I don't see why they would limit themselves to only ever making and ISD for the Imperials in addition to some of the other great stuff out there.

It's not that they won't make anything else. It's that we have something that doesn't fit into this game, nerfed to oblivion to make it fit.

If they make one, everyone has to deal with it, because the meta will change. I'd just rather see them make something that fits in the game.

I don't see why they would limit themselves to only ever making and ISD for the Imperials in addition to some of the other great stuff out there.

It's not that they won't make anything else. It's that we have something that doesn't fit into this game, nerfed to oblivion to make it fit.

If they make one, everyone has to deal with it, because the meta will change. I'd just rather see them make something that fits in the game.

Oddly enough, if its nerfed to oblivion the meta won't change. It will only exist in fun games.

I still think its very feasible to include a ISD in the game. Just from playing around with friends, we think it can work and seems to work if you get creative with the firing arcs (kind of like how they limited arcs with the secondary weapons on the CR90). Math wise we just haven't figured out how the X-Wing having firepower 3 to the Tie Fighter 2 still kind of accurately shows double firepower statistically would work in relation of putting 8 CR90 guns against the 60 for the ISD. At what number statistically does the ISD's firepower have to be to be 7.5 more than the CR90?

Can't wait for a star destroyer to be made then we can have hundreds of topics of when will they make a super star destroyer?

if you do not want a Star Destoryer why would you read a post titled "for those of us that want a Star Destoryer" if you do NOT want a Star Destoryer?

Because they're too important for something as "common" as sense. It's my own fault, I should have typed "imagination is required" in the title.

LOL.

Oh, the irony.

Why would you comment on a topic for those who want star destroyers if you don't want star destroyers? My answer, lack of common sense.

Why do people cross when there's nearly a dozen signs that say "do not cross"? My answer, lack of common sense.

For someone who reported his own thread, you're getting rather unpleasant here.

Your thread is not "for people who want Star Destroyers". You can tag it as such all you want, but it is really a thread about putting Star Destroyers in the game. Trying to wall off a topic so that only people who agree with you are allowed to post is silly, both in general and because it's supremely futile in an open forum such as this.

Why would someone post in an open forum and expect that nobody who disagreed with them would ever post? My answer, lack of common sense.

Posted this elsewhere, I'm going to post it here as well.

Please remember, the base game rules are capped at 100 points per squad. The Epic Tournament play rules are capped at 300 points per squad, with 5 Epic points available for Huge ships.

Incom T-65 X-Wing Starfighter

12.5 metres long (approximately 1" long in the X-Wing Miniatures game).

4 x IX4 Laser Cannons

2 x MG7 Proton Torpedo launchers

Crew: 1

In Game Basic Points Value: 21 points (Rookie Pilot)

Millenium Falcon modified YT-1300 Light Freighter

35 metres long (approximately 3" long in the X-Wing Miniatures game)

2 x AG-2G Quad Laser Cannons

2 x ST2 Concussion Missile Launchers

Crew: 1 minimum, can carry up to 15 passengers)

In Game Basic Points Value: 42 points (Chewbacca)

CR-90 Correllian Corvette

150 metres long (approximately 12" long in the X-Wing Minatures game).

2 x H9 dual turbolaser turrets

4 x H9 single turbolaser turrets

Crew: 7 minimum, usual 30-165, can carry up to 600 passengers

In Game Basic Points Value: 90 points(?)

Epic Points Value: 3

OK, so far? We have internal balance for these ships in-game, both in offensive capabilities and physical representation on the board. Right, let's look at one of the SMALLEST Star Destroyers then, the Victory I-Class, and see what it would bring to the table...

Victory I-Class Star Destroyer

900 metres long

So, to keep it in scale with the Corvette (which is already scaled down from the X-Wing and Falcon), it would need to be 6 foot long. Even if you decided to say goodbye to any idea of comparative scaling and HALVED this, it would still be 3 foot long, which means it would barely fit at all on a regular sized board, and would still be a logistical nightmare to move (and manuever around) on even a 6' by 4' board. OK, let's ignore the obvious sizing issues (and by association, the cost of producing and shipping such a model and the price it would consequently demand) for a moment and look at the ship's capabilities instead, shall we?

Face it. It's simply not going to happen.

but... but.... I want it to happen, so I'm gonna hold my breath until it does!

Ya know... I love this game, it is awesome and fun to play. Part of that reason is balance and scale.. the ships look awesome.. got my transport today.. that thing looks itty bitty, but ya know, I like it..

The reduced size should be fine, but the could have made it a few inches longer to fit the 270 scale and it would still be cool..

I have been a Star wars fan since I saw it when I was 13 in the theater.. to suggest I hate star wars because I dont want to see the most iconic ship in the series on a game mat.. is slightly offensive, as is the suggestion that I have no common sense. But I can over look this because I choose to, and keep trying to make poeple see how ridiculous putting such a ship into the game is.

To shrink such a mighty and impressive .. not to mention intimidating ship, to the small size it would have to be to use on the game surface.. it's like making the hulk the same size as captain america so when they put him in the group picture you dont just see his chest and not his face...

Not to mention the massive firepower the ship has to bring to the engagement... you just cant make that fair and balanced in the game system.. that ship should reign fiery death on anything it comes up against... it has been shown how awesome they are in the movies.. video games don't count because they are designed fornthe player to enjoy and actually win.. soni discount all video game references to any smal, ship taking one out..

Truth is, I am a huge fan, and the ISD is my favorite ship... and that is why I don't want to see one on the table.. it would be a disservice to the game and the imperial side of the game...

And I agree with a couple others.. I have posted this because I don't want some designer to see just a happy flowers and rainbows delusion of what a wonderful idea it would be... many of us do not want to see it....

Not to mention the massive firepower the ship has to bring to the engagement... you just cant make that fair and balanced in the game system.. that ship should reign fiery death on anything it comes up against... it has been shown how awesome they are in the movies.. video games don't count because they are designed fornthe player to enjoy and actually win.. soni discount all video game references to any smal, ship taking one out..

Just curious, but you recognize that games have at least made the ISD vulnerable for gameplay purposes why is so bad to do it again for another game like X-Wing minis?

The following tidbit isn't directed at you Oneway

I'd caution against overstating the firepower of the ISD. The only canon source of firepower I can find, The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, states the ISD had 60 Turbolasers and 60 Ion cannons. While there appears to be conflicting opinions of how many guns an ISD had, the Mon Calamari MC 80 had 48 Turbolasers and 20 Ion cannons. A ship that generally could hold its own against an ISD. Just some perspective from a pro ISD sucka fool.

So I've thought about this a couple times. If folks truly want ISDs in the game, I think that the only way to do it would be to have a whole separate side board. This extra board would be for "capital scale" ships like the Mon Calamari Cruiser and the ISD and they could all be made in a totally separate scale factor from the current ships, but would be in scale with each other. The game mat with the small, large, and huge scale ships could be represented by a token or small area of the "capital scale" board. The capital ships would have the option of firing into the current scale board via rules similar to the turbolaser rules included with the Rebel Transport. There would be a lot to work out, but I do think it would work, wouldn't cost a lot, and could possibly make everyone happy. Of course this would be an alternate game type would be separate from the current ones.

Just curious, but you recognize that games have at least made the ISD vulnerable for gameplay purposes why is so bad to do it again for another game like X-Wing minis?

One is a solo player experience the other is a competitive game.

[/i]states the ISD had 60 Turbolasers and 60 Ion cannons.

Which means it still outgun a CR-90 by about 15-1

Just curious, but you recognize that games have at least made the ISD vulnerable for gameplay purposes why is so bad to do it again for another game like X-Wing minis?

One is a solo player experience the other is a competitive game.

That doesn't really answer the question why it's so bad but reinforces why its important to make it balanced. (If that is truly your reason for being against toning down the ISD, I apologize and than you for sating my curiosity. )

As to the firepower issue of it being 15-1 xs the firepower, the game is already full of little conceits like it taking more than one hit to kill a Tie fighter and not including Ion Cannon armament in a ship's firepower. We can just take the ion cannon trend and apply it to the ISD and we get a much more manageable 8 guns to 60, or about 7.5x the firepower.

Edit - I brought up the point about the firepower in relation to the MC 80 because I was trying to highlight that maybe, just maybe, the ISD is not the all powerful juggernaught that a lot of people seem to think it is.

That doesn't really answer the question why it's so bad but reinforces why its important to make it balanced.

Well that's more of the reason why you can't use what happened in a video game as the foundation for something happening here. Just because you could do it in X-Wing Video Game, doesn't mean you should be able to do it in X-Wing Miniature game.

Plus in the video game the ISD was pretty close the the correct size, which is a bit part of why most of us are against one.

or about 7.5x the firepower.

But if the CR-90 is 150 points to achieve it's level of firepower, how to you make something 7.5 times as strong and balance it in a 300 point list?

Not to mention the massive firepower the ship has to bring to the engagement... you just cant make that fair and balanced in the game system.. that ship should reign fiery death on anything it comes up against... it has been shown how awesome they are in the movies.. video games don't count because they are designed fornthe player to enjoy and actually win.. soni discount all video game references to any smal, ship taking one out..

Just curious, but you recognize that games have at least made the ISD vulnerable for gameplay purposes why is so bad to do it again for another game like X-Wing minis?

The following tidbit isn't directed at you Oneway

I'd caution against overstating the firepower of the ISD. The only canon source of firepower I can find, The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, states the ISD had 60 Turbolasers and 60 Ion cannons. While there appears to be conflicting opinions of how many guns an ISD had, the Mon Calamari MC 80 had 48 Turbolasers and 20 Ion cannons. A ship that generally could hold its own against an ISD. Just some perspective from a pro ISD sucka fool.

And an MC80 would be just as out of place in X-wing as a star destroyer.

Always the same discussion ... VanorDM seems to be the high protector of the anti ISD campaign

Sorry but i read you on every thread about this over and over. We all know your concerns by now.

We all knew the threads of people saying over and over that the falcon will be the largest ship in xwing. Vader would say " i find your lack of faith disturbing" And Yoda " that always everything is impossible for you" :-)

For myself i think everything is possible, the ISD is the most iconic capital ship in star wars.

FFG talks all the times about star destroyers in their news.

They will find their way into this game. Maybe not yet but FFG would be stupid to waste money in the end. I read sometimes that the hardcore xwing players wouldn't buy an out of scale ISD . That is bull. My fleet is now over 150 ships and many people i ask would buy them if ffg finds a playwise solution. The scale is irrelevant !

Didn't we just leave this party?

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/104656-no-star-destroyers-please/

That doesn't really answer the question why it's so bad but reinforces why its important to make it balanced. (If that is truly your reason for being against toning down the ISD, I apologize and than you for sating my curiosity. )

As to the firepower issue of it being 15-1 xs the firepower, the game is already full of little conceits like it taking more than one hit to kill a Tie fighter and not including Ion Cannon armament in a ship's firepower. We can just take the ion cannon trend and apply it to the ISD and we get a much more manageable 8 guns to 60, or about 7.5x the firepower.

Edit - I brought up the point about the firepower in relation to the MC 80 because I was trying to highlight that maybe, just maybe, the ISD is not the all powerful juggernaught that a lot of people seem to think it is.

1 and 3: Single ships taking out weak spots in otherwise massively powerful units makes for great story, and hence great single-player games. In a competitive environment, watching what should be a massively powerful unit routinely annihilated by a few fighters is frustrating and annoying. Arvel plowing into the Executor's bridge was epic; A-wing pilot #71 doing it for the fifth time this tournament is somewhat less so. If you want to try and convince people that the ISD really wasn't all that, I wish you the best of luck with that. But really, it's irrelevant, because FFG can't make that argument. Can you imagine a preview article that started with "Everyone knows that an Imperial-class Star Destroyer is one of the most powerful ships in the Star Wars universe, but they're wrong. It's really not all that strong, so we thought it would be perfect to include."

In short, they have to build to perception. Oh, and Lucas - they have to get it past Lucas. Good luck getting THAT approved.

As for the conceits - yes, they're there. But TIE Fighters (at least by many other sources) could routinely absorb a few hits. Optional upgrades like the Ion Cannon Turret are almost certainly a simplification of different models of the ship, or represent low-tech kitbashing. Neither is anywhere near the scale of making an ISD 1/10th the proper size. What's more, they're done in service of making the game more realistically playable. Could TIEs have had a hull value of 1? Sure. Could they have made 13 different Y-wing cards, each with different upgrade icons and representing all the various versions? Certainly. Would either have made for a better game? No. And no matter how much a few people seem willing to sacrifice the game for their dreams of an ISD, gimping one to cram it into a 6x3 isn't good for the game either.

We all know your concerns by now.

So should we simply stop talking about it? Or is it only me who can't express an opinoin?

That is bull.

No it's not, myself and may others will not buy a ISD if it's massively out of scale.

The scale is irrelevant !

Not to me and many others it's not.

Well do you buy the out of scale cr-75 ? Many will do , and in the end that is all what matters $$$

Well do you buy the out of scale cr-75 ? Many will do , and in the end that is all what matters $$$

You're kidding yourself if you don't acknowledge there's a huge difference between how out of scale the transport /corvette are, and how out of scale a 2ft Star Destroyer would be. Not just in physical size, but again, in capability.

Well do you buy the out of scale cr-75 ?

Yes because a ISD that's not even twice the size of a CR-90 is exactly the same thing...

Sometimes i think you guys fear that they will release one. Lets just wait and see what comes

I think Vanor and Buhallin have explained it pretty well.. I'm with them in most of these... discussions... I guess I just cant see how anyone would look at an .. 18 inch .. model of an ISD and put it next to a 12, or 14 inch CR90 and think it was cool.. to me that is the height of delusion.. let alone remembering the most iconic scene with those two ships... the ISD literally swallows the Tantive IV whole ... it is beyond me how one could look at them on a table and theink.. yeah, those look right..

I can suspend a fair amount of belief for a game... but to put a devastating ship on the table next to something it should tuck into its hold is ludicrous.

I personally can't think how to balance out the ship to put it in game.. with the original plans of 60/60 guns and ions... cutting it in half still makes it 30 of each... so that gives the imps 60 shots a turn depending on what is in an arc.. even quartering it.. 30.. seriously.. then lets knock it down to just say... 6 of each.. now we have the devastating power of an ISD cut to something that doesnt even resemble an ISD, so you may have well have just made a carrak or a vigil class ship and been done with it..

What I am saying is, there is a point when it just becomes ridiculous to try and do something.. I feel an ISD.. even a victory class SD.. is just not worth it.. it makes the shipmout to be a shell of what it should be.. and lastly.. they werent designed for dogfights, which this game is.. even woth the advent of the huge ships, it is still essentially a dogfight game and that is what is important to keep in mind...

It's not like I'm just tossing this out there to get reactions.. a fair amount of thought has gone into my side of this... and all I really see from the other side is... I want my ISD, and you are a hater to tell me it's not a good possibility... make me see why it's a good idea and ill concider it, but to date, that hasn't happened...

That doesn't really answer the question why it's so bad but reinforces why its important to make it balanced. (If that is truly your reason for being against toning down the ISD, I apologize and than you for sating my curiosity. )

As to the firepower issue of it being 15-1 xs the firepower, the game is already full of little conceits like it taking more than one hit to kill a Tie fighter and not including Ion Cannon armament in a ship's firepower. We can just take the ion cannon trend and apply it to the ISD and we get a much more manageable 8 guns to 60, or about 7.5x the firepower.

Edit - I brought up the point about the firepower in relation to the MC 80 because I was trying to highlight that maybe, just maybe, the ISD is not the all powerful juggernaught that a lot of people seem to think it is.

1 and 3: Single ships taking out weak spots in otherwise massively powerful units makes for great story, and hence great single-player games. In a competitive environment, watching what should be a massively powerful unit routinely annihilated by a few fighters is frustrating and annoying. Arvel plowing into the Executor's bridge was epic; A-wing pilot #71 doing it for the fifth time this tournament is somewhat less so. If you want to try and convince people that the ISD really wasn't all that, I wish you the best of luck with that. But really, it's irrelevant, because FFG can't make that argument. Can you imagine a preview article that started with "Everyone knows that an Imperial-class Star Destroyer is one of the most powerful ships in the Star Wars universe, but they're wrong. It's really not all that strong, so we thought it would be perfect to include."

In short, they have to build to perception. Oh, and Lucas - they have to get it past Lucas. Good luck getting THAT approved.

As for the conceits - yes, they're there. But TIE Fighters (at least by many other sources) could routinely absorb a few hits. Optional upgrades like the Ion Cannon Turret are almost certainly a simplification of different models of the ship, or represent low-tech kitbashing. Neither is anywhere near the scale of making an ISD 1/10th the proper size. What's more, they're done in service of making the game more realistically playable. Could TIEs have had a hull value of 1? Sure. Could they have made 13 different Y-wing cards, each with different upgrade icons and representing all the various versions? Certainly. Would either have made for a better game? No. And no matter how much a few people seem willing to sacrifice the game for their dreams of an ISD, gimping one to cram it into a 6x3 isn't good for the game either.

I understand your point about the ISD being powerful, but I'm not trying to make anyone think its not powerful, just not THAT powerful. The first page had someone quoting the wiki stats but I've never seen those appear anywhere except the RPG books. In some of the past threads people have stated that an ISD should just be able to ram a CR90 and kill it when at Endor a CR90 rammed and basically crippled an ISD. Its just a matter of perspective. When it comes to actually playing I'm not saying its should be easy to kill an ISD in any way, just that its okay to let the little fighters hurt it. Its okay that its not an unstoppable Juggernaut since it really wasn't. If the ISD is balanced for the game, then competitive play isn't an issue. Why say its OP or garbage before we even have one?

-As for getting something past Lucas, I have no faith in Lucas. Midichlorians...something ...something...Midichlorians.... (but on a more serious note, nothing I've seen make me believe Lucas cares about scale or even canon when it comes to merchandising)

Another point of me trying to put the power of an ISD into perspective is that I think you can put it into the game without gimping it since I'm not starting from such bigger perception. I just don't agree with everyone saying it has to be gimped to be put into the game without seeing the rules for one. To make it balanced I think it could be done simply with something like putting on more restrictive arcs (I've mentioned before in other threads how this would accurately portray the firepower since the ISD's, even noted in the wiki, weapons coverage wasn't efficient).

I found the Star Destroyers that folks want:

It's from the alternative "The Star Wars" comic adaptation of the first version of Lucas' original draft.