OK, here is it:

I won't buy a SSD for Armada even if it would come from FFG because it would be either too large or it would be a joke.

As soon as it would become playable size-wise, it would be a joke.

There is nothing in between. Face it.

nothing for you... But fur many others they could

Would it be ok for you if it would be twice the length of an ISD?

If that were the only option to have a SSD on the table, sure. But I would prefer a 24"-28" version with special setup rules. I see no reason why it can't be made to work.

So... are you guys discussing model or base size?

I pointed this out in last night's Sullust event: In an average game, how much table space of the 6x3 are you actually using? Is it really that implausible to bring in a massive starship about a foot long with a base (regardless of the miniature size), and push it in from the side of the table you're not using? It'll only go about speed one or two, and would almost never turn, but imagine what kind of firing arcs its' going to have and how one would distribute the firepower across them! Massive board control for the sake of eating at least half your list!

It's even less likely to fly off the board than any epic X-Wing ship on the fact that the game is only six turns in length!

I still feel that, as playing pieces, they will be heavily abstracted and scale is not a concern. Because it is a space ship , the Executor is still eligible. We are not trying to jam a space battleship into a game about single-seat fighters, just add a big capital ship to a game about capital ships . We will however never see the Eclipse , or a Torpedo Sphere. Golans may be possible in the future, if armed space stations are ever a thing.

But I will admit that the size of the Star Destroyer "miniature" gives pause to the notion that an SSD can be manufactured, because if it did, it may be the length of most mantelpieces.

Even so I don't think that necessarily precludes seeing one from FFG. How many of you owning Super Star Destroyer lego kits wish you could push it around on tables making pew pew with dice and damage cards? That's about what I would expect about the SSD.

scale is already way off look at the cr90 and the ISD everyone is fine with that. Why are so many people unwilling to compromise on the SSD?

We are.

Your option is

Armada Epic at a 300+ price tag for just the SSD. Then you will have to price the epic movement tools, epic range rulers and cost of painting your FLGS floor black. And the tools aren't for just the SSD, the whole scale of the game will have to be changed.

The ~5" base for large ships is already straining the games scale.

I would buy a SSD at 2' long. I think a base of 18" x 8" would work. Have it for "Epic Play" only , without any tournament legal upgrades so that people didn't have to buy a $150 kit in order to get certain cards. In fact the only new upgrade cards I would probably introduce would be an Emperor Palpatine fleet commander (but restrict him from tournament play).

I would have a max speed of 2, with no yaw joints. Only way to change it's angle would be using a nav command for 1 click. Require that it be deployed touching BOTH the imperial edge and 1 of the short edges (either side), enforcing it to deploy at a vector close to parallel to the long axis of the map to get any use out of it.

I think that would cover most of the "playability" issues. Then just load it up with stats, hull, guns, etc. as you see fit for points cost. Might have an additional "Epic rule" that it has a total of 6 hull zones and can shoot out of up to 3 when it activates.

Scale does not matter.

When are people going to figure out that scale is not the main issue? Those of us against a SSD are not simply saying that it won't work due to scale!

To make it look correct would require the SSD to be over 6 feet long. Sure you could make it smaller, like say 3 feet or even 2 feet. At which point it may look ok on the table but would not look correct.

But even then 2 feet is still too large, it would take up huge chunk of the table, and effectively be in range of everything without having to move. Which is something it really couldn't do, short of moving in a mostly straight line along the long edge. Plus the thing would cost $250.

So once again, the issue isn't scale. The issue is that IMO and the opinion of others the smallest you could make a SSD and have it be anything but stupid looking it still too big.

You're still talking about sizes... I thought the physical dimensions of things is called scale?

Besides if it's only the base you can look to see how there isn't much of a difference between small bases and large bases (and the scale of ships on small bases is also pretty wild between the CR-90 and the Gladiator!). FFG may simply stick three Star Destroyer bases in a line and call that the basis for their SSD, no matter how long the miniature ended up becoming.

Besides, next time you set up an Armada game see if you can find a space to put a two-foot long base in. With a 6x3 playing space, I think you'll find that easier than you are thinking. Especially if you replace a medium or huge ship with that hypothetical two-foot-long base.

A post from a few months ago. A forum member was talking to a FFG emplyee and was told a SSD wasn't in the cards.

Could you dig up that quote, Gonardll?

I think I could if FFG and SSD were allowed search terms.

All I get is "The following search terms are not allowed and were removed from your query: ssd,ffg " I've been trying. And employee isn't doing it for me ether.

OK, here is it:

I won't buy a SSD for Armada even if it would come from FFG because it would be either too large or it would be a joke.

As soon as it would become playable size-wise, it would be a joke.

There is nothing in between. Face it.

nothing for you... But fur many others they could

Would it be ok for you if it would be twice the length of an ISD?

If that were the only option to have a SSD on the table, sure. But I would prefer a 24"-28" version with special setup rules. I see no reason why it can't be made to work.

You could make work anything rule-wise. Put an apple in, give it some rules, and it could work. Thats not the point at all.

I would buy a SSD at 2' long. I think a base of 18" x 8" would work. Have it for "Epic Play" only , without any tournament legal upgrades so that people didn't have to buy a $150 kit in order to get certain cards. In fact the only new upgrade cards I would probably introduce would be an Emperor Palpatine fleet commander (but restrict him from tournament play).

I would have a max speed of 2, with no yaw joints. Only way to change it's angle would be using a nav command for 1 click. Require that it be deployed touching BOTH the imperial edge and 1 of the short edges (either side), enforcing it to deploy at a vector close to parallel to the long axis of the map to get any use out of it.

I think that would cover most of the "playability" issues. Then just load it up with stats, hull, guns, etc. as you see fit for points cost. Might have an additional "Epic rule" that it has a total of 6 hull zones and can shoot out of up to 3 when it activates.

Now, I like the nothing in this up grade is tourny leagle bit. Owning a C3-PO, I still dislike his use in tournoment play. Isn't flipping fair to the general public.

Having baby stuck in the corner is a heck of a problem just to make one ship work and that bridge is still gonna look tiny. AKA,The Thrud effect.

OK, here is it:

I won't buy a SSD for Armada even if it would come from FFG because it would be either too large or it would be a joke.

As soon as it would become playable size-wise, it would be a joke.

There is nothing in between. Face it.

nothing for you... But fur many others they could

Would it be ok for you if it would be twice the length of an ISD?

If that were the only option to have a SSD on the table, sure. But I would prefer a 24"-28" version with special setup rules. I see no reason why it can't be made to work.

You could make work anything rule-wise. Put an apple in, give it some rules, and it could work. Thats not the point at all.

Oh, OH, OH, Can I have the USS Swinetrek?!?! Pleeeeease!!!!!!

Well, you did say apple, and you know, roasted pig ........... And I'll be over here......

I would buy a SSD at 2' long. I think a base of 18" x 8" would work. Have it for "Epic Play" only , without any tournament legal upgrades so that people didn't have to buy a $150 kit in order to get certain cards. In fact the only new upgrade cards I would probably introduce would be an Emperor Palpatine fleet commander (but restrict him from tournament play).

I would have a max speed of 2, with no yaw joints. Only way to change it's angle would be using a nav command for 1 click. Require that it be deployed touching BOTH the imperial edge and 1 of the short edges (either side), enforcing it to deploy at a vector close to parallel to the long axis of the map to get any use out of it.

I think that would cover most of the "playability" issues. Then just load it up with stats, hull, guns, etc. as you see fit for points cost. Might have an additional "Epic rule" that it has a total of 6 hull zones and can shoot out of up to 3 when it activates.

Now, I like the nothing in this up grade is tourny leagle bit. Owning a C3-PO, I still dislike his use in tournoment play. Isn't flipping fair to the general public.

Having baby stuck in the corner is a heck of a problem just to make one ship work and that bridge is still gonna look tiny. AKA,The Thrud effect.

Yeah the bridge of the SSD would look so tiny as well as the engines for a start ... it would just look and feel wrong

I would buy a SSD at 2' long. I think a base of 18" x 8" would work. Have it for "Epic Play" only , without any tournament legal upgrades so that people didn't have to buy a $150 kit in order to get certain cards. In fact the only new upgrade cards I would probably introduce would be an Emperor Palpatine fleet commander (but restrict him from tournament play).

I would have a max speed of 2, with no yaw joints. Only way to change it's angle would be using a nav command for 1 click. Require that it be deployed touching BOTH the imperial edge and 1 of the short edges (either side), enforcing it to deploy at a vector close to parallel to the long axis of the map to get any use out of it.

I think that would cover most of the "playability" issues. Then just load it up with stats, hull, guns, etc. as you see fit for points cost. Might have an additional "Epic rule" that it has a total of 6 hull zones and can shoot out of up to 3 when it activates.

Now, I like the nothing in this up grade is tourny leagle bit. Owning a C3-PO, I still dislike his use in tournoment play. Isn't flipping fair to the general public.

Having baby stuck in the corner is a heck of a problem just to make one ship work and that bridge is still gonna look tiny. AKA,The Thrud effect.

There might be other ways to have it deploy in ways that make sense/are doable. That's just the first thing that comes to mind.

The point is, unlike a star destroyer for X wing (or, really, even a nebulon b), I think it's just on the fringe of doable to have a SSD in Armada.

I just did some quick maths...

ISD to CR90 should be ~ 11x size. In game, it's about 3x size.

SSD to ISD should be ~12x size. At 24", in game, it would be about 3x size.

So we are looking at about the same ratio compression from SSD to ISD, as we are from ISD to CR90.

Hey, i'm not saying it's perfect. I'm just saying I'd buy it :-)

I would buy a SSD at 2' long. I think a base of 18" x 8" would work. Have it for "Epic Play" only , without any tournament legal upgrades so that people didn't have to buy a $150 kit in order to get certain cards. In fact the only new upgrade cards I would probably introduce would be an Emperor Palpatine fleet commander (but restrict him from tournament play).

I would have a max speed of 2, with no yaw joints. Only way to change it's angle would be using a nav command for 1 click. Require that it be deployed touching BOTH the imperial edge and 1 of the short edges (either side), enforcing it to deploy at a vector close to parallel to the long axis of the map to get any use out of it.

I think that would cover most of the "playability" issues. Then just load it up with stats, hull, guns, etc. as you see fit for points cost. Might have an additional "Epic rule" that it has a total of 6 hull zones and can shoot out of up to 3 when it activates.

Now, I like the nothing in this up grade is tourny leagle bit. Owning a C3-PO, I still dislike his use in tournoment play. Isn't flipping fair to the general public.

Having baby stuck in the corner is a heck of a problem just to make one ship work and that bridge is still gonna look tiny. AKA,The Thrud effect.

Yeah the bridge of the SSD would look so tiny as well as the engines for a start ... it would just look and feel wrong

I think the modelers could take some license with the scaling of certain parts in order to get around this problem.

I would buy a SSD at 2' long. I think a base of 18" x 8" would work. Have it for "Epic Play" only , without any tournament legal upgrades so that people didn't have to buy a $150 kit in order to get certain cards. In fact the only new upgrade cards I would probably introduce would be an Emperor Palpatine fleet commander (but restrict him from tournament play).

I would have a max speed of 2, with no yaw joints. Only way to change it's angle would be using a nav command for 1 click. Require that it be deployed touching BOTH the imperial edge and 1 of the short edges (either side), enforcing it to deploy at a vector close to parallel to the long axis of the map to get any use out of it.

I think that would cover most of the "playability" issues. Then just load it up with stats, hull, guns, etc. as you see fit for points cost. Might have an additional "Epic rule" that it has a total of 6 hull zones and can shoot out of up to 3 when it activates.

Now, I like the nothing in this up grade is tourny leagle bit. Owning a C3-PO, I still dislike his use in tournoment play. Isn't flipping fair to the general public.

Having baby stuck in the corner is a heck of a problem just to make one ship work and that bridge is still gonna look tiny. AKA,The Thrud effect.

Yeah the bridge of the SSD would look so tiny as well as the engines for a start ... it would just look and feel wrong

I think the modelers could take some license with the scaling of certain parts in order to get around this problem.

Welllllllll, that might be a problem. The ISD is near flawless and after Sullust some people were going off about it being a distorted piece of crap and I pay good money for this game and I expect blaa blaa blaa .....

Now, you can't see the engines from the top, so they could be left, but making the bridge 4 times larger so it doesn't look silly next to the ISD?!

I'm just going to use my X wing raider. It looks close enough for now.

I thought the physical dimensions of things is called scale?

Then you'd be wrong. Scale is the size of something compared to something else. Size is just size and it's not really relative. Scale is completely relative to other objects.

A 2 foot long SSD wouldn't look stupid next to a 8 inch ISD. But a 2 foot long SSD is not going to work well on a 6x3 table. Seeing how you seem to be confused about what scale actually is... Comparing the size of the SSD to the table has nothing to do with scale, since the table is not a playing piece that you would compare the model to.

I'm just going to use my X wing raider. It looks close enough for now.

I've put mine on the table and it does look pretty good next to the VSD's.

See the thing is, no one is against a SSD persay, our issue is with trying to get the Executor into the game or anything else that's 18km or bigger. FFG could quite easily do the same thing with an SSD they did with the Raider, make a new model that fits.

They've already established that 150-200m is the max size they'd go with for Epic X-Wing which also uses a sliding scale. I'm sure they have done the same with Armada, and a foot to 15 inch long model is the largest they'll do.

In the end, the look of the ship is subjective, but the playability is only tangentially (at best) connected with the feasibility of the ship model. After all, I know someone who believes that the Imperial Star Destroyer is too big. It looks odd on the table when there's 3 of them, and it's really right up there in the realms of a 'toy' rather than a model. But it's also mounted on a 76mm x 129mm base, same as an MC80. The ISD plays perfectly fine despite any misgivings regarding the model itself.

Lets be generous and start the measurement for an SSD base at 2 large and a small base in length: ~ 76mm X 329mm or about 13”. I normally don't chime in with absolutes, but I'll state from experience, that yes, it's perfectly fine to maneuver a unit this size on a 6X3 or a 6X4 tabletop without resorting to anything weird (I'm an End Times Bretonnian player. For those lacking context, look up 'Bretonnian Lance Formation' then make it bigger.) Even without the obvious 'measuring from the rear stand' thing that would effectively alleviate some of the extreme swing of the ship's bulk length, a unit with a footprint of 76X329mm is possible.

Now, I'll say model size isn't completely independent, because we have an offender that bothers me in our current line up: the Gladiator Star Destroyer. It has an awkward overhang given that the model is wider in parts than the base and doesn't taper much from aft to bow. The SSD could have such a problem if they aren't careful. But the GSD problem could have been eased if the stand it was on was physically higher, thus obscuring less of the base. An SSD's profile is super long, so the sides aren't an issue, the stand and the front-to-back length is.

What is our make or break point? What is the full length of a Raider's base? I know it has to be 80mmX160mm minimum, but what are we talking about in profiles where a ship base (IE, the most important playable aspect of the game) becomes objectively unworkable, and then what about the full ship model in comparison with the base itself?

If FFG would come up with a kind of epic format for Armada and a brand new Star Destroyer ( not THE SSD ) in the size of the X-Wing Raider I think this would be ok for me.

But would it be neccessary at this point?

Nope!

I decited to build a Imperator Class SSD it is 5000m long.

On the table it will be around 75cm.

An Executor Class SSD is around four times longer, I get 288cm for that ship. It will be to big for the game.

So I go with the smaller one and use it as Transport case for my ships.

I used a factor of 0.0152 for the imperial ships. If you take the lenghtx0.0152=lenght in cm.

I dont know if I write some rules for the SSD but it will look awesome on the table.

Regards

Scale does not matter.

Scale matters. You would have to 'slide' the scale of the SSD so far that it would look ridiculous just to fit it on the table, and it would STILL be too big for practical play.

Scale does not matter.

Scale matters. You would have to 'slide' the scale of the SSD so far that it would look ridiculous just to fit it on the table, and it would STILL be too big for practical play.

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it.

If it comes in at 24-28" and I will buy it for sure. (That would be a fact.)

I am confident that rules can be made to make it work at that size, and it would look no more ridiculous than the CR90 next to the ISD. (That was another opinion, mixed with a a factual comparison of the Armada sliding scale.)

I do understand your misgivings, I also happen disagree with them. One way or another, I will have a playable SSD on the table, FFG or not.

Top Right: Death Star 3.0 or Torpedo Sphere 2.0 ?

Top Right: Death Star 3.0 or Torpedo Sphere 2.0 ?

I'm really, really hoping that it's not another Death Star . Between the two in the OT, the references/appearances in the PT, and getting the plans being the story for Rouge One , I'm about Death Star-ed out.

Top Right: Death Star 3.0 or Torpedo Sphere 2.0 ?

I guess this confirms that the Finalizer isn't the only FO SD out there, wave 3? Poe Dameron X-wing ace?

Edit: And more death stars

It could be something else, perhaps a starforge-like facility spewing out ships. But it does look like yet another death-star.

I don't think we'll see FO Star Destroyers until... hmm... until we're hearing about Episode VIII? I dunno, there needs to be at least one rebel ship to balance out the FO side I think. Just feels weird to introduce one new ship without a counterpart. Everything in X-Wing was that way after all (Ghost vs Inquisitor TIE, T-70 vs TIE/FO) so there is precedent.

An interesting question would be, if FFG does an SSD, whether we'd see that first or Star Destroyer FO. If I were to bet, I'd probably say the FO actually :\ If not in the same wave!

I have a bad feeling about this...