9 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

How is it that the older Y-wing has more armor, but it can do a 4 Straight that is white while the lighter version can't? I don't understand that. I'd probably remove the 4 forward all together.

I'd probably leave the greens the same, though. I don't see how going faster would be better for the Y-wing.

Overall....I'd think that the old Y-wings were a bit crappier than the current.

BTL-B should probably have a K-wing-like dial, and double bomb slots, since, you know, bomber. Removing the 4 straight altogether will simulate the 'long range bomber' feel.

Maybe.

11 hours ago, GrimmyV said:

Inertial dampners? Also bigger engines for more mass means approx similar performance. And stuff.

remember, the BTL-B (for bomber) is an earlier model than either the A4 or S3, which also had full armor plating but were smaller in size. These models could be considered different enough that a new model could make sense, like the T-70 or /FO.

And even tho I love Y-wings I would rather see the V-19 or, I dunno, the FAQing GUNBOAT.

Don't think the engines were bigger in the B which was the main reason Rebel crews stripped the armour and other systems, to increase the speed and mobility. Side effect was reducing the trained crew needed to operate the ship. The A4 was the variant seen at Yavin, Scarrif and Endor (the stripped down version). It is worth noting though that the A4 had a reduced engine output to further boost the shield power available, so the 6/2 spilt seems very reasonable.

28 minutes ago, Ironlord said:

Especially given that all 3 types of Y-Wing are closely related - using the same computer model, with modifications.

The 2-seaters were converted to single-seaters by the Rebellion (appearing in Secret Cargo episode of Rebels, Season 3).

And I think the "laser turret" two-seat version was converted to the "ion-turret" two-seat version by the Republic during the Clone Wars - given that one appears in the Hera's Heroes episode of Season 3.

Don't forget the Longprobe, the most Star Trek looking SW ship since the Lancer!

And the Y-wing scout!

9 minutes ago, boomaster said:

Don't think the engines were bigger in the B which was the main reason Rebel crews stripped the armour and other systems, to increase the speed and mobility.

Most of the armor-stripping took place before the Rebels got their hands on them -

turning this:

into this:

What the Rebels did was modify it a little more, turning it into this:

We can see from this comparison:

that the engines on the oldest version, are longer.

11 minutes ago, Ironlord said:

Most of the armor-stripping took place before the Rebels got their hands on them -

turning this:

into this:

What the Rebels did was modify it a little more, turning it into this:

We can see from this comparison:

that the engines on the oldest version, are longer.

I always figured this pic (the earliest appearance of the armored pre-chopped Y) omited the engine cowlings since it was a very common mod, like the tail fin on the Cloakshape, to the point that most folks thought it was how the stock model was produced.

31 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:

I always figured this pic (the earliest appearance of the armored pre-chopped Y) omited the engine cowlings since it was a very common mod, like the tail fin on the Cloakshape, to the point that most folks thought it was how the stock model was produced.

I'm okay with the armored variant depicted in that drawing from that DK picture book. The armor looks like it actually goes on the ship, and it looks like it's from a 70's-80's retro future, which is how Star Wars is supposed to look. It looks really cool and would love to have that armored variant in the game.

1999 shapeless ugly blob gold Ford Taurus aesthetic =/= Star Wars.

That's one of the main problems I have with the prequels. It has that late 90's, early 2000's stink on it. Everything is ugly and shapeless and some sh*tty gold color, like a 1999 Ford Taurus. That's one of the ugliest cars I've ever seen and I'm so glad those cars are no longer ubiquitous.

The Original Trilogy looks like a Delorean. The prequels look like a 1999 Ford Taurus.

18 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

It has that late 90's, early 2000's stink on it.

Not everything from the that time was bad. There's TMNT, Transformers Armada, Titanic, The Matix, The Mummy, Saving Private Ryan, the Ford Mustang that was produced at the time, and the list goes on.

But I would love to see the old armored version of the Y-wing in game.

19 hours ago, weisguy119 said:

We need Clone Wars Era ships. It's silly to pretend they don't exist. If we can have Resistance and FO ships mingling with OT ships, why not Prequel-Era ships as well? Especially, when there are so many cool looking ships from that era.

Who is "pretending they don't exist?" We already have ARCs, Z-95s, YT-1300s, YV-666s, and Firesprays in the game. That's actually a fair amount of Clone Wars era stuff already, one might say. Arguably, the Rebel and Scum Y-Wings are basically just the Clone Wars era Y-Wings with most of the armor plating removed, so they exist as well.


To the OP: I don't think your Clone Wars era ship is very thematically accurate. If the Rebels and almost all other Y-users in the Galactic Civil War era stripped the substantial armor plating off of the Y-Wing to get increased speed and reduced weight, the gains must have been pretty significant to warrant stripping the ship to bare basics. Given that, your Armored-Y dial seems far too generous, and it really isn't that much worse than the basic Y dial. I know it's tough to make a dial that's significantly worse than the Y-Wing, since it's already near the bottom of the barrel in X-Wing's Dial Spectrum, but maybe that just means there's not room for something as slow and clunky as the Armored Y in X-Wing (just like there wasn't room for something so slow and clunky in the Galactic Civil War).

I'd think it would need to be something like having both turns red and no K-turn, at least.

This old model should not be better than the current model except in hull value. That armour was removed in later models to keep the Y-Wing competitive. I don't buy that longer engines increase performance it's more likely the performance of the newer engines is equal or superior due to miniaturisation reducing their mass and removing the armour on top of that.

With this in mind the dial should be worse and the agility value should be 0 due to the increased mass of the armour and large engines. Why would anyone use such a ship in the Galactic Civil War and onwards? It needs some sort of reason. The BTL-B was designed primarily as a bomber. Maybe it needs to have some sort of mechanic to enhance bombing?

As proposed this seems more like the next model of Y-Wing rather than an older one.

I like the feedback I am getting. To address a few concerns. the base stat mods from the Ep4 Y are: -1 shield, +1 hull. So a bit of a trade off. And a cost increase to cover the crew slot and reinforce action.

As for the dial changes. The Ep 4 has red hard 3's, the clone/republic one has red hard 2's (reason's described at the beginning of the post).
A couple have commented that R2 Astromech can make all 2's green, making the dial too strong. -I would counter that a standard Scum Y-Wing can add Unhinged Astromech and make all 3's green. So it's really the same existing game mechanic applied to Rebels. So nothing game breaking.

As for the straight 4 being white. I'm kind of on the fence. Looking at the ship, on one hand having the engines enclosed prevents energy dissipation out the sides, like the Ep4 model would experience. Making straight forward movement easier/less stressful. On the other hand, as some have stated, the additional armor would add mass, requiring more thrust to move the 4 straight. So the question becomes, would that additional mass negate the concentration of thrust, making the 4 straight red again?

It could be the engine cowlings were removed because they added little to the performance and the weight was too much to justify on a starfighter. The Republic BTL-B was a bomber and thus was probably seen as needing lots of armor and shields. Later versions used by the Empire might have been more of an assault craft and ended up being more compact and less massive. It's hard to tell whether the B version's engine hardware is longer than later versions or if the extra length of the nacelle is due to simply really long struts and cowing separating the engine from the control vanes.

either way, I used to drive that crappy 99 Taurus, and it was ugly. My B Y-wing is nothing like that thing.

1 hour ago, GrimmyV said:

It could be the engine cowlings were removed because they added little to the performance and the weight was too much to justify on a starfighter. The Republic BTL-B was a bomber and thus was probably seen as needing lots of armor and shields. Later versions used by the Empire might have been more of an assault craft and ended up being more compact and less massive. It's hard to tell whether the B version's engine hardware is longer than later versions or if the extra length of the nacelle is due to simply really long struts and cowing separating the engine from the control vanes.

either way, I used to drive that crappy 99 Taurus, and it was ugly. My B Y-wing is nothing like that thing.

Agreed, I'd suggest that the longer cowlings on the engines and the streamlined armour was mainly for Atmospheric work, it was designed as a bomber and that doesn't just mean bombing ships. The majority of the civil war actions where planetary based combat. It might then have been found that the plating had less of a benefit than simply removing it, reducing weight (more significant in atmospheric combat than out) and increasing the speed when the Rebels modified it to the A4 they cut the power distribution back on the engines to increase shield performance, more significant in space combat. Deflectors do work inside an atmosphere but with reduced benefit.

9 hours ago, ScummyRebel said:

Small ship only.

No ghost abuse, no fiascos with the YT models, and K-wings really want TLT/Sabine anyway. If the crew card has the "you cannot perform another attack this turn" text it seals it as not being for a tlt carrier.

If it has "cannot perform another attack" that already limits abuse by the ghost and the custom card uses the [Turret] icon instead of the word "Turret" so it's not useable by primary turrets.

51 minutes ago, nitrobenz said:

If it has "cannot perform another attack" that already limits abuse by the ghost and the custom card uses the [Turret] icon instead of the word "Turret" so it's not useable by primary turrets.

I don't think we have to worry about the "Turret Gunner" card on the Ghost. The Ghost pays a minimum of 18 points to dock a shuttle that can do nothing but sit there, to enable that double tap with the turret. Given the limited turret options (Dorsel, Blaster Synced, Ion), that the card would work with, it's not a game breaker. None of those do unusual damage.

Not to dig up an older thread. But I had 4 different groups play test these cards. And the results were very positive. Everything worked well. The only change that was ironically suggested by all 4 groups, was that the ship cost for each card should be 1 pt higher for game balance.

So I've updated the card images at the beginning of this thread. Please let me know your thoughts.