5 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

I do deliberately use Strawmen and Hyperbole to draw attentions across to certain things - a lot of the time, its just to see if I'm called out on it - (hint, I'm not - that's disapponting in and of itself...) and I will agree that there may be the perception that I overdid it with that one.

I guess the main problem is I try to educate people in the things that I am actually educated in, and honestly, no-one seems to want that - so do I end up feeling like a reasonable, educated person benging my head against a wall? Sure. Sure do.

As someone else who did not take to kindly to your tone in previous conversations I will say that you may believe in "you do you", but what I really see here is that in general purposeful uses of strawmen and hyperbole are demeaning, pandering and meant to ridicule a position as opposed to arguing or illuminating it. Thus, it is particularly possible to take offense at the way you make your statements, even if you don't intend it.

I also think you're making it seem here that you want to seem more educated and better than the rest of us. And that frankly happens far too often in real life to be tolerated much. I also still remember you attempting to make fun of my English. As in deliberately using that as your response instead of responding to the subjects at hand.

These all can be viewed as some form of micro-aggression. Or, a deliberate attempt to emotionally discredit others, or at best, jokes at the expense of an opposition that aren't particularly funny. These aren't laugh with me jokes. These are laugh at you jokes.

3 times Arqs with intel officer and DTT. Rips ISDs apart.

Well, I've been playing around with this a while, and I've reworked a lot, kinda refining what I want this ship to be. I think the cost is a hair low, but probably within 3-5 points for both versions. The reason I low-balled the cost is the arc layout. The front and rear zone is going to be extremely narrow.

Consider a nebulon's arcs scaled to medium size.

With a cuts to engineering and a cut to the overall hull and shields, as well as cutting many attack die (only improving a few) and gutting Defensive and Offensive retros, I feel this ship is more appropriately balanced for imperial play.


The ship is designed to be an interceptor, speedy (to an extent), with a powerful damage potential and just enough hull/shields to weather some damage. Its sides and rear are basically garbage, and it has a very focused forward arc. Low engineering capabilities and weak rear shields.

I almost want to add a yaw on 3's last click... maybe make it command 2?

@Drasnighta @geek19 @GhostofNobodyInParticular

I would, of course, appreciate your input again. when you get the chance...

i cant say for sure whether everything looks fair points wise or all, but this i can get behind i think. Dras can probably tell you the points formula better, but it looks mostly solid. My one worry with the red version is the fact that Vader can make that thing bananas, especially since with gunnery team it can reach out and touch 2 ships with 5 red dice. 6 if you spinal. Might be more fair if you had it somewhat like the star cruiser/battle cruiser, giving your left one 2 red/3 blue and the right one 3 red/2 blue, butttttttttttttttttttt again, i'm not sure. 88 points for 6 red dice and gunnery teams seems....unfair to me, but maaaaaaaaaybe?

1 minute ago, geek19 said:

i cant say for sure whether everything looks fair points wise or all, but this i can get behind i think. Dras can probably tell you the points formula better, but it looks mostly solid. My one worry with the red version is the fact that Vader can make that thing bananas, especially since with gunnery team it can reach out and touch 2 ships with 5 red dice. 6 if you spinal. Might be more fair if you had it somewhat like the star cruiser/battle cruiser, giving your left one 2 red/3 blue and the right one 3 red/2 blue, butttttttttttttttttttt again, i'm not sure. 88 points for 6 red dice and gunnery teams seems....unfair to me, but maaaaaaaaaybe?

You may be right but I'm hoping that the extremely narrow front arc will make that less the case. lol

15 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Well, I've been playing around with this a while, and I've reworked a lot, kinda refining what I want this ship to be. I think the cost is a hair low, but probably within 3-5 points for both versions. The reason I low-balled the cost is the arc layout. The front and rear zone is going to be extremely narrow.

Consider a nebulon's arcs scaled to medium size.

With a cuts to engineering and a cut to the overall hull and shields, as well as cutting many attack die (only improving a few) and gutting Defensive and Offensive retros, I feel this ship is more appropriately balanced for imperial play.


The ship is designed to be an interceptor, speedy (to an extent), with a powerful damage potential and just enough hull/shields to weather some damage. Its sides and rear are basically garbage, and it has a very focused forward arc. Low engineering capabilities and weak rear shields.

I almost want to add a yaw on 3's last click... maybe make it command 2?

@Drasnighta @geek19 @GhostofNobodyInParticular

I would, of course, appreciate your input again. when you get the chance...

Seems pretty good to me. I agree with geek19 that the II class has the potential to get rather nasty with its dice and GT. The I class faces a similar issue with DCs and an Ion upgrade, but without GT and it being limited to 1 turn, I think that too is a small enough bonus to be overlooked. Maybe add just 1 or 2 points more to the cost of them both, but that's open to debate. I also think it definitely shouldn't be command 2. That type of command flexibility would be nasty.

I like it.

I feel it a bit unbalanced but not sure if I feel it cause it is or cause VSD-II does.

Its a much more interesting ship now...

Right off the face of it, I have very few negative thoughts overall - because its both interesting and entertaining.

An exclusively high-speed Jouster. Narrow arcs (as stated) that are full of dice, a defensive package that is borderline for its size (and front-centric), and a maneuver system that feels like a Wedge on Rocket Engines.

I'd add the Yaw to speed 2's First or last click... This thing fangs down at Speed 3, then has to pull a handbrake turn... (Naving down to speed 2 lets you double-double at that point), but it then needs to speed up so its not surrounded... Its a good parallel - Consider the Raider and MC30 flatline speeds - their High Speeds are Terrible with navs, but the slower you go, the better turning it has... Plus it still gives Ozzel an option to use (handbrake that handbrake even more) and Jerjerrod (now you're getting the turning without slowing down)... And you want to be speeding past, because if the enemy looks at your *** end, all they see is Engines for days.. No Shields or return fire, really...

Which is good, its interesting, and its not straightforward in its use... Well, it is straightfowrad in its usage profile, but actually using it is a challenge - like most of the ships that aren't "Good at everything" are. Command 3 really puts the pressure on being able to setup the strike at a particular time.

Points seem fairly fair to me... It is fragile for a medium, only being 5 hull - but I am basing that lore-wise on the fact that Fragile engines are the majority of the rear hull of this thing, and thus, vulnerable to overall damage... I think since you dropped to Eng 2, that 6 hull might be a compromise to return to it.

Points wise, I think they fill an interesting slot - even Captain K is going to enjoy having these around as they are positionable and work withhis ability.

I certainly feel this is much more plausable and interesting, so beyond knowing the actual specifics of the formulae, it would get a tick to move on for testing in my book.

27 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Its a much more interesting ship now...

Right off the face of it, I have very few negative thoughts overall - because its both interesting and entertaining.

An exclusively high-speed Jouster. Narrow arcs (as stated) that are full of dice, a defensive package that is borderline for its size (and front-centric), and a maneuver system that feels like a Wedge on Rocket Engines.

I'd add the Yaw to speed 2's First or last click... This thing fangs down at Speed 3, then has to pull a handbrake turn... (Naving down to speed 2 lets you double-double at that point), but it then needs to speed up so its not surrounded... Its a good parallel - Consider the Raider and MC30 flatline speeds - their High Speeds are Terrible with navs, but the slower you go, the better turning it has... Plus it still gives Ozzel an option to use (handbrake that handbrake even more) and Jerjerrod (now you're getting the turning without slowing down)... And you want to be speeding past, because if the enemy looks at your *** end, all they see is Engines for days.. No Shields or return fire, really...

Which is good, its interesting, and its not straightforward in its use... Well, it is straightfowrad in its usage profile, but actually using it is a challenge - like most of the ships that aren't "Good at everything" are. Command 3 really puts the pressure on being able to setup the strike at a particular time.

Points seem fairly fair to me... It is fragile for a medium, only being 5 hull - but I am basing that lore-wise on the fact that Fragile engines are the majority of the rear hull of this thing, and thus, vulnerable to overall damage... I think since you dropped to Eng 2, that 6 hull might be a compromise to return to it.

Points wise, I think they fill an interesting slot - even Captain K is going to enjoy having these around as they are positionable and work withhis ability.

I certainly feel this is much more plausable and interesting, so beyond knowing the actual specifics of the formulae, it would get a tick to move on for testing in my book.

I gotta agree, now that the idea has been focused it seems more interesting to play. I may see if a friend wants to play test these... I just need to find a ship that fits an Intercept role in the lore, probably old EU....

So from your perspective it could probably squeeze that extra point in hull back on and add that extra yaw on speed 2?

Wow there is another version I missed. Hmm I like it even more. I would prefer the 6 hull points but I like it.

1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I gotta agree, now that the idea has been focused it seems more interesting to play. I may see if a friend wants to play test these... I just need to find a ship that fits an Intercept role in the lore, probably old EU....

So from your perspective it could probably squeeze that extra point in hull back on and add that extra yaw on speed 2?

I think the Extra Yaw on Speed 2 is something I'd feel like doing right away. If that ends up being *too* maneuverable, I'd make second click double and first click nothing (like an arquitens) for Speed 2...

I'd leave Hull 5, wait on 6 to see how Fragile it is for its points in testing... But its a point to consider going forward... I'd be reluctant to give it everything back without first seeing how it performs...

But you promised calzone!

1 minute ago, Xeletor said:

But you promised calzone!

I couldn't find a good PNG lol

The revised version.

"Pizzawedge class interceptor"

Yeah, I think Hull 6 vs Hull 5 is my main point of contention - it seems good at six, but it also seems weak at 5...

Definitely need testing on that one to shake it out - see if 6 is applicable...

... Maybe 5 and a Contain? That could represent some interesting things - but again, testing needed

The biggest part of games design is "okay, we've got something to test... Now Break It..."

Needa TRCs is pretty bad on the II... It would ironically be worse for opponents under "5 and a contain" because you're keeping your Brace/Redirct and having Redundant evades...

Careful flying and Montferrat, is of course a choice... Most things that apply to demolisher (Wulff/Monty) apply here, just because of the speed.

DCaps and Ion is a one shot deal on the I, so never that bad...

9 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Yeah, I think Hull 6 vs Hull 5 is my main point of contention - it seems good at six, but it also seems weak at 5...

Definitely need testing on that one to shake it out - see if 6 is applicable...

... Maybe 5 and a Contain? That could represent some interesting things - but again, testing needed

The biggest part of games design is "okay, we've got something to test... Now Break It..."

Needa TRCs is pretty bad on the II... It would ironically be worse for opponents under "5 and a contain" because you're keeping your Brace/Redirct and having Redundant evades...

Careful flying and Montferrat, is of course a choice... Most things that apply to demolisher (Wulff/Monty) apply here, just because of the speed.

DCaps and Ion is a one shot deal on the I, so never that bad...

Yeah I'm really looking forward to putting these down on the mat, the hardest part I face is getting the nebs arc pattern scaled and printed.... I don't have PS so I can't use RogueKnight's templates I may have to photocopy the nebs base card and a medium ships so I can just scale it in paint and revise lol

1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Yeah I'm really looking forward to putting these down on the mat, the hardest part I face is getting the nebs arc pattern scaled and printed.... I don't have PS so I can't use RogueKnight's templates I may have to photocopy the nebs base card and a medium ships so I can just scale it in paint and revise lol

For testing these sorts of things, I got a sheet of 3mm black Foamboard from michaels and drew the arcs on with paint... The point of testing is testing, not looking awesome, that is marketing's Job

That would make for a great ship. I really hope a ship with similar stats gets released. It's not really overpowered. Looks pretty balanced to me. Good work.

Still want another large ship for the empire also. Perhaps you can mess around with ideas for a large imp ship someday lol.

On 6/2/2017 at 10:48 PM, ninclouse2000 said:

That would make for a great ship. I really hope a ship with similar stats gets released. It's not really overpowered. Looks pretty balanced to me. Good work.

Still want another large ship for the empire also. Perhaps you can mess around with ideas for a large imp ship someday lol.

Yeah, I plan on doing so soon. The problem I run into when theorizing is the ISD really is a jack of all trades for a large ship. It's missing support, sure, but it seems kinda crazy to build a large base ship (likely in the 100-130 point range) to give support.... but it's something I'm mulling over.


As for the Pizzawedge class... yeah, I'm trying to build for a local tournament and I'm mentally stuck without something of it's nature.... I'm having such a hard time deciding what I wanna field.

31 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Yeah, I plan on doing so soon. The problem I run into when theorizing is the ISD really is a jack of all trades for a large ship. It's missing support, sure, but it seems kinda crazy to build a large base ship (likely in the 100-130 point range) to give support.... but it's something I'm mulling over.


As for the Pizzawedge class... yeah, I'm trying to build for a local tournament and I'm mentally stuck without something of it's nature.... I'm having such a hard time deciding what I wanna field.

That's the same wall I hit with the empire. How can a large based ship compete with the isd and be unique?

1 minute ago, ninclouse2000 said:

That's the same wall I hit with the empire. How can a large based ship compete with the isd and be unique?

It's certainly possible. A low speed, medium hull, high shields with fleet support slots could be interesting. Or it's certainly possible to build an ISD sized ship with no squads, low engineering and lower shields with higher peak damage output...

I just feel like the ISD got so much right there wouldn't be much incentive to take another large ship.... especially if it's the same cost or more... Maybe a borderline large ship, so it's cost is only 98-105 cost range... could be something lol

we'll see.

16 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

It's certainly possible. A low speed, medium hull, high shields with fleet support slots could be interesting. Or it's certainly possible to build an ISD sized ship with no squads, low engineering and lower shields with higher peak damage output...

I just feel like the ISD got so much right there wouldn't be much incentive to take another large ship.... especially if it's the same cost or more... Maybe a borderline large ship, so it's cost is only 98-105 cost range... could be something lol

we'll see.

The problem with a borderline large ship is then you're making a knock-off LMC80.

I'd think, especially with the vaunted Imperial Military Might that you go even harder and heavier. Make it a max speed 2 but hit like a truck if you get up close. It's not going to be fast, but it's going to kill whatever it shoots. Put the H1MC80 movement arc on it (it's slow and heavy) and give it the ISD-I front arc plus a few more dice. Add in either some more shields or health or something, make it weak against fighters, engineering 4, command 3 (command 4?), 150 odd points or whatever. THAT'S an interesting ship to consider. You aren't going to win any races or anything, but you're going to survive a heck of a lot of punishment.

And yes I did just create a fake SSD. Why not, though?

17 minutes ago, geek19 said:

The problem with a borderline large ship is then you're making a knock-off LMC80.

I'd think, especially with the vaunted Imperial Military Might that you go even harder and heavier. Make it a max speed 2 but hit like a truck if you get up close. It's not going to be fast, but it's going to kill whatever it shoots. Put the H1MC80 movement arc on it (it's slow and heavy) and give it the ISD-I front arc plus a few more dice. Add in either some more shields or health or something, make it weak against fighters, engineering 4, command 3 (command 4?), 150 odd points or whatever. THAT'S an interesting ship to consider. You aren't going to win any races or anything, but you're going to survive a heck of a lot of punishment.

And yes I did just create a fake SSD. Why not, though?

Well... you kinda said it yourself...

Why not?

For 150 points.... it suffers in all the same areas as the rest of the large ships....

Firstly it's "weak against fighters" (big easy target , slow moving, and limited defenses against many smaller attacks)

Second it's already hard to fully kit an ISD and still have room for more than a few Gozantis with a full screen to keep it safe. At 30 points over you're either going to sacrifice activations, squad cover, or fail to equip needed upgrades to make that 150 points worth while....

I'm all for bigger better ships, I love playing ISDs, but in the current state they'd come with a free "Why bother?" poster.

(maybe if they can find a way for large ships to hard counter squadrons without dumping 100s of points into AA but I feel like we're just going to see a few gentle counters over the next few waves.)

But yes I agree, my idea would basically make an IMP flavored MC80L, but that's about the only thing I can really think to give the imps in terms of large ships and still have it be usable.

If you want a Imperial answer to the MC80, I feel compelled to bring up my old Sorannan class designs on KDY. They even mirror the LMC80's mirror of Rebel arc preferences.

For the PizzaWedge, the blue one is probably costed within five points of what it should be, by back-of-napkin figures. If anything it's probably up a point or two, which isn't a bad thing on a custom. The other ship is probably undercosted, and significantly. Between Vader or JJ and a Weapons Team slot, I'd figure you're short by about ten points, maybe eight. I always had trouble with those high power/low hull designs and making them well costed (see Defiant and Prometheus on KDY). Go to a mixed forward battery, say three red two blue, you're probably only short two-four points then. That's my guess.