This is like trying to prove to someone that the Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't real. Irrational beliefs heed no rational argument.

You /can't/ prove the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist. That's not irrational, unless you're referring to rationalism in the philosophical sense, ie as opposed to empiricism.

But back on topic, nobody's being irrational (well, on the ARC-170 side anyway), people are making perfectly rational points and the prequel haters simple refuse to accept any rational point that might allow the object of their hate into the game they love. I blame the dark side. I bet you're all Empire players.

Well we are the good guys of course we are all imperial players you filthy terrorist

No, the message is clear: the game will not include prequel movie ships.

I think mazz0 is aware that such a decision was, in all likelihood, made. He just wants to change it.

And why not. If the game is about the Galactic Civil War and the ARC played a role in that war, then there's enough wiggle room to include it. I won't complain. It's a good looking ship and it would be a shame if FFG bowed to the wishes of fanboys who prefer derivative pulp over actual Star Wars films.

But it didn't play a part the only source that says it was still around was star wars galaxies, if you look at other games it's never seen, force unleashed 2 for example showed y-wings and starchasers being used by the rebels no trace of the arc and that game was made after galaxies.

X-wing, tie fighter, x-wing vs tie, rogue squadron on and on its never mentioned.

The fact is Lucas couldn't accept people hated the prequels so he made Lucas arts push out games based on those movies the majority of which sucked because the dev teams had no passion for it, or they forced the ship's into games they didn't belong in.

Did you just cite a bunch of games released a decade before EP 3 ever came out as an example as to why the ARC shouldnt be included?

How dare they not precognitate enough to take later material into consideration! /endsarcasm

SImply amazing. So basically your argument boils down to "I hate the prequels so you can't be happy with anything from them either. You've offered nothing concrete other than a misquoted statement that we won't see Prequel era ships anytime soon .

Its already been discussed that the Manpower and Intensive ship would be fairly hard for the resource strapped Rbellion to regularly field in any numbers. Which doesn't invalidate it from why it should be included in the game.

I invite you to come up with an actual criticism of why it shouldnt be included. From an actual design perspective.

How does Peterson's statement only preclude prequel release soon and not later? I don't get it.

No, the message is clear: the game will not include prequel movie ships.

I think mazz0 is aware that such a decision was, in all likelihood, made. He just wants to change it.

And why not. If the game is about the Galactic Civil War and the ARC played a role in that war, then there's enough wiggle room to include it. I won't complain. It's a good looking ship and it would be a shame if FFG bowed to the wishes of fanboys who prefer derivative pulp over actual Star Wars films.

But it didn't play a part the only source that says it was still around was star wars galaxies, if you look at other games it's never seen, force unleashed 2 for example showed y-wings and starchasers being used by the rebels no trace of the arc and that game was made after galaxies.

X-wing, tie fighter, x-wing vs tie, rogue squadron on and on its never mentioned.

The fact is Lucas couldn't accept people hated the prequels so he made Lucas arts push out games based on those movies the majority of which sucked because the dev teams had no passion for it, or they forced the ship's into games they didn't belong in.

Did you just cite a bunch of games released a decade before EP 3 ever came out as an example as to why the ARC shouldnt be included?

How dare they not precognitate enough to take later material into consideration! /endsarcasm

SImply amazing. So basically your argument boils down to "I hate the prequels so you can't be happy with anything from them either. You've offered nothing concrete other than a misquoted statement that we won't see Prequel era ships anytime soon .

No i cited examples both pre and post the movies, 2010 force unleashed came out it's set during the early days of the rebellion yet even though revenge came out 5 full years earlier the arc was no where to be seen amongst the rebel forces.

The point is it does not belong.

How does Peterson's statement only preclude prequel release soon and not later? I don't get it.

What part of "there won't be Separatist or Republic factions anytime soon " is unclear? Emphasis on soon. Last time i checked soon wasnt a synonym for never.

No, the message is clear: the game will not include prequel movie ships.

I think mazz0 is aware that such a decision was, in all likelihood, made. He just wants to change it.

And why not. If the game is about the Galactic Civil War and the ARC played a role in that war, then there's enough wiggle room to include it. I won't complain. It's a good looking ship and it would be a shame if FFG bowed to the wishes of fanboys who prefer derivative pulp over actual Star Wars films.

But it didn't play a part the only source that says it was still around was star wars galaxies, if you look at other games it's never seen, force unleashed 2 for example showed y-wings and starchasers being used by the rebels no trace of the arc and that game was made after galaxies.

X-wing, tie fighter, x-wing vs tie, rogue squadron on and on its never mentioned.

The fact is Lucas couldn't accept people hated the prequels so he made Lucas arts push out games based on those movies the majority of which sucked because the dev teams had no passion for it, or they forced the ship's into games they didn't belong in.

Did you just cite a bunch of games released a decade before EP 3 ever came out as an example as to why the ARC shouldnt be included?

How dare they not precognitate enough to take later material into consideration! /endsarcasm

SImply amazing. So basically your argument boils down to "I hate the prequels so you can't be happy with anything from them either. You've offered nothing concrete other than a misquoted statement that we won't see Prequel era ships anytime soon .

No i cited examples both pre and post the movies, 2010 force unleashed came out it's set during the early days of the rebellion yet even though revenge came out 5 full years earlier the arc was no where to be seen amongst the rebel forces.

The point is it does not belong.

See? That's a good example. The point is that they they don't necessarily not belong, its just your opinion that they don't. You have so far used one, maybe 2 actual examples of why, from a lore perspective, why the ARC doesn't belong in the game. All the rest is your personal opinions and feelings, none of which i care about for the purposes of this discussion.

Again, i invite you to refute the ARC's inclusion from a design perspective, as to why the ARC shouldn't be included.

I'll even give you a frame of reference.

Large base, 3 attack 1, defense, 6 hull, 2 shield.

Astromech, Crew, Title, Torpedo, Modification, System Upgrade. Has a forward and rear arc. Actions: TL, Focus,

Title: Tail Gunner. 2 pts. In the combat phase, before declaring an attack from this ship, spend a Focus token to fire out of both arcs. Both arcs are considered primary arcs for the purposes of card effects related to determining arcs of fire.

Give it a dial similar to a y-wing, but with the 4 forward white, and no kturn.

Dpnt ask me points but i'll ball park it at 32ish.

Tell me why this ship would add nothing to the rebel lineup, or why its just plain borken/wrong/terrible. Try not to use an opinion.

And yes, i believe it will be a large base since the wingspan is 22.5 meters and the Wave 6 Aggressor is 20 meteres long and is large base.

Tell me why the Tardis can't be included, not from a lore perspective but a design view.

Tell me why the Tardis can't be included, not from a lore perspective but a design view.

Tell me why the Tardis can't be included, not from a lore perspective but a design view.

"I hate the prequels so you can't be happy with anything from them either."

Tell me why the Tardis can't be included, not from a lore perspective but a design view.

Well im not a Whovian some im not up to date on how exactly it works but i assume it has basic time/space transportaion capabilities yes? Is it impervious to most/any/all forms of damage? Does it have any built in offensive capabilities besides being a set piece on a British sci-fi/melodrama? Are you an insufferable troll? Stop resorting to troll/flamebait tactics whenever you get out manuevered on these forums. Its pathetic.

Tell me why the Tardis can't be included, not from a lore perspective but a design view.

Well im not a Whovian some im not up to date on how exactly it works but i assume it has basic time/space transportaion capabilities yes? Is it impervious to most/any/all forms of damage? Does it have any built in offensive capabilities besides being a set piece on a British sci-fi/melodrama? Are you an insufferable troll? Stop resorting to troll/flamebait tactics whenever you get out manuevered on these forums. Its pathetic.

It's not trolling or flame bait; at least I'm polite enough to not call you pathetic. My point was that lore matters.

Responding to a question with another question, trying to mock my argument is trolling. I'll be polite when you start. Derailing threads is what you have always fallen back on in these kinds of threads. You'll get no further response from me until you decide to be constructive.

I'm sincerely sorry you thought I was mocking you. It was honestly not my intent, only a style of trying to reach people's perspective.

Responding to a question with another question, trying to mock my argument is trolling. I'll be polite when you start. Derailing threads is what you have always fallen back on in these kinds of threads. You'll get no further response from me until you decide to be constructive.

Your definition of trolling is grossly inaccurate and should not be considered valid for the purposes of this discussion.

Have a nice day.

Again, i invite you to refute the ARC's inclusion from a design perspective, as to why the ARC shouldn't be included.

Done already earlier in the thread.

I'm not sure what the argument is about now, are we talking /gameplay/ design or /aesthetic/ design? If the former, I've seen no even remotely good argument as to why it couldn't be an unique and interesting new ship to play with. Lore arguments I understand even if I disagree with them, but how can you argue it wouldn't add something fun and new? Even if it were as simple as a rebel Firespray with astromech slot, that would immediately open up lots of new options (Rebel crew, crew+astromech), throw in firing from both arcs in one turn (suitably costed) and it's even better. In fact has anyone even tried to argue that it wouldn't add something cool, gameplay-wise? All I remember is people saying maybe it should have 2 attack coz of the oldness of the guns (which I obviously disagree with).

The Tardis would be overpowered as a ship regardless of pilot, but with The Doctor I think you'd have a special ability of "Space Magic. You Win". For gameplay purposes I vote against this.

But this ship IS GCW, so it's a moot point

How so? If you're going to refer to an obscure video game or book that no one but fan boys know about and is no longer canon, I think FFG realizes the vast majority will always equate the ship with the prequel movies and nothing else.

And again I ask, what else could Peterson refer to, and for what other purpose, when he said this game is the GCW going way forward? To inform us it's not going backward in time? To inform us it's not going to join with Star Trek? No, the message is clear: the game will not include prequel movie ships.

The TIE Phantom, which is mentioned on this board constantly says hi.

The tardis is from another universe, would people rather see the Enterprise make an appearance too?

Guys, the ARC and by extension most prequel ships can be justified, done it earlier in the thread. No-ones bothered to refute it.

Here's a different, but related, point. Going out on a limb, I'd say Imperial Assault is also about the galactic civil war. Yet it includes the nexu, which is a creature from a prequel film. Ofcourse, nobody said that the nexu *cannot* play a role in the war between empires and rebels, so there is enough justification possible to include it, even without resorting to 'obscure non-canon sources'. Whether these exist is irrelevant; the point is that we can easily accept the nexu because we can assume it did no go extinct right after Attack of the Clones.

But surely the same holds true for the ARC. It didn't instantly disappear when the clone wars were over.

And in the nexu's case, the association with the prequels apparently is no obstacle. I have no idea what insights are behind these decisions.

Also, FFG completely made up new stuff to fit the bill, (cards, the RAIDER) and I AM OK WITH THIS!

The only reason it could be argued that the ARC should not be in this game is its age. Why would either side use this old fighter when they have their more advanced X-wings and TIE Fighters? Just look at the stats on the Z-95 to see how age affects a ships design in this game. Likewise, we're not likely to see any Hapan ships for the same reason (unless the idea of firing your 1 dice primary weapon once per game is appealing to you ).

Also, wouldn't the ARC be an Imperial ship rather than a Rebel ship? It was fielded by New Republic forces, not the separatists so it should belong with the Empire.

But surely the same holds true for the ARC. It didn't instantly disappear when the clone wars were over.

No they stayed in imperial service for five years as the tie fighter was developed and brought in then got junked, why? because it was far cheaper to produce and service the frankly disposable tie fighter than a now obsolete ship.

rebels would not get the arc the only 100% canon source clearly shows republic ships in imperial hands.

The only reason it could be argued that the ARC should not be in this game is its age. Why would either side use this old fighter when they have their more advanced X-wings and TIE Fighters? Just look at the stats on the Z-95 to see how age affects a ships design in this game. Likewise, we're not likely to see any Hapan ships for the same reason (unless the idea of firing your 1 dice primary weapon once per game is appealing to you ).

Also, wouldn't the ARC be an Imperial ship rather than a Rebel ship? It was fielded by New Republic forces, not the separatists so it should belong with the Empire.

The Z-95's age isn't the problem, they just designed ships with different priorities. Bigger, tougher, heavier weaponry, subsequently more expensive. The ARC-170 was in the other direction. Come on, we're already had the "Star Wars tech is a flat line" discussion.

Yes we have and i have to explain one more time that KotoR looked like the OT for financial reasons as a directive from the publishers i'll punch a kitten.

The only reason it could be argued that the ARC should not be in this game is its age. Why would either side use this old fighter when they have their more advanced X-wings and TIE Fighters? Just look at the stats on the Z-95 to see how age affects a ships design in this game. Likewise, we're not likely to see any Hapan ships for the same reason (unless the idea of firing your 1 dice primary weapon once per game is appealing to you ).

Also, wouldn't the ARC be an Imperial ship rather than a Rebel ship? It was fielded by New Republic forces, not the separatists so it should belong with the Empire.

The Heavy Scyk is older and you see it in the game.