The wiki lies LIES!
The wiki is the same page that says its 29m long?
Edited by DodtWhy does the HWK-290 have such low damage?
The wiki lies LIES!
The wiki is the same page that says its 29m long?
Geez according to this illustration, where the heck do they put the cargo? On their laps?
The scale on that one seems closer to the ffg one. I dunno about this whole cargo thing look at the size of the model its no bigger then a y-wing. If anything id say Kyle was the ships cargo and all it did was ferry him from one level to the next. 
Don't think their guns at the back with the offset angle of the engine pods you wouldn't be able to fire straight ahead.
When you talk about a ship like the crow a lot of different cooks have had their fingers in the pot. So we end up with this weird taste.
Edited by DodtI feel like the description of its maneuverability wasn't reflected in the game......
There is the A-wing two-seater, it would line up at least better with that size. Plus a-wings look kinda right for some screen shots of space battles. If anything the Y-wing ought have been a tad bigger. But the models look fine to me either way so meh? A-wing model looks super sexy and am fine with it. But any who yeah, HWK should have been 2 ATK. If nothing else so when your building your squad you could have a decent putter-butt fighter. I'ts annoying to some players, myself included, that I must take the turret tax or just have an awful ship, particularly when I just want some of those pilot abilities in my squad. Y-wings seem to have auto-take turrets but in actuality they could be torpedo boats just as easily and still have some form of kick after that, so I'm really not restricted as much with their build as I am the HWK.
And in one game I was playing, the HWK got critted and the crit discarded the Blaster turret....
Precisely. It has build problems. A week ago I had a full health Keyan kitted out get walked down to 1 hull with Ion before I could force a mistake with barrel roll and get one turn of maneuvering, I got a k turn off the next turn into range 1 and said, "Y'know, I desperately need to roll like straight crits here and hope the turret gets knocked out." *roll dice* hit, crit, crit, crit....AWESOME! He rolls double evade, loses his shield and takes a Direct Hit and accidentally draws the next card anyway, which was Munition Failure. I was so sad to tell him he dealt him self one too many 
Still won so YAY!
That illustration and the captions make the Hawk out to be waaaaaayy the hell better than our game says it is. It compare it's maneuverability as second to A-wings? Surely thou jest!
I'm sure they gave it 1 attack die to keep it from being too much like the Y wing.
What I would love to see is a modification that allows them to extend the range of a turret by 1 when measuring in arc. 
The game really doesn't give a good depiction of the crow, it was shoe horned into this imperial shuttle counter part with its terrible dial. I know the pic is mostly some fan creation but still the thing has like six engines and a cockpit and not much else, should have a bit of go fast. It was given to -spies- so they could get into an empire base and out before they could say "Stop rebel sucm!"
With a name like the hawk it always strikes me as the star wars sports car its got two seats so it fits that role better then "light-freighter". "Personal transport" seems like a better name for it.
The wiki lies LIES!
The wiki is the same page that says its 29m long?
Never seen that before. They classify it here as a "Heavy Fighter" that.....makes much more sense actually. Also say it's pretty agile. Cool. If only FFG reflected that in their meneuver dials.
This one also has most of it covered wheras the FFG model has a lot of exposed stuff like a Y-Wing...
Edited by KingsguardThat illustration, which states the Crow is a heavy fighter as maneuverable as an A-Wing almost, calls it an HWK-270.
Basically the only place I find that ship type mentioned is here in the RpG forums.
The 270 things probably just a typo. Is the crow in any of the ffg rpg books?
IIRC I believe the designers once said they almost regret giving it only 1 attack die and not 2.
Well if anything they should have either given it a 2AD turret instead if a cannon mount, or they should have really actually made it maneuvrable and make it the cheapest cannon ship in the game. It also probably should have had a systems upgrade with all that hardware in its nose section... But oh well it came alongside the B-wing who boasted most of that already, and as a counterpart to the shuttle which maneuvers like a dumptruck. So they were probably hesitant to make a better ship because imperial players would whine again because they got Bomber and Shuttle that wave which is not exactly great to be honest. Still the Hawk does not deserve to be bad just because of a problem in the release plan. And that came into a meta still totally dominated by wave1 Howlrunner Swarms...
Imperial players were also already crying because of turrets back then (and at that time for no **** reason because it was an imperial swarm meta), so the HWK ended up as a "support" ship. In the end all 3 pilot abilities (besides Kyle who is essentially garven dreis with other upgrade possibilities) are really useful. But the ship is utter rubbish. It does not remotely match its description nor does it fit its mission profile. Courier? No too slow! Heavy fighter? Not enough hp and where is the armament.
Oh and the best thing was that Dark Curse was ruled in a way that blaster turrets can not shoot at him. This was probably the single worst ruling FFG ever made. It makes HWK or even HWK plus Y-Wing blaster turret builds impossible. Especially the hawk with blaster got 100% countered by a 16 point ship. Bad idea.
With the BTL-A4 coming i see rebel hawks going nowhere because besides the B, Rebels will have the Y as a good heavy fighter. For Scum it's a bit different. Especially Palob shows great potential and the other pilots are by no means bad. But i'm also a bit sad about it because we will now probaly never see a HWK title, modification or anything that makes it possible to run it as a real heavy fighter.
Edited by ForceMUmm, the HWK and Wave 3 was pretty far along in development when Wave 2 was finally released. All the Falcon complaints were likely to be coming far, far too late. There was only about 3 months between the initial, very short release of Wave 2 and the announcement of Wave 3. The stats were done before the Falcon was readily available to people.
If the unique pilots are useful, how is the ship bad? Pilot abilities can make a ship useful. And if the ship was sooooo bad, why were the 40 pt versions doing quite well at Worlds?
Personally, I think I like the 1 Atk. It makes the ship unique. And I think more ship should require the turret upgrade for turret capabilities.
I admit I would like thee primary attack to be 2 but only because I always lose my turret and nothing is more sad.
Personally, I think I like the 1 Atk. It makes the ship unique. And I think more ship should require the turret upgrade for turret capabilities.
This begs a question: If a ship is meant for a turret, why not build a turret into the ship itself? Not a 360 firing arc but a positive incentive for turrets instead of a negative (the primary is so weak). This would require a special rule card but we see that with the Phantom and cloaking. So make a ship that has 1 attack (because it has to have something) but make it so any turret equipped is -2 cost or something. Otherwise it is meant for a turret but now paying extra for that item it is meant to have. Seems odd.
Personally, I think I like the 1 Atk. It makes the ship unique. And I think more ship should require the turret upgrade for turret capabilities.
This begs a question: If a ship is meant for a turret, why not build a turret into the ship itself? Not a 360 firing arc but a positive incentive for turrets instead of a negative (the primary is so weak). This would require a special rule card but we see that with the Phantom and cloaking. So make a ship that has 1 attack (because it has to have something) but make it so any turret equipped is -2 cost or something. Otherwise it is meant for a turret but now paying extra for that item it is meant to have. Seems odd.
Agreed with R22. This looks like a case where the designers were suppose to give you choices to play with, and then dictated one of them. More on accident then out of any real intent I get the feeling too, to be fair. Sure it's pitiful firepower makes it 'unique', but that isn't really a good thing if all it really means that the ship has one uniquely awful quality. However I'm deeply against any kind of rules that say "when doing X, reduce cost of X by Y for this case" I know a lot of people on this forum like to use really case specific upgrade types for different things in their home brewing but you have to understand the cost of a given upgrade is not linear from ship to ship. So to have a ship that just changes it's own costs is fairly disruptive to the in-built balance mechanics. The Phantom and other's got special rule cards because they were adding something to the game like an action type, not because they were changing point values of upgrades. Very important we remember that difference when we play in the sandbox. 
Having had a few days now to ponder it, they wouldn't have had to make that many different changes to bring it in line with the earlier illustration and description. Like add a 1-turn red, make 3-banks white, give it 3-turn red, and that would have covered it's maneuverability for me. Not good at extended tight or fast maneuvers like the A-wing, but it could do them. Alternatively they could have given it boost and not changed the dial, and it would have been just as in line I think. While still being fairly unique.
For the weapon yeah, I feel it should have been a turret at 2 Firepower (or even 1 firepower if it would have worked, I don't have a bank of playtesters to run it through, whatever), that would line up with stock model characteristics described better. Then the Blaster Turret upgrade would have been a good match for the description about Jan's modifications. Though I also think it's stupid that it costs the Focus token. I'm totally fine with the thematic and mechanic of the "Attack(Focus):" but it's really bad that it requires you to spend that token when for a point more you can get Ion Turrets which are in almost every case, real talk, strictly better. Especially with Dark Curse hanging out in the wings, cheers to ForceM. But then the dynamic fire zone changes of that upgrade slot would have been really cool to design in and around. Even if you just went back and said okay, Blaster Turret goes up to 5pts, stays 3 firepower, stays range 1-2, reads Attack(Focus): Attack one ship (even a ship outside your firing arc). You may spend a Focus token to re-roll one attack die." would have given really cool choices to the player to make, especially considering the Moldy Crow Title. Probably a bit too powerful there but hey, there were options.
All that said, this is a case of hindsight being 20/20. Every good game has growing pains and design mistakes littered through its history. Bad games don't try to ever fix them. FFG is trying fairly hard in their own fashion. I don't know anybody that could have truly known back then what that goof would have meant for the game today. And I'm just as shocked to say this as many will be to hear it, but with this in review, I could see reason in starting up a second edition at some point like many have over time brought up. That might be thirty years from now, but for things like this which will overtime accumulate, I could see the point in doing that. Yeah, when I'm sixty, and the game may have been discontinued some 15-20 years, yeah, alright, lets try making this game again. Or hell, 5 years from today, let's rework some of the old product in a brave new marketing plan. When the time is right, I could see it. I'm going to be barbecued for that opinion, but Socrates was sentenced to death for basically asking too many questions, so whatever.
Okay number one? That illustration is by my buddy Millennium Falsehood. We're both very big fans of the crow.
Number two? Dude the Wiki knows NOOOOTHING about the Crow. All that cargo bollocks? That huge size? Thank the Dark Forces II novelization for that crap.
Holy Necro Captain Lackwit! Where did you dig up such an oil fossil?
7 minutes ago, Khyros said:Holy Necro Captain Lackwit! Where did you dig up such an oil fossil?
OH GOD I DIDN'T EVEN NOTICE THE DATES I'M SO SORRY.
The thing is we can have all the different versions of the HWK explained away if someone took the time to do some relabeling. You have the large frighter description which can be attributed to the HWK-1000 (something FFG made), and give the HWK-290 it's appropriate size (which the model looks about good). Heck, we can give the undersized ship above the HWK-270 name.
6 minutes ago, SabineKey said:The thing is we can have all the different versions of the HWK explained away if someone took the time to do some relabeling. You have the large frighter description which can be attributed to the HWK-1000 (something FFG made), and give the HWK-290 it's appropriate size (which the model looks about good). Heck, we can give the undersized ship above the HWK-270 name.
But that really doesn't make that much sense. You look at the Ford Ranger and the Ford F-150 and the Ford Super Duty and they're all trucks, but different scales, but they all are distinct. They're not just stretched versions of each other. You could perhaps get away with something for the HWK-270 to HWK-290, but going to the super sized HWK-1000 would be like jumping up to a semi. It just doesn't really make sense for it to be the same exact shape.
12 minutes ago, Khyros said:But that really doesn't make that much sense. You look at the Ford Ranger and the Ford F-150 and the Ford Super Duty and they're all trucks, but different scales, but they all are distinct. They're not just stretched versions of each other. You could perhaps get away with something for the HWK-270 to HWK-290, but going to the super sized HWK-1000 would be like jumping up to a semi. It just doesn't really make sense for it to be the same exact shape.
It wouldn't be the exact same, though definitely similar. The cockpit windows would need to be resized, but the same basic shape still works.
Using this official art from the FFG RPG book:
We can already see that while it definitely looks like the 290, there are deferences.
That can be further enhanced like this fan image suggests:
Note how the main body of the 1000 broadens as it goes back.
With some appropriate adjustments, I think the overall HWK style could still work with the size increase.
1 hour ago, Khyros said:But that really doesn't make that much sense. You look at the Ford Ranger and the Ford F-150 and the Ford Super Duty and they're all trucks, but different scales, but they all are distinct. They're not just stretched versions of each other. You could perhaps get away with something for the HWK-270 to HWK-290, but going to the super sized HWK-1000 would be like jumping up to a semi. It just doesn't really make sense for it to be the same exact shape.
You lost me at Ford.
On 12/13/2014 at 6:08 AM, Dagonet said:
That looks like a vehicle straight out of the GI Joe cartoon
Actually.....
http://www.yojoe.com/vehicles/87/slam/
and or
4 hours ago, Captain Lackwit said:Okay number one? That illustration is by my buddy Millennium Falsehood. We're both very big fans of the crow.
Number two? Dude the Wiki knows NOOOOTHING about the Crow. All that cargo bollocks? That huge size? Thank the Dark Forces II novelization for that crap.
Thread Necromancer