32 minutes ago, GiledPallaeon said:In defense of that translation, "battleship cruiser" and "dreadnought cruiser" (no idea what the latter is in Spanish) were two of the early terms in the press for what we today call the battlecruiser before that debate was settled (something about brevity).
Indeed. But (apparently) the generally accepted Spanish translation for battlecruiser is also the literal one: "crucero de batalla".
1 minute ago, DiabloAzul said:Indeed. But (apparently) the generally accepted Spanish translation for battlecruiser is also the literal one: "crucero de batalla".
Plus we have a Battlecruiser already.
FFG likes calling stuff different things.
1 hour ago, Forresto said:Is there a venator on the art for one of the cards?
Wait lemme check
2 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:I have been reading Caitken more carefully
...
Also I am quite sure the last lines are "[re]roll any [number] of dice.
YES PLEASE.
Sure looks that way to me....awesome!
1 hour ago, DiabloAzul said:Indeed. But (apparently) the generally accepted Spanish translation for battlecruiser is also the literal one: "crucero de batalla".
Armored Cruiser was a real ship class in pre drednought era, battle cruiser is a real term too so there are proper translations for those in most languages.
Also looking at the MC75 you can clearly see armored belt around the midsection of the ship, Armored cruiser makes the most sense no matter how you look at it.
40 minutes ago, Microscop said:Armored Cruiser was a real ship class in pre drednought era, battle cruiser is a real term too so there are proper translations for those in most languages.
Yep. That's why CA is the abbreviation for a heavy cruiser, because it used to be "Cruiser, Armored".
57 minutes ago, Noosh said:Wait lemme check
It's on the card next to the electrical tie fighter. It's definitely some weird looking ship.
54 minutes ago, Forresto said:It's on the card next to the electrical tie fighter. It's definitely some weird looking ship.
Doesn't really look like a Venator. Could be a 3/4 rear view of a MC75
57 minutes ago, Forresto said:It's on the card next to the electrical tie fighter. It's definitely some weird looking ship.
I thought it was just a weird view of the MC75. Could it instead be a Secutor-class ? I kinda hope not. Or... maybe .
On 9/6/2017 at 7:28 AM, Church14 said:Interesting that it translated Profundity as Depth. I had no idea that profundidad was the Spanish word for Depth
I take it as raddius personal ship was called depth, like ackbar has home one
Dont think i care for the brace, redirect and double contains.
I'm guess this will fill the role of the dictor for the rebels. I can even see a grav well title or upgrade.
Wish it was squadrons 4 vs 3.
16 minutes ago, mobow213 said:Dont think i care for the brace, redirect and double contains.
I'm guess this will fill the role of the dictor for the rebels. I can even see a grav well title or upgrade.
Wish it was squadrons 4 vs 3.
Like the Assault vs Command, the other version might be.
In R1 the Profundity commanded the fighters in the attack on the shield gate, carried Tantive IV, controlled comms with the strike team and gave some commands to the rest of the fleet. This *should* be an out and out carrier and command vessel. However, blue and black dice seem to indicate it getting up close and personal like a giant MC30Torp.
Maybe a clue:
1 redirect in a ship with a lot of shields and a new defensive retrofit.
Let's say that at the start of the command/ship phase you may manage the shields between your hull zones in some way.
2 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:Maybe a clue:
1 redirect in a ship with a lot of shields and a new defensive retrofit.
Let's say that at the start of the command/ship phase you may manage the shields between your hull zones in some way.
I can see that as a good possibilty. May help other ships like the MC80 improve (you know which one I'm talking about).
3 hours ago, Battlefleet 01 Studios said:I can see that as a good possibilty. May help other ships like the MC80 improve (you know which one I'm talking about).
Can't take a d retro
4 minutes ago, Tirion said:Can't take a d retro
Just the tip
I think it would be cool to see a defensive retrofit upgrade that changes out a defense token
6 hours ago, Tirion said:Can't take a d retro
The command variant can. The Home One expansion. Not the Liberty.
Alright. Dumb question and thread-romancy for a detail that is bugging me
Contents are:
1 ship
1 base
1 pylon
1 speed dial
3 command dials
2 ship cards
14 upgrade cards
25 tokens
25? 4 command tokens, 2 to make speed dial, 3 for command dials, 2 ships bases, 4 defensive tokens, 3 for the ship ID tags. I get 18. What am I missing?
21 minutes ago, Church14 said:Alright. Dumb question and thread-romancy for a detail that is bugging me
Contents are:
1 ship
1 base
1 pylon
1 speed dial
3 command dials
2 ship cards
14 upgrade cards
25 tokens
25? 4 command tokens, 2 to make speed dial, 3 for command dials, 2 ships bases, 4 defensive tokens, 3 for the ship ID tags. I get 18. What am I missing?
Don't they all come with a ridiculous amount of victory and objective tokens?
30 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:Don't they all come with a ridiculous amount of victory and objective tokens?
That probably makes up the difference. Forgot about those
Or...you get a slightly less ridiculous number of victory and objective token plus the two grav shift tokens because Profundity gets an experimental upgrade slot. Ya know, to be fair since the Imperial Cymoon gets the fleet command upgrade slot.
Only just seen this thread today, and know its been said to death buuuuuuut.... 2 Contains? Seriously? Im hoping this ship really has something up its sleeve to make that worth it. Or one of the new officers is "swap out one of your utter pants contains for a defence token you may find useful".
Should totally work for FFG
