Having read how disappointed two people were with the transport because of scale I acknowledge that I was an idiot to bring up this topic. I've a feeling the huge ships are not going to be the big hit the hype made them out to be.

To be honest, I got it for the X wing... I may use the transport for terrain/obstacle more than as support in an "epic" game.. seeing the difference has really made me rethink getting the Tantive... I was hoping the scale shift wouldnt matter.. or would be 'good enough' but when you realize the falcon is normally a third the size of it... it looks small

And this is why a ISD just won't work in the game... you can pretend there is a balance point to bring it into line with whatnis in game now.. but that ship.. that 2 foot 'ISD' is no longer an ISD.. it is a small disrespectful, diminished, unworthy... substitute... it will not be impressive.. it will not be commandimg... it will be lame, and that is what I find reprehensible about it.... and that you guys are willing to accept lame.. to represent an Icon... saddens me... it makes me feel like you dont care about the game or balance and fairness in the game... no matter how many times you say otherwise, the more you push it the more I feel you just dont care, as long as you get your lame pretend ISD...

Just how I see it... it cant be done, as you can never bring the first few minutes of epIV impressiveness to the table with a 2 foot imposter...

That's a bit...cataclysmic. I think a lot of how you feel about the big ships really has to do with your personal opinions on scale and how much you value it. I'm sorry you feel that way but just because the size question beyond making sure the ISD is what I consider "big enough" (about 2 feet) doesn't make me any less of fan of Star Wars. I honestly can't believe how much I've nerded out over this to be honest. Truthfully, I care about the game to the point that I wan't to believe I can recreate those epic moments from the series, we just care about them in different ways. Please don't read this paragraph with a snobby or argumentative tone. I understand your sentiment I just don't agree on a personal level.

-Edit- If you can't tell, I don;t really have an issue with the transport. I love that thing. Then again it is just a transport.

If it's unplayable then it's a bad design. We both know that.

If it's unplayable it may just be a bad idea to start with.There isn't always a way to make something work. No matter how badly you want it you can't make 1=10 without breaking something somewhere.

No, but if I add up every natural number they equal -1/12. (Seriously true fact. Look it up.)

It can be made playable until FFG says otherwise.

I'm strictly staying out of the Star Destroyer conversation, but the sum of all natural numbers is assuredly not -1/12. The sum of natural numbers from 1 to n is a monotonically increasing function, with no possibility of reaching any negative number. In fact, since the sum of any two natural numbers is also a natural number, the sum of all natural numbers is a natural number.

Moreover, the sum of natural numbers from 1 to n doesn't converge, period. It has no sum in the typically understood sense.

If it's unplayable then it's a bad design. We both know that.

If it's unplayable it may just be a bad idea to start with.There isn't always a way to make something work. No matter how badly you want it you can't make 1=10 without breaking something somewhere.

No, but if I add up every natural number they equal -1/12. (Seriously true fact. Look it up.)

It can be made playable until FFG says otherwise.

I'm strictly staying out of the Star Destroyer conversation, but the sum of all natural numbers is assuredly not -1/12. The sum of natural numbers from 1 to n is a monotonically increasing function, with no possibility of reaching any negative number. In fact, since the sum of any two natural numbers is also a natural number, the sum of all natural numbers is a natural number.

Moreover, the sum of natural numbers from 1 to n doesn't converge, period. It has no sum in the typically understood sense.

Having read how disappointed two people were with the transport because of scale I acknowledge that I was an idiot to bring up this topic. I've a feeling the huge ships are not going to be the big hit the hype made them out to be.

To be honest, I got it for the X wing... I may use the transport for terrain/obstacle more than as support in an "epic" game.. seeing the difference has really made me rethink getting the Tantive... I was hoping the scale shift wouldnt matter.. or would be 'good enough' but when you realize the falcon is normally a third the size of it... it looks small

And this is why a ISD just won't work in the game... you can pretend there is a balance point to bring it into line with whatnis in game now.. but that ship.. that 2 foot 'ISD' is no longer an ISD.. it is a small disrespectful, diminished, unworthy... substitute... it will not be impressive.. it will not be commandimg... it will be lame, and that is what I find reprehensible about it.... and that you guys are willing to accept lame.. to represent an Icon... saddens me... it makes me feel like you dont care about the game or balance and fairness in the game... no matter how many times you say otherwise, the more you push it the more I feel you just dont care, as long as you get your lame pretend ISD...

Just how I see it... it cant be done, as you can never bring the first few minutes of epIV impressiveness to the table with a 2 foot imposter...

That's a bit...cataclysmic. I think a lot of how you feel about the big ships really has to do with your personal opinions on scale and how much you value it. I'm sorry you feel that way but just because the size question beyond making sure the ISD is what I consider "big enough" (about 2 feet) doesn't make me any less of fan of Star Wars. I honestly can't believe how much I've nerded out over this to be honest. Truthfully, I care about the game to the point that I wan't to believe I can recreate those epic moments from the series, we just care about them in different ways. Please don't read this paragraph with a snobby or argumentative tone. I understand your sentiment I just don't agree on a personal level.

-Edit- If you can't tell, I don;t really have an issue with the transport. I love that thing. Then again it is just a transport.

The scale issue is something we all should be thinking of.. it just drives me over the edge to see a divide here, when we all should be outraged by a small ineffective ship pretending to be an ISD..

I just dont see how anyone could look at a 2 foot model and think.. yeah that looks good next to the ship that should fit in its hold..... I do think it would look good on my shelf... but not on my game table...

I just dont understand why people want an unimpressive model.. I think the 'off mat' rules in the transport are the best way to go, therein lies your imagination.. therein lies the large impressive .. imtimidating craft we all know and love... I for one dont need to see it on the table..

I may still get the Tantive, but it will be a decoration in my room.. nothing kore.. but I need to think hard if I wanna spend that kind of koney for such ships..

I would love to see a Star Destroyer in the game, but it cannot be the same size or even only slightly bigger than the corvette. Maybe they slide the scale back but add a third base to it so its like 6 inches longer? Maybe it costs 150 points stock? Hell, I don't know. I'm just looking forward to whatever Empire huge ship they have in mind.

But, what will the haters say if they announce a Star Destroyer?

What will they say if they don't?

Having read how disappointed two people were with the transport because of scale I acknowledge that I was an idiot to bring up this topic. I've a feeling the huge ships are not going to be the big hit the hype made them out to be.

To be honest, I got it for the X wing... I may use the transport for terrain/obstacle more than as support in an "epic" game.. seeing the difference has really made me rethink getting the Tantive... I was hoping the scale shift wouldnt matter.. or would be 'good enough' but when you realize the falcon is normally a third the size of it... it looks small

And this is why a ISD just won't work in the game... you can pretend there is a balance point to bring it into line with whatnis in game now.. but that ship.. that 2 foot 'ISD' is no longer an ISD.. it is a small disrespectful, diminished, unworthy... substitute... it will not be impressive.. it will not be commandimg... it will be lame, and that is what I find reprehensible about it.... and that you guys are willing to accept lame.. to represent an Icon... saddens me... it makes me feel like you dont care about the game or balance and fairness in the game... no matter how many times you say otherwise, the more you push it the more I feel you just dont care, as long as you get your lame pretend ISD...

Just how I see it... it cant be done, as you can never bring the first few minutes of epIV impressiveness to the table with a 2 foot imposter...

That's a bit...cataclysmic. I think a lot of how you feel about the big ships really has to do with your personal opinions on scale and how much you value it. I'm sorry you feel that way but just because the size question beyond making sure the ISD is what I consider "big enough" (about 2 feet) doesn't make me any less of fan of Star Wars. I honestly can't believe how much I've nerded out over this to be honest. Truthfully, I care about the game to the point that I wan't to believe I can recreate those epic moments from the series, we just care about them in different ways. Please don't read this paragraph with a snobby or argumentative tone. I understand your sentiment I just don't agree on a personal level.

-Edit- If you can't tell, I don;t really have an issue with the transport. I love that thing. Then again it is just a transport.

I love everything Star Wars..also... and I'm sure you do... we obviously depart on what we feel this game can bring..

The scale issue is something we all should be thinking of.. it just drives me over the edge to see a divide here, when we all should be outraged by a small ineffective ship pretending to be an ISD..

I just dont see how anyone could look at a 2 foot kodel and think.. yeah that looks good next to the ship that should fit in its hold..... I do think it would look good on my shelf... but not on my game table...

I just dont understand why people want an unimpressive model.. I think the 'off mat' rules in the transport are the best way to go, therein lies your imagination.. therein lies the large impressive .. imtimidating craft we all know and love... I for one dont need to see it on the table..

I may still get the Tantive, but it will be a decoration in my room.. nothing kore.. but I need to think hard if I wanna spend that kind of koney for such ships..

If they announce one.. I won't say anything, nor will I purchase one... if they dont .. if they come up with other ships instead, I'll be glad they went the sane route and keep gaming.. maybe buying whatever else they come upnwith.. and Action IV would be awesome for the inps transport.

If it's unplayable then it's a bad design. We both know that.

If it's unplayable it may just be a bad idea to start with.There isn't always a way to make something work. No matter how badly you want it you can't make 1=10 without breaking something somewhere.

No, but if I add up every natural number they equal -1/12. (Seriously true fact. Look it up.)

It can be made playable until FFG says otherwise.

I'm strictly staying out of the Star Destroyer conversation, but the sum of all natural numbers is assuredly not -1/12. The sum of natural numbers from 1 to n is a monotonically increasing function, with no possibility of reaching any negative number. In fact, since the sum of any two natural numbers is also a natural number, the sum of all natural numbers is a natural number.

Moreover, the sum of natural numbers from 1 to n doesn't converge, period. It has no sum in the typically understood sense.

I understand that. But there are mathematical proofs that say otherwise. Google it some time. It's wierd, makes no sense, but yet is perfectly logical.

I'm familiar with those "proofs"; they're wrong. Some are simply broken logic, and the rest require violations of fundamental assumptions. The best proof is the Riemann zeta function at s = -1 + 0j, but that violates the domain of the function and holds only under some fairly specific constraints (that I don't really understand very well).

If it's unplayable then it's a bad design. We both know that.

If it's unplayable it may just be a bad idea to start with.There isn't always a way to make something work. No matter how badly you want it you can't make 1=10 without breaking something somewhere.

No, but if I add up every natural number they equal -1/12. (Seriously true fact. Look it up.)

It can be made playable until FFG says otherwise.

I'm strictly staying out of the Star Destroyer conversation, but the sum of all natural numbers is assuredly not -1/12. The sum of natural numbers from 1 to n is a monotonically increasing function, with no possibility of reaching any negative number. In fact, since the sum of any two natural numbers is also a natural number, the sum of all natural numbers is a natural number.

Moreover, the sum of natural numbers from 1 to n doesn't converge, period. It has no sum in the typically understood sense.

I understand that. But there are mathematical proofs that say otherwise. Google it some time. It's wierd, makes no sense, but yet is perfectly logical.

I'm familiar with those "proofs"; they're wrong. Some are simply broken logic, and the rest require violations of fundamental assumptions. The best proof is the Riemann zeta function at s = -1 + 0j, but that violates the domain of the function and holds only under some fairly specific constraints (that I don't really understand very well).

Having read how disappointed two people were with the transport because of scale I acknowledge that I was an idiot to bring up this topic. I've a feeling the huge ships are not going to be the big hit the hype made them out to be.

To be honest, I got it for the X wing... I may use the transport for terrain/obstacle more than as support in an "epic" game.. seeing the difference has really made me rethink getting the Tantive... I was hoping the scale shift wouldnt matter.. or would be 'good enough' but when you realize the falcon is normally a third the size of it... it looks small

And this is why a ISD just won't work in the game... you can pretend there is a balance point to bring it into line with whatnis in game now.. but that ship.. that 2 foot 'ISD' is no longer an ISD.. it is a small disrespectful, diminished, unworthy... substitute... it will not be impressive.. it will not be commandimg... it will be lame, and that is what I find reprehensible about it.... and that you guys are willing to accept lame.. to represent an Icon... saddens me... it makes me feel like you dont care about the game or balance and fairness in the game... no matter how many times you say otherwise, the more you push it the more I feel you just dont care, as long as you get your lame pretend ISD...

Just how I see it... it cant be done, as you can never bring the first few minutes of epIV impressiveness to the table with a 2 foot imposter...

That's a bit...cataclysmic. I think a lot of how you feel about the big ships really has to do with your personal opinions on scale and how much you value it. I'm sorry you feel that way but just because the size question beyond making sure the ISD is what I consider "big enough" (about 2 feet) doesn't make me any less of fan of Star Wars. I honestly can't believe how much I've nerded out over this to be honest. Truthfully, I care about the game to the point that I wan't to believe I can recreate those epic moments from the series, we just care about them in different ways. Please don't read this paragraph with a snobby or argumentative tone. I understand your sentiment I just don't agree on a personal level.

-Edit- If you can't tell, I don;t really have an issue with the transport. I love that thing. Then again it is just a transport.

I love everything Star Wars..also... and I'm sure you do... we obviously depart on what we feel this game can bring..

The scale issue is something we all should be thinking of.. it just drives me over the edge to see a divide here, when we all should be outraged by a small ineffective ship pretending to be an ISD..

I just dont see how anyone could look at a 2 foot model and think.. yeah that looks good next to the ship that should fit in its hold..... I do think it would look good on my shelf... but not on my game table...

I just dont understand why people want an unimpressive model.. I think the 'off mat' rules in the transport are the best way to go, therein lies your imagination.. therein lies the large impressive .. imtimidating craft we all know and love... I for one dont need to see it on the table..

I may still get the Tantive, but it will be a decoration in my room.. nothing kore.. but I need to think hard if I wanna spend that kind of koney for such ships..

Ultimately I think where we differ on is what we consider "impressive." My definition just isn't tied to being in scale with another ship. As long as its a big model, powerful, and the rules are balanced and fun I don't have an issue with it. I also happen to believe its possible to make it balanced within the rules so I see no reason why FFG can't or shouldn't.

Having read how disappointed two people were with the transport because of scale I acknowledge that I was an idiot to bring up this topic. I've a feeling the huge ships are not going to be the big hit the hype made them out to be.

To be honest, I got it for the X wing... I may use the transport for terrain/obstacle more than as support in an "epic" game.. seeing the difference has really made me rethink getting the Tantive... I was hoping the scale shift wouldnt matter.. or would be 'good enough' but when you realize the falcon is normally a third the size of it... it looks small

And this is why a ISD just won't work in the game... you can pretend there is a balance point to bring it into line with whatnis in game now.. but that ship.. that 2 foot 'ISD' is no longer an ISD.. it is a small disrespectful, diminished, unworthy... substitute... it will not be impressive.. it will not be commandimg... it will be lame, and that is what I find reprehensible about it.... and that you guys are willing to accept lame.. to represent an Icon... saddens me... it makes me feel like you dont care about the game or balance and fairness in the game... no matter how many times you say otherwise, the more you push it the more I feel you just dont care, as long as you get your lame pretend ISD...

Just how I see it... it cant be done, as you can never bring the first few minutes of epIV impressiveness to the table with a 2 foot imposter...

That's a bit...cataclysmic. I think a lot of how you feel about the big ships really has to do with your personal opinions on scale and how much you value it. I'm sorry you feel that way but just because the size question beyond making sure the ISD is what I consider "big enough" (about 2 feet) doesn't make me any less of fan of Star Wars. I honestly can't believe how much I've nerded out over this to be honest. Truthfully, I care about the game to the point that I wan't to believe I can recreate those epic moments from the series, we just care about them in different ways. Please don't read this paragraph with a snobby or argumentative tone. I understand your sentiment I just don't agree on a personal level.

-Edit- If you can't tell, I don;t really have an issue with the transport. I love that thing. Then again it is just a transport.

I love everything Star Wars..also... and I'm sure you do... we obviously depart on what we feel this game can bring..

The scale issue is something we all should be thinking of.. it just drives me over the edge to see a divide here, when we all should be outraged by a small ineffective ship pretending to be an ISD..

I just dont see how anyone could look at a 2 foot kodel and think.. yeah that looks good next to the ship that should fit in its hold..... I do think it would look good on my shelf... but not on my game table...

I just dont understand why people want an unimpressive model.. I think the 'off mat' rules in the transport are the best way to go, therein lies your imagination.. therein lies the large impressive .. imtimidating craft we all know and love... I for one dont need to see it on the table..

I may still get the Tantive, but it will be a decoration in my room.. nothing kore.. but I need to think hard if I wanna spend that kind of koney for such ships..

Largely because I play this game in tournaments. An off the map model, or a model that is a map are meaningless. If I wanted that I'd be in a Star Wars Role Playing Campaign. Having anything other than a model has no substance, no Strategy, none of the feeling of command. It's just a poor substitute. Meanwhile Scale is a triviality for me. I played with Star Wars Micro-machines as a kid. The X-wing, the Falcon and every version of the Star Destroyers were within an inch of each other. It didn't reduce the fun at all.

Obviously FFG differs in opinion, as they have given us rules for ISDs..

And comparing this game to childhood fantasies is really not what we are doing.. seriously, this is totally different.. I mean come on man, we arent children here.. sure we may actnit sometimes, but we are adults... video games have no hold on this game, nor does our memories of flying around our yard with toys.. I was 13 when A New hope came out...

This discussion needs to go beyond childhood fantasies.. you wonder why I say some of the things I do, it's because you keep insisting these crazy notions that FFG is sitting back imagining the samenthing... oooooo wouldnt it be cool if we could... blah blah blah... you wonder why I say you have no care for balance in the game... Right there... your insistance that it can be made ... that a 2 foot model can be 'all that we expect... and fun to play' sorry.. an unimpressive sham is not all I expect.. nor will it be fun.. the ship should destroy everything on the table and crash through your fighters and be the only thing left on the table... but that wouldnt be fun for your opponent.. so there goes balance and fair play...

Maybe ... I just like a game the way it is.. and not how broken it can get...

Having read how disappointed two people were with the transport because of scale I acknowledge that I was an idiot to bring up this topic. I've a feeling the huge ships are not going to be the big hit the hype made them out to be.

To be honest, I got it for the X wing... I may use the transport for terrain/obstacle more than as support in an "epic" game.. seeing the difference has really made me rethink getting the Tantive... I was hoping the scale shift wouldnt matter.. or would be 'good enough' but when you realize the falcon is normally a third the size of it... it looks small

And this is why a ISD just won't work in the game... you can pretend there is a balance point to bring it into line with whatnis in game now.. but that ship.. that 2 foot 'ISD' is no longer an ISD.. it is a small disrespectful, diminished, unworthy... substitute... it will not be impressive.. it will not be commandimg... it will be lame, and that is what I find reprehensible about it.... and that you guys are willing to accept lame.. to represent an Icon... saddens me... it makes me feel like you dont care about the game or balance and fairness in the game... no matter how many times you say otherwise, the more you push it the more I feel you just dont care, as long as you get your lame pretend ISD...

Just how I see it... it cant be done, as you can never bring the first few minutes of epIV impressiveness to the table with a 2 foot imposter...

That's a bit...cataclysmic. I think a lot of how you feel about the big ships really has to do with your personal opinions on scale and how much you value it. I'm sorry you feel that way but just because the size question beyond making sure the ISD is what I consider "big enough" (about 2 feet) doesn't make me any less of fan of Star Wars. I honestly can't believe how much I've nerded out over this to be honest. Truthfully, I care about the game to the point that I wan't to believe I can recreate those epic moments from the series, we just care about them in different ways. Please don't read this paragraph with a snobby or argumentative tone. I understand your sentiment I just don't agree on a personal level.

-Edit- If you can't tell, I don;t really have an issue with the transport. I love that thing. Then again it is just a transport.

I love everything Star Wars..also... and I'm sure you do... we obviously depart on what we feel this game can bring..

The scale issue is something we all should be thinking of.. it just drives me over the edge to see a divide here, when we all should be outraged by a small ineffective ship pretending to be an ISD..

I just dont see how anyone could look at a 2 foot kodel and think.. yeah that looks good next to the ship that should fit in its hold..... I do think it would look good on my shelf... but not on my game table...

I just dont understand why people want an unimpressive model.. I think the 'off mat' rules in the transport are the best way to go, therein lies your imagination.. therein lies the large impressive .. imtimidating craft we all know and love... I for one dont need to see it on the table..

I may still get the Tantive, but it will be a decoration in my room.. nothing kore.. but I need to think hard if I wanna spend that kind of koney for such ships..

Largely because I play this game in tournaments. An off the map model, or a model that is a map are meaningless. If I wanted that I'd be in a Star Wars Role Playing Campaign. Having anything other than a model has no substance, no Strategy, none of the feeling of command. It's just a poor substitute. Meanwhile Scale is a triviality for me. I played with Star Wars Micro-machines as a kid. The X-wing, the Falcon and every version of the Star Destroyers were within an inch of each other. It didn't reduce the fun at all.

Obviously FFG differs in opinion, as they have given us rules for ISDs..

And comparing this game to childhood fantasies is really not what we are doing.. seriously, this is totally different.. I mean come on man, we arent children here.. sure we may actnit sometimes, but we are adults... video games have no hold on this game, nor does our memories of flying around our yard with toys.. I was 13 when A New hope came out...

This discussion needs to go beyond childhood fantasies.. you wonder why I say some of the things I do, it's because you keep insisting these crazy notions that FFG is sitting back imagining the samenthing... oooooo wouldnt it be cool if we could... blah blah blah... you wonder why I say you have no care for balance in the game... Right there... your insistance that it can be made ... that a 2 foot model can be 'all that we expect... and fun to play' sorry.. an unimpressive sham is not all I expect.. nor will it be fun.. the ship should destroy everything on the table and crash through your fighters and be the only thing left on the table... but that wouldnt be fun for your opponent.. so there goes balance and fair play...

Maybe ... I just like a game the way it is.. and not how broken it can get...

As for giving us rules about Star Destroyers. They've also given us rules for Hyperspace gates. And Wildly out of scale Senator's shuttles. Scenario play does not count. It's a way to make it work for that scenario. Nothing more.

I'm strictly staying out of the Star Destroyer conversation, but the sum of all natural numbers is assuredly not -1/12. The sum of natural numbers from 1 to n is a monotonically increasing function, with no possibility of reaching any negative number. In fact, since the sum of any two natural numbers is also a natural number, the sum of all natural numbers is a natural number.

Moreover, the sum of natural numbers from 1 to n doesn't converge, period. It has no sum in the typically understood sense.

I've a mathematical question for you:

Can 2 + 2 ever = 5?

When at school I was taught that fractions between 0.1 and 0.4 could be rounded down while 0.5 to 0.9 were to be rounded up. When somebody made the statement " you can't make 2+2=5" I turned around and said I could, using what I learnt in maths at school.

2.3 is rounded down to 2

2.3 + 2.3 = 4.6 which is rounded up to 5

So technically speaking, and I do appreciate the flaw in my logic (if I rounded down it would be 2 not 2.3 I added), I made 2+2=5. But the person said you always round up and I was wrong. Curious to know your thoughts....

I would love to see a Star Destroyer in the game, but it cannot be the same size or even only slightly bigger than the corvette. Maybe they slide the scale back but add a third base to it so its like 6 inches longer? Maybe it costs 150 points stock? Hell, I don't know. I'm just looking forward to whatever Empire huge ship they have in mind.

But, what will the haters say if they announce a Star Destroyer?

What will they say if they don't?

It was said that at 150pts it would represent a 'damaged Star Destroyer with only one attack' thus explaining the lack of upgrades on it, so that way we could also add some fighters on the board as well. Then we could use the 11 hardpoints plus crew/energy slots to upgrade our Star Destroyer to it's full 300pt potential.

So a 'damaged' Star Destroyer has a handfull of fighters accompanying it, and that means that a fully upgraded, and therefore that represents an undamaged Star Destroyer, has no fighters?

If they announce a Star Destroyer? I'd say nothing and would not buy it.

If they Don't? I am not sure if you are looking for me to say "See, I told you so," becasue I would not do that and am not that type of person to 'rub noses in it.' Instead I'd talk about the ship and it's use in the game, but would not mention anything about Stard Destroyers because it would not be relevant to that ship.

they can't help but have at least tried to make a Star Destroyer work because of how fascinating the puzzle of getting it right is.

And perhaps they have and found that such a thing just can't be done in an acceptable way.

Myself I'll never accept a ISD can balanced for this game. I've seen the ideas people have for making it balanced and in every case what you end up with is a Corvette with delusions of grandeur.

Because it no longer has the firepower a ISD should have, it has the firepower a Corvette should.

For example this idea of limiting the arc's when the whole point of the shape behind the ISD was to allow it to bring the most guns to bare at one time as possible. All you've done is taken away the whole point in the shape of the ship, so you can hammer it into a game where it clearly doesn't fit.

I'm strictly staying out of the Star Destroyer conversation, but the sum of all natural numbers is assuredly not -1/12. The sum of natural numbers from 1 to n is a monotonically increasing function, with no possibility of reaching any negative number. In fact, since the sum of any two natural numbers is also a natural number, the sum of all natural numbers is a natural number.

Moreover, the sum of natural numbers from 1 to n doesn't converge, period. It has no sum in the typically understood sense.

I've a mathematical question for you:

Can 2 + 2 ever = 5?

When at school I was taught that fractions between 0.1 and 0.4 could be rounded down while 0.5 to 0.9 were to be rounded up. When somebody made the statement " you can't make 2+2=5" I turned around and said I could, using what I learnt in maths at school.

2.3 is rounded down to 2

2.3 + 2.3 = 4.6 which is rounded up to 5

So technically speaking, and I do appreciate the flaw in my logic (if I rounded down it would be 2 not 2.3 I added), I made 2+2=5. But the person said you always round up and I was wrong. Curious to know your thoughts....

There are actually some even better proofs out there. Infinitesimals do strange things to math. My brother had a proof he worked out in highschool for how 1=2. And if 1=2 everything equals everything, or can be made to do so. Math gets strange... If the math seems t defy reality though, then go with reality.

I like the game how it is. But I would like it better without Star Destroyers.

I agree.

they can't help but have at least tried to make a Star Destroyer work because of how fascinating the puzzle of getting it right is.

And perhaps they have and found that such a thing just can't be done in an acceptable way.

Myself I'll never accept a ISD can balanced for this game. I've seen the ideas people have for making it balanced and in every case what you end up with is a Corvette with delusions of grandeur.

Because it no longer has the firepower a ISD should have, it has the firepower a Corvette should.

For example this idea of limiting the arc's when the whole point of the shape behind the ISD was to allow it to bring the most guns to bare at one time as possible. All you've done is taken away the whole point in the shape of the ship, so you can hammer it into a game where it clearly doesn't fit.

Actually the shape of the ship doesn't allow it to do that which the Wookiepedia article actually recognizes. To put it in another perspective, if you assume the ISD had fairly evenly spaced guns a ship parallel but slightly above or below the ship could actually only be hit with a quarter of the guns. You're correct that a diamond shape meant to allow all the guns to fire but the reality of the ISD shape means they didn't use the shape effectively which defeats the purposed of the diamond shape.

they can't help but have at least tried to make a Star Destroyer work because of how fascinating the puzzle of getting it right is.

And perhaps they have and found that such a thing just can't be done in an acceptable way.Myself I'll never accept a ISD can balanced for this game. I've seen the ideas people have for making it balanced and in every case what you end up with is a Corvette with delusions of grandeur.Because it no longer has the firepower a ISD should have, it has the firepower a Corvette should.For example this idea of limiting the arc's when the whole point of the shape behind the ISD was to allow it to bring the most guns to bare at one time as possible. All you've done is taken away the whole point in the shape of the ship, so you can hammer it into a game where it clearly doesn't fit.

Much of the reason I want one is because FFG has been shocking me with their brilliance over and over again. If anybody can do a Star Destroyer the justice you talk about, it's them.

Because it no longer has the firepower a ISD should have, it has the firepower a Corvette should.

This is what it comes down to.

It will be a Corvette, dressed up in Papa Star Destroyer's clothes

Sorry, I'll disagree.. a 2 foot ISD is not going to be impressive next to the Tantive... it will look small...

Telling me to be more open minded is not the best way to argue your point... you have no idea who I am, I have a more open mind than you can imagine.. also.. I could use the same comment on you.. as your idea is a bit shallow in depth... you amuse me when you say a 2 foot ISD can be balanced but that a Deathstar or SSD cant be..(you said as much in another post) but by your reasoning those shouod be able to be balanced and dropped in.. we can paint a basketball grey and throw some black lines on it and there you have your Deathstar... oh.. bit wait.. that won't look impressive either... will it....

It still holds true.. you cant make an ISD balanced for this game.. but you can make other smaller ships... and that is what they should do. Besides, once you have a scaled down ISD, and driven its power and impressiveness down to such a dinky version.. you just have a Vigil class ship anyway... so make the fair and balanced Vigil, and keep the ISD off table... the ship off mat, that still can take pot shots at the pieces on the table.. that is impressive.. and allows us our big impressive ISD.. because as you are fond of saying.. use your imagination...

I do, every game I play, therenis an ISD sitting just out of range of the ships.. waiting to retrieve its remaining ships, and then jump to new coordinates....

There are actually some even better proofs out there. Infinitesimals do strange things to math. My brother had a proof he worked out in highschool for how 1=2. And if 1=2 everything equals everything, or can be made to do so. Math gets strange... If the math seems t defy reality though, then go with reality.

Thanks a lot, I'm now trying to figure out how 1 can = 2.

I accept that reality is just what we perceive, and that what we perceive may not be the true reality but only our own attempts to interpret the world around us. Therefore the reality of today might be tomorrows fiction and vice versa.

So technically speaking, and I do appreciate the flaw in my logic (if I rounded down it would be 2 not 2.3 I added), I made 2+2=5. But the person said you always round up and I was wrong. Curious to know your thoughts....

What you call "a flaw in your logic" most people just call "being wrong and making stuff up".

x + y = 5 is not (necessarily) the same as (Math.ceil(x) + Math.ceil(y) = 5).

At the outer end of mathematics it does some very strange stuff. But incorrect proofs and made-up numbers is not "math breaking its own rules", it's bad math, and it's wrong.

And I have no idea what this has to do with Star Destroyers, but whoever started it is quite simply wrong.

I would love to see a Star Destroyer in the game, but it cannot be the same size or even only slightly bigger than the corvette. Maybe they slide the scale back but add a third base to it so its like 6 inches longer? Maybe it costs 150 points stock? Hell, I don't know. I'm just looking forward to whatever Empire huge ship they have in mind.

But, what will the haters say if they announce a Star Destroyer?

What will they say if they don't?

It was said that at 150pts it would represent a 'damaged Star Destroyer with only one attack' thus explaining the lack of upgrades on it, so that way we could also add some fighters on the board as well. Then we could use the 11 hardpoints plus crew/energy slots to upgrade our Star Destroyer to it's full 300pt potential.

So a 'damaged' Star Destroyer has a handfull of fighters accompanying it, and that means that a fully upgraded, and therefore that represents an undamaged Star Destroyer, has no fighters?

If they announce a Star Destroyer? I'd say nothing and would not buy it.

If they Don't? I am not sure if you are looking for me to say "See, I told you so," becasue I would not do that and am not that type of person to 'rub noses in it.' Instead I'd talk about the ship and it's use in the game, but would not mention anything about Stard Destroyers because it would not be relevant to that ship.

I haven''t address the Tie Fighter issue because it would muddy the waters even more but really I don't see an issue with a ISD having less than 72 Ties for the same reason you don't buy Tie Fighters in Squadrons of 12. It's a game and you make concessions for game balance. Can you run 4 Tie interceptor fleet? Sure. Not really canon but it could happen. Could you face an ISD without fighters? Sure. Not really canon but it could happen.

Also, Aminar, your issues with scale.. are one of the things that has brought many people to this game, and FFGs commitment to that has made it what it is.. they just cant throw it out now, they stand a chance of people losing interest...

If nothing else, their own remarks about scale should quiet the ISD conversations... they cant scale it down to fit asmit breaks their own thoughts on the subject...