Just now, KCDodger said:

The **** do you mean by Swingy?

"Oops, half my list just got one-shot. might as well call it now."

20 minutes ago, Rakaydos said:

After learning their lessons for 2nd ed? only 3 dice for phantom, and the Upsilon's fat hull is anything but swingy.

One of the lessons they should have learned from 1.0 is that ships like this should never get an IN 5 or 6 pilot.

A 4-die attack backed by Never Get Shot should make this a High Risk High Reward design, if you don't get to go 1st.

On 2/5/2020 at 11:13 PM, Darth Meanie said:

StealthX

The good guys get a cloaked ship, but with a catch: if the ship is running any instrumentation at all, it's not actually cloaked. Thus, pilots of the StealthX must rely on their Force senses to guide the ship while "running silent". . .

Initial ideas. Aces will get 2 Force; recover 1. I wonder if the ship ability should include "execute a 2 OR DECLOAK.

Not sure about how this mechanic works. As you say your not officially cloaked.

For starters the Stealth X is just a stealthy XJ. Think you should create the XJ and then add a title or a config card to make stealth X?

The XJ should be better than the T-65 but about the same as a T-70. Maybe add the barrel roll and boost as main features but are red actions. Closed S-foils, BR and Boost become white and have focus - red link actions.

Ship ability for the XJ could be "Stutter fire" - Essentially TLT. You roll twice for the attack. If it hits you do 1 damage. Range 1 modifier don't apply. 2 x 3 dice attack. I know that was oppressive as a turret in V1 but think it would be okay in one arc.

For the stealth X mechanic how about you don't use the cloak rules but give it an inherent stealth device. Something like...

While you have an active charge add plus one to agility. When you are hit flip the charge token.

At the start of the engagement phase, if you are out of range 3 of all enemy ships you may flip this charge to active.

So disengaging boost agility rather than healing?

3 hours ago, Tyhar7 said:

Not sure about how this mechanic works. As you say your not officially cloaked.

The XJ should be better than the T-65 but about the same as a T-70. Maybe add the barrel roll and boost as main features but are red actions. Closed S-foils, BR and Boost become white and have focus - red link actions.

Yeah, the mechanic was bad, and I redid it but never reposted.

Quote

For starters the Stealth X is just a stealthy XJ. Think you should create the XJ and then add a title or a config card to make stealth X?

Mmm, I don't think they are as close as that. The StealthX is a less hardy variant. Also, I think that the Title for Subvariant design ethos is dead. Which I like. For example, if they ever get around to making the TIE Shuttle a thing again, it should have all new pilot cards with the variant listed on the card. Reuse the model for sure, and probably the dial.

Quote

The XJ should be better than the T-65 but about the same as a T-70. Maybe add the barrel roll and boost as main features but are red actions. Closed S-foils, BR and Boost become white and have focus - red link actions.

I'm currently working on the T-65A3. It is SERIOUSLY HARD to come up with a new X-Wing that feels same but different!! I pity FFG for the T-85; they are going to need to do that one at some point!

OTOH, the idea for the T-65A3 is to get the faction up to speed fast. . .so if it is more alike than different, I don't think that's a major concern. And the pilots' abilities will be different, which is the major factor in flying.

Furthermore, the new A-9:

And lastly, I finally figured out I could actually jazz up the card backgrounds. See above, and now card backs!!

T-65AC4 X-Wing Starfighter

Reinventing the X-Wing is hard. The game already has 2 of them, so trying to give a new variant a new spin without breaking the curve is a bit of a challenge. So I didn't. It's really just a T-70 with a small swap of hull for shields. Lame, you say? Well, the primary feature of this design to [a] faction building with no new plastic, and keeping the iconic X-Wing fighter on the tables for passerbys to say "that's a game about Star Wars."

One nice bit is that Wes and Hobbie get to say "hi."

Up next: Putting ALL of Rogue Squadron in one of these. Boy, will I need a lot of Ace abilities. . .

5 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

The game already has 2 of them, so trying to give a new variant a new spin without breaking the curve is a bit of a challenge. So I didn't.

Don't forget you've got a dial to play with.

The AC4 was meant to bring the engines almost up to spec with the OT era RZ-1. Even if all you do is give the AC4 a 5 straight and make the 3 straight blue, you've gone some way to bridging that gap and making it different from the Rebel T-65.

There's also things you can do with slots. The tech slot is currently the game's primary means of distinguishing ST era ships from OT or PT. The T-70 was developed in the same era as the old Legends New Republic, and it gets a tech slot. So giving the AC4 a tech slot could help blur the lines between the T-65 and the T-70, which is kinda where the AC4 should sit.

5 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

I think Wes needs some updating to move into second edition.

For one thing, there are no more blue lock tokens. If a defender 'has a lock token' then in a normal game that means it's one of yours. Sure, in 2e you can lock your own ships and there are couple of very niche cases where that's beneficial, so having someone who can remove that lock would be good for the other player. But that's so niche.

Also, Wes' 1e ability was before reinforce or jam tokens were a thing that could be taken on non-huge ships.

His ability gets much cleaner if you change it to either 'remove 1 green token' or 'the defender gains 1 jam token' which essentially does the same thing, but allows you to break locks.

5 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

So again, the wording you're using on some of these abilities doesn't really work.

Look at how FFG writes pilot abilities. While there are some exceptions that have caused confusion, most abilities call out specific timings - even if those timings might seem obvious. I know that you're thinking because 'the Range 1 bonus' can only apply to an attack that people know what you mean, but it's still vague and doesn't really have the mechanics to tell you how it works. It could also be confusing, what happens if the defender is at range 1 anyway? What happens if I have multiple ships in my bullseye.

When writing an ability, I'd suggest basing the language off an existing ability that uses similar triggers and results. The Grand Inquisitor is probably the best example of someone who plays around with range bonuses. Based on how that's worded, I'd phrase Myn as:

"While you perform an attack against a defender at attack range 2-3, if the defender in your [bullseye] you may apply the range 1 bonus."

There you have a timing trigger (while performing an attack), a specific callout of who the ability affects (the defender), a condition (bullseye) and a result. But by being specific, it also includes the phrase 'attack range'. That brings clarity to the situation where the corner of the ships base means it sits at range 1, but that corner is out of arc so the attack happens at range 2.

The one thing I have to admit I'm not sure where to come down on is why even bother to say 'apply the range 1 bonus'? I think they used it on the Grand Inquistor to contrast him being able to prevent it being used on him with the other aspect of his ability.

Is it really relevant for Myn though? Why not just say "While you perform an attack at range 2-3 against a defender in your [bullseye], you may roll 1 additional attack die."?

Of course, that just makes him a worse Scourge Skutu, but that's basically what the ability you're proposing makes him anyway. If applying the range 1 bonus meant the defender also didn't get the range 3 defensive bonus, it would be a distinction. But that's not the case. 'Applying the range 1 bonus' just means adding an extra die, and honestly I'm really not sure why they didn't just write Grand Inky's 2e ability like that anyway.

A quick thought, if you want to make Myn a bit more distinct and emphasise his sniper training, why not make his ability:

"While you perform an attack at range 2-3, if the defender is in your [bullseye] you may add 1 [eye] result."?

This kinda fits with Myn's personality in that he gets results when he's focused, it's range and precision based which suits him, it's different from Scourge and stronger in that it adds a result, but weaker in that doesn't work at range 1 and doesn't do anything at all if you don't have that focus token.

5 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

Don't forget you've got a dial to play with.

The AC4 was meant to bring the engines almost up to spec with the OT era RZ-1. Even if all you do is give the AC4 a 5 straight and make the 3 straight blue, you've gone some way to bridging that gap and making it different from the Rebel T-65.

There's also things you can do with slots. The tech slot is currently the game's primary means of distinguishing ST era ships from OT or PT. The T-70 was developed in the same era as the old Legends New Republic, and it gets a tech slot. So giving the AC4 a tech slot could help blur the lines between the T-65 and the T-70, which is kinda where the AC4 should sit.

This is all great stuff. Thanks!!

I actually didn't forget about the dial (well, not totally, but only after I crawled in bed) and agree with your recommendation.

But I did forget about the Tech slot idea. I still have plans for the T-65A3, so. . .

Quote

I think Wes needs some updating to move into second edition.

For one thing, there are no more blue lock tokens. If a defender 'has a lock token' then in a normal game that means it's one of yours. Sure, in 2e you can lock your own ships and there are couple of very niche cases where that's beneficial, so having someone who can remove that lock would be good for the other player. But that's so niche.

Also, Wes' 1e ability was before reinforce or jam tokens were a thing that could be taken on non-huge ships.

His ability gets much cleaner if you change it to either 'remove 1 green token' or 'the defender gains 1 jam token' which essentially does the same thing, but allows you to break locks.

I think giving him the Jam ability is perfect.

Quote

When writing an ability, I'd suggest basing the language off an existing ability that uses similar triggers and results. The Grand Inquisitor is probably the best example of someone who plays around with range bonuses. Based on how that's worded, I'd phrase Myn as:

"While you perform an attack against a defender at attack range 2-3, if the defender in your [bullseye] you may apply the range 1 bonus."

There you have a timing trigger (while performing an attack), a specific callout of who the ability affects (the defender), a condition (bullseye) and a result. But by being specific, it also includes the phrase 'attack range'. That brings clarity to the situation where the corner of the ships base means it sits at range 1, but that corner is out of arc so the attack happens at range 2.

The one thing I have to admit I'm not sure where to come down on is why even bother to say 'apply the range 1 bonus'? I think they used it on the Grand Inquistor to contrast him being able to prevent it being used on him with the other aspect of his ability.

Is it really relevant for Myn though? Why not just say "While you perform an attack at range 2-3 against a defender in your [bullseye], you may roll 1 additional attack die."?

Of course, that just makes him a worse Scourge Skutu, but that's basically what the ability you're proposing makes him anyway. If applying the range 1 bonus meant the defender also didn't get the range 3 defensive bonus, it would be a distinction. But that's not the case. 'Applying the range 1 bonus' just means adding an extra die, and honestly I'm really not sure why they didn't just write Grand Inky's 2e ability like that anyway.

A quick thought, if you want to make Myn a bit more distinct and emphasise his sniper training, why not make his ability:

"While you perform an attack at range 2-3, if the defender is in your [bullseye] you may add 1 [eye] result."?

This kinda fits with Myn's personality in that he gets results when he's focused, it's range and precision based which suits him, it's different from Scourge and stronger in that it adds a result, but weaker in that doesn't work at range 1 and doesn't do anything at all if you don't have that focus token.

Well, I do try to use existing language, and I did in fact look at Grand Incky.

I guess it was too late in the evening for my translation to come off well. I was also unaware of Skutu.

Your first wording is exactly what I intended, given he is a sniper.

Your second wording helps prevent power creep, but does it make his ability so conditional that no one bothers to play him?

14 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

And lastly, I finally figured out I could actually jazz up the card backgrounds. See above, and now card backs!!

4 attack? WTH?

If you want if to have a cannon slot, give it 2 attack, or 3 attack (without cannon). The ship could also be 180º fire frontal fire arc.

29 minutes ago, Odanan said:

4 attack? WTH?

If you want if to have a cannon slot, give it 2 attack, or 3 attack (without cannon). The ship could also be 180º fire frontal fire arc.

Odanan, you don't want a swarmer to have a 180 arc. Good gods.

Honestly it could be a 4 bullseye and that'd be good risk/reward tbh.

I had literally no idea that thing existed.

T-65AC4 X-Wing Starfighter: Rogue Squadron

Because just once I would like FFG to create an entire bloody squadron of named pilots.

Gods, legends sure did love the X-Wing...

5 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

T-65AC4 X-Wing Starfighter: Rogue Squadron

Because just once I would like FFG to create an entire bloody squadron of named pilots.

That roster's a bit all over the place.

There's some names on there I don't now, and the Rogue Squadron comics and X-Wing novels are pretty much my favourite parts of all Star Wars.

If you want a full squadron as it was at a particular time, then I wouldn't look at the comics - I don't think they ever listed a full twelve pilots in any given story.

And if you're happy to mix and match Rogue Squadron 'generations', then I'd say you should look at some of the better known pilots first. Feylis and Avan are basically background characters, and I've never heard of Samoc Farr, Dix Rivan or Dar Keyis.

Not having Ooryl Qrygg in there as Corran's wingmate is almost criminal, and you're missing some of the best characters like Asyr Seil'ar and Gavin Darklighter.

The best combination of really well known pilots is probably the Bacta War line up:

Wedge Antilles, Rogue Leader

Asyr Seil'ar, Rogue 2

Gavin Darklighter, Rogue 3

Riv Shiel, Rogue 4

Rhysati Ynr, Rogue 5

Inyri Forge, Rogue 6 (she's often forgotten about, but Inyri is actually one of the longest serving Rogues - she joins during the capture of Coruscant and is still there at the start of the Yuuzhan Vong war, I think that only puts her behind Tycho and Gavin. Her sister Lujayne, on the other hand, doesn't even make it past the first book)

Tycho Celchu, Rogue 7

Nawara Ven, Rogue 8

Corran Horn, Rogue 9

Ooryl Qrygg, Rogue 10

Bror Jace, Rogue 11

Aril Nunb, Rogue 12.

And as a side bonus, you'd have the option of giving all these pilots custom paint jobs on their X-Wings.

Couple of notes:

6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Since the switchover in 2e, this is now just a worse version of Braylen Stramm's ability.

Why not give her the ability she has in the ARC-170? "After you fully execute a maneuver, if you are stressed, you may roll 1 attack die. On a [hit] or [crit] result, remove 1 stress token.

6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

So in terms of FFG's ability writing syntax, there's no such thing as an [eye] token.

In every ability, it is always spelled out 'focus token'. c.f Soontir Fel, Garven Dreis, Palob Godalhi for quick reference.

The [eye] symbol is either used for the die result or the focus action. c.f. Jake Farrell. Could be a source of confusion here

6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

This is just Biggs' ability.

Is that intentional?

6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

These two have the exact same ability and Initiative. They're the exact same pilot.

Was that intentional?

Also, I'm not sure the second part of this ability works. FFG can be a little loose with their wording sometimes, but I don't know that 'a weapon that inflicts ion tokens' is enough of a keyword. I'd probably just refer to an 'Ion weapon' and then add a rule to the rules reference that defines Ion weapons.

Also also, I'm guessing the 'or' condition is meant to mean you can only apply one of the effects, but I don't know how easy it is to track. Why not give him a single recurring charge and phrase it

"While you perform an attack with an Ion weapon, you may spend 1 [charge] to roll 1 additional attack die or, if this attack hits, you may spend 1 [charge]. If you do, the defender gains 1 additional ion token"

Also also also, this is such a niche ability. It basically only works if you bring Ion Torpedoes. With that in mind, even 47 points seems a bit steep. I'd probably just cost him the same as the generic.

6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Unless you define elsewhere what a 'TIE Series starship' means in X-Wing terminology, this ability doesn't do anything.

And I'd really, really shy away from any ability that's completely match up dependent. I know that this is all homebrew stuff for fun, I know that it's meant to be played with fluff as a priority, and I know that it's never going to be anywhere near a tournament, but it's still a game and it should still be balanced and fair. And yes, I know that FFG have made some match up dependent ships like Ahhav, but that at least is a fairly broad category of ship that isn't faction dependent.

Also, I don't think 'while attacking' is a specific enough trigger for this ability. The attack covers a number of steps, when does the token get removed? Before they roll? After? If the intention is that they lose the token before they have the opportunity to spend it, then I would probably have the trigger be "After you declare the target of an attack". This is a really, really strong ability, by the way. There's a reason Wes is after the attack, and he was still considered one of the best pilot abilities in the game in 1e. There's a reason Juke is dependent on an evade token, only modifies one result to require a token spend and costs 7 points.

6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Again this is non standard/non technical syntax.

Should read more like

"After you perform a [roll] action, if you are in an enemy ship's [front arc], gain 1 focus token."

Though personally I'd say it should be 'you may perform a [focus] action' as that's a little more balanced (stops you double focusing if co-ordinated, for example, stops you getting the token if somehow you were able to roll while stressed such as via an AP-5 type ability).

That's a pretty strong ability too, by the way. There's absolutely no way Andoorni should be costed the same as Avan.

9 hours ago, KCDodger said:

Gods, legends sure did love the X-Wing...

And I'm just getting started. . . bwuhaha!!

4 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

That roster's a bit all over the place.

There's some names on there I don't now, and the Rogue Squadron comics and X-Wing novels are pretty much my favourite parts of all Star Wars.

If you want a full squadron as it was at a particular time, then I wouldn't look at the comics - I don't think they ever listed a full twelve pilots in any given story.

And if you're happy to mix and match Rogue Squadron 'generations', then I'd say you should look at some of the better known pilots first. Feylis and Avan are basically background characters, and I've never heard of Samoc Farr, Dix Rivan or Dar Keyis.

Not having Ooryl Qrygg in there as Corran's wingmate is almost criminal, and you're missing some of the best characters like Asyr Seil'ar and Gavin Darklighter.

And as a side bonus, you'd have the option of giving all these pilots custom paint jobs on their X-Wings.

Oi, I know. It was hard to figure out who was flying with who, and the "Rogue ____" callsigns are all over the place. Also, I've never read the comics, and it has been 20+ years since I've read the books, so my relationship to the original source material is strained.

Sometimes I used a named pilot because their history cued me into an idea for a pilot ability, so there's that for Feylis, Samoc Farr, Dix Rivan and Dar Keyis.

For this pass, I was trying to stick with characters from the early "post Endor" timeframe; c. 5-7 ABY. Ooryl Qrygg might be a notable loss, so maybe I need to squeeze the Gand in.

I'm going to do something with the 25 ABY crew: Gavin and girlfriend are coming!

I'm also going to do Wraith Squadron, so Piggy, Face, and that gang will have their day, too!! (speaking of too many x-wings. . .)

Quote

Since the switchover in 2e, this is now just a worse version of Braylen Stramm's ability.

Why not give her the ability she has in the ARC-170? "After you fully execute a maneuver, if you are stressed, you may roll 1 attack die. On a [hit] or [crit] result, remove 1 stress token.

Done. I didn't realize she got moved to the ARC.

Quote

This is just Biggs' ability.

Is that intentional?

Yes.

Quote

These two have the exact same ability and Initiative. They're the exact same pilot.

Was that intentional?

No, that is me overwriting a file.

Quote

Also, I'm not sure the second part of this ability works. FFG can be a little loose with their wording sometimes, but I don't know that 'a weapon that inflicts ion tokens' is enough of a keyword. I'd probably just refer to an 'Ion weapon' and then add a rule to the rules reference that defines Ion weapons.

Also also, I'm guessing the 'or' condition is meant to mean you can only apply one of the effects, but I don't know how easy it is to track. Why not give him a single recurring charge and phrase it

"While you perform an attack with an Ion weapon, you may spend 1 [charge] to roll 1 additional attack die or, if this attack hits, you may spend 1 [charge]. If you do, the defender gains 1 additional ion token"

Also also also, this is such a niche ability. It basically only works if you bring Ion Torpedoes. With that in mind, even 47 points seems a bit steep. I'd probably just cost him the same as the generic.

Actually, I could not decide which ability to go with, so I put OR to get some input. I will revisit it.

Quote

Unless you define elsewhere what a 'TIE Series starship' means in X-Wing terminology, this ability doesn't do anything.

And I'd really, really shy away from any ability that's completely match up dependent. I know that this is all homebrew stuff for fun, I know that it's meant to be played with fluff as a priority, and I know that it's never going to be anywhere near a tournament, but it's still a game and it should still be balanced and fair. And yes, I know that FFG have made some match up dependent ships like Ahhav, but that at least is a fairly broad category of ship that isn't faction dependent.

Also, I don't think 'while attacking' is a specific enough trigger for this ability. The attack covers a number of steps, when does the token get removed? Before they roll? After? If the intention is that they lose the token before they have the opportunity to spend it, then I would probably have the trigger be "After you declare the target of an attack". This is a really, really strong ability, by the way. There's a reason Wes is after the attack, and he was still considered one of the best pilot abilities in the game in 1e. There's a reason Juke is dependent on an evade token, only modifies one result to require a token spend and costs 7 points.

Given that there are TIE-somethings in almost every faction, it doesn't seem too rare of a match-up dependency to me. I will admit, I kinda like the fluff. . .and if I were producing a 12 pilot expansion pack, I might not worry 1 pilot was a little restrictive/fluffy.

Also, the token is meant to be stripped before, with the idea she understands the weaknesses of TIE starships. Maybe I just make her cost more. . .

Quote

Again this is non standard/non technical syntax.

Should read more like

"After you perform a [roll] action, if you are in an enemy ship's [front arc], gain 1 focus token."

Though personally I'd say it should be 'you may perform a [focus] action' as that's a little more balanced (stops you double focusing if co-ordinated, for example, stops you getting the token if somehow you were able to roll while stressed such as via an AP-5 type ability).

That's a pretty strong ability too, by the way. There's absolutely no way Andoorni should be costed the same as Avan.

Cool. I'll change it.

And again, thanks for all the input. You are actually helping me learn a lot about the game from this.

On 2/19/2020 at 5:24 AM, GuacCousteau said:

The best combination of really well known pilots is probably the Bacta War line up:

Wedge Antilles, Rogue Leader

Asyr Seil'ar, Rogue 2

Gavin Darklighter, Rogue 3

Riv Shiel, Rogue 4

Rhysati Ynr, Rogue 5

Inyri Forge, Rogue 6 (she's often forgotten about, but Inyri is actually one of the longest serving Rogues - she joins during the capture of Coruscant and is still there at the start of the Yuuzhan Vong war, I think that only puts her behind Tycho and Gavin. Her sister Lujayne, on the other hand, doesn't even make it past the first book)

Tycho Celchu, Rogue 7

Nawara Ven, Rogue 8

Corran Horn, Rogue 9

Ooryl Qrygg, Rogue 10

Bror Jace, Rogue 11

Aril Nunb, Rogue 12.

And as a side bonus, you'd have the option of giving all these pilots custom paint jobs on their X-Wings.

Actually, this is perfect!!

It pairs with Wes and Hobbie forming Talon, Gauntlet and Corsair Squadrons that I have already featured in this chassis.

*sigh*

Back to the beginning. . . 🤣

Edit: These are helpful:

http://www.xwpilots.de/Dateien/roster1.html

http://www.xwpilots.de/Dateien/roster2.html

10 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

And I'm just getting started. . . bwuhaha!!

But see that's- that's kind of just it Darth. Don't you think, maybe, this is too many? See, this is one of the things I hated about the EU SO much... It never stopped loving the X-Wing in the worst way. Never stopped making it the king of starfighters. Never stopped putting EVERYbody, even soontir frakking fel in the cockpit of one of these **** things.

E-Wings? Oh no, they're riddled with problems! They threw out the baby with the bathwater and just made the X-Wing better. Was no issue to replace the Z though.
B-Wings? Too fussy, but hey they can replace Y-Wings, that's fine because Ys aren't as beloved for some reason!
A-Wings? Too fragile, can't do the same jobs as the good old X-Wings! If you fly one you're probably nutty! Whoo!

It just

All comes back to bias. To most Star Wars fans, the T-65 X-Wing Starfighter is the fighter that killed the Death Star. The fighter that won freedom for The Galaxy. The machine that kills fascists.

To me, it's a symbol of an entire hundred plus writers who cannot stop clutching onto old things. It is why I welcomed The Resistance's take on the fighters so hard. For as much as they were derivative and the same fighters at heart... they were ultimately willing to say, "Those models' time is done. They can rest now." - and made their own versions that could take the mantles. You can imagine how I felt about Red 5 being given this - nigh messianic presence in TRoS then. ****, calling it Red 5 when the saga had two other Red 5s was just, kind of wrong to me. An appeal to the old. A clutch upon the old things, unwilling to let them rest.

That's why I think the X-Wing shouldn't have more pilots than the rest of the chassis in any faction's balance. It's unfair, unjust, and makes it the most flexible platform due to bias.

Meanie, if you do anything, forgo "Who flew what" accuracy and let these pilots fly in chassis that exemplify their personalities, skills and backgrounds. Let the machines be extensions of them, rather than putting them all in the same fighters so that it is accurate to the bias of the hundred plus writers who did not dare nearly enough to defy convention.

1 hour ago, KCDodger said:

But see that's- that's kind of just it Darth. Don't you think, maybe, this is too many?

I

CAN'T

STOP

MYSELF!!

Quote

See, this is one of the things I hated about the EU SO much... It never stopped loving the X-Wing in the worst way.

It is why I welcomed The Resistance's take on the fighters so hard. For as much as they were derivative

Yeah, this is juicily ironic. I started doing the New Republic Needs To Be A Faction! thread because Resistance was just A/B/X/Y all over again. And here I am spending a week on X-Wings.

Quote

Meanie, if you do anything, forgo "Who flew what" accuracy and let these pilots fly in chassis that exemplify their personalities, skills and backgrounds. Let the machines be extensions of them, rather than putting them all in the same fighters so that it is accurate to the bias of the hundred plus writers who did not dare nearly enough to defy convention.

The project here was to make a full pilot roster for a single squadron. Lame and redundant? Probably. Easiest to do with the X-Wing chassis? Definitely.

Still, what about Alex from the Star Wars Adventure Journal? She's be awfully cute in an X-Wing. . .

5 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Yeah, this is juicily ironic. I started doing the New Republic Needs To Be A Faction! thread because Resistance was just A/B/X/Y all over again. And here I am spending a week on X-Wings.

Exactly. And there's plenty of neat little unique NR ships. What about the K-Wing? Defender? E-Wing? Gods, the Defender especially.

12 minutes ago, KCDodger said:

Exactly. And there's plenty of neat little unique NR ships. What about the K-Wing? Defender? E-Wing? Gods, the Defender especially.

The E-Wing and K-Wing are DONE, via FFG even. Heck, even the pilots are already from the EU.

The Defender is on the bucket list. I'll do it next, because I'm about to make you insane. . .

T-65A3 X-Wing Starfighter: Rogue Squadron II

Originally, I thought of this as a way to sort some late New Republic from the early New Republic, and get in a few more iconic pilots while tweaking the venerable X one last time. Mostly, as KC points out, I'm probably flogging a dead horse and flooding the market with x-wingophilia. But, to quote a famous dead Imperial Admiral: "TOO LATE!!"

And now, for something completely different:

Republic Systems Defender

While not very exciting as a ship chassis, this one is all 'bout the dial, 'bout the dial, 'bout the dial.

Although it is a slow ship, it's engine pods can be made to fire in opposite directions allowing it to spin in a 180 degree turn easily. Hence, I gave it a very open dial, with lots of white K-turns. Maybe too many? And maybe I should give it some red reverse maneuvers?

And I'm running out of ideas for pilot abilities. Sorry if these are lame, even if they do fit the pilot histories.

On 2/19/2020 at 11:01 PM, KCDodger said:

Never stopped putting EVERYbody, even soontir frakking fel in the cockpit of one of these **** things.

...wUT?

On 2/19/2020 at 11:01 PM, KCDodger said:

Never stopped making it the king of starfighters. Never stopped putting EVERYbody, even soontir frakking fel in the cockpit of one of these **** things

You know that happens in literally the second thing Fel ever appeared in, right?

He's captured in his very first appearance. His backstory is given using his interrogation by the New Republic, and he joins Rogue Squadron at the end of that issue. He's in an X-Wing in the next one.

Soontir Fel was written as defector and a Rogue Squadron pilot from the moment of his inception.

Try reading the actual comics instead of just wookieepedia entries.

3 hours ago, Prosk_019 said:

...wUT?

Oho, you didn't know?

So this one time Horton Salm ended up disabling Soontir Fel's Y-Wing.

Then he ended up defecting, something about his wife. Who I'm pretty sure was Wedge's sister. He asked them to help them find said wife, they accepted, and he'd join uh, frakking Rogue Squadron.

Yeah.

This really happened.



Fel in a New Republic uniform. Yeah.


And here's Soontir Fel in a DAMNED ******* X-WING.

He ended up joining Thrawn's Empire of The Hand.

Oh and his descendants ended up creating The Fel Empire.

This s**t gets untrackable. People really didn't know what they were asking Disney to do when they demanded they follow the EU. Just saying.

3 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

You know that happens in literally the second thing Fel ever appeared in, right?

He's captured in his very first appearance. His backstory is given using his interrogation by the New Republic, and he joins Rogue Squadron at the end of that issue. He's in an X-Wing in the next one.

Soontir Fel was written as defector and a Rogue Squadron pilot from the moment of his inception.

Try reading the actual comics instead of just wookieepedia entries.

And guess how many folks know that?

Basically nobody from what I've seen. BUT! I'll concede this, you know why I will?

Because it proves my point. Building things off the back of Wook, which is often not terribly well researched or organized, is foolhardy.

I've been here to clear up misconceptions since 2013. One of my first ever posts was correcting people about the size of the HWK-290, which is not 29 damned meters, but like- 16.

Just now, KCDodger said:

And guess how many folks know that?

Basically nobody from what I've seen. BUT! I'll concede this, you know why I will?

Because it proves my point. Building things off the back of Wook, which is often not terribly well researched or organized, is foolhardy.

I've been here to clear up misconceptions since 2013. One of my first ever posts was correcting people about the size of the HWK-290, which is not 29 damned meters, but like- 16.

No, hang on. You don't get to shift goalposts here.

This isn't about what people on the boards here think. This is about you (unfairly) criticising EU authors for forcing everyone 'even Soontir frakking Fel' into an X-Wing at some point because 'bias'.

Soontir Fel was conceived as an X-Wing pilot. He was a Rogue with a different backstory that happened to get that backstory explained early.

This isn't anything to do with EU authors making the story deliberately oblique or whatever you're criticising it for. Rogue Squadron weren't popular because of some 'X-Wing bias' - they were popular because they were Luke and Wedge's squadron from the movies, and they happened to fly X-Wings because that's what Luke and Wedge flew. And 'EU authors' didn't take a fan favourite Imperial character and illogically twist him into an X-Wing pilot through an obscure family connection as your post above snidely implies.

The guy who created him wanted him to be a Rogue Squadron pilot, first and foremost, whose backstory was that he was the Imperial Red Baron. It's not Stackpole's fault the fan community latched on to him as like the only developed Imperial pilot.