Some odd issues I've commented on in the game preview, but nothing really show-stopping until...

Well, if I am playing a game where I command a Star Destroyer, I want to actually feel like a Star Destroyer . IE., embrace the nuance of a Star Destroyer's design.

Specifically - that 'wedge' shape, dating back to Republic ships during the Clone Wars (and further, depending on your EU source!) - being purposely designed to allow the 'broadside' weapons to concentrate both side batteries forward . IE., the port guns can fire forward as easily as they can fire port, and starboard guns can fire forward as easily as they fire to starboard, meaning a target directly in front of a Star Destroyer will be getting walloped with practically its entire armament (although obviously having everything forward means nothing is firing to the sides, then).

Yet, looking at the game fire arcs...

...the Star Destroyer is no different than any other ship. Firing at a target off a broadside does not diminish its forward firepower at all. It's "best" attacks would be to line up a single target splitting the fire arc line between the 'forward' and either 'broadside' arc - off its quarters, just like any other ship.

Neither of these things make any sense for the ship design!

The Star Destroyers really needed to have three 120-degree arcs, rather than four 90-degree arcs like the other ships have. It would even introduce variety to the game maneuvering, in that most ships would try to maneuver to get a single target to 'split fire arcs' down their corners/quarters for concentration of multiple batteries on it, while a Star Destroyer would instead be trying to maneuver to get an enemy to 'split fire arcs' right down its forward centerline in order for IT to concentrate multiple batteries.

That this single biggest feature about the Star Destroyer design - the entire REASON they look the way they do - is ignored by the game system is...disappointing.

Yeah, I too am a bit disappointed in how they seem to have skimped out on firing arcs, but we will have to see how it all shakes out once we have the full rules. Maybe SDs have some special rules or something.

One if the best things about Star Fleet Battles was how different firing arcs for different weapons really made ships play differently. Klingons had weird arcs on the wings for instance. Wouldn't expect this game to go quite as far with it, but something to distinguish different kinds of arcs would have been nice.

It gets an additional attack die in it's front arc. What more do you want?

Actually I think four arcs could be just as good a representation as 3. Going the 3 arc route, you would have to make the arcs uneven. While the broadsides can easily shoot forward, they have alot of trouble shooting to the opposite side of the ship. With four arcs, the front arc can be strong enough to represent both broadsides being brought to bear forwards (as the stats appear to indicate here). Sliding the cross back a bit (widening the front arc while shortening the back) may have represented it better, but may have created balance issues.

First off, if you looked at the arcs on the other two ships, they're different. The 4 arcs are not just split up in 90-degree chunks for every ship. The VSD had a much larger front arc than the Nebula-B. The VSD also has some guns that cannot fire forward. You can see them in the image of the ship--there are rows of turrets in a straight line. It makes perfect sense then, to line up a shot that your full forward batteries can hit as you bank to then also bring your side-facing guns to target as well.

I don't see any issue. The main arc still has a huge amount of firepower, but those side arcs are not abstractions or sins against the design of the ship for the sake of mechanics, when you can actually see the turrets on the model itself.

I think the arcs will make more sense if you look at the fact that attack dice are different now. It seems to be 3 levels of attack dice, with red as the weakest, then blue, then black. Front arc on the VSD seems to be 3 blue and 3 red, vs 2 red and a blue for side arcs. thus compared to the two side arcs combined, the front arc has 3 red and 3 blue, vs 4 red but only 2 blue. So the front alpha strike seems more powerful than a double broadside.

Without full rules, it's hard to say just how it will play out, but as Inksplat noted, the VSD's front firing arc is the greatest out of all three ships. This, along with it having the highest amount of dice, does encourage the use of the front arc.

And on the pure speculation side, there could additionally be a Star Destroyer specific rule of sorts that says they can fire their front arc twice.

Specifically - that 'wedge' shape, dating back to Republic ships during the Clone Wars (and further, depending on your EU source!) - being purposely designed to allow the 'broadside' weapons to concentrate both side batteries forward . IE., the port guns can fire forward as easily as they can fire port, and starboard guns can fire forward as easily as they fire to starboard, meaning a target directly in front of a Star Destroyer will be getting walloped with practically its entire armament (although obviously having everything forward means nothing is firing to the sides, then).

That this single biggest feature about the Star Destroyer design - the entire REASON they look the way they do - is ignored by the game system is...disappointing.

I understand and I agree with your view/argument.

However, the overall factor that (possibly) 'forced' the designers to come up with a Forward/Broadsides/Rear arcs was probably due to gaming balance coupled with ease of design and point value assignment.

Thoughts?

Without full rules, it's hard to say just how it will play out, but as Inksplat noted, the VSD's front firing arc is the greatest out of all three ships. This, along with it having the highest amount of dice, does encourage the use of the front arc.

There is a difference between 'the front arc is the most powerful' and 'the front arc is powerful because the side batteries are contributing to it'.

How many dice do I get in my front arc if I'm firing everything I've got forward? 3 red dice, 3 blue dice.

Okay, now I've got a target pulling up alongside me, so I want one of my side batteries to blast it - it its own (side) arc of 2 red, 1 blue to the side...and I've still got 3 red, 3 blue forward.

IE., breaking up the arcs in the way they've done means the side batteries aren't contributing to the forward firepower, as they can still fire will full effectiveness off to broadsides with no impact to the forward firepower of the ship.

You have to remember though, you can only fire each arc once. The arc you suggest would only work if you got the enemy aligned exactly in the centre, which while an interesting challenge, would also result in a rather sizable portion of your ship. being able to fire only once. You'd be actively limiting your targeting options by at least 25%

Without full rules, it's hard to say just how it will play out, but as Inksplat noted, the VSD's front firing arc is the greatest out of all three ships. This, along with it having the highest amount of dice, does encourage the use of the front arc.

There is a difference between 'the front arc is the most powerful' and 'the front arc is powerful because the side batteries are contributing to it'.

How many dice do I get in my front arc if I'm firing everything I've got forward? 3 red dice, 3 blue dice.

Okay, now I've got a target pulling up alongside me, so I want one of my side batteries to blast it - it its own (side) arc of 2 red, 1 blue to the side...and I've still got 3 red, 3 blue forward.

IE., breaking up the arcs in the way they've done means the side batteries aren't contributing to the forward firepower, as they can still fire will full effectiveness off to broadsides with no impact to the forward firepower of the ship.

Read my post above. The VSD has turbolasers mounted on top on either side of the bridge that very obviously can't be turned enough to contribute to the front arc Those are your side arc. You can even see that the arc lines up just about perfectly with how those particular guns could be aimed at an angle.

You have to remember though, you can only fire each arc once. The arc you suggest would only work if you got the enemy aligned exactly in the centre, which while an interesting challenge, would also result in a rather sizable portion of your ship. being able to fire only once. You'd be actively limiting your targeting options by at least 25%

The article notes that a target that DOES cross two arcs (IE., you've aligned your ship so the split goes through the target) allows both arc-batteries to fire at it...so it seems rather like this complexity of 'lining up a shot to get multiple batteries on one target' is specifically something the game is designed to reward as a concept.

Which makes the similarity of arcs across ships...a missed opportunity.

Read my post above. The VSD has turbolasers mounted on top on either side of the bridge that very obviously can't be turned enough to contribute to the front arc Those are your side arc. You can even see that the arc lines up just about perfectly with how those particular guns could be aimed at an angle.

I did, it misses several key points:

• The turbolaser batteries you note are obviously not the ENTIRE side/forward armament, ergo, even if only two of them could contribute at times to the forward firepower (unlikely, see next point), you'd still have some loss either way - firing them to the side instead of forward would reduce the forward firepower, or firing them forward instead of to the side would reduce the side firepower. As it is, all four arcs always have the same value no matter what.
• You've noticed the barrels in these turrets do *elevate*, right? They can shoot over each other...

You have to remember though, you can only fire each arc once. The arc you suggest would only work if you got the enemy aligned exactly in the centre, which while an interesting challenge, would also result in a rather sizable portion of your ship. being able to fire only once. You'd be actively limiting your targeting options by at least 25%

The article notes that a target that DOES cross two arcs (IE., you've aligned your ship so the split goes through the target) allows both arc-batteries to fire at it...so it seems rather like this complexity of 'lining up a shot to get multiple batteries on one target' is specifically something the game is designed to reward as a concept.

Which makes the similarity of arcs across ships...a missed opportunity.

I agree that it's designed to reward positioning and movement, but the ability to fire each arc once also means that any reduction in the amount of arcs is a reduction of firepower when facing multiple enemies. Which the Empire will be doing a lot and with a ship that has to plan out its movement three turns in advance and with very limited turning capability.

From a game design perspective rather than a lore perspective, a trio of arcs with one of the lines on the front seems something much more suited to a more agile ship that will actually have a chance of getting such shots actually fired.

From a game design perspective rather than a lore perspective, a trio of arcs with one of the lines on the front seems something much more suited to a more agile ship that will actually have a chance of getting such shots actually fired.

Right, there is certainly no disagreement that the change makes sense from a 'game design' perspective. Lining up ships on the nose, when you are so much more lumbering than your opponent, must be a real trick, indeed!

But, then, THAT'S THE POINT . That's what makes FLYING a Star Destroyer FEEL like flying a Star Destroyer...you've got a *heck* of a lot more firepower than your enemy, but a real hard time bringing it to bear against smaller, more nimble, enemy ships. Facing a Mon Cal cruiser is *almost* a welcoming sight, as it fights just that little bit more like you do (slow and lumbering), making it more possible to line up the multi-battery shots.

Dealing with that in-universe design decision should be one of the characteristics of flying those large Imperial ships .

Oh, for god's sake, it wasn't "designed" to do anything other than look cool when it zoomed in from off-camera.

Oh, for god's sake, it wasn't "designed" to do anything other than look cool when it zoomed in from off-camera.

And we have a winner

Oh, for god's sake, it wasn't "designed" to do anything other than look cool when it zoomed in from off-camera.

I find your lack of faith... disturbing .

From a game design perspective rather than a lore perspective, a trio of arcs with one of the lines on the front seems something much more suited to a more agile ship that will actually have a chance of getting such shots actually fired.

Right, there is certainly no disagreement that the change makes sense from a 'game design' perspective. Lining up ships on the nose, when you are so much more lumbering than your opponent, must be a real trick, indeed!

But, then, THAT'S THE POINT . That's what makes FLYING a Star Destroyer FEEL like flying a Star Destroyer...you've got a *heck* of a lot more firepower than your enemy, but a real hard time bringing it to bear against smaller, more nimble, enemy ships. Facing a Mon Cal cruiser is *almost* a welcoming sight, as it fights just that little bit more like you do (slow and lumbering), making it more possible to line up the multi-battery shots.

Dealing with that in-universe design decision should be one of the characteristics of flying those large Imperial ships .

But to do so by weakening it's firepower by 25% compared to other ships? I don't know... sounds like a high risk, high reward kind of gameplay. Which Star Destroyers are thematically designed to avoid.

Umm. Easy fix and I'm pretty sure it's already worked into the rules.

It seems that ships only get one shot per turn.

This means that the VSD forward firepower approximately equal to it's two side arcs combined.

Source: the part of the article that says that a ship firing at star fighters isn't firing at something else seems to imply that you only get one shot out of one arc per turn (including point defense)

That fix things?

Oh, for god's sake, it wasn't "designed" to do anything other than look cool when it zoomed in from off-camera.

I disagree.........

I think it was designed to look menacing when it zoomed in from off camera

Umm. Easy fix and I'm pretty sure it's already worked into the rules.

It seems that ships only get one shot per turn.

This means that the VSD forward firepower approximately equal to it's two side arcs combined.

Source: the part of the article that says that a ship firing at star fighters isn't firing at something else seems to imply that you only get one shot out of one arc per turn (including point defense)

That fix things?

No. The article specifies that a ship can make 2 attacks a turn, out of 2 different arcs. However, if it wants to use its anti fighter point defense system, that is 360 and prevents it from making other attacks. So if it is shooting at fighters it can't shoot at other ships.

Oh weird. Why wouldn't that just count as one of the two attacks?

Umm. Easy fix and I'm pretty sure it's already worked into the rules.

It seems that ships only get one shot per turn.

This means that the VSD forward firepower approximately equal to it's two side arcs combined.

Source: the part of the article that says that a ship firing at star fighters isn't firing at something else seems to imply that you only get one shot out of one arc per turn (including point defense)

That fix things?

No. The article specifies that a ship can make 2 attacks a turn, out of 2 different arcs. However, if it wants to use its anti fighter point defense system, that is 360 and prevents it from making other attacks. So if it is shooting at fighters it can't shoot at other ships.

The wording on that is vague though. The article talks about "reduced firepower" and "any shot fired at fighters is a shot not taken at bigger ships", but it doesn't say that a ship shooting one of its attacks at fighters can't fire its second shot at a bigger ship.

The thing about the ships being dagger shaped to concetrate firepower forward is purely an EU reference that doesn't reflect the models in the film. The idea makes sense, but the ships are not designed that way. The large guns actually block each other's line of sight unless the ship does a wierd slight forward dip, which would then preculde the use of the other smaller guns which have very limited firing arcs (going by the gunnery station in Episode IV, which has a tiny window the fire their gun out of). Going by the way the ship is actually designed it would look like they are actually primarily meant to use their briadsides as their main weaponry.

George Lucas actually said that Star Wars ships were actually envisioned to fight like age of sail battleships, ie, sailing (or flying) at close range to each other and exchanging broadsides... actually very like we see in both The Return of Jedi and the Revenge of the Sith.

George Lucas actually said that Star Wars ships were actually envisioned to fight like age of sail battleships, ie, sailing (or flying) at close range to each other and exchanging broadsides... actually very like we see in both The Return of Jedi and the Revenge of the Sith.

...although, curiously, not here - all ships we have data for, at the moment, has slightly more attacks forward than to the broadsides.