I personally would love an all grey Acclamator and an Imperial Venator. I feel like they could significantly change the stats on an Imperial Venator to represent wear and tear on the ships over the years, reduction in firepower, maybe reduce hull by a couple points, reduce command and engineering values due to older equipment and lack of parts, possibly reduce max speed/turning by 1 for highest speed value, reduce upgrade slots. Any kind of combination of these to differentiate it from the Republic ones. I feel with enough changes or significant ones you could definitely alter the feel of it.

We get our Venator , yet it feels different enough so it isn't a carbon copy of the Republic's.

I dunno just throwing out ideas

44 minutes ago, BlueSquadronPilot said:

I personally would love an all grey Acclamator and an Imperial Venator. I feel like they could significantly change the stats on an Imperial Venator to represent wear and tear on the ships over the years, reduction in firepower, maybe reduce hull by a couple points, reduce command and engineering values due to older equipment and lack of parts, possibly reduce max speed/turning by 1 for highest speed value, reduce upgrade slots. Any kind of combination of these to differentiate it from the Republic ones. I feel with enough changes or significant ones you could definitely alter the feel of it.

We get our Venator , yet it feels different enough so it isn't a carbon copy of the Republic's.

I dunno just throwing out ideas

It might be just me on this but I don't see a problem with identical stats for an Imperial Venator. The squadrons it would command would be significantly different from the Republic Venator, and there would be a lot of differences in the available upgrades because of the Clone keyword, Commanders, and unique officers.

57 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

It might be just me on this but I don't see a problem with identical stats for an Imperial Venator. The squadrons it would command would be significantly different from the Republic Venator, and there would be a lot of differences in the available upgrades because of the Clone keyword, Commanders, and unique officers.

I don't have a problem with it either, but some are worried it would become too much of a mirror for factions. I just figured why not throw out ideas as to how they could potentially get around it. I am strictly a casual, narrative and lore player so identical stats don't bug me haha.

4 hours ago, BlueSquadronPilot said:

I feel like they could significantly change the stats on an Imperial Venator to represent wear and tear on the ships over the years, reduction in firepower, maybe reduce hull by a couple points, reduce command and engineering values due to older equipment and lack of parts, possibly reduce max speed/turning by 1 for highest speed value, reduce upgrade slots.

Sounds like a Rebel ship.

With all the talk of Imperial Venators, I ask the question (possibly in ignorance)

Is there any (new) canon references to the Empire using Venetors in the era of the Rebellion ? That would be the key thing. FFG seems to require either a canonical reference that a particular ship is used as a mainline (i.e production, not a one off) order of battle. Or they have to make up a completely new type of ship (which may later be retconned into canon, such as the Raider, or the look of the Starhawk).

This is why we don't have rebel Quazars (they only stole 1), or imperial Peltas or Nebulon-Bs (not seen at all in new canon)

So where does that leave CIS ships that the rebels have been cited to use in numbers (mainly in the comics, but hey, canon is canon!)?

Vader is stationed aboard one in Age of Rebellion: Vader #1 . An Imperial variant could even use that comic’s antagonist as a commander.

12 hours ago, Funk Fu master said:

With all the talk of Imperial Venators, I ask the question (possibly in ignorance)

Is there any (new) canon references to the Empire using Venetors in the era of the Rebellion ? That would be the key thing. FFG seems to require either a canonical reference that a particular ship is used as a mainline (i.e production, not a one off) order of battle. Or they have to make up a completely new type of ship (which may later be retconned into canon, such as the Raider, or the look of the Starhawk).

This is why we don't have rebel Quazars (they only stole 1), or imperial Peltas or Nebulon-Bs (not seen at all in new canon)

So where does that leave CIS ships that the rebels have been cited to use in numbers (mainly in the comics, but hey, canon is canon!)?

It certainly wasn't used at the time of the Rebel Alliance, but the so called Rebellion (the separate groups later joining together into the Alliance) were pretty much around from day 1. Just look at people like Casian Andor, who was a Separatist child soldier.

Personally, I'm swayed by the argument that each of the factions deserves its own "hero" ship, and for that reason, I would have no qualms with the Venator being Republic-only.

I think that the chances of an Imperial Venator depends on what the stats are. The Acclamator is arguably stronger than the VSD and I wonder if the Venator will similarly be made stronger than lore would roughly place it. If the Venator is as strong in-game as the ISD then I think that there will not be an Imperial Venator, because that would create Imperial ship redundancy.

10 hours ago, LennoxPoodle said:

It certainly wasn't used at the time of the Rebel Alliance, but the so called Rebellion (the separate groups later joining together into the Alliance) were pretty much around from day 1. Just look at people like Casian Andor, who was a Separatist child soldier.

Apparently there was one stationed at a space station along with a handful of Arquitens. It states a few months after the battle of Yavin, however, it doesn't state what kind of use it saw.

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Anthan_Prime_Orbital_ Dockyard

21 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

I think that the chances of an Imperial Venator depends on what the stats are. The Acclamator is arguably stronger than the VSD and I wonder if the Venator will similarly be made stronger than lore would roughly place it. If the Venator is as strong in-game as the ISD then I think that there will not be an Imperial Venator, because that would create Imperial ship redundancy.

Can you clarify why you think the Acclamator is arguably "stronger" than the VSD?

Because aside from the Acclamator-I being Speed-3 and 7 points cheaper than the VSD-I, the other stats favour the Victory: +1 Hull, +1 Black die in front arc, 2 Red dice in rear arc (instead of 1 Red, 1 Black), and more balanced shields.

The Acclamator's main advantages are that it should be a better squadron carrier, thanks to its 2 Off. Retrofit slots, and it is cheaper.

But I wouldn't classify the Acclamator as stronger than the Victory. I'd characterize the Acclamator as more useful than the VSD because the Republic will presumably need a dedicated carrier ship, and the Acclamator seems well-suited for that role.

As for the Venator, my prediction is that it will be less powerful and durable as the ISD, probably having 1 less attack die in certain arcs, 1-2 less hull points, and costing fewer points. However, I don't believe that the Venator will be as weak compared to the ISD in Armada compared to their canon stats. Because the ISD is more than twice the size of the Venator in terms of internal volume, has 10 times the anti-ship firepower, faster, and significantly stronger shields and hull armour.

The Venator shouldn't even be in the same league as the ISD, but since the Venator will (presumably) be a large ship, and the Republic's mainline warship, its stats will be scaled up so that its a contender versus the ISD. I expect that Jedi and Clone abilities will enable the Venator to compensate for the ISD's superior stats and give the Venator a chance at defeating the ISD.

2 hours ago, Revan Reborn said:

Can you clarify why you think the Acclamator is arguably "stronger" than the VSD?

Because aside from the Acclamator-I being Speed-3 and 7 points cheaper than the VSD-I, the other stats favour the Victory: +1 Hull, +1 Black die in front arc, 2 Red dice in rear arc (instead of 1 Red, 1 Black), and more balanced shields.

I say arguably stronger because with Speed 3 the Acclamator can use its black dice more proactively, and the Acclamator II having a Def. Retrofit means it won't have a Minister Tua type situation like both VSDs do and can choose offensive officers instead. Beyond that admittedly it's personal preference as I do expect the Acclamator to be more useful whereas my Victories unfortunately stay on the shelf a lot.

2 hours ago, Revan Reborn said:

The Venator shouldn't even be in the same league as the ISD, but since the Venator will (presumably) be a large ship, and the Republic's mainline warship, its stats will be scaled up so that its a contender versus the ISD.

Not going to lie it will bug me when the Venator has superior stats compared to the Victory when that ship class was meant to fulfill the battleship role that the Venator was under-armed for but was forced into. Still hoping that a Republic Victory expansion gives the ship better stats to more closely align with the lore.

3 hours ago, Revan Reborn said:

The Venator shouldn't even be in the same league as the ISD, but since the Venator will (presumably) be a large ship, and the Republic's mainline warship, its stats will be scaled up so that its a contender versus the ISD. I expect that Jedi and Clone abilities will enable the Venator to compensate for the ISD's superior stats and give the Venator a chance at defeating the ISD.

Well looking at the scale range for large ships, the Venator sits perfectly within the smaller end of that (sliding) scale, and the ISD sits at the larger end

INTERDICTOR: 1129

VENETOR: 1137

MC80: 1200

MC75: 1204

ISD: 1600

STARHAWK: 2400

so it will be fine as a large, it just wont perform the same role as the ISD. It will be the fleet carrier. And that will dictate how the GAR will be defined

36 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

Not going to lie it will bug me when the Venator has superior stats compared to the Victory when that ship class was meant to fulfill the battleship role that the Venator was under-armed for but was forced into. Still hoping that a Republic Victory expansion gives the ship better stats to more closely align with the lore.

FFG have the freedom to do this, if they release the VSD for republic (What are the canon (Not legends) sources that the VSD was used by the GAR?) as they can have different classes to the EMPIRE. And that can represent the 20 years of obsolescence to second or third rate ship of the line with the emergence of the ISD.

Also remember, IRL, battleships (with some exeptions) and heavy cruisers were genuinely smaller than the fleet aircraft carriers they were tasked to escort.

Speaking of Victories... Something I came across recently: the Victory appears to have made an appearance on the cover of Darth Vader #9 way back in 2015. Kind of a cool Easter Egg. @Funk Fu master

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Darth_Vader_9?file=Darth_Vader_9_final_cover.jpg

2 hours ago, Piratical Moustache said:

I say arguably stronger because with Speed 3 the Acclamator can use its black dice more proactively, and the Acclamator II having a Def. Retrofit means it won't have a Minister Tua type situation like both VSDs do and can choose offensive officers instead. Beyond that admittedly it's personal preference as I do expect the Acclamator to be more useful whereas my Victories unfortunately stay on the shelf a lot.

I predict that the Acclamator's being Speed-3 with only a single yaw will be a liability and it will have a tendency to fly off the board at Speed 3 if it doesn't use Nav commands (which must be planned in advance since its a Command 3 ship), or there aren't Republic Commanders and upgrade cards that boost the Acclamator's maneuverability. I'd be more worried about that, and the Acclamator colliding with ships and obstacles, than the ship's durability in battle.

The VSD's maneuverability was certainly a problem, but its limited speed helped keep it on the table (most of the time). And a single VSD benefits greatly from the Harrow title, which considerably improved its maneuverability, so it's not so bad anymore.

I think Republic players will need to be very careful when using the Acclamator, especially if they try to rush into black dice range at Speed 3.

3 hours ago, Funk Fu master said:

Well looking at the scale range for large ships, the Venator sits perfectly within the smaller end of that (sliding) scale, and the ISD sits at the larger end

INTERDICTOR: 1129

VENETOR: 1137

MC80: 1200

MC75: 1204

ISD: 1600

STARHAWK: 2400

so it will be fine as a large, it just wont perform the same role as the ISD. It will be the fleet carrier. And that will dictate how the GAR will be defined

It's not the size of the Venator that matters, and no is arguing that the Venator shouldn't be a large ship in Armada. It's the other ship stats that demonstrate the ISD belongs in a different league than the Venator.

According to canon, the Venator has:

8 x Heavy Turbolaser turrets with 2 cannons each (16)

2 x Dual Medium Turbolaser turrets (4)

52-60 x Point-Defense Laser turrets

4 x Heavy Proton Torpedo tubes

and 6+ "Deck Guns" (as seen in RotS)

That's only 26 anti-ship cannons, plus 4 torpedo tubes that might be used against ships (although that's never been shown on-screen).

In comparison, both the ISD-I and ISD-II have 120+ anti-ship cannons: 60 Turbolasers and 60 Ion Cannons.

The canon stats of the ships' shields and hull armour are harder to pin down, but all sources agree that the ISD's defenses are considerably greater than the Venator.

In Armada, the ISD-II has 4 red dice and 4 blue dice in its front arc. If the Venator's forward firepower was accurately scaled to the ISD-II's based on canon sources, it should have 3 dice, probably all red. That would make the Venator only slightly better than a CR90A.

We all know that FFG isn't going to make the Venator that weak. My prediction is that the Venator's front arc with have 6 or 7 dice, at least 3 of them red. As for the Venator's shields, considering that the smaller Acclamator has 4 front, 2 side, and 2 rear shields, I have to assume the Venator shields are better, but I can't imagine the Venator having 5 shields in front because the ISD only has 4 shields in front; or more than 2 shields in the rear because the ISD only has 2 rear shields; so the only plausible option is its side shields will be 3, which would make its shields identical to the ISD: 4-3-3-2. Presumably, the Venator will have fewer hull points than the ISD's 11; my guess is 9.

I think that's reasonable for the Venator in Armada, but it certainly is not scaled correctly according to canon stats. But that's fine because Armada is a game and it needs to be fun, so the ISD can't be as dominant as it should be.

7 hours ago, Funk Fu master said:

FFG have the freedom to do this, if they release the VSD for republic (What are the canon (Not legends) sources that the VSD was used by the GAR?) as they can have different classes to the EMPIRE. And that can represent the 20 years of obsolescence to second or third rate ship of the line with the emergence of the ISD.

This is from Wookieepedia:

"Catalyst: A Rogue One Novel establishes that Sentinel Base was first utilized by the Galactic Republic. Since Tarkin previously established that this base was originally deployed from a Victory-class Star Destroyer, the Victory-class must therefore have been used by the Republic Navy."

The Victory Project was also referenced and Canonized in FFG's Rise of the Separatists. So there is a Canon precedent for FFG to go ahead with a Republic Victory, maybe have the ship cards be Victor I and II prototypes as a Legends reference.

My assumption has been that the Venator will be statted out Similar to an MC75, except with a salvo instead of a second contain, a squadron value of at least 4, and upgrades more favorable to squadrons. Like double offensive retros, a weapons slot, and *maybe* a support slot.

7 hours ago, Revan Reborn said:

We all know that FFG isn't going to make the Venator that weak. My prediction is that the Venator's front arc with have 6 or 7 dice, at least 3 of them red.

Both the hull shape of the Venator and the broadside tactics we see in the clone wars (the conflict not the show) I'd argue that the Venator will be more broadsie oriented than the ISD. So I expect a much heavier firepower cut in the front than the side coming from the ISD. My (much less precise) prediction are mostly red broadsides facilitating a tactic involving squadron coordination and bombarding the enemy from afar.

6 hours ago, LennoxPoodle said:

Both the hull shape of the Venator and the broadside tactics we see in the clone wars (the conflict not the show) I'd argue that the Venator will be more broadsie oriented than the ISD. So I expect a much heavier firepower cut in the front than the side coming from the ISD. My (much less precise) prediction are mostly red broadsides facilitating a tactic involving squadron coordination and bombarding the enemy from afar.

The Imperial Star Destroyer's heaviest guns are also arranged for broadside arcs, and most Star Destroyers including the Venator continued the lore inconsistency of the heavy guns not being front arc oriented in favor of visual consistency. To make the ship models properly match the lore the main guns would have to be in a superfiring configuration like this:

To give you another example besides the Minas Geraes here's a now Legends ship the Procursator-class:

On 9/29/2020 at 7:59 AM, Church14 said:

My assumption has been that the Venator will be statted out Similar to an MC75, except with a salvo instead of a second contain, a squadron value of at least 4, and upgrades more favorable to squadrons. Like double offensive retros, a weapons slot, and *maybe* a support slot.

I agree that the Venator will almost certainly have a Salvo token -- mostly because of the broadside with the Invisible Hand in RotS -- but I think it will be similar to the ISD, not the MC75, so it'll have 1 Brace, 1 Redirect, 1 Contain, and 1 Salvo (instead of a second Redirect, like an ISD has).

I think that the 2 versions of Venator will be:

1. A squadron carrier-focused version, with a squadron value of at least 5, and 1 Weapons Team and 2 Offensive Retrofit slots, more Red and Blue dice, and probably no Black dice.
2. A ship combat-focused version, with a squadron value of 2 or 3, 1 Offensive Retrofit, 1 Defensive Retrofit, and 1-2 Weapons Team slots, and some Black dice -- especially in the side arcs for close range broadsides. This version might also have a Support Team slot (for ET or AST) and maybe an Ordnance slot.

And I predict that the points difference between the two versions of the Venator won't be as great as the ISD-1 vs. ISD-2. I think they might be deliberately balanced so they're the exact same points cost, similar to the ISD Kuat and Cymoon Refits.

On 9/29/2020 at 9:19 AM, LennoxPoodle said:

Both the hull shape of the Venator and the broadside tactics we see in the clone wars (the conflict not the show) I'd argue that the Venator will be more broadsie oriented than the ISD. So I expect a much heavier firepower cut in the front than the side coming from the ISD. My (much less precise) prediction are mostly red broadsides facilitating a tactic involving squadron coordination and bombarding the enemy from afar.

The vast majority of Star Wars sources have stated that dagger-shaped hull ships, like the Imperial Star Destroyer, are designed so they can bring most of their armaments to bear against frontal targets.

The ISD's 8 heavy turrets are split 4 on each side of the command tower, and obstruct the turrets from firing on targets on the opposite side, which is not ideal for a ship intended for broadside salvo attacks.

The Venator is designed similarly to the ISD, with 4 heavy dual-cannon turrets on each side, and has the same limitation on its broadside firing arcs.

I don't believe the Venator was designed to deliver broadsides at point-blank range, like in the battle sequence versus the Invisible Hand. That was just one action sequence that was clearly inspired by 18th century wooden "tall ships" exchanging salvos using their broadside cannons. The whole purpose of that scene was to depict Grievous' flagship suffering heavy damage to explain why it plunged into Coruscant's atmosphere, so that Anakin could demonstrate his extraordinary piloting abilities and save the Chancellor's life.

I know that George Lucas ultimately dictated what was canon and what wasn't, which is why so many fans consider the Venator a "broadside ship", but in virtually all other combat depictions of the Venator, it is a front arc ship, like the ISD.

In fact, none of the Prequel Trilogy starship source materials (Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith Incredible Cross-Sections [2006], Star Wars: Complete Cross-Sections [2007], or The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia [2008]) mention the "deck cannons" that were depicted in the broadside battle scene from RotS.

Neither do the most recent Star Wars starship guides, like the Star Wars Encyclopedia of Starfighters and Other Vehicles, published in 2018:

Wookieepedia is the only Star Wars resource that acknowledges the Venator's "Deck Guns", and they are attributed to only 2 on-screen depictions in RotS and one episode of TCW CG-animated series.

Therefore, I don't believe the Venator will be a "broadside ship" with the majority of its red dice in its side arcs. I predict the Venator's firing arcs and attack pools will be similar to the ISD, with the majority of its dice in the front arc. My prediction is 7 Front, 3 Sides, and 2 Rear.

Although, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a Clones-only upgrade card (probably a Defensive Retrofit) that boosts the Venator's Salvo attack pool by an extra die, for a thematic representation of the broadside battle sequence from RotS.