Shouldn't the imps have better ships I mean that's cannon.
X-Wings are certainly better than TIE Fighters. TIE Interceptors CAN outperform everything, but they also shouldn't really have any armor to speak of. Y Wings and TIE Bombers should be about even for bombing, Y Wing is much better in terms of being a Fighter/Bomber. TIE Defenders should be completely broken in canon, which isn't good for game balance.
That graph does indeed worry me a little because having superior speed, acceleration, and maneuverability means the Imperials can pick their engagements and have the durability needed to get out of dodge.
Coming from a ww2 dogfight perspective, that's a nasty mix. If each side only had a mix of the two it'd be better balanced.
For instance turn fighters vs boom and zoomers. Turn fighters retain energy well through a turn so they use the strategy of getting the boom and zoomers to bleed energy off and catching them where the turn fighters excel. Boom and zoomers use their ability to get high, dive, and retain energy through the climb to pounce on targets. Now, granted, we're talking space combat here but the principles should remain the same. A turn fighter should have great maneuverability and the boom and zoomer better top speed.
IMO, TIEs should be slippery little bastards but lacking in top speed oomph and durability (think Zeroes) whereas their counterparts should be able to maintain a better top speed but not be as maneuverable but have shields to sustain them through a protracted fight. Or at least something along those lines. As it stands the Republic ships are going to be hard pressed to enter the engagement, win, and get out if needed.
Completely agree. While it's not a WWII flight sim, the parallels should exist. Faster ships should have lower maneuverability (I think they are calling it "drift" in this context), lower durability, or less "punch"/firepower. I'm happy for some ships to be better at specific things than others - that's what makes these games fun after all! - but nothing should be the all around best at everything.
It bugs me to see a Tie Fighter with that much armour. As tough as an X-Wing? What? Twice as tough as an A-Wing, with better acceleration and manoeuvrability too?
+3
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Presumably, the are taking feedback through their testing, so numbers may not tell the whole story.
+1
Options
Handsome CostanzaAsk me about 8bitdoRIP Iwata-sanRegistered Userregular
edited September 2020
The A-Wing is the fastest sublight-speed ship in Star Wars so yeah, that aint canon.
Also the TIEs in canon basically use swarm tactics. They deliberately lack the survivability of other fighters and are designed to be expendable. In battle you're not even supposed to go help a fellow TIE pilot in trouble if it compromises the mission in any way, the weak are to be discarded and there's many more TIE's where that one came from. Of course to realize this they would have to make the Imperial teams twice the size of the alliance ones (they continued this practice in the New Republic era even though they had lost their distinct advantage in pilots and materials. This is sort of balanced out in the books by explaining that the remaining Imperial pilots are the best of the best and the most zealous of the empire, only striking when they held an advantage over the enemy) but of course that would greatly disrupt the game balance.
Edit: I seriously (again) recommend the Alphabet Squadron books if you want to learn more about the dynamics between the Imperial and New Republic fleets during this era. That's basically all those books are about and they even have multiple tie-ins to Squadrons!
I want to see DPS/Health before making a decision. But also, perhaps the rebel ships have more total energy? Like enough to max out two systems? So the X could have more firepower and better speed than the TIE, at the cost of shield regen, to where head to head fights are basically always women by the X (it better be either way, Fantasy Flight got my headcannon saying X wings are 50% more durable with 25% more firepower...). Actually it would have been pretty cool to make it 4v5 or something, too.
Also we have to remember there is probably a higher learning curve to managing 3 energy systems plus shield facing than just 2 energy systems. I want to wait a bit to let people learn it before getting out pitchforks.
Also, likely 90% of my time will be spent playing vs AI, so it likely doesn't matter much to me at all.
0
Options
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
Energy is the same. DPS is the same. If anything the Imps have an edge in firepower because they can dump energy from engines to lasers and vice versa.
Speaking purely from an old XvT standpoint, I will say the first thing I do in an rebel ship on launch is overcharge my shields. If there’s ever a lull in combat, same thing. Maybe I’m an outlier, but that also wouldn’t surprise me if they took into account for the weightings.
That said, A wings were always my favorite. Looking forward to comparing those vs interceptors in a week! Hype!
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
*FFS, remember the Executor? It was destroyed by a single A-wing crashing into its bridge? That's dumb as hell and makes no sense but it looked great in the movie to see this Large Imperial Ship (before it had a name) crash into the death star. Yeah, suck it, Empire! Wooo!
Except later they bolt lore on to star wars movie iconography like the Executor. The Executor has a crew of like 310,000. For the record, the entire United States Air Force has around 330,000 active personnel. What the fuck. Star Wars makes no god damn sense, and it applies to space combat too. The universe is exactly as big or small as it needs to be at any given time, and the abilities of the people and equipment in it are just as flexible. Believe me, I hate that. I loved this more concrete and rules-based depiction of the universe that most of the now-legends-lore tried evoke. But maybe that never really existed either...
+4
Options
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
This needs a separate response because it will probably spark a whole nother discussion.
The first time shields were mentioned were in ANH where they talk about angling their deflector shields. And there are multiple instances during the Death Star fight where you can see TIE laser fire hit Rebel starfighter shields. Its been prominent enough since the beginning.
Except later they bolt lore on to star wars movie iconography like the Executor. The Executor has a crew of like 310,000. For the record, the entire United States Air Force has around 330,000 active personnel. What the fuck. Star Wars makes no god damn sense, and it applies to space combat too. The universe is exactly as big or small as it needs to be at any given time, and the abilities of the people and equipment in it are just as flexible. Believe me, I hate that. I loved this more concrete and rules-based depiction of the universe that most of the now-legends-lore tried evoke. But maybe that never really existed either...
Star Wars: suicide attacks work, and don't believe to the contrary.
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
Ah, what I meant was why didn't the devs forsee this BEFORE the beta. Like they needed to be told this is bad? Cursory knapkin balance raises red flags.
And look, that's still a relative throw away line and reference to shields in ANH. The movies never explore or care to compare the relative durability of a tie versus x wing in the original trilogy. They both die quite a lot.
0
Options
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
Ah, what I meant was why didn't the devs forsee this BEFORE the beta. Like they needed to be told this is bad? Cursory knapkin balance raises red flags.
And look, that's still a relative throw away line and reference to shields in ANH. The movies never explore or care to compare the relative durability of a tie versus x wing in the original trilogy. They both die quite a lot.
They talk about deflector shields multiple times during the ANH fight. Before the battle starts and almost every time they enter the trench.
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
Ah, what I meant was why didn't the devs forsee this BEFORE the beta. Like they needed to be told this is bad? Cursory knapkin balance raises red flags.
And look, that's still a relative throw away line and reference to shields in ANH. The movies never explore or care to compare the relative durability of a tie versus x wing in the original trilogy. They both die quite a lot.
They talk about deflector shields multiple times during the ANH fight. Before the battle starts and almost every time they enter the trench.
You're right, it just never seemed to make that bunch of a difference in their effective lifespan. Their existence was very clear, the power differential it created between an X-wing and tie was undefined until elaborated on later.
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
Ah, what I meant was why didn't the devs forsee this BEFORE the beta. Like they needed to be told this is bad? Cursory knapkin balance raises red flags.
And look, that's still a relative throw away line and reference to shields in ANH. The movies never explore or care to compare the relative durability of a tie versus x wing in the original trilogy. They both die quite a lot.
They talk about deflector shields multiple times during the ANH fight. Before the battle starts and almost every time they enter the trench.
You're right, it just never seemed to make that bunch of a difference in their effective lifespan. Their existence was very clear, the power differential it created between an X-wing and tie was undefined until elaborated on later.
That's because X-Wings tend to go up in flames. Possibly because TIE Fighters have more potent cannons to compensate for enemy shields.
I hope you can skip the campaign and just jump right into the dogfighting. Also is progress tied to which side of the way you are fighting on? Or do both sides have like for like ships?
Does anyone know if we'll be able to play between Origin / Steam accounts?
Bel and I both have the top tier EA thing, so we get Squadrons for free but only through Origin. Will the Steam folks still be around for os, or are we in a walled garden?
Does anyone know if we'll be able to play between Origin / Steam accounts?
Bel and I both have the top tier EA thing, so we get Squadrons for free but only through Origin. Will the Steam folks still be around for os, or are we in a walled garden?
Based on other ea/steam releases you'll be able to play together.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
Ah, what I meant was why didn't the devs forsee this BEFORE the beta. Like they needed to be told this is bad? Cursory knapkin balance raises red flags.
And look, that's still a relative throw away line and reference to shields in ANH. The movies never explore or care to compare the relative durability of a tie versus x wing in the original trilogy. They both die quite a lot.
They talk about deflector shields multiple times during the ANH fight. Before the battle starts and almost every time they enter the trench.
You're right, it just never seemed to make that bunch of a difference in their effective lifespan. Their existence was very clear, the power differential it created between an X-wing and tie was undefined until elaborated on later.
I'll just say Lucasarts paid very close attention to the difference in durability and firepower in the miniatures games
+1
Options
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
Does anyone know if we'll be able to play between Origin / Steam accounts?
Bel and I both have the top tier EA thing, so we get Squadrons for free but only through Origin. Will the Steam folks still be around for os, or are we in a walled garden?
It's completely Cross-Play. All platforms can play with each other. But I'm not sure if that's what you're asking
I hope you can skip the campaign and just jump right into the dogfighting. Also is progress tied to which side of the way you are fighting on? Or do both sides have like for like ships?
I'm pretty sure you can go straight into multiplayer. It might make you do a tutorial first?
Progress is measured in a number of ways. Cosmetics are per faction. Unlocking components is per faction as well, with most components being unlocked per ship, but some things do go across ships in the same faction. No unlocks are cross-faction.
Does the steam version make you run origin? Just curious because I could totally see an ubisoft thing where running the stesm version just boots uplay. No malice in that just like, yeah, it's an EA game so sure.
I gifted my brother a copy off of GreenManGaming and its origin only, but apparently that won't interfere with my steam copy.
Edit: sweet. I have some friends who may get this on Xbox or Playstation so that's really neat.
Does the steam version make you run origin? Just curious because I could totally see an ubisoft thing where running the stesm version just boots uplay. No malice in that just like, yeah, it's an EA game so sure.
I gifted my brother a copy off of GreenManGaming and its origin only, but apparently that won't interfere with my steam copy.
Edit: sweet. I have some friends who may get this on Xbox or Playstation so that's really neat.
STEAM only says an EA Account. Says nothing about ORIGIN like Battlefront does.
"Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
0
Options
Handsome CostanzaAsk me about 8bitdoRIP Iwata-sanRegistered Userregular
Less than a week until release!
Right now, I feel like I could take on the whole empire by myself.
Posts
X-Wings are certainly better than TIE Fighters. TIE Interceptors CAN outperform everything, but they also shouldn't really have any armor to speak of. Y Wings and TIE Bombers should be about even for bombing, Y Wing is much better in terms of being a Fighter/Bomber. TIE Defenders should be completely broken in canon, which isn't good for game balance.
Coming from a ww2 dogfight perspective, that's a nasty mix. If each side only had a mix of the two it'd be better balanced.
For instance turn fighters vs boom and zoomers. Turn fighters retain energy well through a turn so they use the strategy of getting the boom and zoomers to bleed energy off and catching them where the turn fighters excel. Boom and zoomers use their ability to get high, dive, and retain energy through the climb to pounce on targets. Now, granted, we're talking space combat here but the principles should remain the same. A turn fighter should have great maneuverability and the boom and zoomer better top speed.
IMO, TIEs should be slippery little bastards but lacking in top speed oomph and durability (think Zeroes) whereas their counterparts should be able to maintain a better top speed but not be as maneuverable but have shields to sustain them through a protracted fight. Or at least something along those lines. As it stands the Republic ships are going to be hard pressed to enter the engagement, win, and get out if needed.
Also the TIEs in canon basically use swarm tactics. They deliberately lack the survivability of other fighters and are designed to be expendable. In battle you're not even supposed to go help a fellow TIE pilot in trouble if it compromises the mission in any way, the weak are to be discarded and there's many more TIE's where that one came from. Of course to realize this they would have to make the Imperial teams twice the size of the alliance ones (they continued this practice in the New Republic era even though they had lost their distinct advantage in pilots and materials. This is sort of balanced out in the books by explaining that the remaining Imperial pilots are the best of the best and the most zealous of the empire, only striking when they held an advantage over the enemy) but of course that would greatly disrupt the game balance.
Edit: I seriously (again) recommend the Alphabet Squadron books if you want to learn more about the dynamics between the Imperial and New Republic fleets during this era. That's basically all those books are about and they even have multiple tie-ins to Squadrons!
Resident 8bitdo expert.
Resident hybrid/flap cover expert.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Also we have to remember there is probably a higher learning curve to managing 3 energy systems plus shield facing than just 2 energy systems. I want to wait a bit to let people learn it before getting out pitchforks.
Also, likely 90% of my time will be spent playing vs AI, so it likely doesn't matter much to me at all.
That said, A wings were always my favorite. Looking forward to comparing those vs interceptors in a week! Hype!
I can't believe people are still upset over balance winning over canon/lore. This is aint X-Wing or Tie Fighter, it's a 5v5 game that's trying maintain some competitive balance (serious concerns about balancing aside).
Also in the original trilogy it wasn't like x-wings or tie fighters were portrayed as being super durable or superior to one another, and in pretty much every star wars movie it shows everything dying after one good hit. Then games came along and it made gameplay sense that the player character (rebels) would have better ships to sort of narratively justify why one player would slaughter whole squadrons of ties. "It's because our ships are better! But, like, Ties are more maneuverable I guess and there's more of them, sure, anyways I started blasting and"
So, I get it. I'm attached to this concept in my mind about star wars fighter combat that was created by the PC games and rogue squadron and the rogue novels and the fel comics and all that. But this game isn't that. And it's actually slightly more authentic to the 'non-plot character ships die immediately' of the movies. I'm not saying the movies actually make space combat interesting* - they don't, at least not as much as the background material I now carry as baggage does - but the trailers and gameplay for this adhere's so close to the movie representations of fighter engagements its incredible.
Like, if I went back I really listened for the first time 'shields' are mentioned for rebel fighters it's probably some goofy throw-away line like the original reference to the Clone Wars was. Still, I get the attachment because we got movies and shows and games about the clone wars and we got tons of games and literature about the intricacies of fighter combat. We've gone deep into that rabbit hole but this game isn't about that.
Just be glad it's first-person. Although again, I'm highly concerned about balance. They're dramatically over-inflating the value of recharging shields when Empire has an equivalent function AND shields represent another micro-management tax that imperial ships don't have! Kind of an obvious balancing issue? HIGHLY concerning even the beta didn't foresee this.
*FFS, remember the Executor? It was destroyed by a single A-wing crashing into its bridge? That's dumb as hell and makes no sense but it looked great in the movie to see this Large Imperial Ship (before it had a name) crash into the death star. Yeah, suck it, Empire! Wooo!
Except later they bolt lore on to star wars movie iconography like the Executor. The Executor has a crew of like 310,000. For the record, the entire United States Air Force has around 330,000 active personnel. What the fuck. Star Wars makes no god damn sense, and it applies to space combat too. The universe is exactly as big or small as it needs to be at any given time, and the abilities of the people and equipment in it are just as flexible. Believe me, I hate that. I loved this more concrete and rules-based depiction of the universe that most of the now-legends-lore tried evoke. But maybe that never really existed either...
The beta 1000% foresaw it. My friend says it was a constant point of feedback on the forums
This needs a separate response because it will probably spark a whole nother discussion.
The first time shields were mentioned were in ANH where they talk about angling their deflector shields. And there are multiple instances during the Death Star fight where you can see TIE laser fire hit Rebel starfighter shields. Its been prominent enough since the beginning.
Star Wars: suicide attacks work, and don't believe to the contrary.
Ah, what I meant was why didn't the devs forsee this BEFORE the beta. Like they needed to be told this is bad? Cursory knapkin balance raises red flags.
And look, that's still a relative throw away line and reference to shields in ANH. The movies never explore or care to compare the relative durability of a tie versus x wing in the original trilogy. They both die quite a lot.
They talk about deflector shields multiple times during the ANH fight. Before the battle starts and almost every time they enter the trench.
You're right, it just never seemed to make that bunch of a difference in their effective lifespan. Their existence was very clear, the power differential it created between an X-wing and tie was undefined until elaborated on later.
As a huge Star Wars fan, I obviously have no problem activating my suspension of disbelief.
That's because X-Wings tend to go up in flames. Possibly because TIE Fighters have more potent cannons to compensate for enemy shields.
Bel and I both have the top tier EA thing, so we get Squadrons for free but only through Origin. Will the Steam folks still be around for os, or are we in a walled garden?
Based on other ea/steam releases you'll be able to play together.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I'll just say Lucasarts paid very close attention to the difference in durability and firepower in the miniatures games
It's completely Cross-Play. All platforms can play with each other. But I'm not sure if that's what you're asking
I'm pretty sure you can go straight into multiplayer. It might make you do a tutorial first?
Progress is measured in a number of ways. Cosmetics are per faction. Unlocking components is per faction as well, with most components being unlocked per ship, but some things do go across ships in the same faction. No unlocks are cross-faction.
I gifted my brother a copy off of GreenManGaming and its origin only, but apparently that won't interfere with my steam copy.
Edit: sweet. I have some friends who may get this on Xbox or Playstation so that's really neat.
/flashbacks to a better time playing TIE Fighter
https://podcast.tidalwavegames.com/
STEAM only says an EA Account. Says nothing about ORIGIN like Battlefront does.
Right now, I feel like I could take on the whole empire by myself.
Resident 8bitdo expert.
Resident hybrid/flap cover expert.
Careful that feeling didn't work out for hobbie.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I hope all rebel scum reveal themselves this easy. . .
Steam ID: Obos Vent: Obos
It was Dak, Hobbie lived through the war.
Shit I'm a fake gamer boy.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I dunno about that. Fake Star Wars boy maybe.
I mean, DeadDak was a password in one of the Rogue Squadron games, so it still works.
I know him more as "Asks Single Question Man".
Resident 8bitdo expert.
Resident hybrid/flap cover expert.