As everybody seems to be throwing their ideas in here... - Here are mine: ?

These are my Versions of the venator, personally i'd favor a single version, that being basically the combat or "front line" refit with just a increased squadron value, but two versions are what i'd call armada tradition. I am also not sure on the defense token and defensive retrofit and dont even metion the points cost.

Also @LordCola I snatched the refit name here.

For the venrtral/hangar Turbolaser I thought of something like this:

P.S.

@Undeadguy I also thought about another die fixing upgrade and I came up with this, giving a bigger function to CF commands:

51 minutes ago, Captain_Nemo said:

As everybody seems to be throwing their ideas in here... - Here are mine: ?

These are my Versions of the venator, personally i'd favor a single version, that being basically the combat or "front line" refit with just a increased squadron value, but two versions are what i'd call armada tradition. I am also not sure on the defense token and defensive retrofit and dont even metion the points cost.

Also @LordCola I snatched the refit name here.

For the venrtral/hangar Turbolaser I thought of something like this:

P.S.

@Undeadguy I also thought about another die fixing upgrade and I came up with this, giving a bigger function to CF commands:

I just don't think you can give a squad value of 5 with the ability to do EHB and boosted comms... that is 7 squads you are throwing. With the amount of squad hate floating around, I don't think that is a good idea...

I do really like the modified turbo laser card though. Could be really cool.

21 hours ago, LordCola said:

I mean it is even canonicaly used by the Empire!

Sure, but canonically the Rebels used quite a few captured or defected ISDs and SSDs, even per the Nu-Canon novels.

That said, I don't think it would be a good game design decision to give Rebels limited access to ISDs in Armada.

1 minute ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Sure, but canonically the Rebels used quite a few captured or defected ISDs and SSDs, even per the Nu-Canon novels.

That said, I don't think it would be a good game design decision to give Rebels limited access to ISDs in Armada.

You don't wanna face down a Raddus drop of an ABT ISD Kuat with all the fixins?

8 minutes ago, MandalorianMoose said:

You don't wanna face down a Raddus drop of an ABT ISD Kuat with all the fixins?

Or an ABT ISD1 with RLB,s holding 4 b's with torryn and bcc around....

30 minutes ago, themightyhedgehog said:

Or an ABT ISD1 with RLB,s holding 4 b's with torryn and bcc around....

I will have Nightmares about this from now on... until there is a way for me to field it ?

15 minutes ago, Captain_Nemo said:

I will have Nightmares about this from now on... until there is a way for me to field it ?

I mean, you could get even more gross, with cross faction by adding Jendon and swapping a B to Keyen.

8 minutes ago, themightyhedgehog said:

I mean, you could get even more gross, with cross faction by adding Jendon and swapping a B to Keyen.

True...

Should one add norra aswell?

1 hour ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Sure, but canonically the Rebels used quite a few captured or defected ISDs and SSDs, even per the Nu-Canon novels.

Difference here is that the Rebels had some defected ISDs. The Empire on the other hand had literally all Venators. You know because the Republic became the Empire with all its assets.

2 hours ago, Captain_Nemo said:

For the venrtral/hangar Turbolaser I thought of something like this:

I love it!

6 minutes ago, Captain_Nemo said:

True...

Should one add norra aswell?

Honestly I have never had good luck with her.

1 hour ago, themightyhedgehog said:

Honestly I have never had good luck with her.

Interesting

I‘m an imperial non bomberguy so I never really thought about her, but she seemed reasonable

1 hour ago, LordCola said:

I love it!

I an happy to hear that

I have to think the Venator would be more of a broadside ship than a front arc ship in order to offer a different playstyle from the VSD and ISD. That said I don't see why it has to be entirely one or the other. The rebs just got the MC75 which has 3 decent sized arcs with decent dice pools. Why not make the Venator have 2 primary side arcs with a half decent front arc? 3 reds 2 blues out the side and then 2 reds 2 blues out the front? or swap the blues for black dice? Give it decent manuverability and speed, with okayish hull but weaker shields and a weaker defense token suite. 1 brace, 1 redirect, 1 contain? The weaker shields and tokens since its older tech. I really like the idea of dbl officer slot, since the ship had 2 bridges. and yeh make one ship more carrier oriented and the other more like a battlecruiser. easy.

also hush hush on this rebels should get the venator nonsense. In the most canon thing there is THE MOVIES it sees use with the Empire. deal with it.

10 hours ago, LordCola said:

...

Once again I think the Venator with a starfighter complement more than 6 times larger than an ISD can not have a suqad value that low.

A Victory Star Destroyer (VSD) has a complement of 24 TiE* Fighters has a squadron value of 3. It can be boosted to 4 with expanded hanger bays, and 5 with a token/dial.

A Imperial Star Destroyer (ISD) has a complement of 72 TiE* Fighters has a squadron value of 2 to 4. It can be boosted to 3 to 5 with expanded hanger bays, and 4 to 6 with a token/dial.

So what is my point you may be asking? I do not think that the squadron value has much to do with how many fighter the ship carries but how many it can control at one time. Using the assumption that each fighter base is a 12 fighter squadron (I am not in this group, but we are going with it here). The VSD can only carry 2 fighter squadrons, but can command up to 5 fighter squadrons every turn (250% of what it can carry). Even if you do not make it into a carrier, and do nothing to boost its squadron value it can still command 150% of the fighters it carries. The ISD that can carry 6 fighter squadrons can command all six every turn, if you take the right upgrades and commander/officer. But if you you do not make it into a carrier then it can potentially only command 33% of what it can carry.

So the two (ship of the line) Star Destroyers we have right now the smaller one can command between 150-250% the number of fighters it can carry, and the larger one can command between 3-100% of what it can carry, if each squadron base is a full squadron. If (the group that I am in) you go with each squadron base being a flight of three (or what you see) then it makes more sense for the VSD who can now control 3-5 of its 8 fighter bases it can carry, but could be argued that it takes the ISD even further away as it can now only control 2-6 of 24 fighter bases it can carry.

* Ship Complements come from Wookipedia.

I wasn't sure how to price this one honestly. Decent Firepower and able to command 4 squads. 2 officer slots for unique setups.

25 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

I wasn't sure how to price this one honestly. Decent Firepower and able to command 4 squads. 2 officer slots for unique setups.

... It just doesn’t seem right to be able to go effective speed 4 on something that the VICTORY was intended to be an improvement on...

12 hours ago, themightyhedgehog said:

I just don't think you can give a squad value of 5 with the ability to do EHB and boosted comms... that is 7 squads you are throwing. With the amount of squad hate floating around, I don't think that is a good idea...

I do really like the modified turbo laser card though. Could be really cool.

Quasar can do 6 with hangars & token. If venator is a carrier then I don’t see 7 as a problem.

In fact, given the propensity for swarms of cheap fighters I may go so far as to say the imperial faction needs this.

It also kinda fits thematically. Newer ISDs carried less fighters as a move to heavy combat ships became the new doctrine.

3 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

... It just doesn’t seem right to be able to go effective speed 4 on something that the VICTORY was intended to be an improvement on...

I was thinking something similar. I went and read some stuff (I like SW but all I know is mostly from the movies and that's all) about the Venator and I found that it was eclipsed by the Victory and phased out " partially due to its over-reliance on starfighters" cause it didn't fit Tarkin Doctrine (I dunno but it seems something like OP ships will rule the galaxy theory). And then see all this:

On 7/18/2018 at 12:49 AM, Divad said:

On 7/18/2018 at 3:44 AM, GiledPallaeon said:

17 hours ago, Captain_Nemo said:

4 hours ago, TallGiraffe said:

and think, ok, they all command squadrons but don't seem too dependant on them and basically all of them look better than a Vic. The Empire have a cheap&expendable policy about starfighters but with ships they did just the opposite. I guess a Venator class should be in between the Quasar and the Vic but as I said, no much idea about SW background and all that.

4 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:

I was thinking something similar. I went and read some stuff (I like SW but all I know is mostly from the movies and that's all) about the Venator and I found that it was eclipsed by the Victory and phased out " partially due to its over-reliance on starfighters" cause it didn't fit Tarkin Doctrine

Looked it up on wookiepedia:

it says that it was eclipsed by designs inspired by the victory i.e. Imperator or rather Imperial class star destroyers.

so it doesn’t say that it was eclipsed by the vic itself

it also says that thr venators Main batteries rivaled the main batteries of imperial 1 class destroyers

so it seens justified for it to have a punch better or equal to the vic

18 minutes ago, Captain_Nemo said:

Looked it up on wookiepedia:

it says that it was eclipsed by designs inspired by the victory i.e. Imperator or rather Imperial class star destroyers.

so it doesn’t say that it was eclipsed by the vic itself

it also says that thr venators Main batteries rivaled the main batteries of imperial 1 class destroyers

so it seens justified for it to have sond punch better or equal to the vic

interesting... it is said "main batteries" not sure what to think about it though. Also later say it is on par with a Victory. Why it was over-relianced on starfighters? If it already punched like an ISD or a VSD that characteristic should be represented somehow and it seems it wasn't a range problem. Maybe weaker than an VSD, like less hull, less shields, poor defensive options. I dunno.