Yeah .. But an xwing against the AT-ATs? We never saw that.

"That armor's too strong for blasters".

I was thinking about that the other day. Why did they use speeders when they could have just flown their more powerful, less manpower intensive X-Wings and Y-Wings which are capable of operating in an atmosphere?

I've always been dubious about "Attack pattern delta". That formation seems to translate to: Fly in a straight line directly at the badguys .. but if possible, position yourself so that you're directly in front of their biggest baddest guns.

Would love to see an "Attack Pattern Delta card". Stats might read "Choose a friendly fighter within R1 .. remove it .. it got blown up because your stupidity.

It seems a little while ago that there wasn't anything new on the release schedule. Just the Transport and the CR90, but they were there since forever. Then Wave 4 appears, and now people want a break?

I'm tired of seeing Attack Wing outpacing X-Wing in terms of releases. I'm not desiring their release schedule mind, but I would like to hear what FFG has in store next after the current wave is released

Yeah .. But an xwing against the AT-ATs? We never saw that.

"That armor's too strong for blasters".

I was thinking about that the other day. Why did they use speeders when they could have just flown their more powerful, less manpower intensive X-Wings and Y-Wings which are capable of operating in an atmosphere?

Because George Lucas wanted to sell more toys.

The airspeeders had to be configured to snowspeeders due to the cold so I guess you could argue the same for using X wings in a cold atmosphere. The airspeeders were probably easier and faster to adapt.... plus they look cute.

You would have to configure an Xwing that flies in cold space because the atmosphere is cold on the planet?

Actually, flight path is a poor representation for fighters in zero-G space. It is far better suited for atmospheric fighter based game. We just all look past that obvious fault because it is Star Wars.

I can't help but feel the upcoming Rebels series will be the source for Wave 5. The Ghost, The a Phantom (which can dock with The Ghost), The Inquisitor's TIE Advanced (perhaps with 'the fix' that people have been waiting for), the Gozanti TIE Carrier.

The series position in the Star Wars timeline fits - between Eps III and IV, where all the OT ships were developed.

It's airing date is Q3, a good couple of months after Wave 4 has been released and we can only presume that Disney and FFG will take advantage of the marketing hype.

I for one would be quite happy to see new, as yet unseen ships.

I'm a big fan of the original ships x's / y's / b's / ties ect. (plenty of threads already on this) though I too wouldn't mind some new ships from the new movies. Just as long as the new movies are more realistic and less cgi than the prequels. I actually prefer the older way to make special effects in sci fi movies, cgi just makes everything with too much pew pew and not enough "bucket of bolts".

It's been said that the Sequel trilogy will be "model" heavy. They're going with a LotR's approach where if something can be done physically it will be.

Its been said in other posts, but I'd really like to see a "missions" book. A ton of tournament, campaign and 'historic' scenarios.

I agree that Gen-Con will likely be the big reveal for whatever is planned next. I might even be content to see some terrain like asteroids, space stations or small transport shuttles. Imagine a battle where random civilian traffic gets in the way!

The airspeeders had to be configured to snowspeeders due to the cold so I guess you could argue the same for using X wings in a cold atmosphere. The airspeeders were probably easier and faster to adapt.... plus they look cute.

You would have to configure an Xwing that flies in cold space because the atmosphere is cold on the planet?

That's not how space works. So space is "cold" in that any heat you radiate is gone, and there's nothing to conduct or convect heat to you. However, there's nothing to conduct or convect heat away from you either. So if you've got line of sight to a star, its radiation may heat you faster than your radiation will cool you. Space is simultaneously hot and cold in this way.

However, pressure is also low, so things tend to evaporate. Moisture evaporates and expands. On Hoth, moisture freezes. Totally different environment.

The temperature dangers for objects in space are computer components overheating and warping due to cyclical heating and coiling. The dangers on Hoth are fuel lines and actuators freezing.

In fact shedding heat in space can be really really tough, as Vacuum is an excellent insulator. He

The airspeeders had to be configured to snowspeeders due to the cold so I guess you could argue the same for using X wings in a cold atmosphere. The airspeeders were probably easier and faster to adapt.... plus they look cute.

You would have to configure an Xwing that flies in cold space because the atmosphere is cold on the planet?

That's not how space works. So space is "cold" in that any heat you radiate is gone, and there's nothing to conduct or convect heat to you. However, there's nothing to conduct or convect heat away from you either. So if you've got line of sight to a star, its radiation may heat you faster than your radiation will cool you. Space is simultaneously hot and cold in this way.

However, pressure is also low, so things tend to evaporate. Moisture evaporates and expands. On Hoth, moisture freezes. Totally different environment.

The temperature dangers for objects in space are computer components overheating and warping due to cyclical heating and coiling. The dangers on Hoth are fuel lines and actuators freezing.

You are absolutely correct

However I contend that Star Wars Space is somehow different from Real Space....after all sound travels just fine in Star Wars Space (and that also explains why movement is more like planes than true zero friction + zero drag + gravity not terribly relevant space flight)

Yeah, isn't the WWII style flight explained in EU as 'etheric rudders'? Which would actuality be pretty useful. Not as maneuverable, but you save fuel. Can do a 180 without deltaV, assuming no 'etheric viscosity' or something.

Gravity is clearly different there, too. Dense asteroid belts and proximal planets.

Are 'Etheric Rudders' designed and built by Medichlorians?

;p

Did the Space Shuttle fly in space using "atmospheric" maneuvering? It all depends on where your thrust vectors are placed. Engines at the back push you forwards, small side thrusters can alter pitch and roll so I see no reason why you couldn't fly in space using the same movement style as in atmosphere. If I was a pilot I would want to have the same response system for my craft in both atmosphere and space.

Star Wars has it's own brand of physics and science.

Did the Space Shuttle fly in space using "atmospheric" maneuvering? It all depends on where your thrust vectors are placed. Engines at the back push you forwards, small side thrusters can alter pitch and roll so I see no reason why you couldn't fly in space using the same movement style as in atmosphere. If I was a pilot I would want to have the same response system for my craft in both atmosphere and space.

Show me real video of the Space Shuttle banking in Zero-G and someone on here (not me) will eat your dirty underwear!

Mythbusters should have tackled this question on their SW special.

The shuttle can do 2 K-Turns just fine:

http://www.technologyreview.com/video/416383/the-shuttle-maneuvering-in-space/

Still not a bank...