16 minutes ago, Arrakus said:

Prove that it doesn't match up.

Seewhatididthere.

Look I'm not going dance this game. Nor am I going to go do the works for others. Everyone here are highly capable individuals with the same access to the same information.

I did that in the post you responded to: I noted that the HWK cannot match the sensor range or Armor of the Madalorian shuttle, and it takes up 4 of the HWK's hard points just to get the astromech slot and weapons of the shuttle.

So having no nav-computer makes the astro-slot manditory. So I am presuming that the astro-slot comes standard. The HWK290 has a navi-computer so it does need a astromech. Plus any mechanic sitting in coach can do what an astromech can do, so IMO the special astromech options are a wash. Because of that, I do not see that astro-slot as boon that the HWK-290 has to match.

Hull, strain and armor goes to the "shuttle". Speed and handling are slightly in the HWK290 favor as the HWK290 can increase both while the "shuttle" has to choose one or the other. Fire power and utilitarian goes to the HWK290.

The asto-slot is the key to this conversation. People can agree or disagree that it is a boon. If one thinks it is, great, have the "shuttle" be the #1 sil3. If one does not, then IMO the HWK290 still gets the nod due to its extreme flexibility to be whatever the players need/want it to be.

E.g.

Combat HWK290

1hp 4x long nose m.lasers

1hp 2x Proton torps

3 remaining HP are player preference. Below are just my opinions.

1hp Ion drive (+1 speed)

1hp 4x light turret ion cannons

1hp targeting system

There's certainly no downside to having an astromech slot, and it offers some nifty options, especially if there is a PC astromech. The speed boost and defensive boosts are both very useful.

Also, I don't think that long nose medium lasers are a legal choice for aftermarket weapons added through attachments. They are a unique system limited to a single craft.

3 hours ago, Arrakus said:

So having no nav-computer makes the astro-slot manditory. So I am presuming that the astro-slot comes standard. The HWK290 has a navi-computer so it does need a astromech. Plus any mechanic sitting in coach can do what an astromech can do, so IMO the special astromech options are a wash. Because of that, I do not see that astro-slot as boon that the HWK-290 has to match.

That is plainly wrong. The astromech slot allows a competent PC to increase the ships speed by one, cap the defense out and still have access to a few more little fun options. "Any mechanic" can do little by comparison. Astromechs are that awesome and for that very reason the astromech slot is worth 2 hardpoints. Even if you use an NPC droid, it is easy enough to at least activate the speed increase maneuver when needed.

And btw, the Aka'jor from friends like these is already modified, the shields and weapons are after market mods, meaning the original HPs from the ship are 5, while it has just that astromech socket and extra HT and 2 armor extra over the HWK-290. Now the HWK-290 has weak shields over the astromech socket, which still leaves the extra HT and extra armor as advantage for mando shuttle. Does this really sound to you like the 290 has any advantages here? Because if I do count, I see the shuttle 2 hardpoints ahead and with a better synergy with rigger characters on top as you can increase the armor by 2 further to end up at those sweet armor 6 which almost completely negates incoming blaster and laser cannon fire. The HWK-290s base armor of 2 does not even get close to that level, even if you spend those two hardpoints for the armor upgrade, you end up still with 4 armor in best case, those two points of extra armor are nothing you can catch up too with just the 2 hardpoint armor +1 attachment.

I don't think you can hold your position much longer, and I did not even start into actual good dogfighting ships like the A-Wing, X-Wing, TIE-Interceptor or Protectorate Fighter which all have an easy time outmaneuvering the HWK-290 unless the ship goes with the astromech socket, Ion Turbines and a astromech PC … which is important as the HWK-290 does not have the armor and HT + armor to just take the hits, it goes doing usually in one turn to missiles + lasers

On 2/23/2017 at 1:48 PM, Desslok said:

Plus there's the problem of it being so darn small. Have a crew more than 4? Need to evacuate that exploding ship and rescue orphans? You're probably out of luck.

"Quickly, children! Into the fuel tank!"

It was said on the previous page that at this time, it is unknown what is and what is not after market/modified for the Aka'jor. If the base line assumptions change to suites ones opinion then the conversation goes no where fast. Look, I am not going to dance this dance. Arguing/debating over the internet, in forum or in a chat room is like competing in the Special Olympics. Win or lose every is still... "special".

Referring to page 72-73 SOT and 248 AOR & the fact that space combat is a game of rocket tag. IMO the difference between the mechanic riding coach and an astro-slot is not big enough to warrant spending the extra 2HP, UNLESS the group has a PC astromech and/or the ship has no nav-computer. If people want to think otherwise, great, have at it. I said it before and will say it again, if someone thinks that a 2HP astro slot that gives the NPC/PC the ability to do two specialized maneuvers, Increase Power, (+1sp -2Hnd), & Watch Your Back (Boost(s) to 1 def zone), is a boon then great give the Aka'jor the nod (Target Lock functions the same as Fire Discipline).

Until further information is provided on what is and what is not standard on the Aka'jor, in IMO the HWK290 gets the nod. But it is very close.

Well, if situationally being able to get a speed 3, sil 4 ship (or speed 2 with High Output Ion Turbine) to be able to use Gain the Advantage is seen as important, then Increase Power is very useful. Personally I think it should be limited in the same was as Full Throttle to disallow this (or both allow it), which would reduce the benefit. Certainly adding large numbers of defence dice from an Astromech with large pools could be pretty nice, though I think it's a little unbalanced that Astromechs can do things no other character can do. It's certainly thematic that the Astromech can do things from an Astromech slot than can be fitted to an otherwise one man ship, but seems strange that they can do things that would seem to be otherwise possible for, say, a mechanic at the right ship's station.

Not gonna argue that pc astromechs are awesome."OP" if you like.

What I do argue is that you are playing rocket tag in a dogfight when your ship has has 5 or maybe even 6 armor. Every point of armor brings increasing amounts of "time to live", the Aka'jor is one of the few ships which can be build defensively around the idea of defense and armor, that suits especially well with rigger/modder astromech characters which can use all those advantages of the ship and use their talents as multiplier for them. It becomes a lot less rocket tag when you can take a pair of concussions missiles or a dozen 2 success 2 advantages medium laser shots.

Other characters will prefer other ships, my Hotshot/Pilot for example would always prefer the Fang fighter and A-Wing over either of other options when flying alone, but always something with astromech socket when flying with his RX. Your character build and the circumstances matter greatly to what ship is the best for the job. The talents and different interactions in combat are actually rather good designed around different strengths in a dogfight. From the Allrounds like pilot to the speedy arc dodging hotshots to the heavy armor and repair heavy options of the rigger.

" Until further information is provided on what is and what is not standard on the Aka'jor, in IMO the HWK290 gets the nod. But it is very close.", is close enough to be not worth arguing, especially as the the HWK.290 can be built into something totally different than the Aka'jor. V-Wing, X-Wing, Y-Wing, A-Wing, Fang-Fighter, Miy'til, all all great ships too.

It is a little bit of a shame that the TIE/IN lacks the small target profile advantage from the Fang, it would definitely deserve it, along with the TIE/LN and TIE/Hunter. I guess FFG would have given at least the intercept now that small target profile if they would create it now. It seems to have become standard to allow those super nimble ships to reach sil 0 with tricky target, an custom attachment and some innate ability. But as mentioned, I guess the defender would have got his tractor beam too, with the same advanced targeting package as the lancer pursuit got.

Agree that a higher HT and Armor increase the ship's "time to die" number. And depending on the weapons used against the ship, the increase could be impressive (M.Lasers vs twin protons). Space combat in this system is still a game of rocket tag. Being able to shoot first is such a huge advantage that it can decide the outcome of almost any space combat encounter. It is only when these "extreme" sil3 ships are used does that become less so.

I would really like for the devs to comment on the modified version.

Another ship that should be added to the discussion is the Mandalorian Heavy Starfighter. With a comparable stats, decent weapon load out and 4 HPs standard. The ship brings a lot to the table.

I could definitely see points of view for anyone of them being #1,2,3.

I have already wrote a rules question about the normal version. I assume the astromech slot is fix, as the ship has no nav computer, and ask if the weapons and shields are the aftermarket attamnets added. I get most likely next month or so an answer, or never.

And it becomes a lot less rocket tag as well when fast ships and fighting for shooting positions via GtA are a thing, it more like not screwing up that GtA check in those cases, this is especially true when you fly either against larger minion groups or with/against ship with especially high armor and/or ht values or in squad combat. Sure if you are in a glass ship you are still needing that first initiative slot, but you won't spend it on shooting, but GtA instead on start turn-fight for superior position.

With the mando heavy fighter you mean the M12-L Kimogila heavy fighter from lords of nal hutta?

13 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

There's certainly no downside to having an astromech slot, and it offers some nifty options, especially if there is a PC astromech. The speed boost and defensive boosts are both very useful.

Also, I don't think that long nose medium lasers are a legal choice for aftermarket weapons added through attachments. They are a unique system limited to a single craft.

- Do not disagree that they add options. IMO, those options come at such a high cost with less than average gain that it really only comes practicable to groups where astromechs are players or VIP NPCs.

- Agree that the Long Nose M.Laser are something for the GM and player have to work out. However the crafting rules could be used to create something with similar affect. And having the party be able to have the choice to choose the weapons is head and shoulders more valuable than a ship having weapons come standard.

Since the crafting rules neither covers constructing vehicles, nor anything related to vehicles (such as attachments or weapons), anything done would be house rules based on extrapolating the existing rules. Which may not work too well, as what is reasonable at the character scale may not be so at larger scale. There are already balance issues with some crafted items, and balance issues with spacecraft RAW. Adding the two could easily create an unmanageable mess. I'm pretty sure there's a reason why the devs chose not to permit adding attachments to Gunnery weapons, and the same thinking probably went into the lack of crafting for items not at the personal scale.

The HWK-290 is so tiny, so while it's the most zippy transport ship ever made it's cramped living conditions for any more then 3 people. My PC owns a HWK-1000 which is somewhat larger, but even then he rarely allows the entire party on board simply because there isn't a lot of room.

One could turn a HWK-290 into a fighter, it's well suited for that role but also rather expensive and requiring a lot of fitting and re purposing. My PC owns a HWK-1000 which compariatively is an extremely poor frigater to use in combat, but it's modified with specialised engines and smuggling compartments to make it a really effective and fast smuggling vessel. It outruns, not outguns.

20 minutes ago, LordBritish said:

The HWK-290 is so tiny, so while it's the most zippy transport ship ever made it's cramped living conditions for any more then 3 people. My PC owns a HWK-1000 which is somewhat larger, but even then he rarely allows the entire party on board simply because there isn't a lot of room.

One could turn a HWK-290 into a fighter, it's well suited for that role but also rather expensive and requiring a lot of fitting and re purposing. My PC owns a HWK-1000 which compariatively is an extremely poor frigater to use in combat, but it's modified with specialised engines and smuggling compartments to make it a really effective and fast smuggling vessel. It outruns, not outguns.

A HWK-290 with armaments added is still likely to cost less than an X-wing.

Mechanically possibly, but I assume the parts brought for a HWK-290 can only fit a 290 and thus simply aren't available in the quantity required to manufacturer a HWK fighters; I find it very suspect that the alliance would find it easier to establish a factory line of HWKs then X-wings.

The G-1A Heavy Starfighter. pg 59 No Disintegrations

Silouette 3, Speed 4, Handling -1, Fore 2, Aft 1, Armor 3, HT 14, ST 13

Hyperdrive: 2, Backup 10

Sensor Range: Short

Ship's Complement: 1 Pilot, 1 Co-Pilot

Passenger: 3

Hard Points: 4

Weapons: 2x medium laser, 2x concussion missiles

It has slightly less HP/ST than the HWK-290. But has higher armor and shields. Plus a back up hyperdrive. But the kicker for me is the two weapon systems that come stock in addition to the 4hps. Not a contender for the #1 nod, but in the conversation for the #2 or #3 position.

Yeah the G-1A is not bad, especially the weapons and hardpoints are a nice asset to the ship while 3 armor would allow to go pretty tanky too with spending the 4 hardpoints on armor and astromech or better shields.

edit: Now that I think about it. With Fore 2 and Aft 1, you only need defensive driving on top to bring the shields to cap, so neither astromech nor shields are really needed, if you go with Pilot/Rigger or Rigger/Squadron Leader you might actually just spend the remaining hardpoints on Ion Turbines and a targeting array, add a gunner brain and let the gunner brain do the shooting for you. Armor 5 is a solid tank, the advanced targetting array brings your gunner brain to solid aapp; or go to sil 0 with nightshadow,ecm and tricky target to increase your tank furthermore. Though don't do this if you can not make a reliable successful GtA check against faster vehicle.

On 2/23/2017 at 4:49 AM, Spice Junkee said:

Ok, so my group us using a HWK-290 as its transport, and when looking at it, at first glance it's a great ship once you add a gun or two! But holy cow, does it seem to have an unrealistic hull and strain. 18 hull t. for a silhouette 3 ship, and 18 strain t. just seem too much.

I havent found any other sil 3 ships with that high of either hull or strain, and it even outclasses sil 4, especially when it comes to strain threshold.

My question is this, is there something Im missing? Did the person that wrote that Hwk-290 statistics just have a mad hard-on for the ship and wanted it to be awesome? Is there errata somewhere I dont know about? I know that the consistency of ship-statistics with ffg games is maddening, but this just seems ridiculous.

I bought this in game and decked it out. Added the paramilitary mod and it added two quad turrets. Since my GM is cool with it we have it that it can carry 6 people now including the pilot and co pilot. Drawback is two of the peeps have to be in the turrets or in the cargo hold.

On 10/22/2019 at 3:13 AM, Metalghost said:

I bought this in game and decked it out. Added the paramilitary mod and it added two quad turrets. Since my GM is cool with it we have it that it can carry 6 people now including the pilot and co pilot. Drawback is two of the peeps have to be in the turrets or in the cargo hold.

While it is a light freighter, the template is probably meant for Sil 4 ships and should probably be tweaked if applied to the 290, particularly since you normally can't fit quads on a Sil 3 ship without oversized weapon mounts. And if your fitting turrets large enough to fit an entire person on ship as small as a 290, I'd definetely feel that the oversized weapon mount attachment would be appropriate.

Using the templates unmodified pushes the 290 from "top tier" to "outright disgusting", particularly if you also let it mount attachments in addition to the paramilitary conversion.

3 hours ago, penpenpen said:

While it is a light freighter, the template is probably meant for Sil 4 ships and should probably be tweaked if applied to the 290, particularly since you normally can't fit quads on a Sil 3 ship without oversized weapon mounts. And if your fitting turrets large enough to fit an entire person on ship as small as a 290, I'd definetely feel that the oversized weapon mount attachment would be appropriate.

Using the templates unmodified pushes the 290 from "top tier" to "outright disgusting", particularly if you also let it mount attachments in addition to the paramilitary conversion.

The templates from Dangerous Covenants are not intended for player use (note that prices are never mentioned):

Quote

If the PCs want to convert a civilian vehicle to paramilitary use, they can do so using attachments and modding those attachments. However, sometimes Game Masters don't have the time to build paramilitary conversions of existing vehicles from the ground up. These quick conversion templates allow the Game Master to adapt an existing craft's game characteristics quickly during play.

Of course, this thread was dormant for several years, so the point is largely moot...

10 hours ago, Ominovin said:

Of course, this thread was dormant for several years, so the point is largely moot...

The HWK 290 was created by wizards of the coast. And yes it is absolutely a mistake and absolutely to good to be true

Kyle Katarn's Moldy Crow was never a freighter it was a CEC VT-1300 Heavy Fighter. There are 2 seats in the cockpit. The door at the rear of the cockpit leads to the airlock/ladder well that lets you access the top hatch. There might be an equipment locker in there but that is it there is no cargo bay because beyond that the body of the ship is reduced less that half the height of the cockpit area.

Even FF's miniature for it is about the same length as a Y-wing and the body is just as thin. there is no room for cargo at all much less the additional passengers beyond the crew.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fculttvman.com%2Fmain%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2FgdMoldyCrow12.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fculttvman.com%2Fmain%2Fgino-dykstras-moldy-crow%2F&docid=oDl0m_qitqyZrM&tbnid=W_hDyTTdbi5DwM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwiKv9LCrrflAhVQTd8KHWbgCtsQMwiMASgsMCw..i&w=800&h=600&bih=937&biw=1920&q=star wars moldy crow&ved=0ahUKEwiKv9LCrrflAhVQTd8KHWbgCtsQMwiMASgsMCw&iact=mrc&uact=8

1 hour ago, Dakkar98 said:

The HWK 290 was created by wizards of the coast. And yes it is absolutely a mistake and absolutely to good to be true

Kyle Katarn's Moldy Crow was never a freighter it was a CEC VT-1300 Heavy Fighter. There are 2 seats in the cockpit. The door at the rear of the cockpit leads to the airlock/ladder well that lets you access the top hatch. There might be an equipment locker in there but that is it there is no cargo bay because beyond that the body of the ship is reduced less that half the height of the cockpit area.

Even FF's miniature for it is about the same length as a Y-wing and the body is just as thin. there is no room for cargo at all much less the additional passengers beyond the crew.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fculttvman.com%2Fmain%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2FgdMoldyCrow12.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fculttvman.com%2Fmain%2Fgino-dykstras-moldy-crow%2F&docid=oDl0m_qitqyZrM&tbnid=W_hDyTTdbi5DwM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwiKv9LCrrflAhVQTd8KHWbgCtsQMwiMASgsMCw..i&w=800&h=600&bih=937&biw=1920&q=star wars moldy crow&ved=0ahUKEwiKv9LCrrflAhVQTd8KHWbgCtsQMwiMASgsMCw&iact=mrc&uact=8

The jedi knight video games have been wiped from canon, what we have now is what we have now.

However the conversation ought to now be about the kst-100, and whether there are enough similar ships hwk-290, Aka'jor (maybe others but they don't instantly spring to mind) to not make it an anomaly/outlier.

15 minutes ago, EliasWindrider said:

However the conversation ought to now be about the kst-100

I KNEW IT! I KNEW YOU'D BRING IT UP! And in such a manner, wow .

Which book is the hwk-290 in?

1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

I KNEW IT! I KNEW YOU'D BRING IT UP! And in such a manner, wow .

Which book is the hwk-290 in?

Viluppo says FH:56, F-CRB:263. FH = far horizons, F-CRB is the force and destiny core rulebook.

http://swrpg.viluppo.net/transportation/starships/1481/