Ok, so being a panel away from being a Phantom originally bothered me too, but then I decided in my head canon that the Striker design helped inspire the design of the Tie Phantom. Cool right? Right? Anyone?

Well, it works for me.

I guess that means that the Interceptor was developed out of the Striker and the TIE Advanced combined.

I just hope, with a grim expression, that they have a justification for why the heck these lil' dudes aren't in the original movies. "Atmospheric only" would be fine. I guess we'll see.

Why would we need 3d infantry anyway? I mean yes it is nice, but it is not like we have 3d asteroids as part of the core boxes. Tokens could work fine.

Ok, so being a panel away from being a Phantom originally bothered me too, but then I decided in my head canon that the Striker design helped inspire the design of the Tie Phantom. Cool right? Right? Anyone?

Well, it works for me.

I guess that means that the Interceptor was developed out of the Striker and the TIE Advanced combined.

I just hope, with a grim expression, that they have a justification for why the heck these lil' dudes aren't in the original movies. "Atmospheric only" would be fine. I guess we'll see.

Is the Death Star atmospheric?

A seperate, though compatible, ground game would be awesome.

The sheer number of people online that have done custom games, would seem it would sell well.

Plus, the gozanti can carry two AT-AT's, so the scale is doable.

At scale that would put a person at just over a quarter inch. So, I would have to disagree. The scale is not doable for a ground game. At least if you want to have troopers. Which I do. Which is why I also play imperial assault, which doesn't allow the AT-AT because at scale it would be too big. Which I also want. Too sad for me.

It could be doable if the troops are as squads instead of individuals, coudln't it?

well i do know all the tie variants and ive never seen or heard about the STRIKER. dont know from where this striker is coming from. its the same about the renaming of the TIE-Interdictor to TIE-Punisher.

well i do know all the tie variants and ive never seen or heard about the STRIKER. dont know from where this striker is coming from. its the same about the renaming of the TIE-Interdictor to TIE-Punisher.

Why would we need 3d infantry anyway? I mean yes it is nice, but it is not like we have 3d asteroids as part of the core boxes. Tokens could work fine.

If they're dedicated atmospheric flyers, that would be a cool new approach to TIE Fighters, but it also would mean they don't really fit in X-Wing.

well i do know all the tie variants and ive never seen or heard about the STRIKER. dont know from where this striker is coming from. its the same about the renaming of the TIE-Interdictor to TIE-Punisher.

It's a completely new model done for the movie Rogue One. Apparently, the Mouse thinks every Star Wars movie should have it's own new TIEs.

Every movie in the OT added new TIEs, so they're just following tradition.

If they're dedicated atmospheric flyers, that would be a cool new approach to TIE Fighters, but it also would mean they don't really fit in X-Wing.

well i do know all the tie variants and ive never seen or heard about the STRIKER. dont know from where this striker is coming from. its the same about the renaming of the TIE-Interdictor to TIE-Punisher.

It's a completely new model done for the movie Rogue One. Apparently, the Mouse thinks every Star Wars movie should have it's own new TIEs.

Every movie in the OT added new TIEs, so they're just following tradition.

I guess I'm just sad because they could, instead of creating new ships, canonize the old Legends ships... (there are Legend ships for all time periods)

Why would we need 3d infantry anyway? I mean yes it is nice, but it is not like we have 3d asteroids as part of the core boxes. Tokens could work fine.

A Star Wars wargame with cardboard tokens for the infantry would be a criminally missed opportunity, and indescribably lame.

Call the game x-wing armour division and focus on repulsorcraft and speeders, as well as walkers.

Even with armor divisions and aerial and naval division's there is always a need for Infantry in warfare. Infantry are needed for capturing and holding objectives. They are needed to interface with civilian populations.

But even then some of the most evocative aspects of Star Wars was the personal feel of the heroes leading the troops against faceless Legions.

A ground combat expansion of X Wing would be empty without Infantry. With lasers the big vehicles aren't very well suited to fighting large groups of Infantry. Infantry squads can utilize heavy weapons like missile launchers or semi portable heavy lasers to take out medium vehicles. The best tool against these vehicle hunters can be other basic Infantry.

There is plenty of scope for Infantry to be fighting on the ground in Star Wars. Think of the battle for Hoth without Infantry.

The 1/270 scale equates to 6mm Infantry with is just fine for having fireteams of 3-5 Infantry per base or a heavy weapon and crew base.

The big question will be the speed differences between the ground and aerial units. I have some 1/270 AT-STs which should be fairly usable as slightly mobile turrets in a normal X Wing game. Moving in almost 360° direction at a max of 1 speed a turn.

Those are named ships? I thought they were incredibly ugly Uglies! Especially that U-Wing ("Hey, guys! Let's take a Y-Wing's cockpit (or is that a snowspeeder?), add an X-Wing's engines, and then graft it all to a giant tuning fork, so the ship can fly around and make sure our giant space pianos always sound perfect!")

As for the Striker, the more I look at it the more I could swear I've seen it somewhere before. It's clearly somewhat derivative of the Eta-2, but I could have sworn I'd seen a 2-winged TIE variant with the wings in that more standard configuration. Can anyone help me out?

Those are named ships? I thought they were incredibly ugly Uglies! Especially that U-Wing ("Hey, guys! Let's take a Y-Wing's cockpit (or is that a snowspeeder?), add an X-Wing's engines, and then graft it all to a giant tuning fork, so the ship can fly around and make sure our giant space pianos always sound perfect!")

As for the Striker, the more I look at it the more I could swear I've seen it somewhere before. It's clearly somewhat derivative of the Eta-2, but I could have sworn I'd seen a 2-winged TIE variant with the wings in that more standard configuration. Can anyone help me out?

Why U hate U-Wing ?

Anyways i think it looks like a TIE Phantom without the dorsal panel. I think it came about because of the rumored encounters rebs had with 2 cannoned interceptor prototypes before yavin.

Those are named ships? I thought they were incredibly ugly Uglies! Especially that U-Wing ("Hey, guys! Let's take a Y-Wing's cockpit (or is that a snowspeeder?), add an X-Wing's engines, and then graft it all to a giant tuning fork, so the ship can fly around and make sure our giant space pianos always sound perfect!")

As for the Striker, the more I look at it the more I could swear I've seen it somewhere before. It's clearly somewhat derivative of the Eta-2, but I could have sworn I'd seen a 2-winged TIE variant with the wings in that more standard configuration. Can anyone help me out?

I think I found it! The S-12 Blackbolt from Star Wars: The Old Republic!

Please tell me I'm not the only one seeing a resemblance here...

The TIE Striker strikes me as a ship that could have a TIE Fighter's base stats but share the Interceptors action bar and dial. Taken together it wouldn't be anything really special and just amounts to another TIE to throw in along with the new TAP.

f the infantry isn't even a focus of the game, and more emphasis is on speeders and walkers, I don't think that cardboard infantry - who wouldn't be able to likely hit a fast moving and flying target, or have weapons that can pierce the armour of an imperial walker, I don't think infantry would necessarily be needed at all.

Call the game x-wing armour division and focus on repulsorcraft and speeders, as well as walkers.

A Star Wars game that didn't even HAVE infantry would be a terrible, terrible mistake IMO.

Ok, so being a panel away from being a Phantom originally bothered me too, but then I decided in my head canon that the Striker design helped inspire the design of the Tie Phantom. Cool right? Right? Anyone?

Well, it works for me.

I guess that means that the Interceptor was developed out of the Striker and the TIE Advanced combined.

I just hope, with a grim expression, that they have a justification for why the heck these lil' dudes aren't in the original movies. "Atmospheric only" would be fine. I guess we'll see.

Is the Death Star atmospheric?

No the Death Star is no atmospheric, and if some potential AWFUL new-cannon writer tries to make it so, then they better also throw in the fact that said planet would be ripped apart gravitationally same with the Death Star itself. At the very least tides would go ballistic. And at that point the Death Star probably wouldnt even needto shoot said planet.

The TIE Striker was a variant of the TIE line starfighters used by the Galactic Empire . Equipped with advanced high-speed wings, it was faster than the standard TIE/LN starfighter and had an extra pair of laser barrels .

Okay so people who are trying to stat this ship as a two attack die ship just haven't done their home work.

hmm, so a few more greens moves and 3 Atk.

Heck, we could leave it at that and I'd be tickled. 3 reds but cheaper than an interceptor would be a spiffy place to be... have it lose the evade or some such to make up for it?

So the atmo fighters slower than the basic tie?

If it is only an atmospheric fighter then we need not concern ourselves with its stats. Unless of course FFG is going to to a wave of atmospheric "fighters" which would include the Cloud Car are rebel Snow Speeder as well.

As far as X-Wing is concerned there isn't a lot of space to make a TIE Fighter "faster and better armed" before you run right smack into the TIE Interceptor. What are you going to do, give the Striker a TIE Fighter dial with the Interceptor stats and upgrade bar? How much less is the TIE Fighter dial worth compared to the Interceptor's? I think one point could be pushing it.

Lets hope it doesn't end up fitting the 20-40 point imperial ace option. The more that space is flooded, the further Imperials are pushed to "Palp+X ace+Y ace".

50 shades of TIE...

Sweet Jesus...

The TIE Striker was a variant of the TIE line starfighters used by the Galactic Empire . Equipped with advanced high-speed wings, it was faster than the standard TIE/LN starfighter and had an extra pair of laser barrels .

Okay so people who are trying to stat this ship as a two attack die ship just haven't done their home work.

Theres not much homework we can do. On twitter we were told that the book isnt reliable / unfinished. Although it says there four laser cannons it might not have any at all. It probably will have cannons but forball we know it could be made to ram ships to death.

The TIE Striker was a variant of the TIE line starfighters used by the Galactic Empire . Equipped with advanced high-speed wings, it was faster than the standard TIE/LN starfighter and had an extra pair of laser barrels .

Okay so people who are trying to stat this ship as a two attack die ship just haven't done their home work.

Theres not much homework we can do. On twitter we were told that the book isnt reliable / unfinished. Although it says there four laser cannons it might not have any at all. It probably will have cannons but forball we know it could be made to ram ships to death.

Not to mention, without knowing any more specifics about the laser cannons, how do we know they're more powerful than the TIE/LN's?

I mean technically, mounting a dozen pellet rifles on a plane would give it more guns than an A-10, but I'd still rather have the latter's GAU-8 Avenger...