I am starting to model many of my smaller ships as flotillas. I simply just use the exact stats the ships already have and apply the Flotilla rules. Point cost unchanged.
DA's Armada Shipyards
I am starting to model many of my smaller ships as flotillas. I simply just use the exact stats the ships already have and apply the Flotilla rules. Point cost unchanged.
Sooo ooooooooooo ooooooo oooooooo ooooo....
Say I had an SSD.......
Does that mean that an ISD could have a flotilla?
How big you want your bases to be?
I have been swapping things out to 1/7000 scale where available.
I was just joking Wes, but I admire your dedication.
I imagine the imperial Venator won't be much different from the republic version.
http://armadashipyards.com/2015/08/29/venator-class-star-destroyer-2/
Me and Wes Janson have made Imperial Venators, you could maybe test them?
Mine
Wes's
Vader in a Eta2? I think cyanbloodbane made one over on KDY. Yes, here it is...
It basically merges DA's Anakin Eta with the FFG Vader. You could try this for now.
Observations about these Imperial variations: They are more agile than the elder Republic versions at max speed, only slightly more expensive, less effective at max range forward but more effective at longer ranges off either beam, are more expensive, pack better A/S, and both carry two Offensive Retrofits AFTER having Squadron 5. In short, they're better carriers, flat out, and arguably better fighting ships generally, if with a different set of drawbacks than the older ones. While I'm open to having my mind changed, I am tempted to call both ships overpowered, or at least undercosted. I'm a fan of the theory behind the old Imperial refits (still up with the original and current GAR ), which is that the GAR units are deliberately hamstrung in the "modern" era. Both are older ships generally retired from frontline service, whose older equipment and armaments are less compatible with modern sets and systems. One very big fear, especially with the canonical superiority of the Venator over its peers, is that it doesn't supplant the Imperial -class as the Imperial battlewagon of choice. I really don't have a great objection to the armament, although I think it's a tad overboard, but more a beef with the upgrade setup, especially dual OR with Sq 5.
For Vader, 30 actually seems way overcosted. I've fought with and against a number of Eta-2s at this point, and while dual Scatter sounds scary, and it is a titanic pain, it's very easily circumvented with a wall of fire. For the Rebels, who have significantly more expensive fighters, it will be harder to mass the necessary fighters, but you only need five attacks to ensure hits, and that's if Vader discards both Scatters in one turn. Two waves of three strikes cleans out both Scatters, with the sixth strike completely unopposed. Then he's down to being a very vicious TIE Interceptor, costing almost three times as much. Counter 3 is nasty, very nasty, but his average A/S damage is only 3. FFG TIE Advanced Vader throws 3.25, and Wedge Antilles with his two spares against an activated squadron averages 3 himself. His battery is also merely a blue, without bomber, so he's pitiful there. Down in the vicinity of 26 should be plenty to start with I think, before playtests help refine that figure. My two cents. Hopefully my life is about to clear up so I can start contributing here more again.
My initial Venator concept tries very hard to make it a carrier. It is listed as carrying near twice the fighters of the ISD. I did make sure to limit much of its fighting range to medium (blue) seeing as many of its weapons are smaller. I do agree that the double offensive retrofit may be over capable. Second, although the ship is a better all round fighter, its weaker forward shields and hull may make all the difference. The cost landing further between the Victory II and ISD-I is about where I would expect to find it.
It is an exceptional carrier in the lore, and I agree that where the cost is, between the Vic and the ISD, is right where it should be,. I'm just concerned that the double OR is a bit much, and that it shifts the cost/benefit balance too far away from the ISD. For curiosity's sake, did you start from the ISD, the old Venator, new Venator, or start from scratch building this?
Honestly, in retrospect, I'm surprised we haven't seen a combination slot yet. An offensive/defensive upgrade slot, so a ship could have one or the other, not both. In the case of Wes' Venator, an offensive upgrade/Turbolaser slot could be the way to go.
I could see upgrades that take more than one slot, too. Want this upgrade? You're going to have to burn both your Offensive and Turbolaser upgrade slots.
So... Any way you could work these two options into a future KDY update?
I seriously have no idea how feasible it would be, so feel free to just say no.
I've been thinking about it, actually. It will take a fairly large overhaul, and a new card layout for upgrades, but it isn't impossible.
It is an exceptional carrier in the lore, and I agree that where the cost is, between the Vic and the ISD, is right where it should be,. I'm just concerned that the double OR is a bit much, and that it shifts the cost/benefit balance too far away from the ISD. For curiosity's sake, did you start from the ISD, the old Venator, new Venator, or start from scratch building this?
Started from scratch. I wasn't looking at the older versions when I made this. The double upgrade slot is a cool idea, but I don't see it needing to be there. I think upgrade cards that require more then one slot would be an even better idea. This way the actual ship upgrade system remains intact. We could always use the new double card concept in X-wing. Front of the card has one upgrade back has another. Choose before set-up which side you will use. That way it occupies both slots but you only get to pick the one you feel is most important for the game at hand. What do ya think?
I saw this and thought this thread might be interested..
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/olo3d/olo-the-first-ever-smartphone-3d-printer
Whew... so much has happened while I was gone. Where do I even begin? For starters, a bunch of ships and squadrons on the site are now obsolete:
-GR-75 Medium Transport
-Gozanti-class Cruiser
-Immobilizer-class Cruiser (Interdictor)
-Arquitens-class Cruiser (Imperial Light Cruiser)
-Liberty-type Cruiser
-Z-95 Headhunter squadron
-E-Wing squadron
-Lambda-class shuttle
-Cargo upgrade cards
-Gravity Well Projector upgrade cards
...did I miss anything?
Whew... so much has happened while I was gone. Where do I even begin? For starters, a bunch of ships and squadrons on the site are now obsolete:
-GR-75 Medium Transport
-Gozanti-class Cruiser
-Immobilizer-class Cruiser (Interdictor)
-Arquitens-class Cruiser (Imperial Light Cruiser)
-Liberty-type Cruiser
-Z-95 Headhunter squadron
-E-Wing squadron
-Lambda-class shuttle
-Cargo upgrade cards
-Gravity Well Projector upgrade cards
...did I miss anything?
Pelta?
Ah yes, indeed. Thanks!
There are also a bunch of titles that may need revision, as some official upgrade cards have the same or very similar abilities (see e.g. Savrip , which is a weaker version of Mon Karren).
Diablo Azul, are you back for good? Because I have tons of ships that need your marvelous work!
Got a list for us Mel?
REBELS
The MC-40
The Mon Remonda
The Quasar Fire Light Carrier
The Hammerhead Corvette
The Nebula Star Destroyer
The Star Gaelleon
The Majestic-class heavy cruiser
EMPIRE
The Cargo Transport from Rebels
The Super Star Destroyer!
The Carrack Cruiser
The Storm Commando Carrier
SEPARATISTS
The C-9979 Trade Federation Landing Craft
REPUBLIC
The CSS-1
SCUM & VILLAINY
The Keldabe-class battleship
I saw this and thought this thread might be interested..
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/olo3d/olo-the-first-ever-smartphone-3d-printer
That's amazing. Going to wait and see the quality of the prints but it looks like it could print corvette and fighter sizes.
Here is my first take on the MC40a for submission. Pick away.
This is a light carrier, it needs much more than Fighter 1. GR-75s shouldn't be doing better than this.
This is a light carrier, it needs much more than Fighter 1. GR-75s shouldn't be doing better than this.
Looking at wookipedia http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/MC40a_light_cruiser
Plus we have the Quasar for a light carrier.
Norse, it only carries a single squadron from what I read. Which means even the Nebulon B has twice the fighter capacity. The Gladiator even holds more fighters.
Edited by Wes JansonThis doesn't make any sense to me... GR-75s are transports, not reputed for carrying fighters at all (yet with fighter 2), while the Light Mon Calamari cruiser features many fighters being deployed for its defense. There's an entire mission in TIE Fighter dedicated to clearing out the Lulsla's defenses, and if you stick around for the bonus goals, it throws A LOT of fighters at you in that mission. It is more than one squadron of many different types (one GUN flight group is assigned to take on one type of fighter apiece; Xs, As, and Bs).
I think it needs at least fighter 2. That way it makes the cruiser more flexible for if you want to make it into a pocket carrier (Expanded Hangers) or more of a general cruiser with some fighter escorts. Fighter 1 isn't a threat at all, and that offensive retrofit should be used to expand the MC-40's fighter capabilities, not make them adequate.
I would also suggest dropping the speed but the problem there is Warhawk was a big deal when it was trying to run down the interdictor Harpax , so speed 3 is reflective of this.
Mel's miniature omits it, but the CLS has a huge hangar built into the side. I think that at least makes the case for the MC40 being made with a respectable fighter amount.
Edited by Norsehound