The ARC-170 seems perfect for a pirate ship, fast and agile enough to escape larger ships, adaptable, rugged, and most importantly packs the punch to take down freighters quickly. The only thing that might make it hard is original parts, but Scum doesn't care about that.

Parts would be an issue, but doesn't it have a pretty bad crew requirement?

To be clear, I'd like it regardless (though I'd rather have V-Wings)

I think the crew requirement is a non-issue. Pirates and smugglers are clearly also taking freighters like the YT-1300, and patrol ships like Slave II, etc. The three-man crew on the ARC is hardly prohibitive. Plus, it seems like it might be easy to squeeze in some cargo capacity. It's also something that has the size to be highly modifiable with illicit weapons and upgrades, and it packs the punch necessary to quickly disable large freighters, which would be the real targets of most pirates.

I'm sure I mentioned the stuka in this topic too. It's what the ARC reminded me of.

At any rate the following must be held as true:

Until the game is rendered out of print, there is always a realistic chance that a prequel era ship wave may exist.

Unless someone can concrete tell the future and say there isn't then it's a possibility.

Look at TFA ships. In order for TFA to be added new factions and ships will need to be added ideally being incompatible with previous GCW waves.

They are realistically more likely than prequel era ships, I suspect no-one here will seriously argue with me over that.

Eventually someone is going to have prequel nostalgia and it's probably going to get greenlit. Maybe a year from now, maybe on TPMs 20th anniversary. **** that's only what? 4 years down the line?

Would you care to make a wager about the inclusion of the N-1 or ARC-170 into this version of XMG?

The ARC-170 seems perfect for a pirate ship, fast and agile enough to escape larger ships, adaptable, rugged, and most importantly packs the punch to take down freighters quickly. The only thing that might make it hard is original parts, but Scum doesn't care about that.

Parts would be an issue, but doesn't it have a pretty bad crew requirement?

To be clear, I'd like it regardless (though I'd rather have V-Wings)

3 Person crew, not that bad really. The forward gunner is optional. I would probably represent it with a rear arc (2 dice) and a crew option. The parts are the iffiest part, but that is more than explainable by Outlaw Techs and so forth. Hell, people put new parts in starfighters all the time (see Modifications/Illicit).

I'm sure I mentioned the stuka in this topic too. It's what the ARC reminded me of.

At any rate the following must be held as true:

Until the game is rendered out of print, there is always a realistic chance that a prequel era ship wave may exist.

Unless someone can concrete tell the future and say there isn't then it's a possibility.

Look at TFA ships. In order for TFA to be added new factions and ships will need to be added ideally being incompatible with previous GCW waves.

They are realistically more likely than prequel era ships, I suspect no-one here will seriously argue with me over that.

Eventually someone is going to have prequel nostalgia and it's probably going to get greenlit. Maybe a year from now, maybe on TPMs 20th anniversary. **** that's only what? 4 years down the line?

Would you care to make a wager about the inclusion of the N-1 or ARC-170 into this version of XMG?

As replied in the other topic about this: How? the possibility exists until the game goes out of print.

It is literally possible until proven impossible.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the ARC's guns are probably more powerful than the TIE fighter's. That doesn't make them more effective for the air to air role (or space to space in this case), it just means that shot per shot they deliver more punch. TIE fighter laser canons seem to me to have an extremely high cyclic rate, both in the movies and in the games. The ARC doesn't seem to possess that high cyclic rate at all. I think what we're dealing with is something akin to the comparison of cannons vs machine guns in WW2.

I would compare the ARC-170's guns to something like the Ju-87G-2 Stuka dive bomber from WW2. It had twin 37mm cannons slung under the wings for tank-busting. They were heavy, slow-firing, and made the roll response on the aircraft extremely sluggish, but they hit like trucks. They weren't suited for the air-to-air role though, because the cyclic rate was too low to get enough of a scatter pattern in the air to actually hit anything. You'd have to be super lucky to hit another plane with the G-2s cannons, except maybe a bomber.

The TIE fighter, by contrast, uses a high-cyclic rate weapon, more like the US .50 Cal from WW2, or if you want to give them a tech boost, more like the high cyclic rate 20mm cannons found on aircraft in later years.

Edit: oh, or just "when targeting a ship with agility of one or less"?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the ARC's guns are probably more powerful than the TIE fighter's. That doesn't make them more effective for the air to air role (or space to space in this case), it just means that shot per shot they deliver more punch. TIE fighter laser canons seem to me to have an extremely high cyclic rate, both in the movies and in the games. The ARC doesn't seem to possess that high cyclic rate at all. I think what we're dealing with is something akin to the comparison of cannons vs machine guns in WW2.

I would compare the ARC-170's guns to something like the Ju-87G-2 Stuka dive bomber from WW2. It had twin 37mm cannons slung under the wings for tank-busting. They were heavy, slow-firing, and made the roll response on the aircraft extremely sluggish, but they hit like trucks. They weren't suited for the air-to-air role though, because the cyclic rate was too low to get enough of a scatter pattern in the air to actually hit anything. You'd have to be super lucky to hit another plane with the G-2s cannons, except maybe a bomber.

The TIE fighter, by contrast, uses a high-cyclic rate weapon, more like the US .50 Cal from WW2, or if you want to give them a tech boost, more like the high cyclic rate 20mm cannons found on aircraft in later years.

OMG, did you just come up with an amazing new mechanic - a ship which has increased attack when targeting large and huge based ships?! Take that Fat Hans and Decimators!

Edit: oh, or just "when targeting a ship with agility of one or less"?

aaaaaaaand ordnance is now fixed.

I'm sure I mentioned the stuka in this topic too. It's what the ARC reminded me of.

At any rate the following must be held as true:

Until the game is rendered out of print, there is always a realistic chance that a prequel era ship wave may exist.

Unless someone can concrete tell the future and say there isn't then it's a possibility.

Look at TFA ships. In order for TFA to be added new factions and ships will need to be added ideally being incompatible with previous GCW waves.

They are realistically more likely than prequel era ships, I suspect no-one here will seriously argue with me over that.

Eventually someone is going to have prequel nostalgia and it's probably going to get greenlit. Maybe a year from now, maybe on TPMs 20th anniversary. **** that's only what? 4 years down the line?

I can't concrete tell you that, but I also can't concrete tell you that they won't do a My Little Pony wave.

You can only analyse probabilities.

aaaaaaaand ordnance is now fixed.

You thinking apply that rule to all ordnance?

Exactly.

TFA = more likely than prequel wave.

Prequel wave more likely to happen eventually than not depending on how long the game goes actively in print for.

See my rather flippant comment which you quoted about 20th year anni of the prequels being within 4 years.

aaaaaaaand ordnance is now fixed.

You thinking apply that rule to all ordnance?

I've been saying it for ages. Torps are primarily anti big ship.

The ARC-170 seems perfect for a pirate ship, fast and agile enough to escape larger ships, adaptable, rugged, and most importantly packs the punch to take down freighters quickly. The only thing that might make it hard is original parts, but Scum doesn't care about that.

Parts would be an issue, but doesn't it have a pretty bad crew requirement?

To be clear, I'd like it regardless (though I'd rather have V-Wings)

3 Person crew, not that bad really. The forward gunner is optional. I would probably represent it with a rear arc (2 dice) and a crew option. The parts are the iffiest part, but that is more than explainable by Outlaw Techs and so forth. Hell, people put new parts in starfighters all the time (see Modifications/Illicit).

See my rather flippant comment which you quoted about 20th year anni of the prequels being within 4 years.

Jesus, I can't believe that's true!

See my rather flippant comment which you quoted about 20th year anni of the prequels being within 4 years.

Jesus, I can't believe that's true!

Yeah tell me about it...

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2015/9/4/man-your-ships/

Well, I think everyone must now admit that the time difference is not the blocker certain people have asserted it to be.

Galactic Civil War and forward?

Galactic Civil War and forward?

Already been debated a thousand times, no point rehashing that. Besides, since the announcment of a certain pair of quite hideous EU ships I've taken that as the clearest indication that FFG isn't interested in prequel ships however well designed, but the time gap argument is clearly out.

Even if they were Disney is fully aware of how hated the prequels are and would block any product based on them.

Depends on what Disney wants and what FFG will do. If Disney thinks they can increase sales by releasing products from the (infamous) prequels movies than you can count on the N-1 and Droid Fighters coming out in the (not so near) future. It is obvious with Rebels and Episode 7 though I think Disney wants the game to focus on Disney produced Star Wars products. It is most likely Disney views these products as means to sell tickets at the box office generating hype and interest in a movie that has yet to be finished instead of the other way around.

Even if they were Disney is fully aware of how hated the prequels are and would block any product based on them.

That's not remotely true. I was watching the feed on StarWars.com yesterday when it started in Australia, the prequels were all over it.

Even if they were Disney is fully aware of how hated the prequels are and would block any product based on them.

That's not remotely true. I was watching the feed on StarWars.com yesterday when it started in Australia, the prequels were all over it.

Besides, Clone Wars is very well regarded.

Is it? Only place I hear it mentioned is these forums.

Know what is liked the 2D version, then revenge ruined grevious.

Is it? Only place I hear it mentioned is these forums.

So I'm told, I haven't seen it myself (and the art style really puts me off, same with Rebels), but people who have tell me it's very good.

I thought Grevious was alright. If you're going to get your body replaced with robot parts why restrict yourself to a boring humanoid structure like Palpatine did for Vader?

To be fair the TCW series was well liked. 5 seasons before cancellation and then a sequel series is nothing to sniff at, even if you don't hear about it.

Same old thread. Same faces, different part of the year.