If ffg releases some info about the new ships, such as how they fix ordinance, I think most people would get over the models. Most people play the game to play the game, and good looking models help make it more fun, but even an ugly ship that serves a good purpose will see lots of play. For most of the competitive crowd, looks matter less than ability to help win the game. I for one don't think they look as bad as I thought they might, but there is some disappointment out there, and an explanation of how they will improve the game might go a long way toward quieting the pitchforks and torches crowd.

If ffg releases some info about the new ships, such as how they fix ordinance, I think most people would get over the models. Most people play the game to play the game, and good looking models help make it more fun, but even an ugly ship that serves a good purpose will see lots of play. For most of the competitive crowd, looks matter less than ability to help win the game. I for one don't think they look as bad as I thought they might, but there is some disappointment out there, and an explanation of how they will improve the game might go a long way toward quieting the pitchforks and torches crowd.

So true. I wanted a Lambda from the beginning because it looks so cool. Then once they released it, it was very "meh" on how it played and it took me forever to buy one because of that. Once people started working it out and it became a good ship AND a good looking ship, I bought one. Long story short, the play matters to me, not the looks (so much).

Misleading topic title is misleading. (Possibly unintentionally). I was excited.

Misleading topic title is misleading. (Possibly unintentionally). I was excited.

To be fair it's only misleading due to grammar fail.

Let's eat Grandma. Let's eat, Grandma.

I expect a preview article today.

If ffg releases some info about the new ships, such as how they fix ordinance, I think most people would get over the models. Most people play the game to play the game, and good looking models help make it more fun, but even an ugly ship that serves a good purpose will see lots of play. For most of the competitive crowd, looks matter less than ability to help win the game. I for one don't think they look as bad as I thought they might, but there is some disappointment out there, and an explanation of how they will improve the game might go a long way toward quieting the pitchforks and torches crowd.

So true. I wanted a Lambda from the beginning because it looks so cool. Then once they released it, it was very "meh" on how it played and it took me forever to buy one because of that. Once people started working it out and it became a good ship AND a good looking ship, I bought one. Long story short, the play matters to me, not the looks (so much).

Wait, the shuttle became a good ship? When did that happen?

Assuming you're not being sarcastic; It's statline is spectacular, putting the B-wing to shame. While the dial is tricky to learn, you can exploit the advantages of being a large ship to achieve some pretty impressive results. Sablegryphon has written a few articles about how to get the most out of the Space Cow.

"Glances at topic' Really? Have some pacience the ships were only announced.

"Glances at topic' Really? Have some pacience the ships were only announced.

Doesn't this mark the first time ships have been announced without an article? Seems it is overdue to me.

How long did it take between the slideshow announcement of Armada Wave 2 and the FFG preview article? I'd expect similar here.

I'm sure they'll give us some idea of what they'll be doing to fix ordinance, and hopefully detail the new action they're introducing with the K-Wing.

Assuming you're not being sarcastic; It's statline is spectacular, putting the B-wing to shame. While the dial is tricky to learn, you can exploit the advantages of being a large ship to achieve some pretty impressive results. Sablegryphon has written a few articles about how to get the most out of the Space Cow.

Any ship can be played well if you're a skilled player, and some ships can only be played well if you're a skilled player. That doesn't necessarily make those ships "good."

FFG always figures it out. The article will come out, give a few teasers, and everyone who hates the ships will talk about how the new upgrade cards can benefit current ships, and they'll be hooked too.

Assuming you're not being sarcastic; It's statline is spectacular, putting the B-wing to shame. While the dial is tricky to learn, you can exploit the advantages of being a large ship to achieve some pretty impressive results. Sablegryphon has written a few articles about how to get the most out of the Space Cow.

Any ship can be played well if you're a skilled player, and some ships can only be played well if you're a skilled player. That doesn't necessarily make those ships "good."

Let's not nitpick words, especially over something tangent to the point. Replace "good" with "functional" or "better than initially thought" if you must, though it is hard to argue a ship that was present at the in a Galactic cup winning list, the top tables of at least a couple regionals, top 8 of US nationals, and in the winning list of US Nationals is "bad".

Assuming you're not being sarcastic; It's statline is spectacular, putting the B-wing to shame. While the dial is tricky to learn, you can exploit the advantages of being a large ship to achieve some pretty impressive results. Sablegryphon has written a few articles about how to get the most out of the Space Cow.

Any ship can be played well if you're a skilled player, and some ships can only be played well if you're a skilled player. That doesn't necessarily make those ships "good."

I can't disagree with what you just now said about the shuttle, but I won't pretend that a forum like this isn't the perfect place to nitpick over words. Semantics is one thing, choosing a word that misrepresents a ship is another thing entirely. What else can we do here, but try to improve how and what we're actually trying to communicate?

Assuming you're not being sarcastic; It's statline is spectacular, putting the B-wing to shame. While the dial is tricky to learn, you can exploit the advantages of being a large ship to achieve some pretty impressive results. Sablegryphon has written a few articles about how to get the most out of the Space Cow.

Any ship can be played well if you're a skilled player, and some ships can only be played well if you're a skilled player. That doesn't necessarily make those ships "good."

Let's not nitpick words, especially over something tangent to the point. Replace "good" with "functional" or "better than initially thought" if you must, though it is hard to argue a ship that was present at the in a Galactic cup winning list, the top tables of at least a couple regionals, top 8 of US nationals, and in the winning list of US Nationals is "bad".

Assuming you're not being sarcastic; It's statline is spectacular, putting the B-wing to shame. While the dial is tricky to learn, you can exploit the advantages of being a large ship to achieve some pretty impressive results. Sablegryphon has written a few articles about how to get the most out of the Space Cow.

Any ship can be played well if you're a skilled player, and some ships can only be played well if you're a skilled player. That doesn't necessarily make those ships "good."

Let's not nitpick words, especially over something tangent to the point. Replace "good" with "functional" or "better than initially thought" if you must, though it is hard to argue a ship that was present at the top tables of at least a couple regionals, top 8 of US nationals, and in the winning list of US Nationals is "bad".

There was also last year's massive Galactic Cup on Vassal, in which the top list featured three Lambda shuttles backed by Soontir Fel.

I can't disagree with what you just now said about the shuttle, but I won't pretend that a forum like this isn't the perfect place to nitpick over words. Semantics is one thing, choosing a word that misrepresents a ship is another thing entirely. What else can we do here, but try to improve how and what we're actually trying to communicate?

We can talk about X-Wing. Or French Historical revisionism.

How long did it take between the slideshow announcement of Armada Wave 2 and the FFG preview article? I'd expect similar here.

I'm sure they'll give us some idea of what they'll be doing to fix ordinance, and hopefully detail the new action they're introducing with the K-Wing.

I think it was something like several weeks between GAMA and the actual Armada wave 2 announcement, so given they've already posted non-X-wing articles today, we're probably going to be waiting.

"Glances at topic' Really? Have some pacience the ships were only announced.

Doesn't this mark the first time ships have been announced without an article? Seems it is overdue to me.

If I recall correctly, Scum and Villainy didn't get an article for a while after their reveal at GenCon last year.

"Glances at topic' Really? Have some pacience the ships were only announced.

Except they haven't been, not really. Announcement articles contain basic profiles on the ships and a few showcase cards. It's almost always how a wave is introduced, Wave 2 Armada (which only had the pictures from that trade show) is the only wave of X-Wing, Armada and IA to deviate from it.

Any ship can be played well if you're a skilled player, and some ships can only be played well if you're a skilled player. That doesn't necessarily make those ships "good."

That sounds like you're defining good as to mean "useable as a crutch."

The shuttle is a ship with great strengths and great weaknesses: it's tactically interesting. It has a very powerful, cost efficient statline but terrible maneuverability. How good it is varies based on how well you're able to mitigate its weaknesses and play to its strengths.

What makes a ship bad is not having any strengths to play to.

How long did it take between the slideshow announcement of Armada Wave 2 and the FFG preview article? I'd expect similar here.

I'm sure they'll give us some idea of what they'll be doing to fix ordinance, and hopefully detail the new action they're introducing with the K-Wing.

I think it was something like several weeks between GAMA and the actual Armada wave 2 announcement, so given they've already posted non-X-wing articles today, we're probably going to be waiting.

"Glances at topic' Really? Have some pacience the ships were only announced.

Doesn't this mark the first time ships have been announced without an article? Seems it is overdue to me.

If I recall correctly, Scum and Villainy didn't get an article for a while after their reveal at GenCon last year.

You do not recall correctly. FFG announced Wave 6 on Friday, August 15 (at GenCon). They posted the initial preview article on Saturday, August 16. I think during GenCon is the only time they post news on Saturday.

We can talk about X-Wing.

That would require... hrmm, what was that word I just used... oh yes, communication.

Or French Historical revisionism.

Can't promise I'll be able to keep pace, but go ahead and start.

I can't disagree with what you just now said about the shuttle, but I won't pretend that a forum like this isn't the perfect place to nitpick over words. Semantics is one thing, choosing a word that misrepresents a ship is another thing entirely. What else can we do here, but try to improve how and what we're actually trying to communicate?

I imagine that some of the delay is due, in some part, to the incredible backlash that portions of their fan base have when FFG make a mistake of any kind. It's a fairly unforgiving lot, the gamers. (my tongue is only slightly in my cheek)

Man, lighten up people. The announcement will be made. The ships will come. If you utilize your patience, you'll be rewarded. I suspect that FFG is deciding not to release info quickly because people were complaining quite a bit about them releasing too much info too quickly. You can't have it both ways.

Jacob

mistake

Is Wave VII a mistake? I don't think it is.

I imagine that some of the delay is due, in some part, to the incredible backlash that portions of their fan base have when FFG make a mistake of any kind. It's a fairly unforgiving lot, the gamers. (my tongue is only slightly in my cheek)

Man, lighten up people. The announcement will be made. The ships will come. If you utilize your patience, you'll be rewarded. I suspect that FFG is deciding not to release info quickly because people were complaining quite a bit about them releasing too much info too quickly. You can't have it both ways.

Jacob

Orrrrrr they have listened the mountain of complaints about them spoiling too much too soon.

We haven't even had another article on the Raider.

Possibly the semantics are useful, but I would argue that whether "good" misrepresents a ship or not is partially up to the beholder. There is plenty of gray area within our opinions and the fuzzy math of X-Wing ship performance for me to think it is "good" and you to think it only "functional" and for both to be near enough to the truth depending upon our experiences and what we each view as valuable. The reason for not discussing the words is because whether or not the ship is good or merely functional is beside the point - which is that for me, the quality of a ship's mechanics is as important or more important than the quality of its model. I thought Lambdas looked cool, but I didn't buy any until I also perceived them as useful. And my point is unchanged whether the ship is in reality "good", "functional", or even actually "bad", so long as I only believed it to be good.

If you can accept that a word, one typically used in an objective sense, might be misconstrued to mean something else owing to an inherent "fuzziness" in the subject matter, perhaps that word is best not used in the first place - if for no other reason than just this sort of communications issue.

Permit me to make an observation or two, then ask a question. The shuttle has, apparently, enjoyed some minute success at the competitive level. You withheld your purchase of a ship you perceived to be aesthetically pleasing until it proved viable, and we can assume that people will be more forgiving of the K-Wing's aesthetics should it prove the same. How much more "good" will the K-Wing need to be than the shuttle in order to overcome its aesthetic shortcomings?