Where is everyone getting a length of 1100 meters for the Interdictor? Everything I've ever seen for an Immobilizer 418 Cruiser is 600 meters. The "interdictor star destroyers" are bigger, but what we got in the game is clearly the Cruiser variant. That would also have it scaled perfectly with the Pelta. I know, theres a "sliding" scale in Armada (which used to bug me more than it does know, I just think of the game table as an admirals threat display.

Beyond that, everything I've seen on the Venator has it within 100 meters or so of an MC80, so I think large is a better fit for it. Would also like to see it as a broadside ship, 4 red, 2 black or blue with an absolutely monstrous squadron value and 2 offensive slots.

29 minutes ago, Milienius said:

I like the VSD. I suppose this would be a more expensive version of it and slightly less than the ISD. It would be a mid range ship I suppose.

As to everyone else. I get that canonically the Venator is a fighter carrier but I question the balance of a single ship being able to naturally activate 5 squadrons without any upgrades or boosts.

Are there any other thoughts on the stats I posted. I know those cards are fun too look at but I hardly think those dice fall in line with the current trend of how ships are balanced in Armada.

Not only the dice but the overall for 88 points, it looks ridiculous. Way better than an ISD actually. If you want a specialiced carrier you already have the ISDI, if you dont want to spend that amout of points then you shouldt be able to activate that much squadrons. Or with a drawback, such as not being able to carry FCT and/or expanded hangar bay. Think, what if Yavaris could carry FCT or EHB? a single slot like that can be incredibly disbalancing. It must be payed in points. If you want something good it must be bad at something. All I saw here atm is boosting an VSD on everything.

13 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:

Where is everyone getting a length of 1100 meters for the Interdictor? Everything I've ever seen for an Immobilizer 418 Cruiser is 600 meters. The "interdictor star destroyers" are bigger, but what we got in the game is clearly the Cruiser variant. That would also have it scaled perfectly with the Pelta. I know, theres a "sliding" scale in Armada (which used to bug me more than it does know, I just think of the game table as an admirals threat display.

Beyond that, everything I've seen on the Venator has it within 100 meters or so of an MC80, so I think large is a better fit for it. Would also like to see it as a broadside ship, 4 red, 2 black or blue with an absolutely monstrous squadron value and 2 offensive slots.

The Interdictor size is because it is the new version from Rebels.

15 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:

Where is everyone getting a length of 1100 meters for the Interdictor? Everything I've ever seen for an Immobilizer 418 Cruiser is 600 meters. The "interdictor star destroyers" are bigger, but what we got in the game is clearly the Cruiser variant. That would also have it scaled perfectly with the Pelta. I know, theres a "sliding" scale in Armada (which used to bug me more than it does know, I just think of the game table as an admirals threat display.

Beyond that, everything I've seen on the Venator has it within 100 meters or so of an MC80, so I think large is a better fit for it. Would also like to see it as a broadside ship, 4 red, 2 black or blue with an absolutely monstrous squadron value and 2 offensive slots.

It's clearly not the Immobilizer.

It's clearly the Rebels Dictor. Which is clearly bigger than a VSD.

33 minutes ago, Milienius said:

I like the VSD. I suppose this would be a more expensive version of it and slightly less than the ISD. It would be a mid range ship I suppose.

As to everyone else. I get that canonically the Venator is a fighter carrier but I question the balance of a single ship being able to naturally activate 5 squadrons without any upgrades or boosts.

Are there any other thoughts on the stats I posted. I know those cards are fun too look at but I hardly think those dice fall in line with the current trend of how ships are balanced in Armada.

What about making your versions similar to the MC80 and Arq? Soooooo

-9 Hull

-3 Command

-4 Engineering

- 4 Shield front, 3 shield sides, 1 shield back

Speed 3 (II) (- I) (- - I)

brace, brace, redirect, contain

V-1: Squadron 4

Front Arc: 2 blue, 2 black

Side Arc: 3 red 3 blue

Rear Arc: 1 red 1 black

Anti-Squadron: 1 blue 1 black

Title, officer, 2x offensive, support, weapons, turbolaser

V-2: Squadron 2

Front Arc: 2 blue 2 black

Side Arc: 3 red 3 black

Rear Arc: 1 red 1 black

Anti-Squadron: 2 black

Title, officer, defensive, offensive, weapons, turbo, ordnance

For arcs, I was thinking something like the Arq but not as wide a rear. I'll have to check the templates when I get home. I don't think Imps need another front aligned ship and the Venator could fit that role.

V1 is the more expensive carrier version. Able to take EHB, RLB, Flight Commander, FCT and Flight Controllers, it is the best carrier. At a staggering 6 squad activation and numerous squad supporting abilities, this ship rivals the ISD I super carrier. I don't think I really need to explain anything else on the build. I was thinking upwards of 100-110 points for this because of the obscene opportunity cost at fielding all of the buffs for squads.

V2 is the brawler. At speed 3, it can close in fairly quickly, and being a large side arc ship, it can maximize the time for a broadside. It pairs well with Raiders and Glads, or with Vics for support. I like the defensive retrofit on this version because it means you can get into the fight and stay alive with RBD, ECM or AP. I never quite understood why the long range ships had defensive slots. I figured the close range ones would be the ones built to survive a knife fight and have the extra armor/equipment. This version would be cheaper, at around 90 points.

The Venator would introduce an entire new play style to Imps, without making any previous design obsolete. These builds mirror what the Rebels already have - a large base side arc and large base front arc ship. It's not nearly as strong as an ISD, which it shouldn't be, but it also doesn't replace the Vic as a supporting gun ship.

31 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

What about making your versions similar to the MC80 and Arq? Soooooo

-9 Hull

-3 Command

-4 Engineering

- 4 Shield front, 3 shield sides, 1 shield back

Speed 3 (II) (- I) (- - I)

brace, brace, redirect, contain

V-1: Squadron 4

Front Arc: 2 blue, 2 black

Side Arc: 3 red 3 blue

Rear Arc: 1 red 1 black

Anti-Squadron: 1 blue 1 black

Title, officer, 2x offensive, support, weapons, turbolaser

V-2: Squadron 2

Front Arc: 2 blue 2 black

Side Arc: 3 red 3 black

Rear Arc: 1 red 1 black

Anti-Squadron: 2 black

Title, officer, defensive, offensive, weapons, turbo, ordnance

For arcs, I was thinking something like the Arq but not as wide a rear. I'll have to check the templates when I get home. I don't think Imps need another front aligned ship and the Venator could fit that role.

V1 is the more expensive carrier version. Able to take EHB, RLB, Flight Commander, FCT and Flight Controllers, it is the best carrier. At a staggering 6 squad activation and numerous squad supporting abilities, this ship rivals the ISD I super carrier. I don't think I really need to explain anything else on the build. I was thinking upwards of 100-110 points for this because of the obscene opportunity cost at fielding all of the buffs for squads.

V2 is the brawler. At speed 3, it can close in fairly quickly, and being a large side arc ship, it can maximize the time for a broadside. It pairs well with Raiders and Glads, or with Vics for support. I like the defensive retrofit on this version because it means you can get into the fight and stay alive with RBD, ECM or AP. I never quite understood why the long range ships had defensive slots. I figured the close range ones would be the ones built to survive a knife fight and have the extra armor/equipment. This version would be cheaper, at around 90 points.

The Venator would introduce an entire new play style to Imps, without making any previous design obsolete. These builds mirror what the Rebels already have - a large base side arc and large base front arc ship. It's not nearly as strong as an ISD, which it shouldn't be, but it also doesn't replace the Vic as a supporting gun ship.

I like this, though I'm not sure I'd ever want to go spd 3 with it, even using Nav Commands.

Definitely let the double offensive retrofit off. That should be the sole purview of the ISD-I. Keep Support on both.

I don't have strong feelings about the specific stats: my gut feeling is a medium ship, broadsider but with a narrow front arc, and one variant that's high squadron and one that's more of a torpedo cruiser. My main feeling is broadsider, simply because it feels like it fits with the ship design (it's got a hanger down the middle for goodness sake), but also because I want it to bring something new and not simply be a reviewed Victory. They should be distinctive.

But one thing I would really like to see is a title or upgrade that reflects a neat little bit of trivia: according to Wookieepedia, Anakin Skywalker suggested that a heavy turbolaser be put in the hangar bay of Venators to protect them whilst the bay was open. You actually see this in 'Revenge of the Sith', when a Venator tears into a Separatist cruiser as Anakin and Obi-Wan fly past. I think you could either have it as a defensive retrofit or turbolaser upgrade that was a sort of ship equivalent of counter: if a ship attacks you at close range, you get to roll a black dice to do damage back at the arc they fired from that can't be tokened away. Or you could have it as a title for the Venator, maybe naming it 'Resolute' after Anakin's flagship.

Werent these things weaker and smaller than the VSD in firepower?

15 minutes ago, Irokenics said:

Werent these things weaker and smaller than the VSD in firepower?

No, they are larger. Wookiepedia says the 8 main guns on a Venator are similar to the ones on an ISD.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Venator-class_Star_Destroyer/Legends

I'm actually of the opinion that I want the Venator to be 5 Squadron and double offensive retrofit on one variant. But no support team or gunnery team slot. Lots of squads, but without the extra upgrades to make it crazy (no FCT or Flight controllers).

So the command variant to me would be Crew, Offensive, Offensive, Turbolaser. Maybe an ion slot Then give it mostly black and red armament. Slightly less than the 16 dice across L/F/R that ISDs have. Maybe 5/3/5 L/F/R

I feel like I keep seeing slightly different flavors of an ISD or VSD. I feel like the Venator presents an opportunity to create a ship thats nothing like the ISD or the VSD (this may upset some of the die hard purists of star wars cannon, but hey its a game and I like variety!). I think a broadsiding carrier that wont shy away from getting up close and personal with other ships but lacks the upgrade slots to be solely a damage dealer on its own Would really set it apart.

The below has a side arc that would make a Wookiee blush with envy but lacks turbo and ion upgrade slots to keep it from outshining an ISD as a damage dealer. It has 1 of each token and a defensive slot to give it some tanky staying power and navigation clicks that pair nicely with Jerjer. Its obvious weakness is its from arc with only 2 shields and a weak battery you are going to want to mind what you let into your front.

Where it really shines is with its squadron of 4 with 2 offfensive retrofits allowing it to be a fantastic squadron carrier. I'm invisioning a flock of ties being pushed along with FCT and activations.

I thinking this ship would be worth about 100-105pts

- 10 Hull

- 3 Command

- 4 Engineering

- 4 Squadron

- 2 Shield front, 4 shield sides, 2 shield back

Speed 3 (I) (- I) (- I I)

Brace, redirect, contain

Front Arc: 1 Red 1 blue

Side Arc: 2 red 2 blue 2 Black

Rear Arc: 1 blue 2 black

Anti-Squadron: 2 blue

Title, officer, 2x offensive, support, weapons, Defensive

Unique Title ability - 4 pts - At the end of the ships activation it may select 1 friendly squadron at distance 2 and restore 1 damage or select 1 enemy squadron at distance 2 and deal 1 damage.

4 hours ago, xerpo said:

Not only the dice but the overall for 88 points, it looks ridiculous. Way better than an ISD actually. If you want a specialiced carrier you already have the ISDI, if you dont want to spend that amout of points then you shouldt be able to activate that much squadrons. Or with a drawback, such as not being able to carry FCT and/or expanded hangar bay. Think, what if Yavaris could carry FCT or EHB? a single slot like that can be incredibly disbalancing. It must be payed in points. If you want something good it must be bad at something. All I saw here atm is boosting an VSD on everything.

The Command variant I listed with Squadron 5 native does not get Support or Weapons Team or Offensive Retrofit, and has good but not actually great battery, with zero native options for rerolls (besides CF tokens). At 88 points when originally tested, I found it actually to be mildly overcosted. The Star Destroyer with Squadron 4 gets OR and WT, but not Support Team. It might be slightly undercosted, but that side battery is devilishly hard to bring to bear on anything not a Large that doesn't want to face it. As far as it has no precendent in FFG's releases, that was actually part of the point, to create new and interesting ways that Armada could go in the future. Both variants suffer from relatively small upgrade bars for their cost (more Command than the Star Destroyer), a defense token layout that does not mesh well with the shields, atrocious maneuver, and a weaker side armament at medium range and beyond. You can claim they are improved VSDs, but it is inevitable the ships will engender comparisons either to that ship or if a broadside ship to the Arquitens (if not well armed) and the MC80 or Assault Frigate (if it is).

For interested parties, I am attaching below the arcs of the older versions, which the new designs retained, and a much older design focused on a red die broadside cruiser. Do with them what you will.

the balance of the game is centered around the diversity of its ships. also food for thought, the squadron game is geared rebel if you go one on one. Hell a y wing can take a tie in that. Where the empire thrives in squads is quantity and the synergy on their squads. what imperial admiral wouldnt want a ship to give an mc80 a run for its money in squad and armament. the venator is a cross between the mc80, assault frigate, and a victory class. not to mention it is absolutely georgous man. and jerry's name is but one word, however, the point is clear: clone wars ships love Mr. J look at what ship he came with: the arqui which is itself a micro-venator. did I mention that the venator is the best ship in star wars?

Vic: ~900 metres

New Interdictor: 1000 metres?

Venator: 1137 metres

ISD: 1600 metres or so

I would love to see the Venator in game.

Some good ideas here, peeps. Good work, all

The thing about the Venator is that it is a ship geared heavily towards carrying fighters.

It had stronger shielding to compensate for the weaker armor due to the flight deck.

Whilst the Victory is a gunship, the Venator is a carrier, they were combined to form the ISD.

It needs to be able to take flight controllers, fighter cord team, flight commander...it needs to be a dedicated carrier.

I'd put it in at around hull 7, with 4/3/3/1 with two redirects and a brace....

I dare say take off the turbolaser upgrade.

I am so glad to see so many different ideas and thoughts coming out of this thread!

To people saying that the Venator shouldn't be a replacement for the VSD. The game has limited stats, there will be similar ships with similar roles and it will come down to personal preference. There's no reason ships can't share movement stats, or weapon stats, or whatever with one another. In this case, one's a tank and spear, the other a carrier and broadside. They can share many stats with only a few tweaks.

This is way too big and powerful for the Venator. Compared to a ISD or even a VSD these ships were tiny. They were often dwarfed by Confed ships. I am fine putting them on a Medium base, I think their stats wouldn't be to far off from a Gup.

According to this graphic Ventors a much smaller than VSDs. Not that this is cannon or anything. But just because we loved the ship doesn't mean we need to make it more powerful than it was.

9 hours ago, Hrathen said:

According to this graphic Ventors a much smaller than VSDs. Not that this is cannon or anything. But just because we loved the ship doesn't mean we need to make it more powerful than it was.

Errr... No it isn't.

Edit: also, dafuq is that stupid-looking thing in the middle...?

38 minutes ago, Hrathen said:

According to this graphic Ventors a much smaller than VSDs. Not that this is cannon or anything. But just because we loved the ship doesn't mean we need to make it more powerful than it was.

You really should look at this one more time.

VSD = 900

Venator = ?

14 hours ago, Prince of Moskova said:

I too love the Venator, but see including it and the fight against the Separatists as an entirely different version of Armada.

Besides all the cute brainstorming here, I completely agree with this guy. I could't see any game where late epV early epVI MC80s(ie) could face old ships from epII on like the venators. Every SS designed after that was meant to improve the Vclass or vary it someway to better. But definetely to take its place. Would not make any sense to me to see them on the table at the current timeline of armada. Maybe if FF come up with a completely new expansion with separatist and republic ships in a new clone wars campaign... but not now at all.

1 hour ago, xerpo said:

Besides all the cute brainstorming here, I completely agree with this guy. I could't see any game where late epV early epVI MC80s(ie) could face old ships from epII on like the venators. Every SS designed after that was meant to improve the Vclass or vary it someway to better. But definetely to take its place. Would not make any sense to me to see them on the table at the current timeline of armada. Maybe if FF come up with a completely new expansion with separatist and republic ships in a new clone wars campaign... but not now at all.

Something being better in stats isn't a problem in this game. Thats why things are point costed.

4 hours ago, xerpo said:

Besides all the cute brainstorming here, I completely agree with this guy. I could't see any game where late epV early epVI MC80s(ie) could face old ships from epII on like the venators. Every SS designed after that was meant to improve the Vclass or vary it someway to better. But definetely to take its place. Would not make any sense to me to see them on the table at the current timeline of armada. Maybe if FF come up with a completely new expansion with separatist and republic ships in a new clone wars campaign... but not now at all.

So this somewhat angers me. the venator, victory, and the ISD were around at 19 bby or rots. the venator served right up to jedi in limited roles. and as for clone wars era ships not being able to contend in the current meta, what the hell is an arquitens then!? Oh, wait. It's a clone wars ship. were the IDS and victory classes improvements on a venator, yes. they improved various funtions and the ISD replaced the venator, but the time frame of this game (original trilogy) does not make a venator inviable. simply read catalyst or tarkin for evidence. dont mean to offend anybody, but this is a topic near and dear to me. I will concede that a clone wars expantion or a new core set as such would be way cool, so that is a good idea and I thank you for it.