Help support TMP


"Specific setting question" Topic


5 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Collectible Miniatures Games Message Board

Back to the SF Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Fantasy
Science Fiction
Toy Gaming

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

Warband


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Chaos Space Marines, Squad #1

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian finishes his first squad of Chaos Space Marines.


Featured Profile Article

First Look: GF9's 15mm Falaise House

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian explores another variant in the European Buildings range.


Featured Book Review


1,482 hits since 28 Jan 2015
©1994-2022 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Mute Bystander28 Jan 2015 5:09 a.m. PST

Saw the first three movies the trailers for the rest turned me off the setting/movies.

I am using 5150:Fighter Command and was looking at the Starship Battle Star Wars ships on Ebay and have two questions.

1) Visually – canon notwithstanding – when I look at the continuum of Light Fighter, Medium Fighter, Heavy Fighter, Bomber, and Assault (boarding actions) craft would you consider the A-Wing, X-Wing, Y-Wing, and B-wig as filling the first four categories. Again, Visually.

2) Why are B-wings so much more expensive then A/X/Y-Wings on Ebay? Usually that means either they are way less produced (within the Common/Experienced/Veteran/Ace Heroclix style/type pricing scheme) or that they are more useful/powerful in game terms (aka the price gouging GW model.)

alien BLOODY HELL surfer28 Jan 2015 1:07 p.m. PST

1/ no, the Y wing is a bomber not a heavy fighter, that's more the B-wing.

Mako1128 Jan 2015 1:57 p.m. PST

True, technically, but I can see using them like that anyway.

My special, non-canon, house rule would be to permit the Y-Wings to fire both their front guns, and the turret weapons at the same time (in any direction desired), as long as the Y-Wing flies straight and level. That should give it a bit more punch, as a fighter.

Perhaps, permit the player to arm the turret with different weaponry too, so it's a bit more effective at destroying other fighters too.

haywire28 Jan 2015 2:41 p.m. PST

Mako11,

They could since the turret is usually manned by a gunner. When they dont have the gunner (ala a new hope), they have the turret fixed forward.

In the x-wing game you can change the turret to other loadouts.

Mute Bystander29 Jan 2015 9:43 a.m. PST

alien BLOODY HELL surfer,

Well in Star Wars it is but I am planning to use them in THW's 5150:Fighter Command and 5150:Carrier Command games.

So what it was designated in the SW game is kind of not relevant to my question about does it look more like a Heavy Fighter visually in my game setting.

Interesting, I always saw the B-Wing more as a Bomber or attack/assault ship based on appearance.

The line between Light/Medium/Heavy Fighter is grey in my mind and the line between Heavy Fighter and Bomber is only slightly more distinct.

Pontification time:

I see Light fighters as cheap/plentiful supplements to "standard" (IMO Medium) Fighters. Not sure if I have a historical example right at hand. In WW1 these would like the Sophwith Pup or the the Nieuport "Bebe" aircraft.

Medium fighters would be Spitfire or P-51 like craft.

Heavy Fighters in aerial combat work be like the P-47, strong in Air to Mud and Good in Air to Air. The Aerospace equivalent.

"Bombers" would be equivalent to strike aircraft like the B-26 Marauder or the Mosquito or Blenheim hunting ships in the Baltic.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.