12 minutes ago, redxavier said:Unfortunately none of the turrets move on the existing model so you're right in a way!
Suddenly I'm reminded of GW's stupid and (thankfully) short-lived rule that vehicle weapons could only fire in the arcs they can traverse in. Meant people who'd glued their turrets down were kinda screwed
With a native white Rotate and a base that has a red shaded in primary arc, it probably has the Lancer setup of two defined arc values. My guess would be a 2 dice front arc primary weapon and 2 dice single mobile arc. I don't think it will have a gunner slot in that case, but it might I guess. It just seems like there are three categories of turreted ships.
One, has a primary arc and a single mobile arc that can equip a turret like ICT. These don't seem to have rotate natively because turrets add them. The Scurrg and Attack Shuttle are exceptions in not having Gunner slots, while the Y-Wing, Ghost, and Aggressor all do.
Two, has only a PWT, which means a native rotate, but no shaded in primary arc on the base. These have a set attack value for their PWT and so have no turret slot, but usually seem to have a Gunner slot. The HWK is a notable exception in not having a gunner unlike the Falcon, Dash, K-Wing, and Deci. Interestingly, this might be exactly because the title Moldy Crow lets you turn the HWK into the third type of turreted ship.
Third, like the Lancer, have a defined primary arc weapon value and a defined turret value with a native rotate. I think this is only the Lancer and the HWK with Moldy Crow title, but I can certainly be wrong. Neither has a Gunner slot.
This doesn't mean they actually have to adhere to this though. Just learning about turrets recently and wanted to write it out.
13 hours ago, Stryker359 said:The reference photo I was going for implied that there were fixed rear guns and a rear turret. If I'm mistaken, so be it
Er, what? Because someone criticises a ship design they hate the movie? I actually quite liked TLJ...
well **** go figure
1 minute ago, Captain Lackwit said:well **** go figure
To be fair, it's the internet and apparently the whole internet hates TLJ, so I get why you came to that conclusion
12 hours ago, RebelProfundity said:With a native white Rotate and a base that has a red shaded in primary arc, it probably has the Lancer setup of two defined arc values. My guess would be a 2 dice front arc primary weapon and 2 dice single mobile arc. I don't think it will have a gunner slot in that case, but it might I guess. It just seems like there are three categories of turreted ships.
One, has a primary arc and a single mobile arc that can equip a turret like ICT. These don't seem to have rotate natively because turrets add them. The Scurrg and Attack Shuttle are exceptions in not having Gunner slots, while the Y-Wing, Ghost, and Aggressor all do.
Two, has only a PWT, which means a native rotate, but no shaded in primary arc on the base. These have a set attack value for their PWT and so have no turret slot, but usually seem to have a Gunner slot. The HWK is a notable exception in not having a gunner unlike the Falcon, Dash, K-Wing, and Deci. Interestingly, this might be exactly because the title Moldy Crow lets you turn the HWK into the third type of turreted ship.
Third, like the Lancer, have a defined primary arc weapon value and a defined turret value with a native rotate. I think this is only the Lancer and the HWK with Moldy Crow title, but I can certainly be wrong. Neither has a Gunner slot.
This doesn't mean they actually have to adhere to this though. Just learning about turrets recently and wanted to write it out.
I think you're right in that it'll likely either have a PWT, or an arc and defined turret arc. I think 2 red dice might not be enough, but then again as stated earlier it's a Bomber not a turret carrier. It'll be interesting to see, anyway.
Regarding bombs: do we think two bomb slots? Maybe even three? Hopefully there's no way to slap Trajectory Simulator on it (though I wouldn't be surprised if you could...)
Special text should be they only last 3 rounds then blow up due to bad ship design...
2 hours ago, Stryker359 said:I think you're right in that it'll likely either have a PWT, or an arc and defined turret arc. I think 2 red dice might not be enough, but then again as stated earlier it's a Bomber not a turret carrier. It'll be interesting to see, anyway.
Regarding bombs: do we think two bomb slots? Maybe even three? Hopefully there's no way to slap Trajectory Simulator on it (though I wouldn't be surprised if you could...)
Now, why would you hope that, especially as you expect a simple 2-dice turret on the poor bugger? They'd be utterly pointless without it. Would anyone be theory-crafting with the Punisher right now if it couldn't spit bombs out the front? Maybe, but it's a solid munitions platform with an improved dial. No one is even looking at the TIE Bomber as a bomber right now, even with multiple charges and the Nimble Bomber text and a Skilled Bombardier, and what does it lack? Sensor slot for Trajectory simulator. Without a Simulator, the B/SF becomes a fat, slow, torpedo-less Y-Wing: boring to fly and a waste of points and design space. If anything, I would have expected the Simulator to have been the ship ability of the B/SF alone - not available to the Havoc or the Punisher or any other, older ship.
Well. That turned into a bit of a rant. Sorry. I didn't realize I liked my space guppy that much, haha. God, now I really hope it's not ****!
1 hour ago, MrMaggles said:Special text should be they only last 3 rounds then blow up due to bad ship design...
Well if we are going to complain about design, then the TIE/LN should have a penalty when being flanked..
43 minutes ago, Kleeg005 said:Now, why would you hope that, especially as you expect a simple 2-dice turret on the poor bugger? They'd be utterly pointless without it. Would anyone be theory-crafting with the Punisher right now if it couldn't spit bombs out the front? Maybe, but it's a solid munitions platform with an improved dial. No one is even looking at the TIE Bomber as a bomber right now, even with multiple charges and the Nimble Bomber text and a Skilled Bombardier, and what does it lack? Sensor slot for Trajectory simulator. Without a Simulator, the B/SF becomes a fat, slow, torpedo-less Y-Wing: boring to fly and a waste of points and design space. If anything, I would have expected the Simulator to have been the ship ability of the B/SF alone - not available to the Havoc or the Punisher or any other, older ship.
Well. That turned into a bit of a rant. Sorry. I didn't realize I liked my space guppy that much, haha. God, now I really hope it's not ****!
Mainly because I'm bitter and jaded about TrajSim from 1.0
. Academically, I know it's a worthwhile upgrade and made certain ships work, but I've suffered at its hands too many times
. Plus I fail to see how a ship so fat, slow and ungainly would manage to throw a bomb,
but
, lore and game mechanics do not often go hand-in-hand, and I know that sometimes one must be sacrificed to preserve the other!
Ultimately, I'll likely buy one regardless of its rules. I really don't think it'll suck (I
hope
not, anyway), because then why would FFG even bother making rules for it, but will it make it into competitive lists? We'll see.
I imagine the Crossfire Formation will still exist in some form, possibly meaning that fielding multiple generics might be favourable to a single loaded-up named pilot? If ships are, on average, double what they are now, a Crimson generic would be somewhere between 45 and 55 points (25 in 1.0), which means you could easily field three with devices and still have room for an escort of some form.
For trajectory Sims, I just imagine they stick it in an ordnance tube like smart blokes instead of sluggishly drifting over their target like a drowned, bloated corpse on a low tide surf
Edited by ficklegreendice
4 hours ago, Stryker359 said:I really don't think it'll suck (I hope not, anyway), because then why would FFG even bother making rules for it,
Just a counter example of FFG making rules for something that sucks, ever tried building with a Scurrg and not put Havoc on it?
1 hour ago, Hiemfire said:Just a counter example of FFG making rules for something that sucks, ever tried building with a Scurrg and not put Havoc on it?
It is so difficult to justify. Maybe with Cad Bane crew? On Sol Sixxa? Somebody want to test that for us and report back?
4 minutes ago, Kleeg005 said:It is so difficult to justify. Maybe with Cad Bane crew? On Sol Sixxa? Somebody want to test that for us and report back?
Ouch. Locks the ship out of an action in the activation phase if you use his ability and don't move slow (blue).
Edited by Hiemfire6 hours ago, Kleeg005 said:It is so difficult to justify. Maybe with Cad Bane crew? On Sol Sixxa? Somebody want to test that for us and report back?
Cad Bane is on my list of crew I want to test on both Emon Azameen and the Scurrg. I might get some reports up after I've formed an opinion.
14 hours ago, Stryker359 said:Plus I fail to see how a ship so fat, slow and ungainly would manage to throw a bomb,
Well, obviously, they were diverting all power from the engines to the electromagnetic bomb launchers?
There was once a movie called Dambusters, based on the heroics of the RAF in WW2. Lucas was inspired by it and copied many flight fight scenes frame for frame. Efectively it was the basis for this game...
As good Star Wars geeks, I'm sure you know this. Effectively Fluke was flying a Spitfire with a one shot puny bomb after the low flying Lancanster (I think) bombers had failed and were shot down...
Inspirational cinema rewritten for a new generation, and they don't just stop the Nazi Heavy water plan (nuclear weaponry) this time; they SAVE THE GALAXY (well the rebel hq really, after their own machinations got a planet zapped, but let's not quibble)! The cinema erupted in joy and applause...
...
And then we come to Turgid Lethargic Junk, otherwise known as TLJ; sorry, the bombers from TLJ...
....
Dambusters, it weren't...
...
Make 'em true to form,, I say. Give 'em a full 360 arc, the only ship to have it. P15S everyone off! But only R1 and only 1 attack die. Their manourve dial should only have a green one forward, a red two forward, red one turns, and white one banks. No agility. Hull and shields to whatever...
And then let 'em fart bombs onto ships that are as bad and defenseless as they are!
...
I'd buy one (if they cost about five bucks)
Edited by Larky BobbleYeah, lets not let dislike for tlj (warranted as some of it may be, albeit a far more reasonable amount, imo) ruin a perfectly good bit of gameplay + a fine model
They looked so cool in the trailer... Like there is a fan made remake ofnthe Vader Kenobi fight, I'd love to see someone remake that space scene, but leave the bit where Poe zooms abour. I like the intentions of TLJ, but not the execution, personally.
Anyway, to keep it on thread, yeah, they have to make the "trailer" version. But isn't that trash too?
**** the trailer version, they have to make a playable version
It's a game before anything else
Leaves me wondering, did they have access to missile or torpedo mags/launchers. The bomb fin is supposedly a detach to reload, attach fresh while reloading the empty design. Maybe a config that switches out which type the bomber is loaded with? Have the ship change from carrying normal ordinance to devices depending on which Configuration is used. Devices one, missiles or torps for another. The base chassis would have crew, gunner, turret, mod, and either sensor or tech or both sensor and tech slot. Primary weapon could be a 2 front arc/2 rear arc setup like a weaker Firespray. The Dial has already been spoiled and has 3 whites...
On 9/6/2018 at 9:22 PM, HolySorcerer said:New dial. Blue one straight, red one banks.
The film accurate dial would be red one straight and nothing else. I am still not convinced that they are capable of turning.
I think the upgrade slots will be a lot more open now that bomb spam has been removed. Possibly 3 bombs, maybe a missile or torpedo slot. Still a bowtie turret.
4 hours ago, ThinkingB said:The film accurate dial would be red one straight and nothing else. I am still not convinced that they are capable of turning.
I had considered going with a white one straight instead of blue. Basically, these things should have the worst dial in the game by a wide margin. They should be slow and not have any turns on the dial.
Wow this thread had turned into a bashing session. If its cathartic and helps you vent I guess it is better than letting your ire at how it was portrayed in TLJ eat you from within. If not... Whats the point y'all doing this?
1 hour ago, Hiemfire said:Wow this thread had turned into a bashing session. If its cathartic and helps you vent I guess it is better than letting your ire at how it was portrayed in TLJ eat you from within. If not... Whats the point y'all doing this?
Haters gonna hate, right? And I will bomb them straight to **** and back!
21 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:**** the trailer version, they have to make a playable version
It's a game before anything else
That's where I beg to disagree. If ships bear no resemblance, gamewise, to their movie counterpart, then in this particular game, it sucks. Star Wars is too evocative, and I wouldn't be playing if Xwings weren't Xwings etc...
There's nothing wrong with having a financially expensive low points cost ship in the game. They could even set the points low enough to make it competitive and make MORE money!