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

Fear, leads to anger... Anger, leads to hate. Hate, leads to... <ahem> suffering!

What the heck does that even mean? We FEAR it? What exactly is there to fear? You think we just assume we couldn't learn to cope with an ISD in play the way you could, so we'll suddenly suck at the game if they put it in?

What a very silly statement.

Sometimes i think you guys fear that they will release one.

Because it would be a mistake to put one in. Then we have to deal with the mistake that FFG made. Especially when you consider there's so many other options out there for ships that will work, such as the Vigil.

Lets just wait and see what comes

You may of noticed that this time it was a pro-ISD person who started the conversation.

No Buhallin. That you guys fear that they will indeed release one and you guys have to struggle with yourself to accept the possibility that such things might happen and you have to choose.

I think they will release one because there is a demand of it. You always have the option to buy it or not . To play epic ( or higher modes) or not.

You can't make a game so that everyone is happy, but you can make money out of everything before a game comes to an end.

That is nothing new.

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).

Leave aside the Wiki and Complete Guides to <Whatever> books for a minute and consider how you see Star Destroyers on screen. What have you got?

The Tantive IV is utterly overwhelmed by one. No visible damage to the ISD, captured easily, literally fits in the hangar bay.

Rebel pilot comments on the craziness of a transport and two X-wings against an ISD.

Ground based ion-cannon takes them out.

The Falcon runs from them - always.

They have problems with asteroids.

Ackbar's comment of "We won't last long against those Star Destroyers!"

Arvel's suicide run into the Executor that takes out the bridge.

How will these things FEEL to normal people if it rolls 5 attack dice? You think it'll feel like the ship that captured the Tantive without breaking a sweat? Unlikely.

Again, you're welcome to try and convince people that an ISD fits because the entire freaking world thinks they're more powerful than they really should be. But if Boba Fett can maintain his reputation as a badass despite his on-screen incompetence, I doubt you're going to do much to change the evaluation of the ISD.

No Buhallin. That you guys fear that they will indeed release one and you guys have to struggle with yourself to accept the possibility that such things might happen and you have to choose.

Again... what?

If they release a ship that's 1/10 of the proper scale for an ISD, with silly levels of firepower, with the price tag that would accompany even a 2-foot ship at this level of detail, I can assure you that there will be no struggle against the dark side. It will quickly, easily, and permanently become the first ship for this game that I don't purchase.

You think we're campaigning against the ISD because we think we'll give in and buy one if they release it, and we're afraid of our own lack of self-control? What an idiotic statement.

No Buhallin. That you guys fear that they will indeed release one and you guys have to struggle with yourself to accept the possibility that such things might happen and you have to choose.

I think they will release one because there is a demand of it. You always have the option to buy it or not . To play epic ( or higher modes) or not.

You can't make a game so that everyone is happy, but you can make money out of everything before a game comes to an end.

That is nothing new.

Honestly, thisnis ridiculous... I don't fear anything about this game.. if they do, fine... I WON'T be buying one.. the pricepoint would be too kuch for me to afford... and I have said as much before.. to spout that we are afraid of it, is simply a silly notion...

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.

I think it is closer to 17 feet long.

Doh! I looked up the length of an Imperial II-class frigate. The full star destroyer is 4x that.

I think they will release one because there is a demand of it.

There's more demand for them to make the Vigil then there is for them to make a ISD.

Some will yes, some won't care at all , but you might have enough self-control, so of course not .

It is by FFG to calculate that loses.

...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...

Yeah, let's not go overboard here, it only has 120 guns...

...oh, and the rest:

I think they will release one because there is a demand of it.

There's more demand for them to make the Vigil then there is for them to make a ISD.

I think there is demandfor them to make both. The iconic and the mostly not iconic ships.

I think there is demand for them to make both.

But there isn't really room for both. 2 Ships the same size, same firepower, same role in the game... Because a ISD would be the same thing as a Vigil in game terms.

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".

That ISD is in the background by a significant distance and it doesn't even fit on the card. ISDs are a mile long.

To the OP. No one is stopping you from going out and buying one of the many available model kits that are already produced, and using them in your games. Just don't expect most people to be happy about your ideas or want to play against you fielding it. And definitely don't expect players to be supportive of your desires for FFG to produce it.

Have a nice day.

Note: I'd really love to put in a word filter that replaced the words "Star Destroyer" with "Giant [Expletive Removed]". It would make many posts, so much more amusing.

I really want to see Giant [Expletive Removed]'s in this game.

Check out that Giant [Expletive Removed] flying through space!

I don't thing a Giant [Expletive Removed] has too much firepower.

Can you really fit a CR-90 inside a Giant [Expletive Removed]?

Oh no! Those two Giant [Expletive Removed]s might run into each other whilst chasing the Millennium Falcon!

I think they will release one because there is a demand of it.

I think they won't because I doubt the licensor will allow them to dumb down an iconic ship that much. There is a brand to protect and to seriously cripple and shrink one of the most iconic space ships in all of science fiction so that it fit the game would harm the brand as a whole.

Can people stop using "iconic" as a reason for FFG to make a Star Destroyer? AT-ATs are iconic. Is anyone suggesting FFG's going to make them?


The huge ships aren't scaled down much at all. At 1/270 the transport's 30cm long and the corvette's 55cm. I don't have the measurements for the models but the downscaling isn't that extreme.

The ISD is almost 6 metres long at 1/270. To fit it on a huge base you'd have to scale it down to 20% of its actual size. An X-wing would be the same size as the bridge tower, a TIE fighter would be bigger than the bridge tower. Certainly taller.

Can people stop using "iconic" as a reason for FFG to make a Star Destroyer? AT-ATs are iconic. Is anyone suggesting FFG's going to make them?

I want to see lightsabers added to X-wing, personally. At the very least they'd fit the scale better.

OK, after thinking it through, I've come up with some house rules which I feel represent an ISD perfectly within the confines of the game. Let's git ourselves some playtestin'!

Model:

• We use a cardboard cut out to represent the ISD - a 3 foot long, 1 foot wide triangle. Is is mounted on 12 large ship bases, arranged in a triangle.

• The ISD is split into five sections - forward port, forward starboard, aft port, aft starboard and Bridge. All sections have 10 hull points. The ISD has 10 energy.

Movement:

• The ISD can make 1-forward, 2 -forward, 1-bank and 2-bank moves only

• If any part of the ISD overlaps the board edge at any time it is considered to have fled the batlefield.

• Any asteroid or other obstacle touched by the ISD is immediately removed from play

Combat:

• Each section of ISD can attack any ships within range 3-5 of itself with a 4 attack turret main weapon, double defence dice for the target.

• Each section ISD can attack also any ships within range 1-3 of itself with a 3 attack turret secondary weapon by expending an energy point.

• Each section of the ISD can also attack any ships within range 1-2 of itself with a 3 attack ion turret secondary weapon by expending an energy point

• The only section of the ISD which can be initially targeted for attack is the Bridge - representing the Shield Generators. The Bridge has a shield value of 10.

• Once the Bridge's shields are down, all sections of the ISD can be targeted. If reduced to 0 hull points, that section is crippled and may no longer perform attacks or actions. Once all sections are crippled, the ISD is destroyed.

• If the ISD is destroyed, any ship (small, large or huge) within range 3 of any section of the ISD is also destroyed due to the resulting explosion.

Cost: 300 points, 5 Epic points.

Have fun!

Sigh. Can we at least acknowledge either side will budge?

Small and large based ships are at a 1/270 scale. The rebel transport is at about a 1/400 scale, and the tantive IV around 1/450. A three foot long ISD would be at a 1/1760 scale. It is one thing to fudge the scale a bit to fit the epic scale ships in, and then there is mugging scale in a dark alley with a rusty screwdriver. I know that for some people scale is not an issue, but it is for me. Speaking only for myself, but a three foot ISD is not something that I would want in this game.

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).

Leave aside the Wiki and Complete Guides to <Whatever> books for a minute and consider how you see Star Destroyers on screen. What have you got?

The Tantive IV is utterly overwhelmed by one. No visible damage to the ISD, captured easily, literally fits in the hangar bay.

Rebel pilot comments on the craziness of a transport and two X-wings against an ISD.

Ground based ion-cannon takes them out.

The Falcon runs from them - always.

They have problems with asteroids.

Ackbar's comment of "We won't last long against those Star Destroyers!"

Arvel's suicide run into the Executor that takes out the bridge.

How will these things FEEL to normal people if it rolls 5 attack dice? You think it'll feel like the ship that captured the Tantive without breaking a sweat? Unlikely.

Again, you're welcome to try and convince people that an ISD fits because the entire freaking world thinks they're more powerful than they really should be. But if Boba Fett can maintain his reputation as a badass despite his on-screen incompetence, I doubt you're going to do much to change the evaluation of the ISD.

Funny enough, there are only two capital ships that are disabled without being destroyed in the films. One is a CR90. the other is a Star Destroyer. The only capital ship destroyed by normal combat (not a Death Star)...Star Destroyer (background in one of the scenes of the battle of Endor). Oddly enough, the movies are filled with ISD's not doing a whole lot. It's a matter of perception. We've been around the block a few times with the same arguments and some people have pointed out that starfighters were a real danger to ISD's. They are routinely destroyed in the books. This means to me you CAN make them powerful AND you can make them vulnerable and it be okay. Please don't misunderstand me and think that I mean that the ISD should have the same firepower as the the CR90; I don't but I do think you can include it in the game and give it a good amount of firepower without it being overbearing because ISD's aren't super powerful.

...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...

Yeah, let's not go overboard here, it only has 120 guns...

...oh, and the rest:

• Dual heavy turbolaser turrets (6)

• Dual heavy ion cannon turrets (2)

• Quad heavy turbolasers (2)

• Triple medium turbolasers (3)

• Medium turbolasers (2)

• Taim & Bak XX-9 heavy turbolasers (60)

• Borstel NK-7 ion cannons (60)

• Phylon Q7 tractor beam projectors (10)

From Star Wars: Complete Cross Sections, IIRC.

Now, let's play the Star Wars version of "Where's Waldo"... with the Tantive IV.

Just a friendly query, the Complete Cross Sections I have doesn't list all the weaponry (it does point out a few guns on the hull and make special mention of its main batteries). Is yours different from mine?

-Edit- I'm actually really curious where wookiepedia got its numbers from. I can find multiple references to the 60 Turbolasers and 60 Ion cannons but for the life of me I can't find where all that firepower in the wookipedia article is mentioned together. Anybody know?

Sigh. Can we at least acknowledge either side will budge?

true, it's not even a facts issue, even the minor differences there are insignificant in relation to the necessary scale reduction.

It's more a case of personal priorities, which of the arguments take precedence. That's ok and everyone has a right to their opinions there, but this kind of discussions tend to be circular since nothing really new gets introduced into the equation.

So every time there is a pro thread started the con people will also be there and vice versa.

At least these discussions keep us warm in the cold of space.

What's a bit irritating for me is, that some of the mentioned arguments pro are actually arguments against if you minimize it to death (iconic, imposing, threat level, the referenced opening scenes in the trilogy).

Besides, the mentioned business and demand angle is from my perspective (based on current and announced releases) a con argument since a Star Destroyer wasn't the first announced huge ship. If FFG would think it would be a feasible ship in the constraints of this game it would be out already and we could move on to discussions on Executor class ships.

There is a danger in too many threads like these, in that there will be a hardening in the participants who all have said the same thing over and over, both sides becoming more dogmatic and offering more heated responses.

I'm glad to see some pro-SD people finally popping up again.