The thing is, how do you point something like that even partially appropriately?

Sorry but I see those pictures above and that scale of an executor sucks as far as looks go.

I know you guys "Want It" but that is not a good reason for it if it makes the game imbalanced. I just can't see it and that is that. So dream on but I hope for all our sake it remains a dream because the reality would not be as cool as you might think.

I think at this point nothing would ever make you see it as anything but a bad idea. As you are so set against it, we know that. You do not need to keep telling us that, there have been lots of people who think it can work, your keep "disproving" them with you opinion. My opinion is that it would look fine at that scale, it is imposable to disprove an opinion, I do not say it would work as I do not know what stats he is going to end up using. I do think that the six shield zones could work.

Well this thread is 46 pages long and nothing being said now is new or interesting. The most interesting pages were way back in the first 12 pages when we covered EVERYTHING! So if you guys continue with a pointless thread I will continue to state my opinions because of you guys are going to be stubborn so should those on the opposite end of the discussion.

Go back and read the topic from page one and tell me that the last thirty some pages have not been a waste of people's time. It's rediculous and mirrors the ISD threads on the X-Wing forum. So I will keep it up as long as this rediculous thread spews the same argument that was concluded 8 months ago.

Sorry but I see those pictures above and that scale of an executor sucks as far as looks go.

I know you guys "Want It" but that is not a good reason for it if it makes the game imbalanced. I just can't see it and that is that. So dream on but I hope for all our sake it remains a dream because the reality would not be as cool as you might think.

I think at this point nothing would ever make you see it as anything but a bad idea. As you are so set against it, we know that. You do not need to keep telling us that, there have been lots of people who think it can work, your keep "disproving" them with you opinion. My opinion is that it would look fine at that scale, it is imposable to disprove an opinion, I do not say it would work as I do not know what stats he is going to end up using. I do think that the six shield zones could work.

Go back and read the topic from page one and tell me that the last thirty some pages have not been a waste of people's time. It's rediculous and mirrors the ISD threads on the X-Wing forum. So I will keep it up as long as this rediculous thread spews the same argument that was concluded 8 months ago.

Also this thread feels less of a "let's get hypothetical" and more players try to coerce FFG into making not just a SSD but The Executor itself. Just like the ISD thread it get old because people exclaim "they have to make it!" like it's an ultimatum. That's what I really find annoying, the constant demand for a ship that would not fit into the game but if we keep it up they will have to shoehorn it in just to shut up the masses feel. It didn't work for the ISD and I doubt any of you will sway FFG with this daydream.

Bla, bla, bla, it will break the game because... reasons. Bla, bla, bla, I'm right and you are wrong because... reasons. You are all a bunch of fanboys who want to break the game just because you want a SSD. I will spam this thread until you admit I was right.

Wait a second. You have swayed me with your eloquent argument based on a solid hypothesis, backed up wit facts and examples.

Nope, it is gone. I will have a SSD, one way or another.

Now I really hope FFG makes one so this can turn into a rage-quit thread!

I can be snarky and argumentative too.

You know I doubt they will though Cynan, I dont personally mind but if we want them were probably going to have to make them ourselves.

Much like Vykes, and I have plans too. Mel Mentioned something I think as well.

... so a super laser eh?

I've never liked any of the whole 'ship removal' mechanic, but I guess depending on how many sections you built your ship into, sacrificing or having to outright 'synch' individual command dials and forgo firing any other weapons might be alright for a 'ovewhelming force, can not use defense tokens' sort of thing. Really I have zero idea of how to implement something like that given how crazy strong it is.

But creativity and approaching even an insurmountable problem is still a fun task. No idea how to point it, no idea how to build it, but I can always try. If FFg makes it, they make it, if they don't, they don't. If I fail, I fail, and if I succeed, then I'll have a fun with it in the Ceknell story.

"You've gotta' accentuate the positive
Eliminate the negative
And latch on to the affirmative
Don't mess with Mister In-Between"

I have a 36" long resin model of the Executor. So I figure that is as close I can get to a table top version, So I have 12 squadrons for it,

6 x TIE Squadrons, ( 1 x Darth Vader) , 3 x TIE Interceptor (181st Fighter Wing,With Soontir Fel) 3 x TIE Bomber, With Major Rhymer.

I figure, instead of taking about it, I bought one, it is not perfect scale, but who cares

Bla, bla, bla, it will break the game because... reasons. Bla, bla, bla, I'm right and you are wrong because... reasons. You are all a bunch of fanboys who want to break the game just because you want a SSD. I will spam this thread until you admit I was right.

Wait a second. You have swayed me with your eloquent argument based on a solid hypothesis, backed up wit facts and examples.

Nope, it is gone. I will have a SSD, one way or another.

Now I really hope FFG makes one so this can turn into a rage-quit thread!

I can be snarky and argumentative too.

And I will never rage quit Armada, but if FFG did give in and gave us a matchbox version of the Executor I will purchase the model for my self and will never play an Epic Game because they will have to limit that thing to certain size of games with new rules.

What can I say, I am an old Star Wars fan that hated the idea of mocking the Executor with a shoddy model just to make a few people happy.

If this isn't a pressure thread then let them bring new ideas in and focus one the new ideas but I doubt there are any new ideas. So why the hell is there forty some pages of the same idea when it has been shown conclusively that if you made an Executor it would be only 15% at the most of its size and its fire power would only be 10% of its actual fire power just so it doesn't wipe out the opponent in two turns. That to me is a mockery of the original ship. I have even said bring in a smaller SSD but no one would have it and they stuck to their must have an Executor!

Forget it, it won't happen and if they were to make one you would regret it upon seeing the disappointment that it would represent.

I have a 36" long resin model of the Executor. So I figure that is as close I can get to a table top version, So I have 12 squadrons for it,

6 x TIE Squadrons, ( 1 x Darth Vader) , 3 x TIE Interceptor (181st Fighter Wing,With Soontir Fel) 3 x TIE Bomber, With Major Rhymer.

I figure, instead of taking about it, I bought one, it is not perfect scale, but who cares

would you please post where you got it??

Beatty, you're hung up on a single ship just like the 'Home One' sort are hung up about the Home One type being represented in the more typical Mc80. Thus, 'OMG, iz 3km guys, FFG ruined it forevar and your rong'. Hyperbole, naturally, but the principle is the same: Home One isn't just the Home One , it's also the run of the mill Mc80 with a similar physical appearance shrunk to a manageable size. And it appears to be radically smaller than some people think it aught to have been. The Armada title ' Home One' adds theme and uniqueness to the Mc80 type, command or assault variant.

Executor can be very much the same idea. It's an SSD of the 'Executor'-class, and we have at least one example of an SSD that looks eeeerily the same as The Empire Strikes Back/Return of the Jedi 'named' Executor is, except it's half the size that some people doggedly hold that it should be. We also know it's the equivalent to an entire fleet of Imperial class star destroyers which iiiiiis, 3-6 if memory serves as a 'fleet' unit.

All I'm saying is that it's justification for many people to use a half-pint SSD “Command ship”, one of many according to Solo, which may or may not be upgraded with an optional Executor title, even if the box blatantly says 'Super Star Destroyer Executor ”.

None of that is new and all of it has been said before. Still worth the effort though. Guess I'll treat this as a pariah thread until I have something concrete. Would that be acceptable then? Or should we keep going? We're only 92 posts away from a milestone here. I'd hate to ruin that.

Bla, bla, bla, it will break the game because... reasons. Bla, bla, bla, I'm right and you are wrong because... reasons. You are all a bunch of fanboys who want to break the game just because you want a SSD. I will spam this thread until you admit I was right.

Wait a second. You have swayed me with your eloquent argument based on a solid hypothesis, backed up wit facts and examples.

Nope, it is gone. I will have a SSD, one way or another.

Now I really hope FFG makes one so this can turn into a rage-quit thread!

I can be snarky and argumentative too.

Just getting tried of this repeating thread am I not so much let's discuss rules and now more sick of this because it is clear this thread is nothing more than some people nagging the forums in hopes that FFG will give in to their demands. That actually bothers me but if we remember the ISD threads we know this is nothing new. People feel they can pressure FFG into their personal dreams and that smells an awful like entitled people believing a company should do something because they just want them too.

And I will never rage quit Armada, but if FFG did give in and gave us a matchbox version of the Executor I will purchase the model for my self and will never play an Epic Game because they will have to limit that thing to certain size of games with new rules.

What can I say, I am an old Star Wars fan that hated the idea of mocking the Executor with a shoddy model just to make a few people happy.

If this isn't a pressure thread then let them bring new ideas in and focus one the new ideas but I doubt there are any new ideas. So why the hell is there forty some pages of the same idea when it has been shown conclusively that if you made an Executor it would be only 15% at the most of its size and its fire power would only be 10% of its actual fire power just so it doesn't wipe out the opponent in two turns. That to me is a mockery of the original ship. I have even said bring in a smaller SSD but no one would have it and they stuck to their must have an Executor!

Forget it, it won't happen and if they were to make one you would regret it upon seeing the disappointment that it would represent.

Honestly? If you're tired of the thread, stop reading it and your "problem" is solved. So, honestly, that's probably not your actual problem, or you'd have done it. The dig about entitled people trying to get what they want just because they want it? Anyone who can afford to play a game that costs what this does is "entitled" compared to about 88% of the Earth's population. And voicing what you want in the hopes of getting it is really no different than voicing what you don't want in the hopes it isn't done.

As for a "matchbox" version of Executor, please enlighten me how any of the ships are anything else but exactly that? Heck, the CR-90 is even about the size of an actual matchbox and that represents a 150 meter long starship. Complaining about the SSD being too small applies strongly to the already released ISD which should fit the CR-90 into its main hanger bay. Did you rage against the ISD being released because it's too small?

If you fear new rules, are you then boycotting the flotillas and the new rules they bring to the game? Rules that are only changing the game to include these new models, exactly as you are saying should not be done?

And I assure you, a "shoddy" model of the SSD won't make anyone here happy. A quality model will, and we all already have accepted it won't be any more to scale than the CR-90 is to the ISD.

You don't want a model that is 15% its actual size? So then clearly you didn't buy the CR-90 because it's only around .0005% of its actual size. And with respect; you seriously support not wanting the ship made because you view it as disrespecting the power of a ship that is never seen to have defeated anything other than an X-Wing, and is taken out by a single A-Wing? I'm sorry, but from what I saw in the movies, the SSD isn't anywhere near as fearsome as you imply.

Er...and you're agreeable to an even smaller SSD? After saying you don't want to see it because it would be too small?

The sheer number of pages in this thread is precisely because people won't forget it, and don't see it being made if it would "ruin" the game. You yourself say you'd buy it, and never play it. Imagine for a moment if everyone that plays the game did that? They sell several million units, make a tidy sum, no one ever plays them, and the game goes on as is. Everyone is happy, based on what your outlook seems to be?

I've read ideas in this thread that I'm working on putting into a house rules Executor for play testing. I honestly do believe this can be done and be fun. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm not, but I'm testing what I believe...are you? Or are you just coming back here to tell everyone "I know better than you it won't work you're stupid shut up and go away!"

You're doing the flip-side everything you say the others in this thread are doing. Worse, you're doing it in a thread you don't even believe in, and are only annoyed by because you choose to come here, read posts, and be annoyed.

How about instead of telling us the ideas here won't or can't work, play-test them and back up why they won't?

Bla, bla, bla, it will break the game because... reasons. Bla, bla, bla, I'm right and you are wrong because... reasons. You are all a bunch of fanboys who want to break the game just because you want a SSD. I will spam this thread until you admit I was right.

Wait a second. You have swayed me with your eloquent argument based on a solid hypothesis, backed up wit facts and examples.

Nope, it is gone. I will have a SSD, one way or another.

Now I really hope FFG makes one so this can turn into a rage-quit thread!

I can be snarky and argumentative too.

Just getting tried of this repeating thread am I not so much let's discuss rules and now more sick of this because it is clear this thread is nothing more than some people nagging the forums in hopes that FFG will give in to their demands. That actually bothers me but if we remember the ISD threads we know this is nothing new. People feel they can pressure FFG into their personal dreams and that smells an awful like entitled people believing a company should do something because they just want them too.

And I will never rage quit Armada, but if FFG did give in and gave us a matchbox version of the Executor I will purchase the model for my self and will never play an Epic Game because they will have to limit that thing to certain size of games with new rules.

What can I say, I am an old Star Wars fan that hated the idea of mocking the Executor with a shoddy model just to make a few people happy.

If this isn't a pressure thread then let them bring new ideas in and focus one the new ideas but I doubt there are any new ideas. So why the hell is there forty some pages of the same idea when it has been shown conclusively that if you made an Executor it would be only 15% at the most of its size and its fire power would only be 10% of its actual fire power just so it doesn't wipe out the opponent in two turns. That to me is a mockery of the original ship. I have even said bring in a smaller SSD but no one would have it and they stuck to their must have an Executor!

Forget it, it won't happen and if they were to make one you would regret it upon seeing the disappointment that it would represent.

Hah, they just announced it on the front page. Executor incoming!! Take that Beatty!

Is the next leap the Eclipse Class SSD?

In all seriousness, would people be happy if a third party made a 3x6' mat with an Executioner Class printed on it taking up almost all of the mat slightly angled off center. As an add on, there could be a resin/3D printed model bridgehead or something popping up from the surface that could be some sort of objective? Not for me, but maybe a compromise for those are wanting it. Since FF won't be making it due to shelf space at retailers--not to mention e cost involved vs limited interest--this is a more viable option that could be pitched to Deep Cut, Playmatseu, etc. and maybe combatzone scenery.

Objective:

Destroy the Bridge

Hah, they just announced it on the front page. Executor incoming!! Take that Beatty!

Wait, what?

Well I think I will just put this thread in the same category as the wave three complaints threads, players out to whine to get what they want. Admit it, the only reason this thread still gets attention is because there are few guys that think if they keep it on the front page FFG will change their minds. Good luck with that. My 9 year old son does the same thing, he knows I will not listen to "I want" and instead tries to nag me by trying to convince me how much a $70 magic card will improve his game and life, but despite the well thought out argument it still is another form of nagging for something he doesn't need. This thread is the samething, just Nagging! And as. Parent I can tell you it doesn't work and only ends up annoying the adults.

If you guys own up to your attempts at Nagging I will gladly walk away, but don't try and tell me this thread still has relevance and it is about a logical topic.

Hah, they just announced it on the front page. Executor incoming!! Take that Beatty!

Wait, what?

Hah, they just announced it on the front page. Executor incoming!! Take that Beatty!

Wait, what?

He's just Trolling.

It's the first of april here, I am allowed to

Hah, they just announced it on the front page. Executor incoming!! Take that Beatty!

Wait, what?

He's just Trolling.

It's the first of april here, I am allowed to

I may as well stop visiting this thread because naggers will nag just like haters will hate. Just sad to see our society becoming so needy.

Hmm -clicks Manage Ignore Prefs -

A mat? I'm sure it could work as a scenario but for me it's unappealing because of my personal bias. It would probably work quite well, like a Death Star Trench run in X-wing. but having so many presets feels more like one-off scenario that I might run a few times and that's it. I just don't like flat terrain. My Armada tables have obstacles on the markers, I've got a table with terrain for all my other tabletop wargaming stuff, the Fat Mat flat terrain stuff just isn't appealing. It reminds me too much of those old plastic micromachine playset things.

Again, I'm not averse to features, so the same kind of content could be used for big installations, space based orbitals, even an 'invasion' type to reuse what they have. I'd be fine with that in context, but a 'map' expansion isn't something that would hook me. Bundle it with a full campaign though and it might change my mind.

All of Beatty's nay saying aside, he makes one valid point. We should be discussing how it can, theoretically, be made to work.

The idea that has beed rolling around my head recently is the addition of a two (or three) tiered base. Think of a standard Large base mounted atop one about twice that size. While the arcs would be the same on the upper and lower template, the armaments would then be staggered. It could then have 2 "ship cards" one for the outer hull, one for the inner hull (the central city scape section). The outer can be destroyed, but the ship stays on the table loosing its outer defences. If the central section is destroyed, by by SSD. This way, yes you can make a desperate attack on the core section, but you will get pounded by the outer section. Or you can try to take out the outer section(s) first. The tiered base also means that it can have massive firepower in any given arc without it all being in range at the same time.

Now each section can have armaments, shields and hull equivalent or superior to an ISD.

Thoughts?

Well I think I will just put this thread in the same category as the wave three complaints threads, players out to whine to get what they want. Admit it, the only reason this thread still gets attention is because there are few guys that think if they keep it on the front page FFG will change their minds. Good luck with that. My 9 year old son does the same thing, he knows I will not listen to "I want" and instead tries to nag me by trying to convince me how much a $70 magic card will improve his game and life, but despite the well thought out argument it still is another form of nagging for something he doesn't need. This thread is the samething, just Nagging! And as. Parent I can tell you it doesn't work and only ends up annoying the adults.

If you guys own up to your attempts at Nagging I will gladly walk away, but don't try and tell me this thread still has relevance and it is about a logical topic.

The only one that I see complaining, nagging, or trolling is you. As has been pointed out if you do not like what you see, do not look . I am guessing that you live in a free county and no one is forcing you to look, you just like trying to troll us who do want this (and have been doing a good job at it). Again as other have said I have seen lots of ideas thrown out, right now I am not willing to try them but I do look at them and think about if I think it would work or not. Two last things first you feel that people are nagging you, well stop trolling them, very simple. Two your requirment that we talk about how it can or can not be done. The tread is titled "Super Star Destroyer discussion thread" so as long as you are talking about the super star destroyer it fits with the tread, it does not have to be about rules to use, or scale or anything like that. Anything about the super star destroyer would fit the thread title.

After reading some of Beatty's early posts, I think we may have him wrong. His baseless denial and fatalism is actually him attempting to use reverse psychology on FFG to get them to release the SSD.

After reading some of Beatty's early posts, I think we may have him wrong. His baseless denial and fatalism is actually him attempting to use reverse psychology on FFG to get them to release the SSD.

Classic!

The idea that has beed rolling around my head recently is the addition of a two (or three) tiered base. Think of a standard Large base mounted atop one about twice that size. While the arcs would be the same on the upper and lower template, the armaments would then be staggered. It could then have 2 "ship cards" one for the outer hull, one for the inner hull (the central city scape section). The outer can be destroyed, but the ship stays on the table loosing its outer defences. If the central section is destroyed, by by SSD. This way, yes you can make a desperate attack on the core section, but you will get pounded by the outer section. Or you can try to take out the outer section(s) first. The tiered base also means that it can have massive firepower in any given arc without it all being in range at the same time.

Now each section can have armaments, shields and hull equivalent or superior to an ISD.

Thoughts?

I hadn't thought of a three tiered base, but other than that, this is very similar to some of my own thoughts. With the size of the model, I could easily see it needing a stand similar to the trident that they used for the Ghost; perhaps a second ship card could be suspended in this?

--edit--

You know, you may be on to more than we thought. Why not change the ship stand fundamentally? Imagine "coin slots" molded around the outside of the base stand; say...2-4 per section. The cardstock comes with punch out upgrade "coins" that fit into the slots: tractor beams, expanded fighter bays, turbolaser upgrades, whatever. This allows a player to highly customize each section of the ship, creating tremendous versatility and flexibility for what role the "command ship" will fill. It also means the loss of any section is an immediate blow to the performance over all as the upgrades in that section are lost (remove them when the section is destroyed). By putting them as discs on the sides of the base (like the shield trackers) it eliminates the need for multiple cards for each section and their upgrades.

Crazy...or maybe on to something?

I don't think it is crazy at all, just solid outside the box thinking. Personally, I would hate it, but I don't even like putting command tokens on the ship base. Honestly though, as long as all the ship and upgrade info is on hand to speed up play, Ivsee no reason why it wouldn't work.

After reading some of Beatty's early posts, I think we may have him wrong. His baseless denial and fatalism is actually him attempting to use reverse psychology on FFG to get them to release the SSD.

The Bellator would make way more sense and it is a great ship with a great design whose scale would make more sense. It is also faster and more maneuverable than many other SSD's and it sacrifices firepower for that speed making it a more tactical ship than one that sits in the middle of the board blasting ships to dust in one shot. But the stubbornness is great with this forum and I can play a good devil's advocate. (Just don't tell anyone.)