|
thespaceinvader posted:Equally, to put in a Jedi Interceptor, you make it fluffwise a fairly lovely ship with a totally amazing pilot to explain its good stats - i.e. Jedi are precognitive telekinetic supermen, of course they;re going to be good at this. Looking forward to the 2018 Obi-Wan is balls to the wall elite player ace meme.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:28 |
|
|
The X-wing was a top line space superiority fighter that the Empire decided not to put on contract because it was too expensive. It's not 'ragtag and crappy'. The A-wing has a pretty similar explanation in Rebels. The Y-wing was around during the Clone wars, and was one of the Republic's premier bombers. The Z-95, likewise, was a commonly used ship in the Republic fleet. Anything contemporary to those has to be roughly as good(bad), or they wouldn't have been used in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
There are 50 year old bomber still in service IRL
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
And they're still in use because they can fly really high and drop bombs, which doesn't require a lot of innovation after a certain point. It also doesn't seem like a niche Star Wars has, let alone needs more of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Strobe posted:And they're still in use because they can fly really high and drop bombs, which doesn't require a lot of innovation after a certain point. It also doesn't seem like a niche Star Wars has, let alone needs more of. The MIG17 was still shooting down americans in 1972, a full 20 years after it was introduced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
And it was hands down worse than what we had in the air, which was my point to start if you forgot it. Even a bad ship can win a fight, butStrobe posted:Also that they would all have to suck. Ships that predate modern craft by 30 years are not going to be better than modern craft.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Strobe posted:The X-wing was a top line space superiority fighter that the Empire decided not to put on contract because it was too expensive. It's not 'ragtag and crappy'. The A-wing has a pretty similar explanation in Rebels. By that logic though, the Jedi starfighters are basically the same era as the y wing, only occupyign the a-wing or squint's combat niche. My core point remains though - you account for how old or new or posh or lovely ships are by how many points they cost and what slots they have. The T70 and f/o fit fine, why wouldn't the Jedi interceptor? I mean, I know they never will, but there's no game-balance reason why they shouldn't. thespaceinvader fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:By that logic though, the Jedi starfighters are basically the same era as the y wing, only occupyign the a-wing or squint's combat niche. Basically. Which begs the question: why bother? We already have the M3-A, which does basically the same thing. You can see how often that gets used. The game balance reason that they never will is that you can only drop the points so far before they don't go any lower. FFG will never release a ship that costs fewer than 12 points.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Basically. Which begs the question: why bother? We already have the M3-A, which does basically the same thing. You can see how often that gets used. The M3A is way overcosted and in a different faction though? As noted I'm entirely convinced they will never bother, but there's no particular reason they couldn't. I know you don't go below 12, but you could easily make ti cost 13 or 14. Or you could make it more equivalent to the Squint, which is something the Rebels don't really have - the fast agile dodgy glass cannon, as opposed to the a-wing which hasn't got as much of the 'cannon' bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
I really, really doubt that even if those ships did get brought over, that either of them would end up with 3 red dice. It takes significant guns to get to 3 reds. And then you end up with an A-wing with less health or something, and nobody will play it because the 2 or 3 points you spend to go up to a Green with Chardaan is more worth it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Jedi starfighters have Astromech too 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
Think I'm gonna fly some Inquisitor/Soontir/Carnor build in my next few tourneys (before Imp Vets) because a) gently caress 3JM5Ks and b) I want to get good with low HP ships after flying B-Wings/Y-Wings almost non-stop in tourneys for the last year+
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Also that they would all have to suck. Ships that predate modern craft by 30 years are not going to be better than modern craft. "Better" is subjective. Obviously the F-22 (Introduced in 2005) is going to fly the wings off an F-15 (Introduced in 1976) in a dogfight. But the F-15 is also a hell of a lot cheaper, still incredibly capable, and benefits from modern missiles, avionics, and other upgrades. And that's not even going into specialized aircraft-we're still using the U-2 (Introduced in 1957) in the reconnaissance role, and the manned jet speed record is still held by the SR-71, set all the way back in 1976. We might be building "Better" aircraft today, but you can't pretend that just because something's old that it's not still capable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
I haven't. Cheaper in units of currency matters exactly zero for game terms, and I daresay that the difference between an F-22 and an F-15 is excellently illustrated in the T-70 vs. T-65 comparison. Something introduced as the contemporary of a Y-wing or Z-95 is not going to be much (if any) better than either of those ships, and quite frankly there's no game reason to put them in if the performance and role is going to be similar to either of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:"Better" is subjective. Obviously the F-22 (Introduced in 2005) is going to fly the wings off an F-15 (Introduced in 1976) in a dogfight. But the F-15 is also a hell of a lot cheaper, still incredibly capable, and benefits from modern missiles, avionics, and other upgrades. And that's not even going into specialized aircraft-we're still using the U-2 (Introduced in 1957) in the reconnaissance role, and the manned jet speed record is still held by the SR-71, set all the way back in 1976. We might be building "Better" aircraft today, but you can't pretend that just because something's old that it's not still capable. The 60 year age of the U-2 represents half the age of aviation. When KOTOR era ships came up and I pointed out they were 4000 years old, that's just a blink of an eye compared to the history of starfighters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
Whether or not you think it makes sense lore-wise, they've already done this with original v. FA tie fighters and x-wings (original x-wings might not get played that much, but the tie fighter obviously still does) and the TAP v. the tie advanced. I'm sure they could figure something out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
X-wings and original TIE Fighters came first in the game, so they absolutely have not done this already. With the singular exception of the Z-95 and maybe a couple of the large base ships (and I forgot the TAP, whoops), nothing FFG has introduced to the game has pre-dated anything already in it. Both of those ships are better than their predecessors (which helps my point, I think), so anything earlier would be worse.
Strobe fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Technology has been functionally identical for thousands of years in the setting and in the game and there's no real design space nor reason to make stuff appreciably worse when the stat values typically are on a mostly 1-4 scale for starfighters and clustering hard around 2 or 3. Maybe just have it so nothing gets a system slot pre GCW just like it looks like they staked out the tech slot to indicate TFA era stuff.
Owlbear Camus fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Strobe posted:X-wings and original TIE Fighters came first in the game, so they absolutely have not done this already. With the singular exception of the Z-95 and maybe a couple of the large base ships (and I forgot the TAP, whoops), nothing FFG has introduced to the game has pre-dated anything already in it. Both of those ships are better than their predecessors (which helps my point, I think), so anything earlier would be worse. Why would the order in which they came into the game matter? Ties and Future Ties both exist in the game, and both see play. Or do you think the existing ships have set some kind of baseline which no ship can be worse than (statswise, not pointswise)? Because it's not even obvious to me that older ships *should* have worse stats than TIEs - isn't the whole point of the TIE that it's a cheap mass-produced ship?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Strobe posted:X-wings and original TIE Fighters came first in the game, so they absolutely have not done this already. With the singular exception of the Z-95 and maybe a couple of the large base ships (and I forgot the TAP, whoops), nothing FFG has introduced to the game has pre-dated anything already in it. Both of those ships are better than their predecessors (which helps my point, I think), so anything earlier would be worse. The Firespray was in the prequels in entirely unaltered form. But TBH, that said, I'm really not interested in arguing it any further since it's entirely hypothetical, given that they've more or less said in as many words that it's Not Going To Happen anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Because we started with old stuff and moved toward new, we didn't start with new stuff and backfill the worse ships. I thought that was a pretty obvious distinction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Because we started with old stuff and moved toward new, we didn't start with new stuff and backfill the worse ships. I thought that was a pretty obvious distinction. Yes, I understand the linear nature of time, thanks, the question was why it *matters*. If the TIE/FO had been released before the TIE, do you think no-one would play TIEs?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Of course people would still play TIEs. I still play T-65s. They are both serviceable ships, but clearly individually worse than the two ships that succeed them. The problem is that you can't make ships much worse than they are while still having a place in the game. A worse T-65 is a Headhunter, and it's as bad and cheap as you can make a ship in this game. Everything contemporary with prequel ships must be worse than modern ships (and we now have a clear progression, so that's not merely a guess), and there simply isn't an appreciable game space for ships that are worse than what we have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Of course people would still play TIEs. I still play T-65s. They are both serviceable ships, but clearly individually worse than the two ships that succeed them. The problem is that you can't make ships much worse than they are while still having a place in the game. A worse T-65 is a Headhunter, and it's as bad and cheap as you can make a ship in this game. Everything contemporary with prequel ships must be worse than modern ships (and we now have a clear progression, so that's not merely a guess), and there simply isn't an appreciable game space for ships that are worse than what we have. Well no, they clearly don't, since prequel ships don't have to be direct predecessors to existing ships. A TIE Advanced/Interceptor is better than a TIE/FO before you consider points cost, despite being an earlier ship.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
That's presumably because we haven't seen a TIE Interceptor upgrade yet. I compared ships that were the same general 'package', and there we find the clear progression. Z-95 -> T-65 -> T-70 is pretty clear, no? TIE Fighter -> TIE/fo is likewise pretty clear, and shows a progression.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Every time this discussion comes up I'm always glad that FFG seems perfectly comfortable ignoring the prequels and everything to do with them. What are the great space battles of the prequels anyway? A child actor shouting "Yippee!" while accidentally blowing up a space donut? Jango Fett shooting a billion asteroids while another child actor shouts in his ear? A completely forgettable spastic lightshow above Coruscant?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Strobe posted:That's presumably because we haven't seen a TIE Interceptor upgrade yet. I compared ships that were the same general 'package', and there we find the clear progression. Z-95 -> T-65 -> T-70 is pretty clear, no? TIE Fighter -> TIE/fo is likewise pretty clear, and shows a progression. But, like I said me! posted:prequel ships don't have to be direct predecessors to existing ships And even if they did, they don't have to be predecessors to the cheapest existing ships. (and wouldn't be, since afaik the TIE fighter doesn't have any direct predecessors)
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Make the clone wars star fighter come with two dials: red 1 turns for the generic pilot and green 1 turns for Obi wan and Anakin. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Of course people would still play TIEs. I still play T-65s. They are both serviceable ships, but clearly individually worse than the two ships that succeed them. The problem is that you can't make ships much worse than they are while still having a place in the game. A worse T-65 is a Headhunter, and it's as bad and cheap as you can make a ship in this game. Everything contemporary with prequel ships must be worse than modern ships (and we now have a clear progression, so that's not merely a guess), and there simply isn't an appreciable game space for ships that are worse than what we have. I think the biggest contention is that you're seemingly under the impression the prequel ships would all be direct predecessors to GCW ships in playstyle, but worse, which pretty clearly isn't the case. Take the ARC-170-it's a predecessor to the X-Wing, sure, but you can bet your bottom dollar it would fly very differently from a traditional X-Wing, especially with the rear mounted turret. And the Jedi Starfighter is a predecessor to the A-Wing, but it's also got access to an astromech-something no A-Wing has. It would take a bit of tweaking, sure, but (Most) of the prequel ships would likely fit into X-Wing pretty well, mechanics-wise. Really, the only issue is figuring out which faction to put them in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:But, like I said I think the TIE predecessor is supposed to be that thing Anakin and Obi-Wan flew in Episode 3, for some reason Imgur isn't taking uploads from me at the moment but it's the one with the pod-shaped cockpit and the panels on the wings which fold out and look similar to something like the TIE Advanced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Hell, if you go by the Delta-7 Jedi starfighter Wedge could be a potential pilot. It was in Rogue Squadron III, iirc. He found Obi-Wan's old one on Geonosis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Wedge and Wes and probably Hobbie have all flown TIEs of some sort. Probably Tycho too. In fact, since a number of Rebel pilots went to the Imperial Academy, you could make a case for all of them being TIE pilots. Even Poe flew a TIE.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
I too look forward to the imperial rookies pack.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Wedge and Wes and probably Hobbie have all flown TIEs of some sort. Well, Poe can fly anything
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Tycho was a TIE Pilot before Alderaan was destroyed, Wedge and Wes both flew Interceptors as part of Wraith Squadron at the very minimum, and both Corran and Wedge actually get time in Defenders in Isard's Revenge. Wedge or Corran in a Defender would be loving gross and amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Corran with TIE/D, the hero the rebellion needs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Wedge with /x7 and Juke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Corran with TIE/D, the hero the rebellion needs. Would he be better with an Ion Cannon or with a Tractor Beam?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Wes in a tie D and opportunist. Edit: now I understand why STAW was so bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:28 |
|
|
hoiyes posted:Wes in a tie D and opportunist. That's amazing. Put a Flechette Cannon on him, too, and have basically the same thing as stressbot, if a little less reliable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:25
|
|