Vorlon Transport

I wholeheartedly approve of this move to further differentiate the Vorlon transport from its big brother, the destroyer. And although I realize that this is a unique case, given the near-identical hull design of these two classes, I would also like to suggest (in the most self-effacing manner possible) that perhaps further blending of the FA and regular scale minis might not be amiss.

Take, for instance, the humble but iconic Centauri Vorchan--possibly not the best example, given the ship's disputable effectiveness in combat, but it serves my purposes well enough. There's nothing at all wrong with the present figure, from an aesthetic standpoint, but even back in the days of B5 (and their class-based notions of scale), I always thought it seemed a little overlarge. And it can be rather a pain to assemble, given its weight and the awkward way it perches on its stand. (I will admit, however, that this last may owe more to my own deficiencies when it comes to putting things together than any inherent flaw in the model itself.)

The FA version of the Vorchan was never the nuisance that its larger counterpart could be, in terms of assembly or delicacy of transportation. And . . . well, I just think it looks better, the small but aggressive Vorchans massing in their trademark wolfpacks around a full-sized Primus, or, with the release of Armageddon, the behemoth Adira. Better still when they're swarming regular scale G'Quans, Brikortas, or what-have-you. (Granted, they're more likely to be swatted than cause any terminal damage, but, y'know . . . At least they'll look good doing it! And if anyone can appreciate the importance of style over substance, it's the Centauri.)
 
fa2403.jpg


Can you extrapolate a size from the base? They do indeed look quite wee.
 
compared to the maximus those look about right IMO, definately better than the huge things we got now, think they would fit in more and i would buy some.
 
You know... I wish I bought FA ships for some of the smaller craft like Vorchans. Well, I still need Covrans and Maximus'... so maybe I still have a chance to add some scale to my fleet because I completely agree with Malingerer.

I know this is ALWAYS asked, but aside from eBay and AoG, is there anywhere else I can buy FA scale models online?

EDIT: Nevermind... I just impulsively bought $33 whorth of FA stuff from AoG. I am getting 4 Vorchans, 2 Covrans and 6 Maximus'... Damn you internet for making the waste of money so easy...
 
The Corvan is huge in FA scale as well. (About the size of a Primus). I actually expected Mongoose to tone it down and use the FA scale mini for ACTA.
 
Apachex said:
The Corvan is huge in FA scale as well. (About the size of a Primus).

For a split second (and it could be because I haven't slept tonight) I thought you meant that the FA Covran was the size of a normal Primus... and I blinked.

If nothing else, they have smaller bases, which will make movement a little better.

Part of the reason I don't like Vorchans (aside from their stats) is there base and how huge it is. Speaking of Vorchans, it apears I may have some for sale now. Anyone wanna buy 6 normal sized Vorchans :D ?

Apachex said:
I actually expected Mongoose to tone it down and use the FA scale mini for ACTA.

It sounds like a great idea. The mix of "to scale" ships will make the game even more aesthetic. It would be a good move.

You hear that Mongoose? It would be a good move :wink: .
 
The reason for the size of the mini is that in B5Wars, if I recall correctly the Corvan WASNT a tidly little escort scout, it was in fact a pretty large ELINT cruiser (think more raid level sort of thing like the Leshath). In my eyes, for ACTA the FA Corvans are about the right scale with the rest of the minis. Same goes for several EA ships like the FA Olympus (the normal one is a lovely miniature but its freakin huge!)
 
I don't like the idea of having 2 scales for ships at all. Newbies will be confused. Is it just a way to sell the same model to us twice? Say it ain't so!
 
I think the idea is to replace the large scale models of the smaller ships with FA scale ones so that they are more in scale with the larger ships, not sell both FA and full scale models of the same thing...


Nick
 
animus said:
I don't like the idea of having 2 scales for ships at all. Newbies will be confused. Is it just a way to sell the same model to us twice? Say it ain't so!

Origionally that was AoG plan. They released the FA scale models after they had run dry the B5Wars line. And it prooved quite popular with the punters in fact after they lost the license they even admitted that the FA scale was a brillant way to make everyone buy the same fleets again... :wink:

What people are suggesting for ACTA is that mongoose mixes the two ranges to create one true range.

You may have noticed that certain ships in the game are out of scale with each other... obviously with an Omega 5" long you would be hard pressed to represent the Victory to the same scale so compromises were made. What people are suggesting is that Mongoose mix the two scales to make sure the small escort ships are in fact small and not the same size as ships with twice their damage points.

So for example Mongoose has replaces the Vorlon Transport with the FA scale figure meaning when you look at the fleet as a wholethe ships look far more balanced together.

Mongoose is not releaseing a new scale, they are just merging them to get a more pleasing look to their figure range...
 
Okay, in ACTA there's no scale parody AT ALL.* Why quibble over a couple ships now?

*Scale was also pretty loose the series, to be fair.
 
Court Jester said:
Because it is more asthetically pleasing...

Quite so, in my opinion. Which, like any opinion, should probably be greeted with a healthy degree of skepticism. But even beyond the aesthetic component, there are other benefits to implementing the smaller FA scale for some of the more diminutive ACTA ship classes. For one thing, they tend to be much easier to assemble without recourse to pinning, drilling, or prayer to the Great Maker that the thing isn't going to come apart in your hands and eject pointy, glue-coated pewter shrapnel into one's eye. As a devotee of A Call To Arms who rarely has sufficient time to actually play the game (or hunt down potential opponents), expediency of assembly counts. I don't mind investing hours, even days, of effort into a fleet centerpiece like an Octurion or Sharlin, but on lower Priority ships it does sometimes seem like an unreasonable expenditure.

In my experience, too, the FA versions tend to be somewhat more stable on the tabletop (which varies, almost certainly, according to an individual player's preferred method of basing). And when the inevitable accident does occur, the lightness of the mini seems to keep it from breaking apart in all save the most precipitous of falls. The reduced size also has the advantage of being more economical (at least, on the consumer end), a definite virtue when one considers the numbers in which low Priority ships will often appear relative to larger vessels. This could be a particular boon for those players who favor Narn or Drazi fleets.

Anyway, my intention was not to quibble. Well. Maybe quibble just a tiny bit. But the release of the new, condensed Vorlon Transport could be viewed as a precedent, and I've always been a fan of the idea of mixing scales, as with the Vree and Pak'Ma'Ra B5W scale fighters which received a promotion to patrol boat status in ACTA. At the very least, it seemed a topic worth broaching.
 
Locutus9956 said:
And because I have poisoned your drink :P

I want upi to know that I nearly fell off my chair. I'm in a computer lab and just blurted out laughing... now people think I'm nuts. This forum is not to be read in working conditions...

Malingerer said:
Quite so, in my opinion. Which, like any opinion, should probably be greeted with a healthy degree of skepticism. But even beyond the aesthetic component, there are other benefits to implementing the smaller FA scale for some of the more diminutive ACTA ship classes. For one thing, they tend to be much easier to assemble without recourse to pinning, drilling, or prayer to the Great Maker that the thing isn't going to come apart in your hands and eject pointy, glue-coated pewter shrapnel into one's eye. As a devotee of A Call To Arms who rarely has sufficient time to actually play the game (or hunt down potential opponents), expediency of assembly counts. I don't mind investing hours, even days, of effort into a fleet centerpiece like an Octurion or Sharlin, but on lower Priority ships it does sometimes seem like an unreasonable expenditure.

Which is one of the problems *I* had with the Vorlon Transport. Also, just like you said, expending energy on small ships is inneficient... plus, can you imagine the amount of paint we can save :D ?

Malingerer said:
The reduced size also has the advantage of being more economical (at least, on the consumer end), a definite virtue when one considers the numbers in which low Priority ships will often appear relative to larger vessels. This could be a particular boon for those players who favor Narn or Drazi fleets.

I can't wait to play with my 10 Vorchans... when they get better stats.

Drazi ships should not get the FA scale ships, IMO. They are the bread and butter of the fleet, and size continuity aside, they deserve big ships... cause it is there only ships.

Malingerer said:
... as with the Vree and Pak'Ma'Ra B5W scale fighters which received a promotion to patrol boat status in ACTA. At the very least, it seemed a topic worth broaching.

I saw that too. If nothing else it broadens the lines of models and makes for an aesthetically pleasing game, which I find determines whether a game is "just good" or "absolutely great".
 
The Drazi FA scale ships were tiny anyway, same sort of size as the White Star fighter in some cases.

Plus the Warbird is smaller than the Sunhawk in FA scale...


Nick
 
Hmn. After further review, I feel I must concede to the points raised by my learned colleagues. The FA Drazi range does run towards the puny, and the Sunhawk being larger than the Warbird is just plain mystifying. Aside from coming in one piece, I don't see that these minis have too much to recommend them above the present line.

But, although maintaining scale might be impossible--and perhaps undesirable--among the disparate fleets described in ACTA, having an eye for it within a given fleet doesn't seem terribly unreasonable. Even though I know a Vorchan is somewhat larger than a Sunhawk, I would much rather see it scaled relative to the Primus than other races' heavy combat vessels. Of course, this is purely a matter of personal preference.

It occurs to me that I'm probably coming across as a great deal more of a FA partisan than I actually am. Apologies for that! Perhaps it's time I found another dead horse to flog . . .
 
I like the bigger Vorchan and not just because I painted 6 of them. It's an iconic ship and from a modeling standpoint the bigger model offers more to the modeler. Yes, it's sized larger than the Primus, but it's still a very good size for gaming. On a side note, the Vorchan molds probably need a looking at.
 
animus said:
I like the bigger Vorchan and not just because I painted 6 of them. It's an iconic ship and from a modeling standpoint the bigger model offers more to the modeler. Yes, it's sized larger than the Primus, but it's still a very good size for gaming.

I don't know... personally, I just don't think it looks right when it is over half the size of a Primus. Smaller escorts just look better.

If I were playing a Skirmish game or something and actually decided to use one, maybe I would use the B5W one...

animus said:
On a side note, the Vorchan molds probably need a looking at.

Very true. I have 3 Vorchans I can't put together cause there is so much crap in between the side wings. I can't squeeze the vertical piece in. I tried sanding and cutting, but there is just too much metal. Looks like it's time for a kitbash...
 
Back
Top