On 4/15/2019 at 8:51 PM, Tirion said:

I'm confused by people saying the don't want clone wars because it may mean no gcw stuff for a while. That is different from the current situation how?

Alot o the GCW diehards and myself grew up with the EU books and comics where a number of ships and squadrons were introduced. In this context there are possibly dozens of ships that could be added to the GCW era outside the films and TV shows. Some of them, like the Quasar and Director Isaard, were. A lot of people's favorite ships, squadrons and characters haven't been touched on yet.

The problem with many of is that they never had official designs. That's right, Hondo's flying saucer fleet is more canonical than some classic EU ships.

As a die hard original trilogy and EU supporter, I personally would rather get official designs. But those books really inspired myself and other star wars nerds. I don't blame guys like Norsehound for wondering where the other cool GCW ships went.

Tbh I care a LOT less about how stuff looks and what it's source is, than I do about getting PLAYABLE NEW TOYS! 😀😀

5 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

Alot o the GCW diehards and myself grew up with the EU books and comics where a number of ships and squadrons were introduced. In this context there are possibly dozens of ships that could be added to the GCW era outside the films and TV shows. Some of them, like the Quasar and Director Isaard, were. A lot of people's favorite ships, squadrons and characters haven't been touched on yet.

The problem with many of is that they never had official designs. That's right, Hondo's flying saucer fleet is more canonical than some classic EU ships.

As a die hard original trilogy and EU supporter, I personally would rather get official designs. But those books really inspired myself and other star wars nerds. I don't blame guys like Norsehound for wondering where the other cool GCW ships went.

Agreed. The sad thing is there are some great ships & squadrons from the old EU that would be super cool to include in the game. And while some of it could be considered niche or not well known, its no more so than the AF currently in the game.

10 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

Alot o the GCW diehards and myself grew up with the EU books and comics where a number of ships and squadrons were introduced. In this context there are possibly dozens of ships that could be added to the GCW era outside the films and TV shows. Some of them, like the Quasar and Director Isaard, were. A lot of people's favorite ships, squadrons and characters haven't been touched on yet.

The problem with many of is that they never had official designs. That's right, Hondo's flying saucer fleet is more canonical than some classic EU ships.

As a die hard original trilogy and EU supporter, I personally would rather get official designs. But those books really inspired myself and other star wars nerds. I don't blame guys like Norsehound for wondering where the other cool GCW ships went.

But it is extremely unlikely to get anything from legends unless it is recanonized.

32 minutes ago, Tirion said:

But it is extremely unlikely to get anything from legends unless it is recanonized.

You sure about that? Cause there is a TON of legends already in multiple games that will never be recanonised.

22 minutes ago, Kani Kantai said:

You sure about that? Cause there is a TON of legends already in multiple games that will never be recanonised.

Do you have a ton of examples post acquisition?

41 minutes ago, Tirion said:

Do you have a ton of examples post acquisition?

Well, considering the acquisition was announced in 2012, and Armada was released in 2015, how about all of them?

9 minutes ago, Kani Kantai said:

Well, considering the acquisition was announced in 2012, and Armada was released in 2015, how about all of them?

The canonicity change was not at aquisition announce.

There is a very specific date.

It was in April 2014.

That date is close enough that given a typical 18 month design and production cycle, wave 0-1 could have been completed before it was set.

Whuch is why wave 1 is the vast majority of our legends only content.

This has been “all it confirmed” as so with discussions with designers through the years, but never stated officially by FFG marketing for their own presumably business reasons.

1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:

The canonicity change was not at aquisition announce.

There is a very specific date.

It was in April 2014.

That date is close enough that given a typical 18 month design and production cycle, wave 0-1 could have been completed before it was set.

Whuch is why wave 1 is the vast majority of our legends only content.

This has been “all it confirmed” as so with discussions with designers through the years, but never stated officially by FFG marketing for their own presumably business reasons.

Thanks dras you beat me to it.

12 hours ago, Kani Kantai said:

You sure about that? Cause there is a TON of legends already in multiple games that will never be recanonised.

From what I can tell, nearly all the ships and squadrons from the original West End Games RPG and by extension Heir to the Empire have been recanonized, as have many ships, squadrons and characters that appeared in the X-Wing series.

The material least likely to reappear is the Yuuzong Vong era stuff. And while I realize some players really appreciate the Vong era, I think that just about everything past where the Skywalker kids are old enough to have personalities is just too far beyond the GCW to recanonize from Legends. The E-wing seems to be the only major exception.

On 4/16/2019 at 12:17 AM, Chamberlin said:

I'll be honest while I know that you will be able to mix generations of ships (aka Imperials fighting Separatist) and they will have rules that make it mechanically fine, I am thinking that thematically it will take a lot away from the game having different time periods. For me it is like just because you could make a game that balance WWI forces against WWII and have it be a fun game doesn't mean that thematically or aesthetically it looks as good when compared to sticking to one period. And yes I know that is a large generality purposefully ignoring the large amount of WWI tech used during WWII it just was the first example that popped into my head. Maybe I should have said WWI vs Korea?

In modern Navies ships are routinely in service for 40-50 years. The USS Enterprise (first nuclear carrier) was in active service for 51 years. The USS Kitty Hawk (one of the last conventional fuel carriers) was in service for 54 years. The USS Frank Cable (sub tender) has been in service since 1978. USS Bremerton (attack sub) was in active service for 40 years and is still part of the reserve fleet.

Thematically, there’s no reason why TCW era ships would not be around during the GCW era. If it helps, you can pretend they’re reserve fleets, sector defense fleets, or pirates with old technology.

As far as characters not matching, there have been continuity issues since day one. Luke Skywalker and Raymus Antilles could never have fought together, for example.

2 minutes ago, bkcammack said:

In modern Navies ships are routinely in service for 40-50 years. The USS Enterprise (first nuclear carrier) was in active service for 51 years. The USS Kitty Hawk (one of the last conventional fuel carriers) was in service for 54 years. The USS Frank Cable (sub tender) has been in service since 1978. USS Bremerton (attack sub) was in active service for 40 years and is still part of the reserve fleet.

Thematically, there’s no reason why TCW era ships would not be around during the GCW era. If it helps, you can pretend they’re reserve fleets, sector defense fleets, or pirates with old technology.

As far as characters not matching, there have been continuity issues since day one. Luke Skywalker and Raymus Antilles could never have fought together, for example.

Again I agree that technology can span quite some time, heck look at how long the B-52 or KC-135 have served for. My point was more thematic where while it is perfectly viable for a ship to be used in a GCW scenario I was simply stating my preference to keep the two separate thematically much in the way that when I sit down for a historical game I would rather play a game in one setting (say WWII) instead of mixing similar settings which thematically have differences (aka WWI vs WWII or taken to an extreme Medieval Europe vs WWII, because while "Mad Jack" Churchill showed that a sword and longbow could still be used to great effect it doesn't mean that I want the two mixing as a rule.

I also agree with the sentiment that they are my toys and I can do as I like and so I was simply expressing my opinion that if I were given the choice I would prefer to not have resources spent on CW era ships. In general though I'm just happy to have new products coming out and new cards for my current fleets regardless of source.

On 4/16/2019 at 10:51 PM, thecactusman17 said:

I don't blame guys like Norsehound for wondering where the other cool GCW ships went.

I'll admit one of my frustrations with the Clone Wars is abolishing all of those things that we were told were part of the Clone Wars before, but now hardly show up in modern retellings of the war. VSDs are Clone Wars stock- what the **** is this two-masted thing claiming to be the Republic's primary star Destroyer? Strikefast, the destroyer to find Thrawn, was originally a VSD class. Zahn's newest novel makes it out to be a Venator. Why is the mouse eager to wash out my favorite Star Destroyer variant from canon? It's been mentioned by name precisely once, incidentally, in the new canon.

Z-95s and Y-Wings didn't show up until the Clone Wars cartoon brought them in, yet they're some of our earliest EU examples of craft that were supposed to be Clone Wars Veterans!

Yeah, I'm also waiting for things like the Nebulon-B2 and the MC40a a lot more intently than the Clone Wars material. We know FFG isn't shy on depicting Legends vehicles (Which is where the TIE Interdictor Punisher comes from in X-Wing) if given enough time. Throwing Clone Wars in the way means it'll be longer before we see these other vehicles.

45 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

It's been mentioned by name precisely once, incidentally, in the new canon.

Twice. Tarkin and Catalyst.

5 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Twice. Tarkin and Catalyst.

Really? The Wookipedia pages on neither the Victory-Class Star Destroyer or Cataclyst mention the VSD showing up in Catalyst. I haven't read it, though I did read Tarkin.

We also get some mention of a qaz-Class Star Destroyer though. Evidently the firepower is comparable to superlasers?

21 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

Really? The Wookipedia pages on neither the Victory-Class Star Destroyer or Cataclyst mention the VSD showing up in Catalyst. I haven't read it, though I did read Tarkin.

Perhaps I am mistaken; skimming through it reveals nothing.

The only reason I’m “not” enthused about Clone Wars Armada is that it probably means there won’t be new Armada content released. I know there aren’t many (or any) canon ships left, but there are numerous Legends ships that could be released. However, if the focus shifts to Clone Wars Armada, I’m pessimistic that classic Armada will get any more ships or squadrons.

I wouldn’t be worried if there had not been a dirth of new Armada content for the past year. X-Wing continued to release new Galactic Civil War era content as the Sequel Trilogy and Clone Wars eras were introduced, and it appears Legion will do the same. However, FFG hasn’t announced any new waves for Armada. There’s just the delayed release of the SSD, which was announced at GamesCon last August, and the Rebellion in the Rim campaign expansion that was just announced. Without a new Wave for Armada, it seems like Clone Wars is all that we have to look forward to for Armada.

On 3/29/2019 at 3:58 PM, AegisGrimm said:

I think Clone Wars works better for Legion and Xwing than Armada.

On 4/4/2019 at 2:03 PM, ninclouse2000 said:

Maybe they should just make a separate armada clone wars game rather than adding them to this game. I really would prefer to not see clone wars in this version of the game.

Yeah, I don't understand this at all. If anything, Clone Wars makes way more sense for large scale battles that GCW era, since battleships duked it out regularly at the time. I'm assuming you guys haven't seen the Clone Wars show?

On 4/4/2019 at 5:01 PM, Pwmf said:

Nope not the only one, not that interested in Clone Wars, they would try to rush out waves if they did it, but it would likely end any releases for the existing factions. To me it would seem a separate game even if they balanced them against the existing factions, it would give them more design space if they don't. I don't believe that there is a massive pool of players that will rush to buy into the game because clone wars is what they have been waiting for, more likely it will be a sub set of the existing players and a scattering of players that see their favourite ship/era. If it was just Armada I doubt it would happen, but with two other systems and plenty of art etc already in the bank they just might, how well it goes down will probable depend on the quality of the product. It would be easier for them to do FO/Resistance but that doesn't seem to be their focus ATM, and not that keen to see them do that either.

Clone Wars will be THE reason I'll jump into Armada, as mentioned above. Thematically makes way more sense.

Sequel Armada ship battles would be pretty cool too.

On 4/18/2019 at 1:54 PM, Norsehound said:

Why is the mouse eager to wash out my favorite Star Destroyer variant from canon?

Lucas himself did that when he made Revenge of the Sith. The minute Lucas put the Venator on screen, he created that problem. He then reinforced it with the TV show. The mouse had nothing to do with it.

2 hours ago, MegaSilver said:

Yeah, I don't understand this at all. If anything, Clone Wars makes way more sense for large scale battles that GCW era, since battleships duked it out regularly at the time. I'm assuming you guys haven't seen the Clone Wars show?

Clone Wars will be THE reason I'll jump into Armada, as mentioned above. Thematically makes way more sense.

Sequel Armada ship battles would be pretty cool too.

I have seen a few episodes of clone wars. It’s ok. My main concern is immersion. The way my brain works, I may have an aneurism if someone wants to bring a clones war era fleet against a rebellion fleet or imperial fleet. I would have preferred them to have made a separate armada game just for clone wars rather than new factions. But I am knowingly in the minority on this so I should try to be happy for those that are excited. It’s just a game and will be enjoyable regardless I suppose. Heck I may even want to pick some clone wars ships up to use for clone wars only games.

4 hours ago, Truthiness said:

Lucas himself did that when he made Revenge of the Sith. The minute Lucas put the Venator on screen, he created that problem. He then reinforced it with the TV show. The mouse had nothing to do with it.

Strikefast was replaced under their direction.

Under Lucas direction at least, the Victory continued to be mentioned in EU sources (along with other EU mainstays, such as the Lancer, Carrack, Assault Frigate, etc). With each successive addition to the lore, even in the GCW, the VSD continues to be absent.

3 hours ago, Norsehound said:

Strikefast was replaced under their direction.

Under Lucas direction at least, the Victory continued to be mentioned in EU sources (along with other EU mainstays, such as the Lancer, Carrack, Assault Frigate, etc). With each successive addition to the lore, even in the GCW, the VSD continues to be absent.

It doesn't change the fact that Lucas was the one that made things awkward by omitting the "mainstay" ship of the Republic everywhere on screen. Lucas never considered anything outside the screen sacred. I remember the EU used to have all Jedi Masters fade into the Force. Then Phantom Menace happened. Oops. The Vic is the same situation. Disney is really just cleaning up the mess Lucas started. Plus, since Luceno included a Vic and Zahn didn't, it was probably Zahn's call and not Disney's.

On a related note, I always love hearing the screeching about how Lucas would have preserved the EU (not you Norse, just in general). No he wouldn't have. I guarantee his sequel trilogy concept would have stomped all over the EU just like he did with the prequel trilogy. Best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.

On 4/8/2019 at 12:26 AM, thecactusman17 said:

This is why I want Clone Wars in the game. For all the great storytelling of the expanded universe, the PT and Clone Wars TV show ships and fleets engaging in direct, prolonged combat in a way the original trilogy never managed. And yes, we have a few recent updates tot he GCW from the Rebels and Resistance TV shows, but the actual factual truth is that The Clone Wars and the PT showed us more fleet scale combat in several individual episodes than was shows in A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi COMBINED.

There is just so much more to do with the Clone Wars ships. New ship designs, experimental weapons, clouds of squadrons, iconic characters. The Prequel Trilogy films aren't well made, but you can tell that immense effort was put into making the vehicles look as iconic as any Imperial Star Destroyer or Mon Cal Cruiser or X-Wing or TIE Fighter. I love the Dr Aphra comic book, but I simply don't care about seeing her or 0-0-0 on the table as much as I'd love to see Mace Windu, Asajj Ventriss, Rex Fives, or Cody.

This has, at least in my opinion, always been the biggest strenght of the prequel trilogy. The immense worldbuilding and the unique ship and world designs. From a visual perspective, the prequels just offer much more. I do love the OT X-Wings and TIE Fighters but ships like the ARC170 or the Royal Naboo Ships, the corvette-like Belbullab-22, the Venator class star destroyer, the Eta-2 Jedi Interceptor... those ships just look more "refined", its thats the right word to put it.

I have read the "ART of Episode ..." books of the prequels trilogy and i just love all the 50s and 60s inspirations for the ships and worlds. The OT ships were iconic yes, but at the same time they really feel like typical 70s sci fi designs. Ships made out of very basic shapes like an "X", a Triangle or a disc... nothing wrong with that but i guess i just prefer the more modern and a little more "grounded" feeling sci fi designs. Same goes for the Battlestar Galactica ships, the new ones are just so much more elegant and detailed.

I dont wanna say the prequel designs are more "realistic", but they do feel like they were designed with greater thought put into how those vehicles would work and function in that fictional reality. And i just really prefer that sense of immersion and attention to detail. The "Art of" books and the "Incredible Cross-Sections" Books of the prequels really add to this and are some of my finest star wars childhood memories.

Not going to lie I would enjoy Clone Wars Armada, but I am afraid that the release schedule will be a slow trickle of ships and squadrons for the Republic and CIS, and nothing at all for the Rebels and Empire as stated by numerous other people here. Ideally the Clone Wars would have 3-4 ships and 3-5 squadrons per side at launch, but FFG rolls out Armada content at a slow pace. At least for the Republic some ships are already made like the VSD and Arquitens, all FFG needs to do is make Clone Wars specific cards and change the paint scheme.

1 hour ago, >kkj said:

This has, at least in my opinion, always been the biggest strenght of the prequel trilogy. The immense worldbuilding and the unique ship and world designs. From a visual perspective, the prequels just offer much more. I do love the OT X-Wings and TIE Fighters but ships like the ARC170 or the Royal Naboo Ships, the corvette-like Belbullab-22, the Venator class star destroyer, the Eta-2 Jedi Interceptor... those ships just look more "refined", its thats the right word to put it.

I have read the "ART of Episode ..." books of the prequels trilogy and i just love all the 50s and 60s inspirations for the ships and worlds. The OT ships were iconic yes, but at the same time they really feel like typical 70s sci fi designs. Ships made out of very basic shapes like an "X", a Triangle or a disc... nothing wrong with that but i guess i just prefer the more modern and a little more "grounded" feeling sci fi designs. Same goes for the Battlestar Galactica ships, the new ones are just so much more elegant and detailed.

I dont wanna say the prequel designs are more "realistic", but they do feel like they were designed with greater thought put into thow those vehicles would work and function in that fictional reality. And i just really prefer that sense of immersion and attention to detail. The "Art of" books and the "Incredible Cross-Sections" Books of the prequels really add to this and are some of my finest star wars childhood memories.

I can agree with a lot of that. Visually was certainly not where the prequels fell on their face. Visually they're pretty great. And the POTENTIAL for huge world building was there. But prequels didn't do that. The cartoon did. The prequels suffered from poorly written dialogue and terrible directing. The overall theme, the fall of a democracy into authoritarianism, is a GREAT theme. It just wasn't executed well in the movies. The potential was always there, though. The Revenge of the Sith novelization is all the evidence I need. Minor tweaks to dialogue and the inclusion of Anakin's internal thoughts took that story from poor to absolutely incredible. Then the Clone Wars cartoon rocked it the expanded world building.

I'm pretty excited about Clone Wars in Armada, both from an aesthetic point of view and the idea that we get fresh design starts with new brand factions. But that excitement definitely doesn't come from the prequel trilogy itself