3 minutes ago, Odanan said:

It looks like FFG spends at least 6 months in the design of a ship. So the ideal is for them to announce a Resistance A-Wing only after 6 month after TLJ movie, so they can know the pilots and features of the ship.

See this Resistance Bomber: they clearly didn't know the size of the thing - it should be at least double the size. Something a closer look at the trailer would have hinted. Same poor job for every product they tried to release with the movies. (missing the bombs in TIE Striker, the missiles in TIE Silencer, the proper crew/ pilots for the U-Wing, name of the T-70 pilots, etc.)

Assuming of course, that LFL would allow them to wait. I have seen how the licensee/licensor agreement works with LFL. FFG is not always in control of what they can make. Although, only a complete idiot in marketing would tell you it is a great idea to release a new ship based on a new movie 12-16 months after the new movie.

That's the thing to remember. 6 months of design, sure. But the lead time is 6-12 months.

2 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

Launching =/= dropping. There will probably be no synergy with Deathrain.

Because of course there won't be synergy with a dude whose entire MO is dropping freaking bombs.

I am inclined to agree - I think 'launch' will be codified separately to 'drop', thus not triggering Deathrain's ability.

However, IF launch works like 'disruptor bombs' from Imp Vets (which I genuinely doubt), Deathrain would make them behave differently because the bomb-template nubs would be facing backwards(!).

(it would end up at 3-speed behind his starting position)

I, like others, believe it simply permits deploying them from front nubs, effectively creating a jouster deterrent and/or zone-denial (or threat thereof).

32 minutes ago, petrol blue said:

This is the closest angle of the Slave I could find. Looking at the bomber, though, the perspective on that base looks really off, maybe it's only a cgi mockup?

yeah youre right its CGI. but why are you comparing it to slave one though? to show how off the scale is? cause helll yeah, the bomber almost is closer to armada than x-wing

5 minutes ago, Sithborg said:

Assuming of course, that LFL would allow them to wait. I have seen how the licensee/licensor agreement works with LFL. FFG is not always in control of what they can make. Although, only a complete idiot in marketing would tell you it is a great idea to release a new ship based on a new movie 12-16 months after the new movie.

That's the thing to remember. 6 months of design, sure. But the lead time is 6-12 months.

Yep, the geniuses of marketing certainly know how to milk the hype, it doesn't mater if the released product is half-baked, flawed and not respectful to the lore.

But the game will suffer in the long run, I tell you.

5 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

yeah youre right its CGI. but why are you comparing it to slave one though? to show how off the scale is? cause helll yeah, the bomber almost is closer to armada than x-wing

To get a feel for it's size, yeah. Similar shape (tall), and a ship that even casual players (like me!) are gonna have a feel for. I was gonna say 'should have made it a new epic-scale (with bundled A-wing!)', but then I realised how **** tall it'd be at epic scale, it'd be a nightmare to play around.

For ***** and giggles. Presenting "A day out with Granddad."

Kylo Ren (TIE Silencer) (35)
Push the Limit (3)
Fire-Control System (2)
Primed Thrusters (1)
Autothrusters (2)
First Order Vanguard (2)

Darth Vader (29)
Predator (3)
Cruise Missiles (3)
Advanced Targeting Computer (1)
Engine Upgrade (4)
TIE/x1 (0)

Black Squadron Pilot (14)
Crack Shot (1)

Total: 100

View in Yet Another Squad Builder

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

We are just going to call that thing the B-17 right? Can we agree on that at least?

I was scrolling through the posts looking for this! Lol you beat me to it

B/SF-17 = B-17 Flying Fortress

Just now, Ccwebb said:

I was scrolling through the posts looking for this! Lol you beat me to it

B/SF-17 = B-17 Flying Fortress

I almost just used b-17 in the thread title.

See how the scale is wrong:

In the Bomber's circles is a ball-turret, with one person inside. They should be about the same size of the cockpit of the TIE Silencer (which itself looks a little bigger than it should)

It's awful!

13 minutes ago, Ccwebb said:

B/SF-17 = B-17 Flying Fortress

Perhaps they should have designated it as B/FF-17

Especially when one of the upgrades seems to grant a bonus when it has its BFF's nearby.

That being said, the cockpit and fuselage more resembles the Superfortress, so maybe it's the number they got wrong (should be 29).

6 minutes ago, Odanan said:

See how the scale is wrong:

In the Bomber's circles is a ball-turret, with one person inside. They should be about the same size of the cockpit of the TIE Silencer (which itself looks a little bigger than it should)

It's awful!

But those two images aren't in scale to each other. Look at the bases; there's no way a small ship base is that size compared to a large one.

Seriously, the scale talk needs to take a rest until we see a physical model that doesn't say "not final product" and we also see the full length film.

Yeah the large base is only like 2/3 larger than the small base in that image, rather than 4x.

Regardless the bomber is definitely downscaled more than usual. Though i dont think its as bad as people think it is.

Really curious what that new action EPT is....could it possibly be an ept that youngster could use at long last?

Considering how small ball turrets were in WWII planes, the scale seems okay. The person in there is not standing, but sitting.

https://68.media.tumblr.com/21d21027e3cd945bab34b6c91b9eba18/tumblr_ot5fwhxhAp1qdlu2po2_540.gif

I think the cockpit area of the bomber is supposed to be very similar in size to the falcon cockpit. Can anyone tell if the scale looks the same as the falcon model?

Going by the contents of the silencer, it seems Debris "hugger" lets you take an evade for each debris obstacle in range 1, to a maximum of 2

3 hours ago, Thormind said:

Good for you if you play casual and dont care about winning anything better than store champ

That's the only way I play this game now. It's way more fun than the ultra-toxic WAAC tournament crowd.

Oh wow

I read through the first five pages of this thread and holy crap you guys are negative!

The resistance bomber is not broken enough to replace Nym?! But we all know that him being better than Nym would not exactly improve the game... Come on guys, I remember the Shuttle Tydirium talking about slinging bombs and how fun it is. Isn't that a great mechanic? Either you are low PS and can deny area or predict the movement well - something we all declaredly want and ask for! Or he's high PS and can react to movement. 5template+radius is 8.5 ship lengths. So some of you will be amazing at predicting the distance, allowing you to hit beyond range 3! That's fascinating and a very interesting new turn. It could even be an answer to imperial alpha strikes if they stick around long enough.

And the silencer is a bit on the expensive side but he is more a Corran-like ship. No, he has no regen and no double tap. But he doesn't need to to be comparable - a comparison can be limited, and in this case it's limited to the role within the squad due to cost, and to the crazy movement due to advanced sensors (or consistent output with FCS). Which brings me to the next criticism: yes he only has 3(5) slots. But aren't we also moaning about 7 upgrade ships?! So EPT, Title, Mod, Tech and System is NOT enough?! There are several good options for Systems, and this wave introduces some new tech slots. There are 'only' three slots, but they are among the three most interesting ones with crew missing... and we can all see why the silencer has no crew!

And a 3/3/4/2 statline is crazy good! We already can run a 39pt QD, and we used to run 41-43pt Whisper, so why is a 42pt Ren so unbelievably bad and un-imperial?! It's like a Defender but with an amazing dial, high PS and double repositioning.

I really wanted the new A-Wing, but I can not understand how you are all putting this new wave down bevore a sliver of information. We don't believe it's a 2-ship wave, right? So try to be patient and keep calm.

5 hours ago, Parakitor said:

Why does it have a TL at all? FCS or the title would cover that, then put the Evade action on its bar. Oh well. Kind of sad there's no missile to use that TL with, but that would make it prohibitively expensive. Expensiver.

Thats a really good question... is there a unrevealed Tech card that allows it to carry ordinance? Is there any other ship in the game right now that can TL but cant equip missiles or torpedoes?

25 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

Really curious what that new action EPT is....could it possibly be an ept that youngster could use at long last?

Well... there's rage swarms, but yeah. Marksmanship is a janky way to get more crits on Wampa, but...

2 minutes ago, Phoenix5454 said:

Thats a really good question... is there a unrevealed Tech card that allows it to carry ordinance? Is there any other ship in the game right now that can TL but cant equip missiles or torpedoes?

The Lancer, the HWK, and the TIE/fo.

Just now, SabineKey said:

The Lancer, the HWK, and the TIE/fo.

Ah OK so this isn't really out of the normal scope. Thanks

Theres also the Upsilon, Lambda, and the Iggy88 Aggressors. No ordnance on them (bombs dont take TLs so that dont count)