Have those of you clamoring for the Tector actually looked closely at the Kuat Refit art? If not, go look at it again.
Chimera ISD
If we are going to get another Star Destroyer why not a Secutor? Another medium, same point range as a Victory but sqn rather than firepower orientated.
32 minutes ago, slasher956 said:If we are going to get another Star Destroyer why not a Secutor? Another medium, same point range as a Victory but sqn rather than firepower orientated.
How can it be medium when it’s bigger than an ISD?
Plus we just got a carrier for imperials, can’t see them doing another.
I don’t know how you make a more Squadron orientated Victory whilst keeping the firepower.
The Victory 1 has ridiculous stats for everything apart from speed.
17 minutes ago, ISD Avenger said:How can it be medium when it’s bigger than an ISD?
Plus we just got a carrier for imperials, can’t see them doing another.
Re:Size.... legion has it as larger, Canon has it as existing 
About the light carrier existing... and? why cant we get a heavy carrier? one with inbuilt boosted comms for example
Just now, TheCallum said:I don’t know how you make a more Squadron orientated Victory whilst keeping the firepower.
The Victory 1 has ridiculous stats for everything apart from speed.
who said keeping the firepower..... drop the firepower slightly OR make it a large with the same firepower
So a more expensive, tankier Quasar?
I don’t understand what that role that fills in the game.
The Vic has Flight Commander, boosted comms, and relay to help make up for its speed, and the last two also help keep the Quasar alive.
What points range are you picturing this ship? Maybe seeing your idea of stats might be useful.
Quite often suggestions for new ships come down to just getting new models, which is cool, but not necessarily good for the game.
55 minutes ago, slasher956 said:Re:Size.... legion has it as larger, Canon has it as existing
About the light carrier existing... and? why cant we get a heavy carrier? one with inbuilt boosted comms for example
You mean a Ton-Falk class carrier?
14 hours ago, Thrakhath said:Have those of you clamoring for the Tector actually looked closely at the Kuat Refit art? If not, go look at it again.
It might be missing its belly hangar - but it still has a lump that looks like a belly reactor dome.
1 hour ago, TheCallum said:So a more expensive, tankier Quasar?
I don’t understand what that role that fills in the game.
The Vic has Flight Commander, boosted comms, and relay to help make up for its speed, and the last two also help keep the Quasar alive.
What points range are you picturing this ship? Maybe seeing your idea of stats might be useful.
Quite often suggestions for new ships come down to just getting new models, which is cool, but not necessarily good for the game.
yeah thats the trouble with what they have stat and command wise....
& yeah to be fair my suggestion was more about another ship rather than another variant of something we already have two expansions (four cards) of ... the ISD :s
Although I wonder if they could do a flagship upgrade card? then you could have one that says ISD Flagship -x points Or Pelta Flagship -x points....edit: they could do a generic one that gives you a Fleet command slot on the upgrade bar if you dont already have one for say 5 points
2 hours ago, slasher956 said:Re:Size.... legion has it as larger, Canon has it as existing
About the light carrier existing... and? why cant we get a heavy carrier? one with inbuilt boosted comms for example
And? And from a marketing perspective I doubt FFG are going to release another carrier anytime soon.
2 hours ago, DScipio said:You mean a Ton-Falk class carrier?
I want this.... just hanger, hull, engines, and maybe a squadron health boost or the like?
On 2/19/2018 at 5:41 PM, Ironlord said:You can see the filled in forward hangar - but you can also see a patch where the main hangar would be and isn't - replaced with textured surface.
ISD:
Sequence of Tector images
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/tector-class-star-destroyer.50015468/
Can anyone can provide a single image of a Star Destroyer rotated 180* from the "horizontal" plane of other cap ships, in any film?
How is this not just the top of the forward section of the Star Destroyer? Any differences in the model are going to be the result of the props department variations.
This whole Tector discussion seems very silly in light of the stills from the movie...
41 minutes ago, NotBatman said:Can anyone can provide a single image of a Star Destroyer rotated 180* from the "horizontal" plane of other cap ships, in any film?
How is this not just the top of the forward section of the Star Destroyer? Any differences in the model are going to be the result of the props department variations.
The point is - it seems very clear from the shots, that they created the shot by taking an existing Star Destroyer underside and modifying it a bit, before compositing in the other ships.
The forward top sections of Star Destroyers do not have those notches where the forward hangar used to be.
2 minutes ago, Ironlord said:The point is - it seems very clear from the shots, that they created the shot by taking an existing Star Destroyer underside and modifying it a bit, before compositing in the other ships.
The forward top sections of Star Destroyers do not have those notches where the forward hangar used to be.
Just as likely that they added those notches to the top side of an ISD as it is that they removed the hangars from the bottom.
But the conclusion is solid. A few seconds of footage is a bit trivial to worry over.
Edited by Democratus8 minutes ago, Democratus said:Just as likely that they added those notches to the top side of an ISD as it is that they removed the hangars from the bottom.
The terraces would have been visible. Features matching underside rather than topside of ISD, except for modifications, suggest that modding the underside was simpler and quicker.
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/dagger.html#destroyer5
1 hour ago, Lobokai said:I want this.... just hanger, hull, engines, and maybe a squadron health boost or the like?
http://kdyards.com/ships.view.php?id=5127
instead of: 