[FT] B5 Ships Scale Question

Hello,

Those who use the B5 ships, which scale of ships do you use? I see there are
two. A larger scale and a "fleet action" scale. Which do you use? Or do you
mix them?

> "Casquilho, Daniel" wrote:

I mostly have the big scale but I do mix in the fleet action scale stuff too.
Just never have the same ship in both.

> Those who use the B5 ships, which scale of ships do you use?

I prefer the FA scale. Easier to assemble, transport, AND paint. However, as
they are not yet available for my favorite race, the Brakiri, I've had to
break down and get some of the larger scale.

> [quoted text omitted]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:31:01 -0800
From: "Casquilho, Daniel" <Daniel.Casquilho@disney.com>
Subject: [FT] B5 Ships Scale Question

Hello,

Those who use the B5 ships, which scale of ships do you use? I see there are
two. A larger scale and a "fleet action" scale. Which do you use? Or do you
mix them?
<<<<<<<<<<

I use the Fleet Action (FA) scale B5 minis. they work well with FT minis. the
regular size B5 minis are comparativly huge. if you wanna great deal for
buying, try

www.crazymage.com  -->Catalog-->Agents of Gaming.  look for the FA code.
 James is
fast, friendly and gives 30% off mail order.

Dave

Depends on what you're using them as. The B5 wars size (larger) has the
dreadnoughts as somewhat larger dreadnoughts. About right I think. The small
size would look like a destroyer except for the explorer ship.

In other words, if you're playing with real FT miniatures, use the big ones.

--- "Casquilho, Daniel" <Daniel.Casquilho@disney.com>
wrote:
> Hello,

[quoted original message omitted]

On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:32:35 +0100 David Pullen
> <david.pullen3@virgin.net> wrote:

> Those who use the B5 ships, which scale of ships do you use? I see

> I mostly have the big scale but I do mix in the fleet action scale

> I have quite a few of both. Which I use depends on what I'm doing.
I've used the big range in FT as DNs and the Omega Destroyers of the small
range as destroyers. <

I don't mix "identical" models, but I do use the FA versions of the supposed
"smaller" classes with the larger big ships. After all, the size of the
Olympus "corvette" in the large "scale" (would that they
_were_ in something related to scale!) is ridiculous -- unless, of
course, it's a CT in the same way that an Omega is a DD! <g>

And don't get me started on those tiny Minbari "cruisers"... Or the
"unified" scale EA Explorer or forthcoming Vorlon Planet-killer! I want
_big_ versions of those two, frak it!

> I think I'm the only one who even touches the large scale fighters

I find the large-scale fighters make good small classes -- the Drazi
Sky Serpent, for instance. I'd certainly never use them as fighters
unless playing a purely fighter-vs-fighter game as per the 1st edition
rules -- which can be fun. But then, I've had Jon and Nic's (small)
not-B5 fighters ever since the first B5W minis made it over here.

Phil

In message <SIMEON.10103301152.D@eng_fr92920303.uwe.ac.uk>
> Phillip Atcliffe <Phillip.Atcliffe@uwe.ac.uk> wrote:

[snip]
> I don't mix "identical" models, but I do use the FA versions of the

Actually, the Olympus 'Corvette' is an appreciable fraction of the size
of an Omega, at least in a scene in 'A Call to Arms' - one of the few
places you see one.

On a related subject - has anyone ever pinned down the 'missile firing
ship' that we see part of (the missile firing part) in ACTA? - it is
definitely not a defence grid satellite.
> And don't get me started on those tiny Minbari "cruisers"... Or the
[snip]
> Phil
Just don't get me going on the AoG invented Mimbari designs - especially
the carrier - its a fat flying slug! I'm not impressed by the majority
of the other Mimbari designs either. The AoG invented Brakiri designs are
quite nice however (IMHO).

And I think if the EA _had_ a Posidon supercarrier at any point in the
timeline of the show we would have seen it! likewise for most of the other AoG
SDNs.

> Charles Taylor wrote:

And for those of you who missed this discussion from the past, note that JMS'
naval nomenclature does not necessarily correspond to contemporary naval
designations. Thus the Omega Destroyer would be essentially, for all intents
and purposes, equivalent to an attack carrier or an SDN. It was just *called*
a destroyer. The Hyperion
_heavy_ _cruiser_ was noticeably smaller.

Okay, my two bits for the week.  :-)

I like to think that the Omega is a destroyer in the same sense that the
british jumpjet carriers were "through-deck cruisers" - if it helps get
the
appropriation passed - call it a tugboat.

The Omega is based on the Nova-class dreadnought hull, which only
confuses the issue for some people.

> --- Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:44:43 -0500 Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> writes:
<snip>
> And for those of you who missed this discussion from the past, note

Maybe that is as Planet Destroyer (Death Star) as opposed to space going TB
Destroyer... <grin>

My own personal take on the Omega carrier/cruiser/destroyer (yeah it was
called all three at various times) was that you should read 'Omega class' as
'Omega hull'. They build one hull for convenience sake and then outfit them as
needed:

Cruiser - sacrifice fighters, for heavy weapons and mission endurance
Carrier - add extra fighters losing some endurance and heavy fire power
Destroyer - lots of shorter and medium range weapons for fighters and
some endurance

Just a couple of pennies tossed into the pot.

> Michael Llaneza wrote:

> I like to think that the Omega is a destroyer in the same sense that

Actually I believe that was identified as the Warlock Class Advanced
Destroyer. Another one of those "Destroyer" class Dreadnoughts I would say
:-)
It's supposed to be armed with a pair of the same missile launchers as the
satellites (and a pair of those giant particle cannons as well) amongst a long
list of other weapons.

(lot's o'snipping)
> On a related subject - has anyone ever pinned down the 'missile

> Regards,

In message <C6672FD5E16BD3118C3A00805FFE91D901346099@tornt4.mdshealth.com>
> "Kettle, Alexander" <AKettle@mdsintl.com> wrote:

> Actually I believe that was identified as the Warlock Class Advanced
amongst a
> long list of other weapons.

[quoted original message omitted]

> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 21:14:51 +0100
[snip]
> On a related subject - has anyone ever pinned down the 'missile firing

...catching up on digest reading, so please forgive if this was answered...

the missle ship you refer to is the (new) EA Warlock-class "destroyer"
although it's size is more like a hvy cruiser. the Warlock is supposedly a
replacement for the Omega.

Dave