No more fire power three turrets!

Firespray style auxiliary arc would be fine but for the love of all that's unholy no more large base turret ships in this dog fighting game.

I think the wookiepedia page says it has a 180 firing range in the front. So, no 360 turrets.

I dig the model, I dig the art, I think you're just about right in the costing, I think putting a system and crew slot on a dual arc ship might be a bit powerful. I'd have to really cost it out, but C1-10p + Zeb + FCS + Gunner would be... Scary. You'd have 3 chances to hit, and the final attack could be massive. Granted, you'd be paying a lot for that, so it's not clear that this is bad.

Sabine seems like a great anti swarm card, and would give no benefit to someone facing a 2-3 ship list. She's a cluster missile with a weird trigger. I like her conceptually- she's the party's crit stacker!- I just want to rework her a bit to make sure I never feel like taking her was wasted points.

I love Kannan having an ability that deals with Focus. I really want to let him spend a stress to turn one die from blank to focus, but I'd have to think how that pairs with both Han cards.

(A Kannan + Crew!Han +FCS + Gunner would be hilarious. But I'd want to see how it points out- may be too expensive.)

The Ghost title is another card I love the idea of, but want to tweak. As written, it hugely benefits low PS pilots, but does not benefit high PS pilots nearly as much.

I'm kinda tempted to create a Google doc to create crew member ideas of my own.

(JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR: your ideas are good enough to inspire. This post is not meant to tear down your cards. I just want to dig in and play.)

Maybe the Ghost could be the first ship made for a 100 point single-ship build?

Maybe the Ghost could be the first ship made for a 100 point single-ship build?

People hate fat turrets a lot*. Let's make one that is so fat that it can take on an entire 8 TIE Swarm on its own.

*I personally don't hate anything this game has to offer.*

Awesome work on those Rebels cards, man. That's bang-up stuff!

No more fire power three turrets!

Firespray style auxiliary arc would be fine but for the love of all that's unholy no more large base turret ships in this dog fighting game.

Though I do like the idea of The Ghost having forward and aux arcs (w/ docked Phantom) with a Turret upgrade... As long as they never release a "Quad Laser Cannon" turret.

Some want a three attack ship not every one is after a Firespray style ship.

As for a single ship costing 100 points no that would be terrible for the competitive guys for a start and how would it ever kill anything the average list has nine or more attacks no way can you give the ghost that level of firepower it's got less armament than the falcon.

A single 100pt ship with multiple arcs could compete if it could attack from both it's arcs in a similar way to the Warthog Y-Wing's double attack. That would be especialy true if the turret upgrade could either replace one of those attacks or be used as well.

I know there is a lot of hate for 360 turret ships on these boards, but we already have 3. I think if the ghost did enter the game and did have a 360 turret, I don't think either of these things, in and of themselves really changes anything. In other words, if you are building a list around a pancake, does it matter which pancake? would a ghost be worse than an outrider or Yt-1300? not likely. I'm ambivelent about the ghost, but to make it different, I would think the ability to take crew to grant an additonal attck would be interesting.

We have a 180 degree attack on the front

a dorsal Turret, and an auxillary rear arc, but these need to be staffed in order to make use of them. doing so would potentially grant up to 3 attacks, but not all at the same craft, and it would be costly to man all of those positions.

this would make it different. give it a title something like "for each crew member you add, you make make an additional attack from one of the printed firing arcs, to a maximum of 3 attacks per round." Now, you would have to cost in the additional attacks up front to allow for the additional crew ability, as this is admittedly pretty powerful, but different.

The dial supplied earlier in this thread seems too good as well. not every pancake needs to be falcon level manuverable. In fact, given it's mass, it really shouldn't be. It should be big, cumbersome, and tough.

The game doesn't need another knock-off Falcon, especially on the side of the Alliance. We've already got the YT-2400 and the Deci in the game. Why not add the Ebon Hawk in there too?

1. It would be very different from the YT-1300 (MF)

2. The Crew cards would be very different

3. It would sell... regardless of how similar or different from any existing ship in XWM... it would sell!

4. Ebon Hawk is NOT even remotely from the stated time period of the game (that being the GCW)

I am not picking on you here, I just want to point out something from another perspective...

I have been a miniatures gamer for over 3 decades, mostly wargaming historical stuff (pick a period... any period... just about. Historical wargames attempt (to varying degrees) to reproduce or imitate some aspect of actual, historical warfare. An air combat came must therefore attempt to imitate/reproduce some of the aspects of actual air combat (as opposed to games like Chess which reproduce...nothing resembling ancient or medieval warfare). George Lucas based his dogfight scenes in Star Wars on actual WWII air combat footage. Now, a lot of people on this forum argue against adding certain ships because they would not be "different enough" or because "there is already a ship that fulfills that role" in the game. To me, those arguments don't hold water... as, if this were a historical game (and that is the way I see it, a game set in a fictional universe, a long... long time ago...). Anyway... were this a WWII dogfight game, nobody would be arguing against including a P-51 Mustang because "we already have something similar that fills that role" (like a Mk.IX Spitfire). Further more, nobody would be bitching because B-17s have "too much firepower", are "too difficult to kill" and their ability to fire 360-degrees makes flying their highly maneuverable,arc-dodging interceptor (ie. Me-109 or Fw-190) somehow "less fun" and "not in the spirit of a dogfighting game". Just sayin'!

To me, a YT-1300 is similar to BUT DIFFERENT from a YT-2400 or a YT-2000 or whatever the Ghost is... Either way, I want them because they are cool and are part of the SW saga. Why would anyone argue against greater variety in their XWM games? For that matter, as long as FFG can sell the miniatures and make a profit... why would they NOT want to sell more stuff?

*steps down from soapbox*

Anyway... were this a WWII dogfight game, nobody would be arguing against including a P-51 Mustang because "we already have something similar that fills that role" (like a Mk.IX Spitfire).

A WWII dogfighting game would probably incorporate both the P-51 and the Spitfire IX, true. But a really good WWII dogfighting game would find ways to differentiate the Mustang and the Spitfire, so that players could look at the context and decide which one fit the mission better.

It brings nothing new to the table thematically and that's the problem. It is yet another "we can't include the Falcon in this particular instance for reasons, but we want to have one anyways". That and it's an AU ship... let's stick to OT and EU ships please.

2. The Crew cards would be very different

Ships don't have crew cards, they have crew slots you put crew cards in. And the slots are the same wherever you find them.

We have a 180 degree attack on the front

a dorsal Turret, and an auxillary rear arc, but these need to be staffed in order to make use of them. doing so would potentially grant up to 3 attacks, but not all at the same craft, and it would be costly to man all of those positions.

I think the auxiliary rear arc is due to the dorsal turret. So, I would say at most 2 shots.

I do like the Ghost title that prevents you from being TL.

I do think it'd be kind of weird for us to have four large-based turret ships...but to have three in one faction, one in another, and none in the third. Kind of a pancake imbalance goin' on there, y'know?

That and it's an AU ship... let's stick to OT and EU ships please.

If by AU you mean Alternate Universe, you're wrong it's not, it's canon. The Ghost is in fact canon from the GCW period, so it's completely appropriate to put it into the game in terms of theme.

Which isn't a good enough of a reason itself to do it. But the above quote is not even a remotely good reason to not include it, even if the poster was correct.

By Disney standards of canon, the Ghost is more official than about half of the ships in this game.

By Disney standards of canon

By George's standard of canon that's true too. Even under the old rules of EU, LFL TV shows trump everything other than the movies.

So that means if George was in charge still and Rebels came out, it would have the same weight as the Clone Wars.

By Disney standards of canon

By George's standard of canon that's true too. Even under the old rules of EU, LFL TV shows trump everything other than the movies.

So that means if George was in charge still and Rebels came out, it would have the same weight as the Clone Wars.

But Rebels would be a worse show for it...

But Rebels would be a worse show for it...

I passed my willpower check and didn't add that... It was a struggle mind you.

But Rebels would be a worse show for it...

I passed my willpower check and didn't add that... It was a struggle mind you.

Quite honestly, you just need to hear Filoni describe how the Inquisitor would've died if it was in The Clone Wars to realize it.

That and it's an AU ship... let's stick to OT and EU ships please.

If by AU you mean Alternate Universe, you're wrong it's not, it's canon. The Ghost is in fact canon from the GCW period, so it's completely appropriate to put it into the game in terms of theme.

Which isn't a good enough of a reason itself to do it. But the above quote is not even a remotely good reason to not include it, even if the poster was correct.

I do mean Alternate Universe; it's basically the same as the Star Trek reboot in that respect. The new Disney stuff and the 30ish years of EU stuff do not belong to the same continuity, and thus is a different canon. This is true regardless of whether or not it has some sort of official stuff.

The Disney universe is an alternate canon to the Extended Universe, and is thus the Alternate Universe.

It is a valid reason for them not to include it, assuming you prefer the old EU canon to the new, weird AU canon.

The Disney universe is an alternate canon to the Extended Universe, and is thus the Alternate Universe.

You are either delusional or simply not worth paying attention to. Because as far as everyone is concerned the new Disney canon is canon, and not some sort of reboot.

If you can't accept that as a fact, then please don't bother posting to any more discussions about canon because all you do is make yourself look foolish when you claim the earth is flat, and the sun revolves around it.

You are right about one thing though, the EU no longer exists in the same universe, it was ejected when Disney bought Star Wars, and is no longer considered Canon. But based on your post on this issue, I'm not sure you'd even understand the terms being used.

Because anyone claims that Rebels is the same as fanfic... or that new stuff is no longer canon, clearly doesn't understand what Canon actually means.

Back on topic...

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Ghost at some point, I'm sure Disney would like to see it used in things like X-Wing. The problem being, if it should be Epic or not, because it's a bit too big for standard X-Wing but not really big enough for Epic.

Plus what would you do with it to make it something other than just another YT.

And clearly not paying attention to FFG. They seem pretty excited for Rebels content.