer is just too big.

The notion of seeing incoming ships in current images always felt silly to me honestly, if that's what you're going for.

Otherwise all I can say is that I still disagree. X-Wing is not the place for Star Destroyers, and distorting them just so that they can fit in the game by means of balance would be a gross misrepresentation of their capabilities.

I second Battalia here, we need a new game where Capital ships are the focus and where $15 blisters contain beautiful Star Destroyers. Then one wouldn't be worrying about scale misrepresentation and Capital ships would be in their element.

I mean reeeeeeaaaaaalllllyyy MASSIVE.

I would refer you to the Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy's definition of 'space' for a suitable analogue. An SSD is only slightly smaller than that.

Please stop making new threads about Star Destroyers. If its scaled in such a way that it fits the table it will look ridiculous. And it will be WAY too powerful. Star Destroyers

There will be imperial huge ships. They wont be Star Destroyers.

To date. FFG has been pretty spot on with the rules, representing the armament of ships in the game. This is the standard armament of a Star Destroyer.

Barbette turbolasers or Ion cannons (8)
Heavy turbolaser batteries (50)
Turbolaser batteries (50)
Additional turbolaser batteries (26+)
Heavy ion cannons (20)

Giving an even split between Single Turbolasers (8 points) and Quad Laser Cannons (6 points) just the ARMAMENT would amount to around 940 points. On just the guns.

IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. EVER. Not in this game system.

The CR90 is 150m in length. Expect something that size. You have the following in that size range (under 300m):

• ISS Empirical - Science vessel (I would expect this to be the balance to the Rebel Transport)
• Eidolon - although this has TIE-Fighter launching racks
• Vibre-class assault cruiser smaller than the corvette but with more guns.
• Trenchant-class

Frist let me say i LOVE this game... but I don't care if the scale is off.

Is everything in this game to scale in power? the Falcon has the same amount of firepower as a X-wing? or that the Falcon has the same abilty to dodge an attack as a Y-wing?

Please FFG give me a Star Destroyer with better stats than the Corvette and i will buy 2 and fly it with a smile on.

Don't worry, I've reported my own topic.

Sheeeesh!

The stat destroyer won't happen like transports never were going to happen. As long as they keep making things for this game there will always be a possibility

Please stop making new threads about Star Destroyers. If its scaled in such a way that it fits the table it will look ridiculous. And it will be WAY too powerful. Star Destroyers

There will be imperial huge ships. They wont be Star Destroyers.

To date. FFG has been pretty spot on with the rules, representing the armament of ships in the game. This is the standard armament of a Star Destroyer.

Barbette turbolasers or Ion cannons (8)

Heavy turbolaser batteries (50)

Turbolaser batteries (50)

Additional turbolaser batteries (26+)

Heavy ion cannons (20)

Giving an even split between Single Turbolasers (8 points) and Quad Laser Cannons (6 points) just the ARMAMENT would amount to around 940 points. On just the guns.

IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. EVER. Not in this game system.

The CR90 is 150m in length. Expect something that size. You have the following in that size range (under 300m):

• ISS Empirical - Science vessel (I would expect this to be the balance to the Rebel Transport)
• Eidolon - although this has TIE-Fighter launching racks
• Vibre-class assault cruiser smaller than the corvette but with more guns.
• Trenchant-class

this thread is for people that would like a Star Destoryer. There are some of us out there that would buy 1 or 2. you would not be forced to purchess one or play against one.

Truthfully I don't care how they do a star destroyer either in X-Wing or in a new capital ship game either way my money evaporates quickly into FFG's bank account.

I would love to have a Star Destroyer. It just doesnt make sense in a game on this scale.

1) it would look weird.

2) it will be too powerful or it wont be powerful enough and therefore not a Star Destroyer, which defeats the purpose.

3) you cannot release an expansion in this game and not buy it, as you need to get all the upgrade cards.

I have faith in FFG that they will give us cool Imperial ships that are not Star Destroyers and fit into this rule set / scale.

I would be down for an epic scale game where they made Star Destroyers the size of the CR90 and other capital class ships like the Mon Cals would use the huge ship scale rules of Xwing. Smaller ships like the CR90 and the rebel transport would use the small ship rules of Xwing, and star fighters would be represented by tokens. That could be cool. .

Here is another picture that shows the size comparison with the Tantive IV

I'm going to say that is too big.

At the same scale as the standard ships, an Imperial II destroyer is almost 5 feet long.

If they used the same relative as the new GR-75, it would be about 4.5x as long as the transport.

I would like to see turret rules or maps for Epic play that use destroyer mechanics. A 3x6 game mat and terrain/turrets for a destroyer would be cool.

You would not be forced to purchess one or play against one.

This is a very naive statement.

Of course we'll be forced to play against them if we want to play Epic games. Unless you're suggesting that we can tell someone else what the can and can't play with.

Also since FFG likes to include upgrades for other parts of the game in each expansion that means we'll either have to buy it or else do without those upgrades.

That's why most of us are against the ISD. In our opinion it's not a good fit for this game, but we would be forced to deal with it, because the meta will change. Much better IMO to use a ship that fits the game.

Why.

Why?

WHY?

IN THE NAME OF THE FREAKING FORCE... WHY???

WHY would you start YET ANOTHER one of these threads? I swear, it's worse than teenage girls seeing Bieber on the cover of a mag. "OOohhh! The Transport that only appeared in flight next to a Star Destroyer includes art that shows it next to a Star Destroyer! I must go post!!"

<sob>

Please, someone, make it stop.

Don't worry, I've reported my own topic.

Sheeeesh!

Why? Nobody has been rude or inappropriate. If all you want is to pat each other on the back about how awesome your idea is, don't post it on a discussion forum, just find a mirror and high-five yourself. If you post it here, people will likely weigh in with various reasons that it is and isn't a good or workable idea.

Also, that picture you posted shows the Star Destroyer in the background. It's clearly not a useful comparison of size, especially since the length of an SD and a GR-75 are both known from many different sources.

Seriously you people realize relative scale that FFG keeps mentioning is not a set scale for all epic ships. Even in the video when the designers were discussing it they said they play with the scale until it looked right. Reportedly the transport is what 1/475?. They will make a Capitol ship 1/800 scale if it looked right.

FFG just released an 8 and reportedly 11 in ship and I can see them releasing at most a 24in ship if they wanted too on a 4x6 gaming table. That's reportedly over twice the size of the transport model. And using a relative scale FFG can produce a star destroyer and make it look well. A super star destroyer, no but a Capitol ship yes.

FFG just released an 8 and reportedly 11 in ship and I can see them releasing at most a 24in ship if they wanted too on a 4x6 gaming table. That's reportedly over twice the size of the transport model. And using a relative scale FFG can produce a star destroyer and make it look well. A super star destroyer, no but a Capitol ship yes.

FFG just released a 9" Rebel Transport. The CR90 is estimated at about 13" You keep quoting those very wrong numbers, underestimating the size and scale pretty significantly. The huge ships are somewhere in the 1/400th scale.

The victory class was shortest at 900M, at 1/400th that's 2.25M or 88.6" (7' 4.6"), or longer than the entire epic board. Even cut in half it's way too big, and way out of scale. To balance it, the would have to nerf it significantly. It's got over 10 times the armament of a CR90, and starfighters to boot. You have enough epic points for 1.66 CR90s in an epic game, not 10. At that point it's not a Star Destroyer, it's a Star Tickler.

1. Look at the X-Wing closest to the Star Destroyer and imagine that the model of the Star Destroyer was literally that size compared to an existing X-Wing model. That is what I meant.

2. I said Star Destroyer. Not Super Star Destroyer.

3. I don't think because it was in a picture it means it must be being released.

4. This topic was for "those who want a Star Destroyer". Did the title not give it away?

5. Why? To discuss this very, very simple thought: " If it looked like it does in the picture, compared to an X-Wing model, would you like it? "

Frankly, I'm getting the impression that to be a Star Wars fan means to hate Star Wars. So many topics devolving into heated debates or outright arguments. Guess I've just been so sick of it that when I saw my topic looking like it was going to become another ragefest I reported it in the hopes that it'll be deleted and everyone can go back to "look at my latest list" and "hey look at pictures".

Even in the video when the designers were discussing it they said they play with the scale until it looked right.

And for many of us, such a thing isn't possible with a ISD. Not unless it's about 5-6 feet long.

FFG just released an 8 and reportedly 11 in ship and I can see them releasing at most a 24in ship if they wanted too on a 4x6 gaming table.

The GR-75 is 9 inches and the CR-90 will be 13-14 inches, not 8 and 11 like you're saying. That means a 2 foot ISD is less then twice the size of a CR-90. This will never look correct on the table.

Frankly, I'm getting the impression that to be a Star Wars fan means to hate Star Wars.

Because we don't agree with you, we hate Star Wars?

Frankly, I'm getting the impression that to be a Star Wars fan means to hate Star Wars.

Because we don't agree with you, we hate Star Wars?

No. People can disagree.

Read the rest of the post, I've seen too many topics turn nasty. Not people disagree, just people getting unreasonably nasty.

I fully expected to hear:

No, I wouldn't like it to be that small. It is a Star Destroyer and it's meant to be THIS BIG.

or

Yes, it's a Star Destroyer. Even if it was the same size as the transport, FFG make such cool models I'd buy one.

Now because I've said that, someone is likely to completely ignore my entire post and zoom in on "same size as transport" and start treating me like a retard who has never seen Star Wars.

Frankly, I'm getting the impression that to be a Star Wars fan means to hate Star Wars.

Honestly, quite the opposite.

The major objection to putting a Star Destroyer into the game is that it cannot possibly look right. Seriously - go take a look at the picture Hrathen put on the first page. That's an absolutely iconic moment from the first few minutes of the movie that brought most of us here.

Now imagine those two ships next to each other, with the Star Destroyer about 20-24" long, its hangar bay about 2" across, and the Tantive IV that's supposed to fit in it is more than a foot long.

Really, do you think there are people who who hate the Star Destroyer? Don't actually want it in the game just on principle? I doubt it. I know I wish there could be one. But loving Star Wars means RESPECTING Star Wars, even when it means you might not get what you want. In this case, that means respecting that a Star Destroyer is simply too big to put in the game.

I fully expected to hear:

No, I wouldn't like it to be that small. It is a Star Destroyer and it's meant to be THIS BIG.

or

Yes, it's a Star Destroyer. Even if it was the same size as the transport, FFG make such cool models I'd buy one.

Pick one of the seventeen threads over that-a-way for that. Really, pretty much EVERYONE has weighed in on this. Do you think one new piece of art is going to make everyone say "Wow, if you just imagine the ISD is on the other side of the room instead of actually on the map, the scale doesn't look bad at all!"