Been hearing people say the 2e arcs are 90 degrees, this is false. Figured I'd nip it in the bud. Comparison here.

If you're still not convinced, send me a protractor and I'll do it proper.

This is the first i am hearing of it....

But thanks for the closeup, those cleaned up bases without all that clutter in 2.0 are awesome!

Out of interest, how much bigger are side arcs than front and rear arcs?

80 degree front and rear arcs; 100 degree side arcs.

Front arcs are about 82°, which makes each side arc 98°

But I think the angles are slightly different on the medium and large bases, as the proportion of the base that's occupied by the outside ridge is progressively smaller.

Not by much, though.

E: from the small base, that is. The large base arcs will be the same from 1e to 2e. Medium ones are obviously new tho.

Since everything is quadranted, the arcs are all 90 degrees now.

7 minutes ago, GLEXOR said:

Since everything is quadranted, the arcs are all 90 degrees now.

Ship tokens arent Square, so this doesn't make each quadrant 90°

Edit: just measured a ship token as 34x40mm. I'm sure someone has done this before more accurately than me. Assuming the firing arc quadrants make a perfect corner-to-corner 'X', (which varys greatly depending on the cut), the front and rear arc should be about 80.7°, and the side arcs 99.3°

Definitely not 90

4 minutes ago, GLEXOR said:

Since everything is quadranted, the arcs are all 90 degrees now.

No, this is just plain not true.

There are 90 degree marks splitting the base in half widthwise and lengthwise, but they have nothing to do with firing arcs.

Just now, player2072913 said:

Ship tokens arent Square, so this doesn't make each quadrant 90°

Edit: just measured a ship token as 34x40mm. I'm sure someone has done this before more accurately than me. Assuming the firing arc quadrants make a perfect corner-to-corner 'X', (which varys greatly depending on the cut), the front and rear arc should be about 80.7°, and the side arcs 99.3°

Definitely not 90

Just now, thespaceinvader said:

No, this is just plain not true.

There are 90 degree marks splitting the base in half widthwise and lengthwise, but they have nothing to do with firing arcs.

Sure enough! Not 90. I heard they changed it to 90 and never bothered to actually check that for myself.

2 hours ago, GLEXOR said:

Sure enough! Not 90. I heard they changed it to 90 and never bothered to actually check that for myself.

This is the reason for the post. With so much of what we hear about 2e being rumor and hearsay, I figured I'd try to clear any misconceptions about this point as quickly as possible.

2 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

But I think the angles are slightly different on the medium and large bases, as the proportion of the base that's occupied by the outside ridge is progressively smaller.

Not by much, though.

E: from the small base, that is. The large base arcs will be the same from 1e to 2e. Medium ones are obviously new tho.

2 hours ago, player2072913 said:

Ship tokens arent Square, so this doesn't make each quadrant 90°

Edit: just measured a ship token as 34x40mm. I'm sure someone has done this before more accurately than me. Assuming the firing arc quadrants make a perfect corner-to-corner 'X', (which varys greatly depending on the cut), the front and rear arc should be about 80.7°, and the side arcs 99.3°

Definitely not 90

Muon did a very in depth dive comparing large and small base angles to make Vassal as accurate as possible.

https://teamcovenant.com/star-wars-x-wing/x-wing-vassal-module-6-0-0-available

We're the original ships all the same firing arc size? Were they different on small and large bases? Obviously they were wider by the time you got to the edge of the base, so the Range-1, -2, & -3 firing areas were larger on large ships, but was it the same angle?

EDIT: Sorry, the different arc sizes on the same bases were in Armada. I'm reading the posted Vassal 6.0.0 and it looks like the 2 arcs are slightly different between small and large x-wing, but that they are the same across base sizes.

The article says:

• Small Primary: 80.9 degrees
• Large Primary: 84.05 degrees
• Large Side: 95.95 degrees

4 minutes ago, Duciris said:

We're the original ships all the same firing arc size? Were they different on small and large bases? Obviously they were wider by the time you got to the edge of the base, so the Range-1, -2, & -3 firing areas were larger on large ships, but was it the same angle?

No.

As noted above, the large bases are not a perfect scale up of the small - the sizes of the plastic outer ridges and the central bosses don't scale proportionally, so the large ship arcs are slightly wider.

Not much though.

Just so we can all see the ship tokens together:

You should be able to make out that the tokens are not perfect squares. The front and rear are narrower than the sides. The Front and rear arc go to the corner of the ship token, meaning that the front arcs are narrower than the side arcs, hence the front/rear arcs cannot be exactly 90 degrees.

Small bases have the widest side arcs & narrowest front/rear arcs.

Large bases have the most narrow side arcs & widest front/rear arcs because proportionately they are the closest to an actual square shape.

The arcs in 1.0 are essentially identical. See how the arcs go right to the corner in this next pic?

The plastic bases haven't changed, so the dimensions for the punch-board ship tokens shouldn't change either.

When the Saw & Reaper expansions get into our hot little hands we can settle this question once and for all. (I hope)

26 minutes ago, Force Majeure said:

The plastic bases haven't changed, so the dimensions for the punch-board ship tokens shouldn't change either.

When the Saw & Reaper expansions get into our hot little hands we can settle this question once and for all. (I hope)

I can't speak to the other size bases, but I already have a second edition x wing. I linked it in the original post but here it is again in case it was missed. https://imgur.com/a/aJxo5wh

The piece of white paper is the same piece in all pictures. The arcs haven't changed between editions for the small ships, so we have no reason to assume they will for the large ones.

7 hours ago, player2072913 said:

Front arcs are about 82°, which makes each side arc 98°

How much extra width does that add up to at the various range boundaries? I assume it’s a decent amount, so there’s a definite benefit to setting your mobile arcs to the sides rather than front and rear.

1 hour ago, mazz0 said:

How much extra width does that add up to at the various range boundaries? I assume it’s a decent amount, so there’s a definite benefit to setting your mobile arcs to the sides rather than front and rear.

Some quick back-of the-envelope numbers gives me the area from a front arc is 82% the size of that of a side arc.

Again, more accurate versions of this are certainly floating around elsewhere, but I can't find it?

____Small Ship:

Range 1 front arc: ~10500mm²

Range 1 side arc: ~12600mm²

Range 2 front arc: ~35000mm²

Range 2 side arc: ~42600mm²

Range 3 front arc: ~73700mm²

Range 3 side arc: ~89800mm²

14 minutes ago, player2072913 said:

Some quick back-of the-envelope numbers gives me the range 2 area from a front arc is 82% the size of that of a side arc.

Again, more accurate versions of this are certainly floating around elsewhere, but I can't find it?

(35. 0 cm2 vs 42.6 cm2 coverage out to range 2. Numbers for r1 and r3 to come?)

Wow, that’s pretty significant!