Any brainy bubbas stat up the new Xwing?

For science, obviously

As far as these mechanics go, I don't see it as much different. I can't see boosting speed, handling, shields, or weapons...any boosts invalidates a host of other ships, e.g.: if you boost speed you have an overpowered A-Wing. Maybe hull or strain could be tweaked...

In the X-Wing game you can balance things because of the point costs. No such thing here.

Making it faster or more agile is probably justifiable seeing as it is thirty years into the future. Until/if we see other fighters beside X-wings and TIE fighters, it's hard to say. Is there a new vehicle comparable to the slower Y-wing? Or the faster A-wings and TIE Interceptors? The heavily armed B-wings? So far we haven't seen anything, so you can either take the stats for the T-65 and leave them as is, or make them slightly better in a couple of areas to account for at most 30 years of improvements. Same for the TIE/fo.

I have an easy rule for playing different eras: Use the same stats and say that is the equivalent model XD

Making it faster or more agile is probably justifiable seeing as it is thirty years into the future.

I see the SW universe as sort of beyond that kind of speedy tech innovation and progress. I know Kotor isn't canon anymore, but any of those ships could do well enough in a Rebel/Empire fight. The Naboo starfighters were plenty capable. The different shapes and configurations are simply experimentation and stylistic differences. Maybe in the movies the T-70 can outperform the T-65, but each pip in this game has huge significance, and the actual difference might not be worth a single pip anywhere.

I'm sure they'll release a sourcebook though to prove me wrong

Even if they do, you can probably look at the difference between something like the Z-95 and T-65 and make a decent prediction. A couple extra HT and SS, MAYBE a point of forward shields and you'll probably be in the ballpark... From what we've seen so far the T-70 doesn't appear to carry a different weapons loadout, so no need to adjust that.

It's worth mentioning all the other craft are probably going to see a similar tweak (supposedly the X-wing game rules for the new TIEs include shields) so it shoudl stay fairly balanced.

I too am hesitant to suggest any major overhauls. Though I suspect we'll have a better idea once the film is out...

That or it'll be like the prequels and everyone will be so hyped up they'll expect the T-70 to have a speed of 11 and carry 4 heavy turbolasers....

I'm of a similar frame of mind as Ghostofman, in that the T-70 X-Wings are probably only going to be marginally better than the T-65 series. Thinking that +1 to Hull Trauma and System Strain Thresholds and +1 to forward defense would cover the bulk of the changes.

Josep's also got a point in that technology in Star Wars is fairly stagnant, at least if comparing Legends settings such as KOTOR/SWTOR video games which is set about 4000 years before the films and yet has technology that operates on about th same level as "modern" tech such as that seen in the films.

Does it really operate at the same level though? On the same principles definitely but for all we know a turbolaser from ANH might be ten times more destructive then one from KOTOR.

Just a slight "however", but Tales of the Jedi did show a less advanced level of technology.

Wasn't Tales of the Jedi one of the Star Wars comic series which had what appeared to be wooden ships in space?

Whoever came up with that idea should have been banned from working n Star Wars materiel forever IMO.

I think that was New Sith Wars era, so about 3000 years after Tales

Just a slight "however", but Tales of the Jedi did show a less advanced level of technology.

Yes, but no, but yes.

Star Wars tech progression is odd to say the least. While there's certainly SOME progression, it's always in rather strange areas, and how that progression works is usually really strange.

Something like Tales of the Jedi shows hyperspace travel, lightsabers, blasters (pulse-wave, but still largely just blasters) and the like at a tech level roughly on par with the OT. But the style and materials is where it gets weird. Trying to show the age, while still staying "star wars" the end result is essentially a weird Medieval Europe/Ancient Egypt/Roman/Maya hybrid look that can't quite make up it's mind.

"What year is it?!?" - Jedi Master Aye-Bea Trippin

Even their spacecraft get weird. Often you'll find the ships appear to be made out of random plates of sheet metal, stone slabs, and with stretched canvas or hide sails (solar...wind?)

"I got a great deal at the salvage yard next to the Marina! Now full tack on the mizzenmast or we'll never get to Alderaan in these winds!" - Capt. Lowel Wot, Famous Smuggler

So digging to deeply into tech advancement in Star Wars is really just a dive into the mouth of madness. Eventually you'll end up looking at a glorious Jaxon level derp that will do nothing but fry brain cells.

I know they got mentioned in the New Sith Wars section of the Essential Guide to Warfare but if you check the Great Sith War era Republic Command ship , http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Republic_command_ship, appears to be a mix of wood and metal and the Republic Battleship from that era, http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Republic_battleship_(Great_Sith_War) , appears to be primarily made of wood with a few metal thrusters and such.

Looks like brown paint to me. Honestly, I like the aesthetic. It would've been cool if KotOR/TOR used it. But then, I think the developers wanted to make a Star Wars game. Using that design wouldn't have looked like Star Wars most are familiar with.

The command ship might be brown paint but everything about the battleship's look screams wooden planks to me. I don't mind that the look different but wooden spacecraft are utterly absurd to me and honestly from the side the Battleship looks a lot like a wooden ship whose design inspired the Nebulon-B

It would seem reasonable to me to simply use the T-65 stats for the T-70, and a similar solution for the old/new TIEs. however, if you're flying the old ships against the new ones, just add boost or setback dice to rolls to represent the better tech (e.g. the 'whole' T-70 gets the superior quality when compared to the T-65)

I agree that the base model is the same, so big changes are unlikely, but remember, the Z-95 might be as far away from the T-65 as the T-70 is to the T-65?

Maybe a higher Strain treshhold but less Hull? To me they look a little less bulky. Or a Hardpoint more? something along those lines.

oh, and more costly and rare obviously.

I am really curious how EotE will react to Ep.7

As far as these mechanics go, I don't see it as much different. I can't see boosting speed, handling, shields, or weapons...any boosts invalidates a host of other ships, e.g.: if you boost speed you have an overpowered A-Wing. Maybe hull or strain could be tweaked...

In the X-Wing game you can balance things because of the point costs. No such thing here.

There's these little things called credit costs and availability in setting which balance things. As for altering the ship they could always give it proper Heavy Lasers instead of the Extended Range Medium Laser the B-Wing has in place of a heavy

As far as these mechanics go, I don't see it as much different. I can't see boosting speed, handling, shields, or weapons...any boosts invalidates a host of other ships, e.g.: if you boost speed you have an overpowered A-Wing. Maybe hull or strain could be tweaked...

In the X-Wing game you can balance things because of the point costs. No such thing here.

There's these little things called credit costs and availability in setting which balance things. As for altering the ship they could always give it proper Heavy Lasers instead of the Extended Range Medium Laser the B-Wing has in place of a heavy

Um, the only difference this system has between a medium laser cannon and a heavy laser cannon is the range (Close vs. Short, which is what is shown on the B-wing).

As far as these mechanics go, I don't see it as much different. I can't see boosting speed, handling, shields, or weapons...any boosts invalidates a host of other ships, e.g.: if you boost speed you have an overpowered A-Wing. Maybe hull or strain could be tweaked...

In the X-Wing game you can balance things because of the point costs. No such thing here.

There's these little things called credit costs and availability in setting which balance things. As for altering the ship they could always give it proper Heavy Lasers instead of the Extended Range Medium Laser the B-Wing has in place of a heavy

Um, the only difference this system has between a medium laser cannon and a heavy laser cannon is the range (Close vs. Short, which is what is shown on the B-wing).

That's exactly what I was complaining about. Rather then make a proper Heavy Laser, which would do more damage then a Medium Laser they instead gave the Heavy Laser the same damage output as the Medium but with a longer range. Especially jarring in the case of the B-Wing because the B-Wing's main Laser is supposed to be more destructive then any other fighter mounted Laser in this era.

And they seemingly broke their own rules here

Light Ion Cannon Damage 5

Medium Ion Cannon Damage 6

Heavy Ion Cannon Damage 8

Battleship Ion Cannon Damage 9

Light Turbolaser Damage 9

Medium Turbolaser Damage 10

Heavy Turbolaser Damage 11

Light Laser Damage 5

Medium Laser Damage 6

Heavy Laser Damage 6

The pattern is pretty clear with the Heavy Laser bring the only exception to the rule that a heavier weapon of the same type does more damage.

A house rule to increase the heavy laser cannon to damage 7 certainly won't break the game.

True that's what my group does and boosts the cost by 1,500 since that's the cost difference between the Light Laser and the medium Laser where the only difference between them is the one damage. What I don't understand is why FFG set the Heavy's damage to 6 in the rules.

I know that E-wings are not T-70's, but E-wings were supposed to replace the X-wings. Maybe until FFG comes out with official stats just use E-wings with a few obvious changes like 4 cannons instead 3...

I'm generally of the opinion (both as a GM and for SW lore in general) that advancements in warfare, after several dozen millennia, are both gradual, and across the board...and are as such to the point of being a non-factor. That is: we're not measuring laser cannon output in some sort of empirical unit of damage (if there even was such a thing), we're measuring it in an environment of averages when used against a typical target of such a weapon. We do the same thing for the abilities of ships to absorb and resist damage, and within those two constraints of dealing and accepting damage, the specific, granular damage "unit" is very much a fluid, dynamic thing.

That being said, I think that it's safe to say that in a galaxy where they've been using laser cannon, deflector shield, and hull plating technology for thousands of years, there are relatively few radical advancements to be made. Therefore, 30 years of laser cannon and deflector shield development represents a fairly minor change in overall capabilities, mostly in the form of efficiency and small incremental improvements. These improvements are, of course, across the board, meaning that the slight improvement that one fighter gets in laser damage, all the others (and it) also gets a similar improvement in durability and shielding, for an overall net wash. Thus, in RPG terms, the only way I reflect this advancement of technology in stats is when technology of significantly different eras are going up against one another. Clone Wars era to ANH? Not significant. Clone Wars era back to KoTOR era? Okay, we're going to apply a (very) slight modifier to represent a few thousand years of small, incremental improvements. But again, even before KOTOR, this technology had thousands and thousands of years to get itself to peak performance, so that Clone Wars era ship had still better respect its opponent.

It's just a fundamentally different tech situation than earth. They're in a galaxy that has seen virtually no game-changing technical innovation for thousands of years. Design philosophies change, sure, but the tech upon which those designs are built has been well-established from time immemorial. Here in 21st century Earth, there's simply no comparison to that. the oldest tech we have is all measured in the single-digit millenia range. Conversely, over the past 50 to 100 years, we've seen a technology leap that, to this point, the Earth has never before seen, or even come close to. Perhaps the closest analogy to the fighter advancement I can get would be to look at bow & arrow combat on earth. Until the mass adoption of gunpowder in the mid to late Renaissance, archers had been the main form of anti-infantry ranged weaponry for centuries...dating back to ancient Greece and beyond. Going from ancient Greece to, say, the Wars of the Roses, you have a few thousand years where archery was the dominant form of ranged combat. Had there been advancements in that time? Most certainly. Had the bow and arrow changed so dramatically that in 1470 they were unrecognizable from their 2000 BC antecedents? Certainly not. Had tactics to use them become more evolved and effective? Probably. Had the armor, shields, and tactics used by line troops evolved to better protect against them? Sure. Would the average Lancastrian footsoldier from the late 15th century still had to respect a time-travelling Greek archer? Absolutely. So you see...even though it's a smaller scale of 3500 years or so, there's somewhat of an example of a dominant technology seeing improvements, but with the technology that counters it also improving at a rate where the improvements effectively cancel one another out in real time...and even if you don't account for those improvements, the tech still retains most of its effectiveness.

My thoughts are as follows: Keep the same stats for the x-wing and either add on a boost die for the new tech, or a setback to represent the older tech. Add this to all rolls. I lean towards the setback as players can remove those easier, and as a GM you should always be adding them liberally. If just to make the talents that remove them worthwhile, and it is a simple and elegant way to represent tech levels without whole new stats.

TIE/FO stats: add a shield 1/-/-/- Setback to old TIEs. Voila! New Era, easy peasy, lemony squeezy!