Search the Forums
Options
Keywords search:


Search in Forum...

Search within...

Match...

Antiquity...

Player messages...
You are here: FFG Forums /  Miniatures /  X-Wing

X-Wing
Take control of powerful Rebel X-wings and nimble Imperial TIE fighters!
Moderator: FFGStuartFFG_IanGecko Topics: 1419 | Posts: 17181
i want bombers
by ironman
Published on 14 November 2011 - 13:03:09
Page 2 of 2 (22 messages) « First page... 1 2
Reply #16 | Published on 21 February 2012 - 05:14:25

If they have the have the licence for the expanded universe then I guess they could really branch out and add plenty of other fighters and bombers.  Bombers make sense as scenario ship so they will likely make an appearance at some point.  Saying that, FFG will probably just stick to galactic Civil war and Clone war settings for the ships available.

Reply #17 | Published on 21 February 2012 - 09:11:47

Agrivar said:

And, if I remember correctly, the concussion missiles were supposed to be smaller than proton torpedoes, so you could carry more concusion missiles than proton torpedoes (let's say double the capacity). An Y-wing carrying 16 concussion missiles instead of 8 proton torpedoes was a very powerful deterrent against TIE Fighters.

I loved the X-wing games, but I am finding that they are the only source in Star Wars that say concussion missiles are smaller and more maneuverable than proton torpedoes. Everybody else claims that concussion missiles are heavier warheads. Has anybody else run across this discrepancy?

Some people play to win. I play because it's one of the few ways to fly an X-wing here on Earth!

Reply #18 | Published on 21 February 2012 - 15:33:21

The only explanation I have is that concussion missiles come in different sizes with different weights of warheads.  No references, though...

You can teach monkeys to fly better than that!

Reply #19 | Published on 23 February 2012 - 11:59:09
3
0

 I agree, an expansion set of bombers would make a lot of sense: slow moving point buckets that have a lot of firepower but poor maneuverability.  No immelman turns here! Equating this game to Chess, the bomber is King--doesn't matter how many ships you loose, or how many of their ships you take out, each team has one piece they need to protect at all costs. Taking it up another notch, introduce the interceptors as Queens: Double moves, but lighten up of the damage compared to the fighters. 

Without Signature
Reply #20 | Published on 24 February 2012 - 11:08:49

Quixote4u@gmail.com said:

 

 I agree, an expansion set of bombers would make a lot of sense: slow moving point buckets that have a lot of firepower but poor maneuverability.  No immelman turns here! Equating this game to Chess, the bomber is King--doesn't matter how many ships you loose, or how many of their ships you take out, each team has one piece they need to protect at all costs. Taking it up another notch, introduce the interceptors as Queens: Double moves, but lighten up of the damage compared to the fighters. 

 

 

Ah, interceptors. Now that gets interesting. See, TIE interceptors have quad laser cannons, so does it make sense to give them reduced firepower? Even if the lasers were weaker, you'd think it would average out to the same amount of damage. A-wings, however, could be even more interesting. Aren't their laser cannons supposed to be able to rotate 360 degrees in the Z-axis (vertical axis)? You can imagine the base for an A-wing having two diagonal guides indicating where it can fire and maybe you have to choose as your action whether to face your lasers backward or forward. That could get really interesting.

As far as bombers being like kings, I think that would be good for a scenario, but I wouldn't like that as a permanent skirmish rule. I think Y-wings are plenty competitive against TIE Fighters, even if the newer craft are superior. But I totally agree about less maneuverability. Having no immelmans is a good idea, and I would go further and say that no turns would be able to move it 90 degrees. All turns would have to be less than 90. Then again, even the Y-wings broke away from the 2nd death star pretty quickly when the Rebels figured out that the shield was still up in Return of the Jedi.

Reply #21 | Published on 24 February 2012 - 11:51:25

Ack! Too many rules for me. I don't mind if bombers can hold their own against TIEs in this game. I just want to fly some ships against my friends. Streamlined with options -- that's the mantra for this game, I think.

Some people play to win. I play because it's one of the few ways to fly an X-wing here on Earth!

Reply #22 | Published on 24 February 2012 - 13:03:08

Parakitor said:

Ack! Too many rules for me. I don't mind if bombers can hold their own against TIEs in this game. I just want to fly some ships against my friends. Streamlined with options -- that's the mantra for this game, I think.

Yeah, the turning laser cannons could be complicated, but the maneuverability should be pretty streamlined -- you just make each ship have its own unique movement dial and you're restricted to the choices on the dials. You wouldn't have to remember that Y-wings can't take immelmans or anything like that because it's all on your movement dial.

Page 2 of 2 (22 messages) « First page... 1 2
You are here: FFG Forums /  Miniatures /  X-Wing

© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS