PDA

View Full Version : Republic Units for SWGB2 - Poll


Darth Windu
05-21-2003, 10:48 AM
Hi everyone. As you may or may not know, i am developing a template that i think would be useful for a future SWGB2.

At the moment, the Republic needs one more unit, and i would like to know what the board thinks would be the best choice.

Republic Assault Ship - large transport for mass movement of mechs and troops. Useful to follow up an assault by gunships with loaded Assault ships to consolidate your ground.

Clone Repeater Trooper - slightly longer range, but far greater firepower and rate of fire than ordinary troops. Good for defending against a massed infantry attack.

Clone Sniper - fast trooper with a very long range, but slow rate of fire anti-infantry unit. Most useful to assasinate targets such as officers, medics or workers.

Clone Flame Trooper - short range flamethrower can do large amounts of damage to any unit or building caught in its attack. Good as taking down walls or defensive positions, and mechs if you get close enough although the unit is slow with low hp's and when destroyed will explode, damaging all units in a small radius.

lukeiamyourdad
05-21-2003, 06:24 PM
You could describe what these units do so we can make a better choice.

Admiral Vostok
05-22-2003, 08:56 AM
I vote for Sniper. Although we've seen Bounty Hunters do some sniping, the Republic are the only military force that has the ability to have large numbers of snipers. Their standard issue firearms (which I'm sure some EU-literate person will name for me) have the ability to be used as a sniper rifle.

R5D4
05-22-2003, 10:46 AM
Sniper would be fun :D

lukeiamyourdad
05-22-2003, 08:13 PM
I thought we could give snipers exclusive for hit-and-fade civs(Rebs, Naboo, Wooks).

Why does an army so huge need a sniper for?

Admiral Vostok
05-23-2003, 02:56 AM
I don't care whether we have Snipers or not, but I would like to see some ability for the Clone Troopers to use their weapons in Sniper mode as the EU says they can do (and this is supported by the shape of them in the movies). Perhaps this goes back to my idea of having "Trooper Abilities" for each civ, which made Troopers more usable and emphasised their difference from Mechs. This probably isn't the place though, I might put it on one of the other threads.

FiNLuX
05-23-2003, 06:35 AM
Yeah a sniper so everyone can camp so it gets liek cs. !PFF

lukeiamyourdad
05-24-2003, 01:08 PM
Vostok- Since when you're using an EU argument???:confused:

And it's too micro-intensive anyway...

Admiral Vostok
05-27-2003, 03:34 AM
I know, it's weird, but at least this EU was made up by the people who make the movies, so it doesn't contradict the movies. If I have to choose a made up thing I choose the one closest to the movies.

pbguy1211
05-27-2003, 05:04 AM
should i be a pain in the butt and post 7 different threads now for the other civs and their additional units? ;)
aren't the republic strong enough already? shouldnt they be weaker since they'll be nearly wiped out at the end of the next movie? as a matter of fact, in the next game the republic wont have cloner units, they'll be the empire's at the end of the movie. the republic will be made up all of aliens and robots. so the clones may as well be for the young empire. or at least dont call it a republic unit.

Darth Windu
05-27-2003, 12:03 PM
Well pbguy, the reason i posted this sort of thread for the Republic only was because i didnt really have any clear idea of what the Republic's final unit should be, so i thought id do the democratic thing and put it to a vote.

pbguy1211
05-27-2003, 01:51 PM
what makes you think that they should be allowed another unit?

lukeiamyourdad
05-27-2003, 06:26 PM
pbguy has a good point. If the other units are already strong enough, the republic might not need another unit. One civ can live with one less unit...

Sithmaster_821
05-27-2003, 07:03 PM
Hey, windu, wouldn't the fact that, since the accepted view of swgb2 features unique unit sets make your thread obsolete. I mean, if all the unit will be relatively new, why have a poll about adding a single new unit. (i voted for the 'peater)

Darth Windu
05-28-2003, 05:49 AM
pbguy - because im working on the principle of giving every civ 20 units

sith - no, because this thread has nothing to do with what sort of sets will be used, simply the final Republican unit.

pbguy1211
05-28-2003, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
sith - no, because this thread has nothing to do with what sort of sets will be used, simply the final Republican unit.

LOL, I'm sure that you'll be sending the final poll results to gary... so he has your final approval as to what the game will use. dude, sorry but in the grand scheme of things your poll is pointless in that if you're not working on the game why bother?
Developers and designers come up with the balance for these games. The key word is BALANCE. And no matter what happens in the new game, you still won't be happy with it. And you'll complain to have more units added in an expansion pack and you still won't be happy until you get a GUNSHIP as strong as Simon the Killer Ewok...

... waits patiently to be once again added to Windu's ignore list.

lukeiamyourdad
05-28-2003, 06:42 PM
OK let's not start flaming each other...

Everyone can do what he wants. Maybe Windu will get a chance in who knows many years to make the game of his dreams so let people do what they want without the need to be flamed.

Darth Windu
05-31-2003, 10:10 AM
pbguy - i am doing this becausei would like to see a SWGB2, and would like the community involved in drafting an outline of what the fans would like to see in SWGB2 so that, if it is made, the developers would be able to look at the template we have created and have some sort of idea as to what the fans want, for example more unique unit sets.

If you dont want to be involved in this, fine, but i would like to have the whole board involved so that my finished concept will have a broader appeal in relation to the fans and a more stable foundation.

eizo131
05-31-2003, 03:38 PM
To vote for the last unit we neex to see all the other ones...

Darth Windu
06-01-2003, 01:33 AM
Ok then, the current Galactic Republic units are-

Infantry-
01. Kaminoan Worker Droid
02. IM-6 Medic Droid
03. Clone Trooper
04. Clone Rifle Trooper
05. Clone Commander
06. ARC Trooper
07. Jedi Knight
08. Jedi Master

Mechs-
09. Clone Trooper on Imperial Speeder Bike
10. AT-XT
11. AT-TE
12. SPHA-T

Aircraft-
13. AA-9 Starfreighter
14. Jedi Starfighter
15. Republic Gunship
16. Republic Dropship

Ships-
17. Utility Trawler
18. Republic Frigate
19. Republic Cruiser

hence, there is one space left for another unit.

Sithmaster_821
06-01-2003, 06:20 PM
I didnt expect number 15 to be on the list:rolleyes:

pbguy1211
06-01-2003, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Sithmaster_821
I didnt expect number 15 to be on the list:rolleyes:
:lol:

Darth Windu
06-02-2003, 01:04 AM
Well considering that the Gunship is one of the Republics main weapons, of course it will be on the list. Leaving it off would be akin to leaving out the AT-AT or the X-wing.

boinga1
06-02-2003, 01:08 AM
He was being sarcastic- and I say snipers, simply because the others seem a little out of place. Assault transport would be okay, too though.

Sithmaster_821
06-03-2003, 09:09 PM
Yeah, windu it was only in jest. The list looks (from an entirely realism standpoint) fairly thorough and well-done. The gameplay jury's still out, but it doesn't look like a positive verdict from where im standing

Darth Windu
06-04-2003, 05:26 AM
sith - wow, thats quite an honour coming from you.

In terms of gameplay and realism i went for 100% realism and then started balancing. Of course i cant balance it properly because its just on paper, but i have a good idea of what id like to see and hopefully that comes across in my idea.

Sithmaster_821
06-04-2003, 09:45 PM
sith - wow, thats quite an honour coming from you.
Nah, you're a respectable member of the community (no more annoying threads). A lot higher standing in my book than like say simwiz. The only thing I raised an eyebrow to the Kaminoan worker. I think that the current ones are more realistic (being from corusant and in a movie) plus their a lot cooler to kill.

Darth Windu
06-05-2003, 12:00 PM
Well with the droid i havent actually paid a great deal of attention to the name of the Republic worker in SWGB, but thats the one im talking about anyway.

lukeiamyourdad
06-05-2003, 06:05 PM
Should we have something else then droids?

I mean I know they're the main workforce but in the movies we saw tons of engineers and technicians. Should they have a role?

Darth Windu
06-06-2003, 07:53 AM
luke - well at one time i had the Republic's worker as a Clone Engineer, but then you have to realise that the job of the worker is not only to build buidlings, but also to mine resources. Because of that, i thought it would be a bit wierd to have a Clone trooper mining Nova crystals...

sith - how do you mean "The gameplay jury's still out, but it doesn't look like a positive verdict from where im standing". As i've said from the start i like member input so if possible could you expand on this?

lukeiamyourdad
06-06-2003, 11:56 PM
Windu- Thought so...

Darth Windu
06-07-2003, 11:01 AM
luke - what do you mean by 'thought so'?

lukeiamyourdad
06-07-2003, 01:28 PM
What you said about technicians looking weird when they're gathering ressources.

JediMasterEd
06-07-2003, 09:15 PM
Clone Troopers were ment to fight. Hence the "Troopers" title. Course you already knew that...I hope...:confused: Perhaps one that may look like a trooper but with different armor colors like the battle driods.

Darth Windu
06-08-2003, 02:20 AM
Well as i said i thought about giving the Republic Clone Engineers but they would look odd collecting resources.

Sithmaster_821
06-09-2003, 06:22 PM
Windu-I meant that there wasn't any gameplay info (stats, etc.), so the jury's still out.

Admiral Vostok
06-10-2003, 09:39 AM
Windu - ever thought that each civ doesn't need the same number of things? Units will be balanced while at the same time remaining true to the movies, so one civ may have less variety but better standard units while another may have a huge selection of mediocre units.

By the way, what is an ARC Trooper?

Darth Windu
06-10-2003, 10:59 AM
Vostok - well there were a few reason, being that each civ had around that number anyway before i even counted, and also to prevent stuff like 'you're favouring x civ because they have more units!'. Obviously if my idea were to be converted to a playable game, these numbers would likely change for the sake of balance.

Also the ARC Trooper is the Advanced Reconnaissance Clone Trooper. I first saw it as a Hasbro toy and apparently they are also in some comics. Basically, they are the Navy SEAL's of the Republican Army. They just seemed very unique to me, even though they arent in the movies, and i thought they would be fun to use.

lukeiamyourdad
06-11-2003, 06:08 PM
I read stuff about the ARC in the databanks at SW.com and they're simply like the rebel specforces. So they are not so unique.

And a civ having x more number of unit doesn't mean you are favoring it. A civ with uber units will however be favored(or look like)

Darth Windu
06-12-2003, 10:43 AM
luke - but Rebel special forces arent in the game, hence the ARC Trooper is unique.

Also, it depends on what you consider to be an 'uberunit'. In my idea, each and every unit has particular strengths and weaknesses. For example-

SPHA-T - has very long range and very powerful, but has no secondary weapons, has a minimum range, cannot be air transported, takes up 5 pop slots

AT-AT - very heavy armour and heavy firepower, but is slow, expensive, takes up 4 pop slots and can only fire at targets directly in front of it and a few degrees left and right

A-wing - very fast interceptor, best used vs bombers and can destroy them quickly, but has low armour and performs poorly against and ground target and is weaker than fighters

and so on...

lukeiamyourdad
06-12-2003, 07:08 PM
Windu- What tells that the rebel specforce won't be in the game?


And Uber units are like simon the killer ewok or the death star.

Or if you want a better example(being an old StarCraft fan) the protoss.

The Dark Archon could mind control any unit turning him to your side giving the protoss the ability to mind control other civs' workers. Those workers could then build Terran or Zerg buildings and start a new uber civ made of all the civs combined. That's a uber unit. A unit too powerful.

If a civ was made up of such units, it would be favored.

CorranSec
06-13-2003, 06:20 AM
Well, I've decided to be a rebel and vote 'Other.'

Windu, I don't know how many times we have to say it. It's clear that GB2 would be much better if there were unique unit sets, instead of your generic templates with a few unique units and a single- yes, count it, single- unique building.

Windu, you simply cannot say that you have unique unit sets faced with evidence like that, taken directly from your latest Word document.

And seeing as we are seeking unique units that enhance the civ's character and make it different to other civs- well, why not all of them, instead of basic troopers/mechs? Why not none of them?

The idea of restricting the amount of units to 20 and having 5 unique units yet only including one seems directly contradictory to what we've been talking about the whole time (namely, unique unit sets). Does anyone else see this way?

Luke's dad- Hehe. Good old Protoss.

Sithmaster_821
06-14-2003, 12:59 AM
I agree Corran. When i was making (or copying) my templates (see thread) I was focusing on balance and the civ's character/play style. Those to elements make up gameplay (with some extras)

Darth Windu
06-14-2003, 10:51 AM
Luke - because i didnt include them in my idea, and thats what we're talking about...

Corran - what are you talking about? No unit in my idea is exactly the same as any other unit. BTW, i have significantly updated my idea since the one i sent you.

Also, as i have said, my idea for uniqueness goes as such-
1. Generic unit with multipliers (ie speed, firepower etc)
2. Semi-unique units with multipliers
3. Unique units
4. Generic buidlings
5. Unique buildings

I dont see any need for more than 1 unique building as that building enhances a particular civ's strengths, and whats the point in having a unique barracks for every civ since they do the same thing anyway?

As for my generic units, as i said they all have multipliers, for example, the Rebel trooper is significantly faster but has less armour and firepower than the Clone Trooper, but they are both troopers.

PS: if you're going to vote 'other', it helps to say what 'other' unit you would like instead of the other options...

Sithmaster_821
06-14-2003, 12:58 PM
Windu, like I said at my thread, unique buildings aren't just the generic ones with different units/arts/names. They are truly unique. You'll understand when I post my next template (its gonna be the gungans probably, they're the most "done"). The gungans only have three "military" buildings, compared to the Confeds six (thy have so many buildings to simulate the idea that they were made up of bunches of different parts, unlike now, which is pretty homogenous). And, if I remember my templates correctly, there really isn't a "mech" building or a "trooper" building. Having generic units or semi-generic units kinda defeats the purpose of the unique unit sets...

lukeiamyourdad
06-14-2003, 05:56 PM
To get back at my example of StarCraft, you can look at the zealot, the marine and the hydralisk. They're all primary infantry units while being really unique at the same time.
Of course in the case of SWGB, this can't really be done(with exceptions of Wookiees, Gungans and Hutt Cartel). The other units uses similar weapons so they might need to be semi-unique after all.

And maybe certain civs have different types of building units. Like gungans breed their mechs(if we can call them mechs)
we can do this la zerg in StarCraft. Their mechs come from eggs and gets armed after that.(ok maybe those animals don't come from eggs but I dunno!).

The republic can create clone clones(d'uh) in a clone factory. The trade fed can litterally build stuff. With the rebels you train recruits, with the wookiees(and ewok) well...they do...what people have to do to have babies(ok weird I just had to say it:p )

Sithmaster_821
06-15-2003, 12:08 AM
you look at things from a fairly graphical level. Weapons aren't what dictate uniqueness, its the way they play and their overall purpose in the game. Spears, hops, and ulfs in AoM look pretty different and even have quite different stats, but they are the only universal semi-generic unit in the game because they are all very similar in purpose. My StarCraft experience is limited, but im pretty sure that zealots, hrdalisks, and marine were fairly different for gameplay reasons as well.

lukeiamyourdad
06-15-2003, 12:22 AM
well take it from a StarCraft maniac(old StarCraft maniac).

They weren't so different(the zealot can't attack air but that's all). They are your primary ground infantry unit and serves almost the same purpose.

It's not only from graphical point of view. I actually think that Wookiees and Hutt Cartel should have different main infantry unit(berserker and gamorrean guard).

And cool graphics are important
we don't want big squares and circles fighting each other.

Darth Windu
06-15-2003, 01:27 AM
Sith - i strongly disagree about having completely unique buildings because-

1. They generally do the same things
2. It would be very difficult to balance
3. It would take up a lot of system resources

Hence, why have them? Most, if not all RTS games have generic buildings, the difference in my idea being that each civ has access to a unique building, such as the Clone Factory for the Republic and Starfleet Uplink for the Empire.

I would also like to point out Corran was severely mistaken when he said that each of my civs only has 5 unique units, i will use the Republic as an example-

Generic-
1. Worker
2. Medic
3. Clone Trooper
4. Clone Rifle Trooper
5. Clone Commander
6. Jedi Knight
7. Utility Trawler
8. Frigate

Semi-Unique-
1. Clone Repeater Trooper/Sniper
2. Cruiser

Unique-
1. ARC Trooper
2. Jedi Master
3. Clone Trooper on Imperial Speeder Bike
4. AT-XT
5. AT-TE
6. SPHA-T
7. AA-9 Starfrieghter
8. Jedi Starfighter
9. Gunship
10. Dropship


As you can see the Republic actually has 50% totally unique units, the rest being semi-unique and generic as a matter of course (ie everyone has them anyway) and are that way to save on system resources and make for a better performing game.

Sithmaster_821
06-15-2003, 07:21 PM
Windu, didn't you agree on the unique unit sets thread that unique unit sets were necessay despite some system resourses problems? Strange change of pace...

Most, if not all RTS games have generic buildings Actually the only mainstreamRTS game that has come out in the past year that used generic buildings/units was RoN, and there already is a thread concerning that games short-comings so i dont need to go into it.

1. They generally do the same things
2. It would be very difficult to balance
3. It would take up a lot of system resources
1. Most of the aforementioned (or somewhat aforementioned) games with unique building sets had buildings that produced different types of units than their counterparts in other civs.
2. I understand balancing different unit sets, but buildings? You rarely have "overpowered buildings, especially if they all just build units
3. In 2005, when this game probably will come out, I'm certain that most of the people will have computers that can handle it.

Darth Windu
06-17-2003, 01:51 AM
Games that have generic buildings-
1. Command & Conquer
2. Command & Conquer: Red Alert
3. Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun
4. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2
5. Age of Empires
6. Age of Empires: Age of Kings
7. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds
8. Rise of Nations

and that's just off the top of my head. The games listed there all had generic buildings and are listed at the greatest RTS' of all time! As i have previously said, totally unique unit and building sets are unrealistic, unrequired and unsuitable for a game like SWGB2.

With the units i agree that it should be predominantly unique units BUT sometimes, like in the case of the Worker and Trooper, it is unnecessary and undesirable, instead generic units WITH MULTIPLIERS are a lot better.

CorranSec
06-17-2003, 06:40 AM
I'm getting a strange feeling of deja vu. I think we've already been through how every unit, down to the simple workers/basic troopers, can be unique.
As Luke said, look at StarCraft. The Marine was a pretty cheap unit, with medium range and decent damage- best in groups. It didn't really have any special abilities. The Hydralisk cost more, with a longer range, better attack, and Burrowing if the ability is researched. Like all other Zerg, it slowly regenerates health. The Zealot cost even more (about 250 crystal thingys and 100 gas thingys if I recall?), has a very powerful hand-to-hand attack, plus (like all Protoss) is outfitted with recharging shields.
StarCraft's workers. Zerg Drones gathered resources and had to 'morph' into buildings (sacrifice themselves to form the building). Protoss Probes 'warped' in completed buildings, which means that they just had to start the warp and could then go and do other stuff. Terran SUVs (I think that's the name... ^^) were your typical everyday worker seen in many games, which had to sit around constructing a building.
The same went for many other things that you would leave as generic. Everything was unique in SC, and even basic concerns such as pop limits were dealt with in a different way by each civ.

I know this is only one example. But let's look at your list of examples. 1 to 7 are all old games, plus all the C&Cs had many unique elements (you didn't see NOD with Gap Generators or GDF with Flamethrowers, did you)? And now look at where each series is going. The next C&C installment, Command and Conquer: Generals, features 3 totally unique civilisations- China, USA, and the Global Liberation Army. The next AoE, Age of Mythology, is the same. Galactic Battlegrounds is in the same boat as AoK (considering they're rather alike) and as for RoN... well, chalk up another point against it. A supposedly new, groundbreaking game and it can't do something that the very first C&C did- namely, have unique civs.

Unrealistic? Is it realistic that Gungans build their underwater cities and Yuuzhan Vong grow their living structures with a construction droid armed with welders, just like the Republic? I don't think so.
Unrequired? Depends on what you're aiming for. If you're aiming for a small-ante game, which won't be all that good at all, then sure, uniqueness is unrequired. Good graphics are unrequired. A good storyline is unrequired. But we should be aiming for a top-of-the-line game, and we know that unique unit sets are achievable.
Unsuitable? See above on 'Unrealistic'. I can't think of what could be more suitable, considering the huge diversity of species and civilisations, all with their own buildings and armies, within the Star Wars universe. I also can't think of what could be more suitable for a top-of-the-line game. Which is what we're aiming for.

lukeiamyourdad
06-17-2003, 03:56 PM
Corran- Amen! And it's Terran SCV and Zealots only costs 100 crystal.

Sithmaster_821
06-17-2003, 06:55 PM
Actually the only mainstreamRTS game that has come out in the past year that used generic buildings/units was RoN
Games that have generic buildings-
1. Command & Conquer
2. Command & Conquer: Red Alert
3. Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun
4. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2
5. Age of Empires
6. Age of Empires: Age of Kings
7. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds
8. Rise of Nations
How many of those came out in the past year and are not RoN? In fact, as Corran pointed out, most of those games have sequels that came out in the past year and had unique civs/buildings

Darth Windu
06-18-2003, 05:07 AM
How many civs does C&C: Generals have?
How many civs does Starcraft have?

BTW dont use starcraft examples on me, ive never played it.

Also, remember that GAMEPLAY > REALISM, and 100% unique units are neither required or wanted. I would bet any amount of money any game designer would agree with me in the case of a game as complex as SWGB2 is in my idea, and with 8 civs.

lukeiamyourdad
06-18-2003, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by Darth Windu
1.How many civs does C&C: Generals have?
How many civs does Starcraft have?

2.BTW dont use starcraft examples on me, ive never played it.

3.Also, remember that GAMEPLAY > REALISM, and 100% unique units are neither required or wanted. I would bet any amount of money any game designer would agree with me in the case of a game as complex as SWGB2 is in my idea, and with 8 civs.

1. It's an old game with nothing to based upon and so does C&C general. SWGB has the whole SW universe which it can take stuff from and create more.

2. Shame on you!

3. Yes they are wanted and for the game's success they are required. like in 1. SWGB has the whole SW universe and more. C&C does not and StarCraft did not.

Sithmaster_821
06-18-2003, 04:33 PM
Don't worry Windu, you didnt miss out on much. Just Warcraft 3 with better gameplay, but worse graphics and pathing.

lukeiamyourdad
06-18-2003, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by Sithmaster_821
Don't worry Windu, you didnt miss out on much. Just Warcraft 3 with better gameplay, but worse graphics and pathing.

He missed the best game story and campaigns ever! And some good cinematics(not the briefings just the cinematics). It's still the best selling RTS of all times.

Sithmaster_821
06-19-2003, 12:24 AM
Sorry Luke, but as the resident Blizzard hater I felt obliged to say something...

lukeiamyourdad
06-19-2003, 03:11 PM
well I'm not a fan of the rest of blizzard's game...actually StarCraft was the first computer game I played...

CorranSec
06-21-2003, 02:08 AM
1. StarCraft is an old game. C&C Generals didn't want to reach or push the mark, and although it is nonetheless a fun game, it is not the pinnacle.
2. I know you've never played StarCraft, and thus I took the time to painstakingly explain quite a lot of the game features.
3. You say Gameplay>Realism, and yet you
a) used "Unrealistic" as an argument, and
b) need I say the cursed word 'Gunship'? Oops, I just did.
Now Gameplay>Realism is all fine and good, and I doubt that there is anyone on these forums who would come straight out and say 'Realism>Gameplay.' But the fact remains that although we all tote this adage, we continue to argue about units. So it is clear that there are degrees of Gameplay>Realism. Let me lay out what we should be aiming for.

Gameplay>Realism means that Gameplay is more important than Realism. This was originally created in Sith's battle against the Gunship, which (being inspired by the films) was basically a Realism idea. Gameplay>Realism worked well against the original Gunship idea because, as we all realise, it would not have fit in the original SWGB and although it would have improved realism it would also have messed up the balance, thus making gameplay worse all-round.
Gameplay>Realism has since been used in many arguments on these forums. Basically, when it's used, we're saying that taking elements from the films/books/etc, creating units out of them and trying to fit them into the game with no regard for balance is a bad thing. By the same token, not including things simply because they do not perfectly fit with realism is also bad. Examples include a Gunship that could carry many Clones and had both unit-killing lasers and one-hit-building-killing-missiles, attempting to fit in Luke Skywalker as close to the movies as possible (and thus sporting a huge array of Force powers), and putting full-size Star Destroyers in the Empire's arsenal.

BUT!

Realism is still to be respected, in that this game is still Star Wars, and Star Wars already has many established conventions and units which would make excellent source material. As such, something that is Un-Star-Wars-ish enough to make a mockery of the whole thing (such as a Greek spear or a Boeing 747) should not be in the game. Realism should be strived for, but can be put aside when gameplay is at stake. This explains why we want to have TIE Fighters and X-Wings, not POW Fighters and H-Wings, which are things that I just made up.
This also explains why we want to have TIE Fighters that are quite different to X-Wings and different again to N-1 Starfighters, instead of them all being identical except for looks and a couple of bonuses which apply to a generic base.

Got all that?
Now, if you observe above, I am confused as to how you, Windu, hope to use Gameplay>Realism in your favour. You have failed to point out how the mere proposition of unique unit sets would have a detrimental effect on gameplay, instead using unproven thoughts such as 'It just won't be possible' and looking to old games for reasons why we should simply abandon pursuit of a good game.

I hope you all enjoyed my rhetoric. Now, as a reward, I am going to go and eat a damned lot of pizza. Thankyou.

Sithmaster_821
06-21-2003, 11:53 PM
Thank you for typing out a long explination of Gameplay>Realism. You deserve the pizza. This is one of the most misused quote on these forums. You hit it roughly on the mark.

Just a point, I didn't make up the phrase, Greg Street did when he was justifying including Elephants in the Mythic..er..Imperial age, even though they went out of use in Persia in the 7th century during my AoK days. He had a better, albeit longer, quote during AoM's development concerning Gameplay>Realism:

"Anything that gets in the way of gameplay will be blindfolded, taken out side, and summarily shot."

lukeiamyourdad
06-22-2003, 12:39 PM
I'm gonna be an ass and say we need greek spears and Boeing 747...as cheat units:p .

CorranSec
06-28-2003, 01:54 AM
Sith: Thankyou. It was some very good pizza.

Luke: Your ass-ness is entirely justified. Greek spears may indeed turn out to be one of the best cheats in the game. It's right up there next to the flying space monkeys.
And as for Boeing 747s, well, the potential is just limitless. They could be transports, they could have lasers mounted on them, and as a last resort, you could fly them into your opponents' buildings!
.... on second thoughts...
*cringe*

Darth Windu
06-28-2003, 06:10 AM
Corran - i understand the concept of gameplay>realism, although i tend to be closer to the middle of the spectrum than others like sithy.

I would also like to point out that 100% unique units will hurt gameplay because it will have to use up more resources from the computer than generic units with multipliers would, and the effect would be the same. Also note that the portion of units i propose this for is rather limited, and the majority are unique.

lukeiamyourdad
06-28-2003, 02:58 PM
Everybody believes it's gonna be in 2005 Windu...2005. If you're gonna have a computer below 1.0GHz you better not complaint 'cause that's gonna be the minimal requirement(probably a bit more) for most recent games. even now it's the recommended processor speed. You're gonna have to deal with it. No one is gonna wait for a few persons to upgrade their comp.

Indy#1Fan
06-28-2003, 04:04 PM
Lets just say that Jango Fetts flame thrower is very cool and hos clones should have one.

:firemad: BURN BABY BURN!!!!!!

The Cheat
06-28-2003, 04:26 PM
i think they should just get all of them

Darth Windu
06-29-2003, 05:27 AM
luke - i've had a 1.3Ghz processor for a few years now. What im saying though is that THERE WOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE in reagrds to these units being generic with mulipliers or unique. Also, having the units generic with multipliers will free up MORE computer power to have better graphics, smoother gameplay etc and allow more people to enjoy the game.

Where is the problem?

CorranSec
07-01-2003, 09:01 AM
1. We cannot base assessments and make conclusions about what computers will be like in 2005. What you're aiming for, Windu, was achievable a couple of years ago, when AoK came out. What I'm aiming for is achievable now, but will be even more achievable during the next couple of years.
Your argument sounds like Joe's feeble protest- "I hope GB2 has generic unit sets because I do not have a very good video card and I would have to buy a new one to play the game." Honestly, people... I don't even know what to say. There can be no response to such willful indifference. Perhaps it's simply Joe being overly protective of his money, but it should be clear to all sane people that if you want great games several years in the future, you're going to have to fork out money to get them. You probably would have spent money on upgrading your system for earlier before GB2 comes out anyway, in the same way that people who upgraded their system for WC3 can now enjoy RoN even more (although the degree of enjoyment provided by that game, even to those with amazing systems, is doubtful at best).

2. I am finding it hard to believe what I see on my screen. Do you honestly believe that there will be no difference between generic units with multipliers and fully unique units? Once again, I find myself lost for words.
Consider the following:
a) The basic stats for a fighter are 10 damage, 2 armor, 50 health and 7 speed. The Imperials get the artwork of a TIE fighter, with modifiers of -3 damage, and +2 speed. The Rebels get an X-Wing, which has the basic stats (and is what the other ships are built upon). This is quite similar to the model used by GB1.
b) With unique unit sets, the Imperials (at their Shipyard) build a TIE Fighter. It does low damage with fast-firing lasers, is fast but weak, and gets an aura buff when in groups. The Rebels build an X-Wing at their Fighter Docks, which does high damage, can fire a proton torpedo (secondary weapon) is fairly slow and thus less manuverable, but has solid armour and medium health.

It's easy to see how B is better, if not by the basic numbers then by imagining it in your head.
And here's another point, Windu. If there is no difference between unique and generic sets, then why would unique sets take up more processing power? You've just defeated your own argument. Congratulations. Have some pizza.

lukeiamyourdad
07-01-2003, 05:04 PM
Hahaha... Windu if you want some old generic games just go back to those old games. The way of the future is unique.

Darth Windu
07-03-2003, 05:24 AM
corran - i actually had pizza last night, wasnt too bad but it was kinda cold.

Anyway that problem with what you just said is that there is a greater difference in your example between generic and unique. What im trying to tell you is that in my idea, the stats would be the same (whether the units were generic with multipliers or unique). Hence the only thing left is computer power. I'm not saying that its impossible to have 100% unique units, what i am saying is that there is no need for it, and with SOME generic units with multipliers, the game would run more smoothly and allow more people to enjoy the game.

lukeiamyourdad
07-03-2003, 01:43 PM
Then windu what's the point in having ''some'' generic unit when you can have a completely unique set? if you really want to save comp power then have them all generic with like one or two uniques. Having half the units generic and the other half unique is just dumb and by the way no one has ever done that because people would enjooy a game with 100% unique sets more then something halfway through.
LA must stop nurturing those with old comps or anything. I mean I only have a 1.3 GHz but I'm planning on getting a new processor. If you're so worried about that do that same thing go get yourself a damn new processor. Don't tell me that with a 2.0GHz and + you're not gonna have smooth gameplay.

JediMasterEd
07-03-2003, 10:17 PM
I have a 2.0GHz processor and several games run skippy...I think though it's just my SDRAM...it's 256 and I was told that since my SDRAM was from DELL, since it's a DELL system, any other memory chipset wouldn't work.

There are many that still have the old PIII's and not many gaiming corps. would want to create a game where it's over 1.5 GHz with it's recommended, save some really graphic games, when I mean graphic, I mean details galor.

Admiral Vostok
07-04-2003, 05:13 AM
Windu, in 2005 computers should be able to handle 7 or 8 unique civs. Besides, having mixed generic/unique unit sets isn't going to save any processing power over totally unique sets. Most of the processing is taken up by the graphics, for which you'll have the same amount whether generic or unique. The hard part about unique units is the programming behind them when compared to generic units. But this won't affect your processing speed. So I don't know what you're on about.

Darth Windu
07-04-2003, 10:03 AM
luke - i have never suggested that half of the units be generic. Those i suggested to be generic with multipliers were-
1. Worker
2. Medic
3. Trooper
4. Rifle Trooper
5. Commander

The reason being is that for all civs, they do basically the same thing, although of course for each civ they are slightly different.

lukeiamyourdad
07-05-2003, 11:56 PM
Look at Sith's Template. And mine. And Vostok's(when he'll show us). We, of course all have laser troopers. But the Laser troopers all have different purposes and that's what makes them unique. I see your Trooper is basic infantry. well me for the wookiees and Naboo I have two melee units that serves as basic infantry and laser troopers for the rebs. Of course similarities can be found within different civs but we can do better then basic multipliers. And Vostok is right. Now that you have 5 basic generic units, I don,t see how much processor power you'll really save.

Sithmaster_821
07-07-2003, 01:07 AM
Yeah. In mine (so far), the CF has 2 laser trooper units, and the Gungans have one quite unique one, IIRC.

Darth Windu
07-08-2003, 03:51 AM
luke - fine, they are all now totally unique. Of course this doesnt change any of their stats, but they are now unique instead of generic with multipliers. Happy?
Also, be careful about using melee units as the main troopers. Remember that it is cheap to give someone a gun, but you will have a lot (and i mean A LOT) of casulties if you charge gun-carrying enemies with melee units.

Sith - frankly i dont see the point of having 2 laser troopers, but still...
In my idea for SWGB2, no two units are the same. Every unit is stronger or weaker in different areas than other units, which helps to make the civs unique.

lukeiamyourdad
07-08-2003, 03:42 PM
windu- I know you've never played starcraft but I'll use that as a point anyway. Zealots and zerglings we're both melee units but they we're well balanced so you won,t suffer to many casualties(except that the zergling is so cheap that you can simply mass hundreds of them and send them to possible suicide)

Darth Windu
07-09-2003, 03:08 AM
luke - what im trying to say is that for any amred force, there will be a number of limiting factors to how large an army/navy/airforce you can have, and with the army, normally it is a lack of people. I cant see any civ in SWGB2 wanting to simply throw away infantry in melee attacks on ranged infantry. The only unit that would be capable of handling that sort of mission would be the Jedi/Sith.

lukeiamyourdad
07-09-2003, 06:28 PM
wookiee berserkers, royal crusaders, mounties, geonosian warriors...example from SWGB1 which we're well balanced and worked perfectly...an everything can be balanced out. almost everything. What do you think the basic infantry's range is? A sniper one? geez...they won't shoot that far early in the game. And my wookiee melee basic infantry was made to represent their old hand to hand combat. and Naboo's is just to make their basic infantry weak.

Sithmaster_821
07-09-2003, 10:19 PM
Windu, melee units add depth and fun to the game. Of course laser troopers would own them, cause thats what counters melee infantry. But melee infantry tend to be fast, thus making them excellent counters to those units that arent as fast-like buildings, heavies, and mechs.

CorranSec
07-11-2003, 08:18 AM
Windu... regardless of the individual merits of melee/ranged units, you simply don't seem to understand the concept of uniqueness.
Unique is not simply a basic guy-with-gun with different art and stats for different civs. Unique is having a completely different unit.
One civ has a basic guy with a gun, medium range. The next has a long-range sniper. The next is a fast, cheap (throwaway) melee unit. The next has a pair of pistols which enable him to fire at two units at a time. The next is amphibious (can cover land and water). And so on.
All of these have practical purposes and could be tailored to fit with the civs and with gameplay. It's just a matter of imagination and ingenuity, things which you don't seem to be bothering with.
A particular unique unit 'class' (eg basic trooper), although it has the same purpose (all-round infantry), can have many different designs and abilities which make it good in a particular way. One could have splash damage, the next could be poisoned (damage over time), the next could fire at air as well as ground, and so on. The possibilities are endless, and our combined imagination should provide an endless supply of ideas. It's simply a matter of thinking outside your generic boundaries and getting into the realms of uniqueness.

Admiral Vostok
07-16-2003, 02:44 AM
Nice post, Corran.

Now Windu, for such the "expert" at modern warfare that you claim to be, you should know that melee units have a valid place. Why do you think troops in WWII had bayonets? Close combat is certainly a major part of warfare even in the age of guns. But let's not forget we are talking about Star Wars here... in which case there are even better examples in the Grass Plains Battle with Gungans b!tch-slapping Battle Droids.

Now for various reasons in an RTS we can't have a unit that carries a gun but still gets a bit of a punch-up in now and then. So it seems reasonable that we split some units to be solely melee units. As we've seen from SWGB2, this works fine.

Also, lets not forget it is Star Wars, and not real life. In real life, we humans may have a preference for ranged combat over melee. This wouldn't necessarily hold true for alien races. Having the Wookiees' basic trooper unit as a melee unit makes perfect sense. The Wookiee race is a large, strong, aggressive species. Surely those traits that come naturally to them would be put to far better use in close-quarters than at range. Melee Wookiees would be much more effective than ranged Wookiees. Wookiees are known for pulling people's arms out of their sockets, not picking them off from a distance. Wookiees have a clear advantage over other races in close-combat that they would not otherwise have in shoot-out, so why waste these advantages?

All evidence cannot be ignored and points to Windu being wrong.

Darth Windu
07-16-2003, 09:32 AM
sith - i agree that melee units are fun and should be in the game. What im saying, however, is that they shouldnt be the basic infantry unit for any civ.

corran - the cheapest and easiest way to get an armed force is to give someone a gun. It will always be that way, and so hence every civ would have the 'guy with gun' unit as their BASIC infantry unit. Each would have different strengths and weaknesses, and of course there would be a variety of unique units to supplement them.

vostok - the bayonet is an obselete relic of wars of old. Modern bayonets are simply stand-alone knives, and it would be very, very, very rare for a soldier to resort to a melee weapon such as a knife rather than fire at the enemy using an Assault Rifle, Pistol or Submachine Gun. I would also like to point out that people are the main resource in combat. All modern western armies would prefer to loose equipment and save their personel rather than lose some personel.

lukeiamyourdad
07-16-2003, 03:30 PM
Windu: For god sakes windu! This is a f****** game! It isn't WWII simulation! IT'S STAR WARS! Ewoks won with rock and sticks(and a stolen AT-ST), Gungans engaged into melee combat with Battle droids like Vostok pointed out.

About the bayonet: The bayonet was used during the falkland island conflict by Great Britain. The soldiers would charge into battle with their bayonet and fear caught the ranks of Argentina's army. Seeing a guy yelling and charging at you with a bayonet is much more effective then you think.

Admiral Vostok
07-17-2003, 07:13 AM
Windu: You seem to have totally ignored all my Star Wars evidence, which is understandable since it gives me such a sound case.

Think about it from a Wookiee's perspective: I'm bigger, tougher, stronger and meaner than a human. Should I run up to him and pull his arms off, or lower myself to his level of weakness by shooting at him?

Darth Windu
07-23-2003, 06:05 AM
Vostok - You have a point there. which is why i have included melee units in my idea, such as the Wookiee Beserker, Jedi/Sith Knight, Jedi Master, Gamorean Guard etc.

BUT look at it this way-
1. Why does Chewy use a Bowcaster if he doesnt need it?
2. How does an army with only hand-to-hand weapons stop large armoured vehicles?

As another example, in ep6, chewy destroys a Scout-trooper on his speeder. If Wookiees were only melee, that scout would have escaped. Think about it. It makes sense to have your basic infantry projectile-equipped and then have an elite squad of melee units.

luke - the Falklands was over 20 years ago.

lukeiamyourdad
07-23-2003, 07:01 PM
20 yrs is not such a long time... you didn't get my point anyway.

Now now who said that wookiees would only have melee units???

Why did you include berserkers if you don't think they can get destroy large armoured vehicles?

CorranSec
07-24-2003, 06:24 AM
If Vostok has a point, and you've already included melee units, then what is one more, especially one more that would fit the character of a civ and increase its uniqueness?

1. Chewbacca uses his bowcaster, sure. But Chewie is not a Wookiee (spelling suggestions appreciated, Vostok) trooper, and Chewie is far better known for his hand-to-hand prowess that his ranged weaponry. Considering that we are taking Chewie as something like the model Wook, basic troopers using melee makes quite a lot of sense.
2. How does an army with only hand-to-hand weapons stop large armoured vehicles? I wouldn't know, Windu, and we'll never get a chance to test it, because the Wookiees aren't going to only have melee weapons, and nobody ever said that.

Chewie also busts into an AT-ST, kills the crew and captures it with his bare hands, I daresay. Back me up here, Vostok, being walking dictionary of SW movie facts and all...

Admiral Vostok
07-24-2003, 10:16 PM
Corran: kudos on the correct spelling of Wookiee and thanks for the compliment about being a walking dictionary of SW movie facts (though I'd prefer the term encyclopedia). You are also quite right about Chewie's taking of the AT-ST.

Windu: No-one is suggesting not giving the Wookiees any ranged weaponry at all. That would be totally against the movies, as we know the Wookiees have a very unique ranged weapon in the form of the Wookiee Bowcaster. What we are suggesting is that the basic Wookiee trooper be a melee trooper. There will be a more expensive, more advanced trooper carrying a bowcaster, but the first available trooper is a melee trooper.

This makes perfect sense. Bowcaster are far more expensive than anything a melee unit would be equipped with. Also, while you did point out all the times Chewie's Bowcaster came in handy, you completely ignored how effective Chewie could be wihout his Bowcaster. Think of the time he sent a prison block guard flying the length of the room with one swipe, or the time he took on several stormtroopers at a time in a fit of rage before Han was frozen, or even his throttling of Lando. Wookiees may not be the smartest creatures in the Galaxy, but they sure wouldn't be stupid enough to totally waste their natural strength by complete reliance on ranged weaponry.

lukeiamyourdad
07-25-2003, 02:43 PM
Hey Wookiees are very smart creatures!

They can repair anything, they can fly ships they can speak...it'S that they don't wear clothing that they aren't smart...

Sithmaster_821
07-26-2003, 10:26 AM
You guys all realize that you're arguing about pointless matters. No one gives two sh*ts about the "basic infantry unit". There isn't a "basic infantry unit", just some infantry that are ranged and some that are melee. It doesn't matter what you guys consider the "standard" unit of each class, cause they're all going to be used regardless.

Darth Windu
07-26-2003, 01:06 PM
Vostok - i would go the other way around. You speak of the cost of weapons, but what of the cost of lives and training? It is cheaper to build a rifle then it is to train someone to use it.

Also, note in ep2 that the Jedi, the best melee fighters by a large margain, took about 80% casulties in their battle with projectile-equipped opponents.

lukeiamyourdad
07-26-2003, 04:06 PM
Windu, in ep2 the Jedi were vastly outnumbered getting shot at from every angle.


i would go the other way around. You speak of the cost of weapons, but what of the cost of lives and training? It is cheaper to build a rifle then it is to train someone to use it.

I don't see how this is suppose to counter Vostok's argument...

Sithmaster_821
07-27-2003, 11:57 PM
Yeah, but Windu, once the melee units close ranks with the ranged once, their superior strength and armor usually defeats the weaker projectile infantry.

Admiral Vostok
07-31-2003, 03:23 AM
Windu: Luke's Dad and Sith just said exactly what I'm going to say but I'll say it again anyway in the hope we get the point across.

In a pitched battle like the Grass Plains Battle or even the Battle of Geonosis, you are correct in that a single Wookiee would do well to be ranged or else he will get killed before he gets into close combat. However, let's not forget he is part of an army. So let's do some comparisons to examine the effectiveness of a melee Wookiee when compared to a ranged Wookiee.

survivability of melee Wookiee = survivability of ranged Wookiee
killing ability of melee Wookiee > killing ability of ranged Wookiee
cost of melee Wookiee < cost of ranged Wookiee

The ranged Wookiee is just as likely to die from shooting attacks as his close-combat counterpart is, but the melee guy is both cheaper and better at killing. So which is the smarter choice?

Of course the Wookiee army will consist of both ranged and melee Wookiees. But to totally leave out the melee component is to reduce the Wookiee's killing capacity greatly. Also, not all battles are pitched battles like the Grass Plains Battle. A Wookiee army battling in the Battle of Endor, or for that matter on their home planet(!) would benefit greatly from their melee troopers, where the melee Wookiees can use the cover of the forest too reach their enemies unscathed.

Clearly the melee Wookiee is the most valuable part of a Wookiee army, and therefore should be the first trooper type available to a Wookiee civilisation in SWGB2.

Darth Windu
07-31-2003, 11:24 AM
Vostok - actually, you are wrong with some of those. It is actually-

survivability of melee Wookiee < survivability of ranged Wookiee
killing ability of melee Wookiee > killing ability of ranged Wookiee
cost of melee Wookiee > cost of ranged Wookiee

Sith - you have a good point there, if the Wookiee melee infantry closed with the enemy projectile infantry, they would rip the enemy to sheds. The problem, however, if the actual closing. You have to get a group of melee units to get really close before they can do any damage, and while they are doing that, THEY will get ripped to shreds.

luke - that was a game, in games such as that, you are always overpowered when compared to your enemy.

lukeiamyourdad
07-31-2003, 04:06 PM
Windu you totally ignored Vostok's point about Endor and Kashyyk.

In such environment, melee units are by far better then most ranged laser units. Using melee weapons gives you the element of surprise while laser weapons give away your position. wookiees can then do intense hit-and-fade strikes that will be more powerful then any ranged assault of the same style.

Also might I say your talking as if we would send 1 melee wookiee trooper against an entire army alone.

In this case the survival rate of the melee wookiee is just the same as a ranged one. It makes little difference unless you totally outrange enemy units. You said it yourself, a melee unit if it has closed on an enemy will totally rip him to shreds. Now this is the same. while a ranged basic infantry wookiee unit does more damage from a range, the melee unit him will certainly lose hp rushing against it's enemy but when he will reached his enemy he'll kill him in less time then a ranged one.

Also note that a melee wookiee would cost less. Wookiees since their childhood know how to hunt, use their claws attacking with their bare hands and melee weapons. They do not need further training which makes their cost lower then the one of a ranged wookiee.

Admiral Vostok
08-01-2003, 02:12 AM
Windu, please explain the following outlandish statements:

1) survivability of melee Wookiee < survivability of ranged Wookiee

2) cost of melee Wookiee > cost of ranged Wookiee

As far as I can see, for number 1 they should be equal. The ability for the enemy to kill you is independent of what type of weapon you have. The Wookiee is just as likely to get shot if he has a ranged weapon himself or not. In fact, if anything the melee Wookiee will have greater survivability, as they might have armour that the ranged Wookiee would not have.

Number 2 also seems bizarre to me. Equipping a Wookiee with two big cutting devices is far cheaper than giving them a bowcaster, which requires more complex manufacturing and even importing parts from off-world.

CorranSec
08-01-2003, 07:29 AM
We seem to be straying a little from the topic here. Let me point something out to you, Windu.
This is a game!
Thus, such statements as 'survivability of monkey-wielding Wookiee>cost of stupidly expensive Wookiee" are really unecessary. Vostok's are helpful, as they give us a solid grounding in known SW fact, but they are only a guide.

So, in GB2, this is how it's going to work.
The 'basic' Wookiee trooper (and by basic I mean first available, like a Footman, Zealot or Trooper Recruit) is melee, in that it does not attack from range. This makes sense because of what has been shown in realism terms, and it also makes sense in that it fits with the generally accepted character of the Wookiees and will add to the uniqueness of the civ.
This melee Wookiee will be sensible to use in gameplay terms too. Although it can be cut down by ranged fire, if it can close ranks with the enemy it can inflict great damage.
So, the way I see it in balance terms, this Wookiee has:
- Larger health/armour than the average ranged trooper (from other/same civs)
- Larger damage + faster attack than the average ranged trooper
- Same speed
- Possible lesser cost

If anyone believes this is underpowered/overpowered, please tell me. I just hope that this serves as an example that things are changable because this is a a game.

Sithmaster_821
08-02-2003, 12:59 AM
I still ascertain that you guys are arguing semantics. There is no such thing as a "basic" trooper. There will be a melee trooper and a ranged trooper and you can fill out your army with whatever proportions you'd like. There really isn't a set standard unit to be supported by other set auxillaury units. A player is free to make what ever unit they desire the standard unit of their army, and a game should be balanced in a way such that one unit would be better fitted than the other (unless they cost substantially more, like trying to make assault mechs the standard unit in your army, or they are designed to be support units, like medics).

lukeiamyourdad
08-02-2003, 01:04 AM
Sith sith now now...Sith...would you...shut up about that...as bad as it seems this argument against windu makes this thread the most lively of all this forum...so please let us continue this possibly pointless debate...for the sake of the forum...

Sithmaster_821
08-02-2003, 01:07 AM
Fine, fine, continue with your endless arguments, but I'm warning you I've been there done that...

lukeiamyourdad
08-02-2003, 01:12 AM
Those were the old times man. The time when pointless debates weren't needed to save the forum.

Sithmaster_821
08-02-2003, 01:16 AM
Yeah, as long as it doesn't turn into a one-sided flame war do to stubbornness...

CorranSec
08-02-2003, 03:26 AM
Sith:
Perhaps the term 'basic' is indeed a misnomer, but if you want to propose another name, feel free to do so.
What I call a 'basic' unit is the first military unit available to the civilisation (thus, Workers don't count). Examples from other games include the Zerg Zergling, Egyptian Spearman, Rebel Trooper Recruit, Orc Grunt, and so on.
In all of these games, the unit I mentioned above is the first unit available- thus it is their 'basic' unit. It's the unit that generally ends up being most used, and could formsthe backbone of the army.
I agree that as you said, it's entirely up to players which unit they use the most. I could make Ultralisks the backbone of my Zerg army and Mercenaries the Egyptian unit I use the most. But they are quite simply not the Zerg or Egyptian 'basic' units.

Darth Windu
08-02-2003, 07:03 AM
Vostok - the sirvivability is not independant of what weapon they are using. It is far easier to kill someone with an Assault Rifle than it is with a knife. The reason survivability changes is because the melee units would be rushing into incoming fire, whereas the ranged units could stand-off and fire from cover, or in a prone position. Also, there is more to melee combat than knowing how to hunt. As i said, it would cost more to train a wookiee to be silent and attack with bladed weapons while avoiding fire than it would be to give them a bowcaster.

The notion of having the basic infantry unit as a melee unit (and i agree with Corran's definition of a 'basic' unit) would still work, but i think it would work better with the Hutts with their Gamorean Guards rather than Wookiees.

lukeiamyourdad
08-02-2003, 12:41 PM
You forgot that wookiees are born to fight with their paws and huge physical capabilities thus reducing their cost. Being silent and good hunters are part of their instinct. It's like a lion who doesn't learn to hunt since its childhood...he will never pick up a rifle and shoot down some gazelle with it.
Thus being their instinct to hunt and kill using melee weapons or paws is part of their natural capabilities. It does not cost more to train him.

Note: How can a Gammorean Guard be a better melee unit then a wookiee? wookiees are stronger I think...

Admiral Vostok
08-03-2003, 11:28 PM
Firstly, I agree with Corran's definition of 'basic trooper' but the fact that Corran cited the Zerg Zergling as the basic Zerg unit got me thinking. While the Zergling is the first available, I would say the Hydralisk is the most significant trooper of the Zerg. They feature in all the Zerg end screens and are seen as the 'primary' Zerg unit. With this in mind, I thought of the Confederacy: the same can be said of the Super Battle Droid. Although it is less numerous than and available after the standard Battle Droid, it really defines the Confederacy. So what you must understand Windu, is that although the 'basic trooper' is the first available military unit, it needn't be the most numerous in a full army, or even the unit most readily identifiable with the civ. Again this can apply to the Wookiees: while their 'basic' trooper is the Melee Wookiee, perhaps their most numerous unit (and since Chewie carries a bowcaster, the most identifiable with the civ) is the ranged Wookiee. So their Melee Wookiee is available first, requiring only a set of knives and basic training beyond their natural combat prowess, while the more expensive and better trained Bowcaster Wookiees are the civ's 'primary' trooper.

NOW, since Windu insists on using false arguments to refute my realism claims, which he will no doubt do to the above, I'll also provide a Gameplay argument, for as Corran said it is a game. The basic trooper for the Wookiee's should be a melee unit on the simple premise that it will make the Wookiees different to other races. They are the only race who would concievably have a melee trooper as a basic trooper, so they shall. Let's also not forget that while other basic troopers may be ranged, their weapon ranges won't necessarily be the same: the Gungan armed only with a sling and boomas will have a much shorter range than the Clone Trooper with his specialist long-barrelled blaster rifle. So a basic Melee Wookiee really is the best way to go.

Sithmaster_821
08-04-2003, 12:03 AM
What I call a 'basic' unit is the first military unit available to the civilisation
Yeah, but most of the time, there isn't just one unit available first. In most games now a days, you can get two or 3 units initially (or whenever the first militayr units are available). And other times the first military unit available wouldn't be considered any where near basic, i.e. Eggie priests/mercs.

"Basic" units are esssentially arbitrary

lukeiamyourdad
08-04-2003, 02:04 PM
I think the term ''basic trooper'' means more like the most used military unit in this early stage of the game. It totally fits it. Zergling are the most used in early games while AoM's egyptian mercenary ain't so used that early in the game let alone priests.

Darth Windu
08-05-2003, 02:18 AM
basic infantry unit - available early, cheap, quick to build some examples for my idea for SWGB2 are-
Confederacy - Super Battle Droid
Empire - Stormtrooper
Republic - Clone Trooper
Hutts - Gamorean Guard
Rebels - Rebel Trooper
Naboo - Gungan Trooper
Federation - Battle Droid
Wookiees - Wookiee Trooper

luke - i never suggested that the Gamorean Guard would be better than a Wookiee Berserker, in fact, if you looked at the latest version of my idea, you would find the opposite to be true.

Vostok - i disagree. Again, melee troops attacking ranged infantry, with the exception of Jedi, will be slaughtered. The Wookiees, though aggressive, are not stupid and would not waste life in that fashion. However, i would be much more plausible for the Hutts to send out their dim-witted melee Gamorean Guards to attack a proectile-equipped force. Hence, the Hutt Cartel would be best suited to having melee basic infantry.

lukeiamyourdad
08-05-2003, 05:26 PM
Windu you're looking at this as if the Wookiee were not a hit-and-fade civ. They are indeed a hit-and-fade civ who could deal lots of damage with melee weapon ambushing their enemies. This is not grass plains where wookiees would charge at the trade fed.
The wookiee civ is made for guerilla warfare, not frontal assault.

Admiral Vostok
08-07-2003, 12:31 AM
Exactly, Luke's Dad.

Windu, you have to remember that the Wookiees don't line up on a battlefield Gungan-style, then procede to run their melee troopers straight into enemy fire.

What they might do, though it is not their preferred style of fighting, is line up their ranged troopers and war machines while infiltrating the melee troopers to attack the enemies flank, or even support the melee Wookiee's with ranged fire, pushing forward until a close-combat strike will produce minimal casualties on their side.

However, where the Wookiees excel is guerilla warfare. Their natural affinity with nature, and their arboreal tendencies make them great ambushers. However, it is difficult to represent this well in an RTS without giving special abilities to a more advanced trooper type. But in an early game situation, if the Wookiees come under attack, a fast-moving, cheap, quick-building melee unit will do wonders for defense.

Don't forget Windu, the ranged troopers will be there, and will be amajor part of the Wookiee force. After all, Chewbacca, our model Wookiee, carries a bowcaster. But the fact that a Bowcaster is much more powerful even than the Clone Troopers' long-barrelled rifles, as well as a Wookiee's natural resilience and speed makes the ranged Wookiee somewhat of an overpowered first trooper unit. The melee unit makes up for this. I might add at this point that I intend for the Confederacy to not be able to build Super Battle Droids (almost as good as ranged Wookiees) straight away either, starting with standard Battle Droids that will work out slightly weaker than the Trade Federation's.

Darth Windu
08-08-2003, 03:22 AM
Vostok - you are making two baseless assumptions here-
1. The Wookiee fighting style
2. The bowcaster power

We dont know what the wookiee fighting style will be, perhaps we will see in ep3, but at the moment it is just conjecture, so they could fight in any style.

Also, in ep6, chewbacca shoots at a scout bike, hits it, and it crashes. In ep2, a clone trooper makes a Droideka explode with one rifle shot. Which is more powerful? The clone trooper rifle.

lukeiamyourdad
08-08-2003, 01:45 PM
I am not sure about the Clone rifle blasting a droideka but if it's the case, the shield was not on(like the one Jar Jar accidently destroyed in ep1) or it was an Ion cannon. Nevertheless, I believe it is taken from JK:JO, the assumption that a bowcaster is more powerful which could be the truth. Checking databanks to be sure...

Darth Windu
08-09-2003, 01:09 PM
The bit with the Clone Trooper blasting apart the Droideka is where the Gunships save the remaining Jedi, and the Clones are getting back on board just before the Gunships take off again.

lukeiamyourdad
08-09-2003, 01:21 PM
It's probably a heavier form of blaster and not the standard weapon...

Darth Windu
08-11-2003, 03:56 AM
No, it's the same one that all Clone infantry use.

DK_Viceroy
08-11-2003, 09:08 AM
I like the ideas here but if it's a new game why only 1 new unit?Sniper would be a good idea for republic because after all the CloneTrooper weapon of choice is the DC-15 and that does have limited capability for sniper.The SPHAAT did have secondary weapons they were anti personal laser cannons which upped the crew compliment by i think 20 things like that arn't EU they are just technical details that wern't put in the films beacuse they'd bore everyone. One thing that the republic should have would be some sort of commando unit maybe the rebels too.I also like the ideas for the woookie troopers but i have an idea that could make them like they are suggestes without overpowering give them a 50-50 stealth mode that i suggested in anohter thread if you wanted the bowcaster powerful you'd need to factor in it's reload time because that was pretty long so long that if you fired one shot you wouldn't get the hance to fire another because you'd have been blown to bits.The bowcatser roload time compared to a normal E-Web Repating blaster or an E-11 while they had stun mode and the capability to fire restraining bolts if the bowcaster ran out of ammo they could switch it to crossbow mode. Maybe for Wookies as special ability they could move units through forests and no other civ could that would help to emphasize their origin since they live on a pretty dangerous planet.

Admiral Vostok
08-14-2003, 12:40 AM
Windu:

1. Yes I am making assumptions, and although they aren't baseless as you claim I admit they could be wrong. However, you are making those same assumptions. Since my assumptions set the Wookiees apart from other civs in a very nice, thematically-viable way, whereas your way assumes them to fight in exactly the same style as every other civ i the galaxy, I think mine is far better.

2. Yes I am making assumptions again about the bowcaster, but these are far from baseless. Yes, I'll admit I am basing them on EU, but as the EU doesn't contradict the movies, why contradict the EU? And yes, I'd also assume the Clone Trooper long-barrelled rifle is more powerful than the Bowcaster, I don't see how I've messed anything up here... the Clone Trooper is far better equipped than a Wookiee, so will no doubt cost more.

Darth Windu
08-15-2003, 11:14 AM
1. I mean no offense, but your claims about how Wookiees fight are baseless. This is due to the simple fact that we have never seen how Wookiees fight, and hence cannot know, only guess.

2. "the fact that a Bowcaster is much more powerful even than the Clone Troopers' long-barrelled rifles" - that is a quote from an earlier post by you Vostok. The point im making, is that the Bowcasters in the movies dont seem any more accurate or powerful than the blasters used by the Empire, Naboo, Federation or Rebellion.

lukeiamyourdad
08-15-2003, 02:19 PM
1. It shows how sith was right about the crappiness of this discussion. Oh well...

2. Actually there are differences between the blasters such as accuracy, ammo, knockback, etc. It's like telling there's no difference between an old WWII M 1 Garand and an M 16...

Admiral Vostok
08-16-2003, 03:18 AM
Windu, I mean no offense, but it seems you have either failed to read, ignored, or failed to comprehend my post. As such I'll repost it in a very simplified format.

1. Windu's idea: valid since we haven't seen Wookiees at war, yet makes them exactly the same as every other civ.
Vostok's idea: valid since we haven't seen Wookiee's at war, and sets them apart from the crowd with a unique fighting style.

2. I might have contradicted myself on the Bowcaster's power issue, I don't know why I said they were more powerful than the Clone Trooper's rifle, it probably isn't, but the fact remains that the Bowcaster is bbigger than a normal blaster rifle, so it stands to logic and reason it is also more powerful.

DK_Viceroy
08-16-2003, 11:36 AM
I looked up the specs for the wookie bowcaster and the Clone Trooper DC-15 rifle

1. Wookie Bowcaster High Power firing ammo called "Quarels" long reload times firing range of about 50 meters dual function of being able to switch to firing metal or wooden bolts like a crossbow Though When Firing Quarrels A Second Shot Is Rarely Required.

2. Clone Trooper DC-15 Blaster Rifle Poor Accuracy due to firing Blue Plasma Bolts which Are very Unstable Makes Up For This In Sheer Weight In Numbers But Plasma Bolts Pack More Of A Punch Then A Standard Blaster Rifle Ammo A 500 Shot Tibanna Gas Cartridge which is Replacable. The Blaster Rifle Comes Equipped With Power Control And Larger Elctromagnetic Accelerator Coils Of The Rifle Giving It A Better Range Than The Average Blaster Rifle The DC-15 Also Could Be Fitted With A Detachable Sniper Scope





In Future With Regard To Technical Details CHeck With Me I Have All Kinds Of Stuff Like This Ranging From The Black Fleet Crisis To Designs For The TIE Defender To The Technical Specifications FOr Ligghtsabres And Blasters I Have Nearly All Of It.

Darth Windu
08-16-2003, 01:22 PM
Vostok - i never suggested that the Bowcaster was no different, simply that it didnt seem different. I would prefer it to be different to the other weapons, as they are in my idea, i was simply pointing out that there is no evidence to back up any claims about power, accuracy etc. Thats all.
As for the second point, you're probably right.

Viceroy - will not respect to EU, i dont care what it says. No offense.

DK_Viceroy
08-16-2003, 03:46 PM
what i am saying though isn't exactly EU i'm getting it from an official source. one more thing I don't mean to be nasty PLEASE explain to me how explaing how 2 weapons that are in the film work is EU i would love to know and for evidence you've got that it just doesn't entirely agree with you that's all but it is all official.

Darth Windu
08-17-2003, 07:52 AM
No its not. Anything that isnt in the movies is EU, and not official. It has been shown numerous times that the movies and EU can contradict each other-
Example 1-
movies - Geonosians design Death Star
EU - engineers in 'Maw Installation' design death star

Example 2-
movies - Boba Fett dies at Pit of Carkoon
EU - Boba Fett survives Pit of Carkoon

DK_Viceroy
08-17-2003, 08:26 AM
come now windu where i get it from they can't call it official if it isn't official you'd propably say any infromation on the battle of endor that isn't in the film is eu but where i am getting this tuff from is official and here's a link where star wars.com is showcasing it.

http://www.starwars.com/eu/news/2001/03/news20010317.html

and if you check carefully enough it's not a contradiction because the death star designs were supposed to be floating around for a while were the geonosians came closest to making a viable version of the death star but the engineers at the Maw made it a reality and the film doesn't show you what happens after he falls in boba fett only FALLS in and we know from episode 5 that you don't die by falling

and you STILL haven't explained how something that is in the films and explaining how it WORKS is EU i don't get it it's in the film and i've explained how it works so how is it EU please explain that in your next post and NOT AVIOD ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

lukeiamyourdad
08-17-2003, 02:09 PM
Now now let's not turn this into another eu vs movie debate. what should be considered unnofficial is the story in any eu book etc.
HOWEVER, I've had an eu vs movies debate myself at the Star wars forum and we have come to the conclusion that weapons stats or vehicle stats are neither eu nor canon because it DOES NOT contradict anything.

To state an example:
See the ISD(Imperial Class Star Destroyer)? Everyone these days considers it to be 1.6 km long due to various sources such as games and stuff. NOWHERE in the movies it is said that the ISD is 1.6 km long but does anyone really care? No.

Thus Windu your arguments against Viceroy cannot be taken into consideration since all he explained are weapons stats.
You're taking the storyline into consideration here which at all costs must not be considered a fact(such as the Boba Fett thingie).

Admiral Vostok
08-17-2003, 11:52 PM
Now now Windu, I hate EU just as much as you, but I think since DK_Viceroy is un-initiated as such I fell we owe him/her (clear this up, DK_Viceroy?) an explanation. Luke and Windu should also take a gander, as from your recent posts it seems you two need a refresher.

Here are the definitions of Canon and EU. These two words are thrown around a lot, but as the Lord of Purists I believe I have a fairly in-deph understanding of the terms. I'll also include some of the terms I myself have coined, which are in semi-common usage on this forum.

Canon: Anything explicitly stated or seen in the movies.

EU (Expanded Universe): Anything not explicitly stated or seen in the movies. However, due to confusion surrounding this area I (being the scholar I am) have subdivided EU into two categories:

PEU (Pure Expanded Universe): EU that is totally independent of the movies. Examples include the Yuuzhan Vong, Talon Karrde, Mara Jade, Nohri, Grand Admiral Thrawn, etc... Much of PEU conflicts with the movies.

EEU (Extrapolated Expanded Universe): EU that is based at least in part on the movies, but is still not evidenced in them. Examples include the length of a Star Destroyer, the events surrounding the Battle of Tanaab, even the name All Terrain Armoured Transport. Very little, if any EEU contradicts the movies and therefore most EEU is taken as fact, but that doesn't make it Canon (which it is often mistaken for): it is still subject to be altered in Episode 3 without disrupting continuity with he other movies.

It is important to note that all of the above, even PEU, can be termed "Official". They have a lot of info from PEU on the official website, but that doesn't make it Canon in any sense of the word.

However, when making any Star Wars-related product other than the movies themselves, it is best not to contradict EEU. PEU is okay to contradict, but in general don't contradict EEU. But using EEU to prove an argument about how the Star Wars Universe works is flawed: only Canon is so powerful.

So how does this relate to our argument? Luke's Dad, your conclusion on the other forum is wrong: weapon and vehicle stats are EU. Granted they are EEU, but EU none the less. Viceroy, you can't use EEU to prove a point, which is what Windu is trying to say. Yet Windu, you can't throw EEU completely out the window. Viceroy's sources should be considered, but by no means do they prove anything.

Now back to the topic: Windu agrees the power of a Bowcaster is somewhere between that of the Clone Trooper long-barrelled rifle and the common blaster rifle in use by Stormtroopers and Battle Droids. So that argument is over. As for Wookiee fighting style, either me or Windu could be incorrect, but as my way makes the Wookiees more unique I think it is a winner.

DK_Viceroy
08-18-2003, 11:48 AM
Thanks for Clearing that up. Some of the stuff on the star wars site you have termed PEU has been said to be in episodes 7 8 and 9 IF george Lucas decides to make them so could we give them maybe a different term like FC { Future Cannon }? Anyway back to the topic if this is gonna be a new game why only have 1 new unit when there's have to be a lot more units to make the game different from SWGB 1 maybe for starships give them the accilmator maybe give them sensor stealhing to give them a run up to the empire and the cloaking device they develop.

and btw i am a him

{ are names found in the factfile for things in the film like the republic troop carrier which the factfile calles the Acclimator Class EU }?

Admiral Vostok
08-19-2003, 12:05 AM
No, we can't have a term "Future Canon", because the fact is there will be no Episode 7, 8, or 9. George Lucas has said he definitely will not do them. The saga is about Anakin Skywalker, so once he's dead there isn't much of a story.

Thought you were a him but didn't want to offend on the off-chance you weren't :D

Yes, those names are EU, though they are EEU. Anything not in the movies (including the credits, I should add, or "Ewok" would be an EU term) is not Canon, and therefore EU.

Those who have seen my website may have noted how incomplete and falling into disrepair it is. As such I've decided to transform it into a page that hosts my Trivia, and several discussions about the in-validity of EU and the righteousness of Star Wars Puritanism. Yes, I am a zealot.

Darth Windu
08-19-2003, 09:08 AM
Viceroy - actually, George Lucas said that Boba Fett DID die in the sarlacc, and there wasnt one ip ep5, you're confusing yourself.

As for EU, i have little respect for what it come sup with, and as you can see from my examples, has, and will be again, been wrong.

There is NOTHING to support the claim that the Clone rifle is inaccurate, or that it can be used as a sniper rifle, the latter actually goes against everything a sane person knows about weapons (before you argue here im actually a weapons expert and know what im talking about, i know its star wars but its based on real weapons)

DK_Viceroy
08-19-2003, 09:20 AM
In episode 5 they did mention that no ship that small could have a cloaking device so therefore in the star wars universe they do have Cloaking devices so that's cannon i'm not saying anything else about it or putting any reasons why they didn't use it so that this can be classed as pure cannon and if you don't beleive me watch episode 5 and watch the escape from hoth scenes. Just before the millenium falcon attaches it self to the garbage disposal hatch the aptain of the star destroyer says " No Ship That Small Could Have A Cloaking Device".

Admiral Vostok
08-19-2003, 10:19 AM
Yes, I'm well aware of that line, unfortunately I use that as the evidence for not having a cloaked unit in SWGB2. If the Millennium Falcon is too small for one, most other war machines are too, except for Assault Mechs - but having a cloaked Assault Mech is way too overpowered.

DK_Viceroy
08-19-2003, 12:51 PM
yeah i thought about that and came to the conclusion that it needed a lot of power to operate maybe it could be used on a star destroyer or other capitol ships but there would have to be some disadvantages as well fortunatly i've already done some reaserach on that it is EU but it's better than nothing what i found was that cloaking devices are very expensive blind the ships sensors and the ship is detable by it's drive emiisions if it starts to move while under the cloak it might be in the game if it decides to go for space combat elements as well as ground elements.

Darth Windu
08-20-2003, 07:01 AM
lol, a cloaked AT-AT, id like to see that, especially if i was a Rebel!

Admiral Vostok
08-20-2003, 10:43 AM
lol, funny one Windu! :D

lukeiamyourdad
08-20-2003, 02:11 PM
OMG Windu made a joke!

I think that those cloaking devices are actually makes the ship undetectable to radar(like our real life stealth fighters). It doesn't make them invisible to anything but radar and possibly targeting systems(I've played a lot of Star Wars flight sims and I can tell you that when you lose the radar, you can't target anything unless you're a damn good pilot).

Admiral Vostok
08-21-2003, 09:17 AM
It's quite possible, Luke's Dad, that is exactly what a "Cloaking Device" does, and that makes sense to me or else they would put one on an AT-AT. However, EU would have us believe Darth Maul's Sith Infiltrator is fitted with a Cloaking Device, which they claim makes it invisible. If that is the case I would think he might have used it while approaching Tatooine - though apart from being terribly unexciting for the audience, you could argue that because it is an unpoliced planet he didn't need to... personally I don't like the idea of cloaking devices making things invisible, if they did make stuff invisible I think we would have "seen" that by now.

DK_Viceroy
08-21-2003, 01:27 PM
haven't we've seen that joke before or was it invisible like the reasoning for not having it i've read about it and they are very expensive stop all sensor beams from seeing it including the users ship so that unless you had a jedi co-ordinating the assault it would be pretty useless if you hadn't thought about how to use it like concealing a fleet or using it in a siege like cloaked asteroids in orbit of a planet perhaps?

Admiral Vostok
08-22-2003, 12:52 AM
Actually you make a good point, Viceroy... if I read your incredibly-hard-to-read post right...

According to EU, viewscreens on Star Destroyers are supposed to be images relayed from external sensors, not actual windows themselves. This is because there is no immediately obvious external equivalent to the command bridge visible. So the sensors that relay the images of the surrounding space to the viewscreens could be jammed, making a vessel with a cloaking device effectively disappear, without the vessel actually becoming physically invisible.

There are a couple of problems with this theory though... the Star Destroyer is the only ship for which this is true - all others have an external part that is identifiable as a window in the cockpit/bridge. So unless someone created a device purely to evade Star Destroyers (which is possible however unlikely) the cloaking device is virtually useless.

Also the EU theory of viewscreens could be wrong - we see in Return of the Jedi an A-Wing crash into the bridge of the Executor, which bursts through the viewscreens. If the viewscreens are just relays this seems unlikely to happen.

Interesting thought, however.

Darth Windu
08-22-2003, 11:49 AM
On a side note, the current 'stealth' aircraft used by the USAF are NOT invisible to radar, contrary to popular belief. The problem for the enemy is that, for example, the F-117 will actually appear on radar, but only the size of small bird, and that is far too small to get a target lock, and hence missiles cannot be lauched to destroy it (the issue of one being shot down in Serbia is another matter).

Hence, with cloaking devices, you could have them invisible on radar, but visible to the mk1 eyeball.

Admiral Vostok
08-23-2003, 12:07 AM
Sounds good to me! This is what I'm going to believe a cloaking device does from now on. Nothing in the movies suggests otherwise. CorranSec won't be happy, he was bent on having a cloaked Rebel ground transport for some reason.

lukeiamyourdad
08-23-2003, 12:13 AM
Huh? When did he say that?

Perhaps a rebel transport who can't be targeted by mechs and turrets...

CorranSec
08-23-2003, 12:36 AM
Ah, the eternal argument about cloaking devices. Hurrah.
Note that I do not want another EU vs Canon debate. However, we need to consider all the possible applications and appearances of cloaking devices.

Okay, so the Imperial lad (Admiral Piett, was it?) said 'No ship that small could have a cloaking device.' First thing is that he could be WRONG. Didn't Mon Mothma say 'The Death Star is not yet fully operational'? We all know how that one turned out....

Second thing is that most everything depends on your definition of a 'cloaking device.' In movie/book terms, there are all sorts of technical things, plot points and so forth. In a game, it is simply a thing that makes a unit unseen onscreen. As such, the archetypal 'cloaking device,' a sci-fi invention that by some strange power makes a thing invisible to the human eye, doesn't need to be included at all.
We could have sensor jammers, radar scramblers, really small units, special plating that reflects light... the only important thing is that the unit is 'invisible' on our game screens.

Not too sure where the whole viewscreens thing came from. I see no mention of it in Viceroy's post. But anyway, it seems obvious that on a Star Destroyer we have windows and computers. Windows are those big things on the walls that let you see out, what the A-Wing flew through. Computers can show radar, data and so on. Either of these could be called viewscreens in the SW universe.
Sure, we could have cloaked units which are entirely visible onscreen but couldn't be fired upon... yet that wouldn't be fun, would seem forced, and would generally detract from the experience.

lukeiamyourdad
08-23-2003, 12:41 AM
Indeed it would seem really forced but...hmmm...we have to live with the purists...

Admiral Vostok
08-23-2003, 04:47 AM
For starters it was Captain Needa, not Piett :)

Those are all good points you make Corran, I don't wholly disagree with anything. EXCEPT for the fact that you believe Captain Needa might have been wrong. This seems a bit of a silly way to make something continuous with the movies. "This guy said that can't be possible" "He was wrong". Mon Mothma was different, the Emperor deceived her. I don't think someone would deceive Needa into believing Cloaking Devices can only be fitted to large ships. By using the "He was wrong" argument we can ligitimise any bit of contradictory EU: "How can ysalamiri (sp) exist? Yoda said the Force is everywhere and it binds everything together." "He was wrong".

Now I don't mean to turn this into a Movies vs EU debate even though I love them so much. I'm not saying cloaking devices don't make things invisible or anything. But I think "He was wrong" is a bit of a silly way around continuity errors.

DK_Viceroy
09-03-2003, 09:26 PM
yes but if you know your darwin species evolve through a need to survive and on mykr the only creatures who hunt through the force known as Voskrs live which by some happy chance are the same planet Yslmiri live on now does that get through to anyone or am i being TOO SARCASTIC


the for the moment what i said is tripe i REGARD EVERYTHING that is not movies or official factfile as fanfic garbage i don;t go in for this cannon garbage it's official or unofficial rubbish. star wars is more than a film it's like saying harry potter are just the books. puhleeze in the novelisation of most of the films it puts in extra or deleted scenes i don't suppose you'd use that in your preciuos eu film argument which is in the WRONG thread as per usual. and for cloaking devices in star wars they make sure light rays and sensor rays don't illuminate it it also MAKES THE SHIP USING THE THING BLIND AS WELL i'd say that in their would be pretty balanced and one other detail they cost an arm and a leg for a ship the size of a star destroyer

lukeiamyourdad
09-04-2003, 03:32 PM
Actually it would be so badly underpowered if it's blind.

If a fighter has a cloaking device similar to what Viceroy says, then it would crash having no functionning instrument. If it has to decloak to attack, it kills the purpose of a cloaking device( la SWGB1).

If a small ground transport was cloaked, it would have the lousiest LOS ever not knowing what's 5 feet ahead of him or unable to know where possible hits come from. If it's detected it's a sitting duck but then again it won't get far.

DK_Viceroy
09-05-2003, 05:09 PM
EXACTLY0 i0 wasn;t0 suggesting0 thsat0 every0 unit0 have one it would be expensive and if you used jedi you could use them to co-ordinate attacks that's personally what i think jedi should get as a sepcial ability instead of any stealth upgrade.


Power0 Of 0The0 Force

It0 would0 be0 a0 technology0 that0 enhances0 accuracy0 armour0 range0 and nearly all catagories0 for units when in the presence of a jedi or sith master and if one of those were onboard a cloaked ship they0 could0 co-ordinate0 with0 a jedi on an uncloaked ship. and0 like i said there are tactiacal uses like i dunno if it's space based cloaked asteroids if it's unmanned and is just meant to orbit until said orbit decay's. WHY would it NEED0 sensors0 the0 cost0 alone0 would balance it out it0 wouldn't be helpless0 just0 goive0 it0 loads of fighters around it and they wouldn't realise and would give it a line of asight i think it could fill a tactical neiche

lukeiamyourdad
09-06-2003, 12:45 AM
There's no point in having a sneak around ship if he needs heavy non-cloaked escort.

DK_Viceroy
09-06-2003, 08:44 AM
It's back to the strategy argument again i see. It's a case of getting it to where is neededor scouting it out who said it had to escort it would merely be a feint while getting the transport or claoked unit into postion. DID ANYONE read the bit i said about jedi?

Darth Windu
09-07-2003, 02:49 AM
No, becuase it was too difficult to read

Admiral Vostok
09-09-2003, 12:03 AM
I did, Viceroy. Why don't you wait for more tha one person to reply before you have a tantrum?

Not a bad idea for Jedi, though it encourages their use as supporting or leading units and leans away from them acting alone, which is often what Jedi do (Obi-Wan on the Death Star, Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon on Naboo, etc...)

This harkens back to our Officer debate.

DK_Viceroy
09-09-2003, 07:37 PM
Yeah True they did act as sort of commando but Episode 2 remeber And Also At The Time They Didn't Have An Actual Army So You'd Have To Factor That In Too