I doubt a semi-shoehorned in prequel ship would be the one to have revoluntionary mechanics. It'd be more like a slower, slighty tougher X-wing (assuming in date tech.)

I suspect that's just your dislike for the ship speaking, FFG will do whatever fits, both thematically and in gameplay. Besides, it's nothing new, really - we already have rear arcs, ships that can fire their primary and secondary weapons in one turn and upgrades unique to one ship, it's just a new combination of existing ideas. Like most ideas are, in fact.

I also share your criticism that a bunch of ships (particularly the two TIEs I mentioned) are derivative, but I have some sympathy with their designers, as the Interceptor and Advanced both looked just as derivative of the Fighter, so I dunno.

I always thought those ships looked fine, because they are supposed to be derivative of the Tie Fighter... I mean a Tie that looks like a Colonel Viper, or something from Robotech just would make no sense.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I think what kinda bothered me was the idea that making a new TIE craft just means cutting the wings up into ever smaller pieces. Perhaps I'm being unfair though.

Yet you pick the ships I dislike most from the prequels.

Yeah, I was pretty sure that was the case.

I grant you that the paint job on the Naboo fighters is pretty lame. Yellow, WTF? But the design itself is pretty cool looking. Any miniatures for it would just get automatic priority for repaints.

They've [the Defender and Phantom] grown on me since I got the minis though, as have all the ships I didn't like before (hated the look of the HWK in the previews, love the model!).

Yet you pick the ships I dislike most from the prequels.

Yeah, I was pretty sure that was the case.

I grant you that the paint job on the Naboo fighters is pretty lame. Yellow, WTF? But the design itself is pretty cool looking. Any miniatures for it would just get automatic priority for repaints.

It made sens to introduce a new style though, when we were no longer dealing with Rebel Alliance and Galactic Empire.

Saying that Legends is still canon sounds a bit too nonsensical to me.

Legends is not canon, it was never really canon in the first place when it was the EU. George may of used parts of it in the movies, but the movies and latter the clone wars show trumped everything in the EU.

By any reasonable meaning of the word Canon, the EU was never canon, since it was always subject to being trumped anytime George wanted to do something different.

He was saying that anything in Legends can be brought into canon.

Again that was always true. Honestly the switch from EU to Legends was a fairly big todo over nothing. There was 2 things that really happened.

The EU was renamed, but it's status never really changed.

From that point forward everything is considered Canon.

I will state again however, we are likely to find huge chucks of Legends wiped out with Eps 7, because IMO at least, anything that isn't at least implied should be considered non-canon.

For example, if there's no mention of the return of Emperor Palpatine, then pretty much every book that featured him is now non-canon. Some small parts of those books may be used, but the story by and large is wiped out.

There's no real way to reconcile the majority of a story when one of the main characters no longer exists.

I think what kinda bothered me was the idea that making a new TIE craft just means cutting the wings up into ever smaller pieces.

That or sticking more wings on it.

But consider the Chevy Corvette, pick any 5 model years and you'll see a car that looks fairly similar. Take the 68, 72, 84, 95 and 2010 models, and you have 5 cars that may look different but are all stylistically the same. Having a line of ships designed by the same company, you'd more or less expect them to look similar.

Again that was always true. Honestly the switch from EU to Legends was a fairly big todo over nothing. There was 2 things that really happened.

The EU was renamed, but it's status never really changed.

From that point forward everything is considered Canon.

I will state again however, we are likely to find huge chucks of Legends wiped out with Eps 7, because IMO at least, anything that isn't at least implied should be considered non-canon.

For example, if there's no mention of the return of Emperor Palpatine, then pretty much every book that featured him is now non-canon. Some small parts of those books may be used, but the story by and large is wiped out.

Agreed. Legends just sounds like a more marketable name for reprinted material. Also, as a scholar of the European Union, the acronym EU has already been claimed in my mind, so I'm happy to see the word 'Legends'. Also, while we're stiill debating the finer points of it, it at least forced them to state policy on the matter.

Anyway, most of this only really matters for those of us engaged in RPGs or near-RPGs. For my own sake, I like to set my stories right after RotJ, in which the characters can make their own future and not be hamstrung by the EU/Legends. However, I will try to incorporate the things from the EU, even if I am forced to discard events from the EU.

I like the idea of the 2 fire arcs, hows this?

new action for action bar = " Gunner" action, allows you to fire out of your primary arc and secondary arc.

Yet you pick the ships I dislike most from the prequels.

Yeah, I was pretty sure that was the case.

I grant you that the paint job on the Naboo fighters is pretty lame. Yellow, WTF? But the design itself is pretty cool looking. Any miniatures for it would just get automatic priority for repaints.

It made sens to introduce a new style though, when we were no longer dealing with Rebel Alliance and Galactic Empire.

It did, and I did get to appreciate the retro pulp look of the ships more. Notably in the case of the Bellabub-22, the N1 and the B22 largely hark to the comic books and TV of bygone years (what the 30s?) and have a very art deco look about them.

I'll agree with Forgottenlore that yeah, it's probably the bling gold covering that turned me off the most.

The only feasible role I see for the ARC-170 is to serve as a dual-arc tank. Only 2 attack leaves it as a very lacking attack craft or heavy fighter, but having more hull than an X-wing and an auxiliary arc could well give it a place.

I like the idea of the 2 fire arcs, hows this?

new action for action bar = " Gunner" action, allows you to fire out of your primary arc and secondary arc.

Fire during the activation phase?

For people saying that the prequel ships are too old to be effective, you guys are aware that the z95 is older than the ARC 170 right?

It's nowhere near comparing a spitfire to an F16, it's comparing an F4 Phantom to an F16.

For people saying that the prequel ships are too old to be effective, you guys are aware that the z95 is older than the ARC 170 right?

It's nowhere near comparing a spitfire to an F16, it's comparing an F4 Phantom to an F16.

By my reading, only Black Knight Leader and TIE Pilot are making the case for the ARC 170 being outdated, but I don't think they're actually saying that it's too outdated to be included in this game.

On a different, more personal, note:

I was given a warning for my post on pg. 3 of this thread, where I called mazz0 a loser. I have already sent him an apology for this, if he felt offended. I was copy and pasting the comment directly from his OP, to poke fun at those people whom he would expect to call him a loser. By copy and pasting his words directly, I thought that I would be immune to being taken as making an authentic case that he is/was a loser - especially where I agreed with him about how it would be cool if they did include the ARC 170. I guess this was not the case, and the lack of tone in text probably made someone misunderstand my meaning.

EDIT: The mod heard my appeal, and I have been given clemency.

I was given a warning for my post on pg. 3 of this thread, where I called mazz0 a loser. I have already sent him an apology for this, if he felt offended. I was copy and pasting the comment directly from his OP, to poke fun at those people whom he would expect to call him a loser. By copy and pasting his words directly, I thought that I would be immune to being taken as making an authentic case that he is/was a loser - especially where I agreed with him about how it would be cool if they did include the ARC 170. I guess this was not the case, and the lack of tone in text probably made someone misunderstand my meaning.

EDIT: The mod heard my appeal, and I have been given clemency.

Wasn't me, I'm used to being called names, it's an inevitable consequence of always being right when so many other people are wrong

Perhaps whoever did it just wanted to draw the mod's attention to this thread, so that they'd pass on the message and make us an ARC-170?

Did it work, FFG? <hopeful face>

Anyway, they cite Star Wars Galaxies a source, and I doubt anyone here would be willing to go and investigate that first hand even if it were still possible, so good look refuting it!

The only "canon" per Disney is now the Movies, the Clone Wars TV show, Rebels, and anything released since the license was taken by Disney, meaning that Galaxies (from way back in the early 2000's) is not canon. However, starwars.com's databank is canon, and if you look at the ARC-170 entry, it's affiliation is strictly "Galactic Republic." To look at a comparison, the Y-Wing's affiliation is "Rebel Alliance, Galactic Republic, Rebel Pilots" - meaning that the ARC-170 only saw action during the Clone Wars, so it wouldn't be valid for Rebel or Imperial pilots.

That said, I'm sorry for it, as I really like the ARC-170 a lot.

Anyway, they cite Star Wars Galaxies a source, and I doubt anyone here would be willing to go and investigate that first hand even if it were still possible, so good look refuting it!

The only "canon" per Disney is now the Movies, the Clone Wars TV show, Rebels, and anything released since the license was taken by Disney, meaning that Galaxies (from way back in the early 2000's) is not canon. However, starwars.com's databank is canon, and if you look at the ARC-170 entry, it's affiliation is strictly "Galactic Republic." To look at a comparison, the Y-Wing's affiliation is "Rebel Alliance, Galactic Republic, Rebel Pilots" - meaning that the ARC-170 only saw action during the Clone Wars, so it wouldn't be valid for Rebel or Imperial pilots.

That said, I'm sorry for it, as I really like the ARC-170 a lot.

No reason that can't be changed! The Raider is now 'canon', if FFG introduce an updated ARC-170 that'll be canon too

Space Pirates will use whatever they feel like will get the job done. It's part of being a Pirate, like flying the Jolly Roger.

If you've got an easy going group that you play with, you could get the ARCs from Mels Minis on shapeways and put them in that way.

One problem may be how you base the ships. Would you use a standard fighter base and just deal with the ARCs wings bumping into other ships at close range? Would you go for a large ship base so the wings don't over lap but then have a fighter with a large ship movement profile? The ships on Mels have a base that is large ship wide but small ship long, that gives you a large ship movement profile when performing barrel rolls. Also how do you then set the fire arc with that base? Center to corners on the wider base gives you a larger coverage for your fire arc for example.

My opinion based on what has come out of FFG so far is that we won't see the ARC-170 showing up in X-wing.

Because both Disney and the current target audience seem to both want to steer clear of the prequels (because JarJar), they will decide not to go there.

That's blatantly untrue. It's because Jar-Jar and because midichlorians.

Legends is a catch-all term for stuff that is outside of the sources of canon. It may become canon if Lucasfilm decides to pull it out of the closet. Once Lucasfilm does that, it's no longer Legends, and has become canon. So, in that sense, Canon and Legends is distinct from one another

I think there should be a third category - stuff that's been ditched by having canon override it.

That's my reading of how things as well, including the category of things-stuffed-down-the-memory-hole. It's empty now, as far as I know, but (as an example) the Yuuzhan Vong are pretty clearly on the chopping block.

I totally agree with you about the internet fashionability of savaging the prequels. Sometimes it seems like whoever comes up with the most extreme attack on the PT expects to win a prize of some sort.

They weren't unutterably execrable, and they made a lot of money (and therefore succeeded from one important perspective).

But they were pretty bad.

(Although, I do grant you that the EU does contain far worse ships. We are nowhere near scraping the bottom of that barrel yet).

I give you the Hornet Interceptor , one of Kevin Anderson's many valuable gifts to the Star Wars universe.

I doubt a semi-shoehorned in prequel ship would be the one to have revoluntionary mechanics. It'd be more like a slower, slighty tougher X-wing (assuming in date tech.)

I suspect that's just your dislike for the ship speaking, FFG will do whatever fits, both thematically and in gameplay. Besides, it's nothing new, really - we already have rear arcs, ships that can fire their primary and secondary weapons in one turn and upgrades unique to one ship, it's just a new combination of existing ideas. Like most ideas are, in fact.

I feel like the overall design space is narrowing a bit--that is, a lot of the things to explore in the existing design space have already been mined. Regardless of the source material, I think most of the stuff coming out in the next couple of years is going to have to do something different or break out a new trick in order to add something to the game.

A ship with different Attack values in the front and rear arc would be a bit fiddly from a "how do we indicate that on the card and ship base" perspective, but it's actually pretty solid from a design standpoint.

Anyway, most of this only really matters for those of us engaged in RPGs or near-RPGs. For my own sake, I like to set my stories right after RotJ, in which the characters can make their own future and not be hamstrung by the EU/Legends. However, I will try to incorporate the things from the EU, even if I am forced to discard events from the EU.

Personally, I like to set RPG stories somewhere in a timeline that starts some hazy handful of years BBY and ends sharply at the establishment of the Rebel base on Hoth. Lots of intrigue, clear good guys and badguys (but enough smugglers, mercenaries, and conscience-stricken Imperial operatives for some gray if you want your game to lean that way), and relatively few established heroes and major world events hanging around.

...but my second -favorite RPG timeline is actually mid-Clone-Wars. To me there's a sort of elegiac feeling to that period: it's the end of the grand old order, like late-Renaissance Europe giving way to the Industrial Revolution. It's also an opportunity for dramatic irony on a large scale, if you like that sort of thing (and I do): the GM and players all know that tyrannical fascism is just about to replace everything around them, but the characters literally shouldn't be able to imagine what it would be like to experience the fall of the Republic.

I was on Mikael's side: wouldn't mind (in the specific and narrow case of the ARC-170), but I wouldn't get my hopes up. But I'm powerless to resist the kitten.

If any prequel ship is going to make it in it should actually be the N1

The rebellion began on Naboo, the ship was used during the early years of the rebellion, its in some of the video games and its seen in RotJ at the end, proving its still in service during the rebellion era.

Kitten also says that although he doesn't much care for the Assault Gunboat himself, he'd like to see it in the game because he knows it would make a lot of other kittens happy.

Space Pirates will use whatever they feel like will get the job done. It's part of being a Pirate, like flying the Jolly Roger.

I can't hear mention of pirates and not think:

I doubt a semi-shoehorned in prequel ship would be the one to have revoluntionary mechanics. It'd be more like a slower, slighty tougher X-wing (assuming in date tech.)

I suspect that's just your dislike for the ship speaking, FFG will do whatever fits, both thematically and in gameplay. Besides, it's nothing new, really - we already have rear arcs, ships that can fire their primary and secondary weapons in one turn and upgrades unique to one ship, it's just a new combination of existing ideas. Like most ideas are, in fact.

I've no problem with the ARC, I just think it's outdated in the GCW era.

I doubt a semi-shoehorned in prequel ship would be the one to have revoluntionary mechanics. It'd be more like a slower, slighty tougher X-wing (assuming in date tech.)

I suspect that's just your dislike for the ship speaking, FFG will do whatever fits, both thematically and in gameplay. Besides, it's nothing new, really - we already have rear arcs, ships that can fire their primary and secondary weapons in one turn and upgrades unique to one ship, it's just a new combination of existing ideas. Like most ideas are, in fact.

I've no problem with the ARC, I just think it's outdated in the GCW era.

The Z-95 was made before the Invasion of Naboo yet you're ok with that being included?

Going by WOTC's Starships of the Galaxy book the ARC 170 has stats very similar to the x wing, except speed and maneuverability (same guns, even though its only got two laser cannons they hit hard) Most of the systems stuff are handled by astromechs and what isn't can be easily upgraded so that fits fine