My bet is the next wave will see four ships
x2 Quaser carriers, 1 Rebels and 1 Imps. Differing paint schemes and upgrades but same ship stats.
x2 Neb B2's, same deal as the carriers.
Future Imperial Ships
I do like the idea put forth earlier of a clean, grey Dreadnought for the Imperials, while the Rebels get the usual "Rebel resourcefulness" of the Assault Frigate Mk 1 to show the obvious differences of each side, though it might be difficult to have solid meaningful differences between the Assault Frigate Mk 1 and Mk 2.
1 st Order Star Destroyer.
I know there's a lot of love for adding the Quasar-Fire class to the Imperial forces, but personally, when i think Imperial carriers, the Venator and the Secutor are the first ships i think of. Large, sleek warships with enough fighter support to make even Wedge Antilles wince.
But then again, us rebels now have the Phoenix Home as a dedicated light carrier-how many small-base carriers do we need?
Agreed i'd buy a venator if they made one but i'd much prefer a white ISD I.
But... WHY why pick one when BOTH is always an option!
But again I must bring up (and will at EVERY opportunity whether appropriate or not!) the new ISD model would be a chance to fix that atrocious and horrifically misshapen ship. Currently this ISD model feels more at home in a Turkish star wars knockoff film (look it up, it exists and is an amazingly horrible must see!)
FFG is usually so good about model accuracy, I don't know how they dropped the ball so hard with the ISD, absolutely one of the most iconic ships of the Star Wars brand!
Agreed i'd buy a venator if they made one but i'd much prefer a white ISD I.
But... WHY why pick one when BOTH is always an option!
But again I must bring up (and will at EVERY opportunity whether appropriate or not!) the new ISD model would be a chance to fix that atrocious and horrifically misshapen ship. Currently this ISD model feels more at home in a Turkish star wars knockoff film (look it up, it exists and is an amazingly horrible must see!)
FFG is usually so good about model accuracy, I don't know how they dropped the ball so hard with the ISD, absolutely one of the most iconic ships of the Star Wars brand!
I believe it is because FFG would not like to duplicate effort. ISD-Is already exist in the game; they are packaged in the Imperial Star Destroyer pack. Regardless of the model the ISD-I will not be depicted. If you are unhappy with this, there are third party modelers (Mel miniatures) that sell conversion kits. Perhaps you can even convince him to re-model an ISD-I from scratch... he does have an SSD in his inventory, so large ships are not beyond his capabilities.
I would have been much happier with an ISD-I depiction myself, but I don't think that's happening. It's like asking for a proper TIE Defender model true to the original flight simulator depiction. Not enough people care to make a big deal of it, it's done, people are moving on to other, newer ships.
Id love to see the Vigil corvette as a small ship along with the Acclamator.
Agreed i'd buy a venator if they made one but i'd much prefer a white ISD I.
But... WHY why pick one when BOTH is always an option!
But again I must bring up (and will at EVERY opportunity whether appropriate or not!) the new ISD model would be a chance to fix that atrocious and horrifically misshapen ship. Currently this ISD model feels more at home in a Turkish star wars knockoff film (look it up, it exists and is an amazingly horrible must see!)
FFG is usually so good about model accuracy, I don't know how they dropped the ball so hard with the ISD, absolutely one of the most iconic ships of the Star Wars brand!
I believe it is because FFG would not like to duplicate effort. ISD-Is already exist in the game; they are packaged in the Imperial Star Destroyer pack. Regardless of the model the ISD-I will not be depicted. If you are unhappy with this, there are third party modelers (Mel miniatures) that sell conversion kits. Perhaps you can even convince him to re-model an ISD-I from scratch... he does have an SSD in his inventory, so large ships are not beyond his capabilities.
I would have been much happier with an ISD-I depiction myself, but I don't think that's happening. It's like asking for a proper TIE Defender model true to the original flight simulator depiction. Not enough people care to make a big deal of it, it's done, people are moving on to other, newer ships.
Perhaps they will just move on, but it doesn't mean I have to accept it, I'm currently converting the Disney Red Box Star Destroyer to Armada use. It also means I will bring this up every chance I get, because FFGs model is atrocious.
Also, I've asked Mel if there was anything he could do, from make a red box details kit, to a whole star destroyer, but I didn't get a response.
As far as new ships, I'm big on the crusader, and it comes from Empire at War, Armadas original inspiration.
What do you mean the ISD model is atrocious? It's a bit wide perhaps but its not that bad at all.
People are different in tolerances and allowances... Some are very particular, others are very laisse faire ...
I don't see what the big deal is.
But that doesn't invalidate the fact it may be a big deal to someone.
I just feel its just lunacy to expect FFG to correct a "problem" that they don't believe exists - as far as they were concerned, they had access to the original models when they were doing the production runs for these... That is what they're as osensensibly based on, and until someone who works or has worked at LFL comes on and tells me otherwise, I'll tend to believe the production company when they have presented pictures of them getting access to said original models...
Vindicators would complete me.
Venators would complete me.
Vindicators would complete me.
Venators would complete me.
People are different in tolerances and allowances... Some are very particular, others are very laisse faire ...
I don't see what the big deal is.
But that doesn't invalidate the fact it may be a big deal to someone.
I just feel its just lunacy to expect FFG to correct a "problem" that they don't believe exists - as far as they were concerned, they had access to the original models when they were doing the production runs for these... That is what they're as osensensibly based on, and until someone who works or has worked at LFL comes on and tells me otherwise, I'll tend to believe the production company when they have presented pictures of them getting access to said original models...
Currently in another thread on Star Destroyers:
If you look at the Star destroyers in this image they are longer and narrower with much larger bridge sections than the model FFG released. I have no clue what model they were looking at when they produced it because there are no images of Star destroyers that look similar.
LFL ISD-II Avenger
http://68.media.tumblr.com/92aae47920d69572b604a9079045cde3/tumblr_og0g6u50Ht1s2wio8o2_1280.jpg
Movie still Empire Strikes Back
https://lumiere-a.akamaihd.net/v1/images/Star-Destroyer_ab6b94bb.jpeg?region=0%2C50%2C1600%2C800
Movie still Rogue One
The following Disney licensed toys are more accurate than FFG by a wide margin.
Revell model kit
Disney die cast Star destroyer
I get it, it seems nitpicky and many people don't/can't see a difference, but it's a pretty major deviation from very easily searched photos.
It's also a huge disappointment when the model standard FFG has previously held themselves to is so high. So when this is what I got, I was (and still am) pretty upset.
I don't know who the FFG modeler was for the ISD but given that previous standard they held, this is a pretty big product control oversight. I'd be curious to see what other models that particular designer worked on (I'm wondering if they're all expanded universe.)
All this coupled with some visual OCD on my part and I can't help but loathe the model everytime I look at it. I'm currently trying to modify the Disney die cast ISDs for Armada.
(I apologize for the use of links, but I'm posting from my cell phone and it's giving me trouble trying to insert pictures)
And that's cool.
Some of us just don't care, either. I have precisely 0 OCD tendencies, and enjoy the game - and the models - for what they are.
Some people care about the Rules, for example - Like I do.
But there are some people out ther ewho just don't care for rules, either. The way they're written, or seemingly intended, or interpreted.
Its cool.
I'm just not a fan of someone going over and over and over on a point that's... already been gotten to.
I just don't understand it.
Edited by DrasnightaAnd that's cool.
Some of us just don't care, either. I have precisely 0 OCD tendencies, and enjoy the game - and the models - for what they are.
Some people care about the Rules, for example - Like I do.
But there are some people out ther ewho just don't care for rules, either. The way they're written, or seemingly intended, or interpreted.
Its cool.
I'm just not a fan of someone going over and over and over on a point that's... already been gotten to.
I just don't understand it.
And that's cool, but I'm a Star Wars nerd, and to me, that type of thing matters, theme is ALL that ties me to this game. That's it. Nothing else. At all. Were it not Star Wars, I doubt it would have even gotten a glance on the shelf. And 0 cents or cares would have been spent.
I know from your previous posts, you are all about the game and rules, not the universe or theme it's tied to, and that's cool. It's kinda like that undeadguy or whatever his tag is who has openly stated he hates everything Star Wars. Different people, different interests, same game. There are bound to be conflicts.
Unfortunately for me, it seems FFG is more interested in rules than theme. Beneficial to your camp not mine, that's all. So when I complain just keep that in mind. Different people, different interests, same game. End result, we both have the same common goal, a successful game that will continue to see support.
Just a heads up, I will, at every opportunity, continue to complain and bring up the ISD issue I feel is a thing until an FFG representative contacts me about it or (and preferably) FFG releases a NEW and correct ISD model!
So if you feel the need, just block me so my posts no longer show for you. I will not be offended.
I don't know who the FFG modeler was for the ISD but given that previous standard they held, this is a pretty big product control oversight. I'd be curious to see what other models that particular designer worked on (I'm wondering if they're all expanded universe.)
All this coupled with some visual OCD on my part and I can't help but loathe the model everytime I look at it. I'm currently trying to modify the Disney die cast ISDs for Armada.
I think you're going to have to post better comparisons than that, because all I'm seeing (so far) is someone who doesn't understand how camera perspective correction works?
The FFG model is fine? I mean, compare things that would be in the same plane - is the bridge section very slightly wider as the top superstructure directly beneath it? Yes, it is. Are the sensor globes on top proportioned correctly to the structure directly underneath them? Indeed. Is the height of the "bridge structure" about twice as tall as the "mast" directly beneath it? Yup.
Lemme tell ya, though - perspective distortion is a thing .
Trust me on this - get even a half-decent digital camera (point-and-shoot is fine, you don't need to go full DSLR), just NOT A CELL PHONE CAMERA (they can't replicate the effect), and switch on 'macro mode', and take some shots of your FFG mini from no more than 4" away from it. You'll notice the model looks exactly like the movie model.
I'm also something of a perfectionist when it comes to model spaceships... don't give me an opportunity to rail against WizKid's Excelsior from their Attack Wing line. FFG's ISD however is serviceable enough to be satisfactory for the game, even if the engine bells sticking out raises some eyebrows. Visually the ship is still impressive and there aren't *that* many obvious flaws.
You have to pick your battles. Like my example above with the "Real" TIE Defender... the original game depiction is so buried by the Decipher TIE Interceptor steroid version that it's not worth trying. Nobody is going to remember the original, and the Decipher TIE/D has already been canonized by Rebels, so there's no going back. I think the only thing that could have "saved" the ISD for a proper depiction was someone paying obsessive care to detail that we have. Their modeler probably found the references, pitched the sculpt to the art director, who signed off on it and got it finalized based on a printed prototype.
Edited by NorsehoundI'm also something of a perfectionist when it comes to model spaceships... don't give me an opportunity to rail against WizKid's Excelsior from their Attack Wing line. FFG's ISD however is serviceable enough to be satisfactory for the game, even if the engine bells sticking out raises some eyebrows.
The only shots with the engine bells not sticking out, are of incomplete models:
In the TESB movie itself, the bells are visible in the shot where they're seen colliding.
I don't know who the FFG modeler was for the ISD but given that previous standard they held, this is a pretty big product control oversight. I'd be curious to see what other models that particular designer worked on (I'm wondering if they're all expanded universe.)
All this coupled with some visual OCD on my part and I can't help but loathe the model everytime I look at it. I'm currently trying to modify the Disney die cast ISDs for Armada.
I think you're going to have to post better comparisons than that, because all I'm seeing (so far) is someone who doesn't understand how camera perspective correction works?
The FFG model is fine? I mean, compare things that would be in the same plane - is the bridge section very slightly wider as the top superstructure directly beneath it? Yes, it is. Are the sensor globes on top proportioned correctly to the structure directly underneath them? Indeed. Is the height of the "bridge structure" about twice as tall as the "mast" directly beneath it? Yup.
Lemme tell ya, though - perspective distortion is a thing .
Trust me on this - get even a half-decent digital camera (point-and-shoot is fine, you don't need to go full DSLR), just NOT A CELL PHONE CAMERA (they can't replicate the effect), and switch on 'macro mode', and take some shots of your FFG mini from no more than 4" away from it. You'll notice the model looks exactly like the movie model.
Its not a perspective thing, I'm sorry, hold an FFG destroyer at any of the angles the photos are at, its WAY off base, if you don't see it, then I cant help you with perspectives. The bridge alone is half the size it should be. The superstructure, for the width of the hull, needs to be larger (to match the bridge section) the length is off... Its really just a hacked rush job to push production when they were crazy behind schedule and the community was hemorrhaging players.
There are 3 key areas its off:
1: The bridge is too small
2: The hull is too wide at the back
3: Its too snub nosed
Honestly though, if you narrowed its nose slightly, and narrowed the back significantly, it would bring it more into appropriate scale. But really, it just needs a complete overhaul.
I regret having ordered 2 of the things, I would have just found a way to buy the cards and bases off eBay had I known it was such a poor model.
If you'd like to post those perspective shots to match the posted photos, by all means.
(If you happen to be defensive because you're the designer.... then maybe a different career choice? I hear brand name knockoffs don't need much accuracy to the original!)
I'm also something of a perfectionist when it comes to model spaceships... don't give me an opportunity to rail against WizKid's Excelsior from their Attack Wing line. FFG's ISD however is serviceable enough to be satisfactory for the game, even if the engine bells sticking out raises some eyebrows. Visually the ship is still impressive and there aren't *that* many obvious flaws.
You have to pick your battles. Like my example above with the "Real" TIE Defender... the original game depiction is so buried by the Decipher TIE Interceptor steroid version that it's not worth trying. Nobody is going to remember it, and that TIE/D has already been canonized by Rebels, so there's no going back. I think the only thing that could have "saved" the ISD for a proper depiction was someone paying obsessive care to detail that we have. Their modeler probably found the references, pitched the sculpt to the art director, who signed off on it and got it finalized based on a printed prototype.
Problem is, this isn't some retconned design, this was in the original trilogy, this was in Rogue One, a crashed one was even in TFA! As mentioned above, this looks like a rush job, it looks like they grabbed a 1st year graphics art student and said we have your cat, you have 2 hours!
If all their models were as off as this, Armada would be as dead as the Wizards of the Coast game!
In the TESB movie itself, the bells are visible in the shot where they're seen colliding.
....although, FWIW, I'd be *very* cautious of taking that 'colliding' shot at its face.
I mean, for real... look at the shadows! Or, hell, if not the shadows, at least the shape of the round dome on the bottom of the ships! (Hint: it's not round! IE., the ship bottoms are being viewed at an off-angle! )
I can agree that the engine bells might be a little oversized - but not that oversized. Even Fractalsponge shows them in his ISD shots ("Imperator" - later images)
http://fractalsponge.net/gallery/
(I also recall reading that his was a bit broader than the real ISD II - proportioned more like the ISD I - so all he had to do was change turrets and tractor beam array to get a pretty accurate ISD I image)
Ok then, back on topic of new cool stuff for Armada...
So beside from some of the great ship suggestions so far, is there anything else they could release as flotillas?
While both are fantastic and provide a range of options for employment, I'd be surprised if they only release two flotilla class packs.
The Braha'tok-class gunship could work for the Rebels, being exactly the right size.
For the Empire - maybe the Guardian-class light cruiser? It's a bit small though - almost as small as a Decimator:
The Braha'tok-class gunship could work for the Rebels, being exactly the right size.
For the Empire - maybe the Guardian-class light cruiser? It's a bit small though - almost as small as a Decimator:
They created the Raider specifically for one of their games, wouldn't be to far fetched that they might invent a new imperial gunship if they cant find something already in existence.
I can agree that the engine bells might be a little oversized - but not that oversized. Even Fractalsponge shows them in his ISD shots ("Imperator" - later images)
http://fractalsponge.net/gallery/
(I also recall reading that his was a bit broader than the real ISD II - proportioned more like the ISD I - so all he had to do was change turrets and tractor beam array to get a pretty accurate ISD I image)
Fractalsponges work, (as incredible and detailed as they are) are in many cases his own interpretation and not accurate to the actual cannon material. His ISD while closer, is still off in all three categories mentioned above. As are a number of his other works. That being said, I prefer his work to the actual thing in a number of cases, such as his new Victory Star destroyer.
Edited by Gadgetron