lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Super Star Destroyer?
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 02-15-2005, 05:47 AM   #1
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
Super Star Destroyer?

How about adding these into the imperial unit list?

Pros:

1. Adds speed bonus to all units in current system.

2. Adds "morale booster" which gives an attack and accuracy bonus to all ships in system.

3. Very large and powerful.

Cons:

1. Really expensive (should only be able to get one or two)

2. Very slow

3. vulnerable to starfighter attack (like the executor on endor)

Feedback welcomed.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2005, 07:08 AM   #2
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
I don't think it should be able to add a speed bonus. It doesn't really make sense really.

The Executor is far from being vulnerable to Star Fighter attacks since it can carry a buttload of Starfighters itself.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2005, 07:15 AM   #3
sith4ever99
Rookie
 
sith4ever99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
The Executor is far from being vulnerable to Star Fighter attacks since it can carry a buttload of Starfighters itself.
Agreed. Also, if you notice the A-Wing that took out the bridge had been shot down, along with every other starfighter that was attacking. It just happend to fly straight into the bridge. If you are getting this from the A-Wings that took out the shield generators, then maybe the shields could be vulnerable, but the SSD would still have armor.


sith4ever99 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2005, 10:36 AM   #4
Nokill
Veteran
 
Nokill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Unknown
Posts: 832
it shoud boost up the moral of the othere troops at least i woud if i knew miljons of tons of metal are helping me in the battle

for the rest it woud be nice to be able to make only one

and make it expencife REALY EXPENCIFE!

for the rest its a nice idear



Site: Clicky
Nokill is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2005, 10:55 AM   #5
SirPantsAlot
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally posted by Nokill
it shoud boost up the moral of the othere troops at least i woud if i knew miljons of tons of metal are helping me in the battle

for the rest it woud be nice to be able to make only one

and make it expencife REALY EXPENCIFE!

for the rest its a nice idear
Woah, short post, hell of a lot of typos
SirPantsAlot is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2005, 01:50 PM   #6
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
reason for speed bonus is because it is, as the emperor says himself, a "kohmand sheep", and with a leadership vessel it boosts the efficiency of the other ships, hence the speed bonus.

Then how can you make a SSD vulnerable without it becoming a superbeast that never dies? (Sorry purists it cant be the super knockdown weapon.)


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-15-2005, 01:57 PM   #7
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
It is a command ship but giving a "morale" boost is all there needs to be. It doesn't upgrade your other ship's engine or anything. An interesting addition would be a morale penalty if the SSD is destroyed. I remember reading about how the sight of the SSD crashing into the Death Star shattered the morale of the Imperial Fleet, seeing their flagship destoryed.

If a Death Star's greatest weakness is the exhaust port, perhaps the SSD's weakness could be its bridge after its shields are drained. Remember, we can target individual ship parts.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-16-2005, 07:00 PM   #8
Darth Windu
TSLRP Beta Tester
 
Darth Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 1,973
A morale boost would be the most logical choice, giving a bonus to things like rate-of-fire, accuracy, friendlies take less damage etc. I was also thinking though that the exact opposite could happen if the SSD was destroyed. While you would certainly get a boost seeing a huge battleship fighting with you, that would plummet if you saw that huge battleship explode.

Also, Heavyarms is correct, it should be vulnerable to Starfighters, as should all battleships. To use an example, the Musashi and Yamato were extremely heavily armed and armoured, and could easily take on any other battleship in the world at the time. However, the US was able to destroy them using airpower, and although there were losses, they were insignificant compared to the Japanese losses. This also raises the point that the most effective anti-Starfighter weapons should be Starfighters.


Dark Lord of the Purists

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Darth Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-16-2005, 07:37 PM   #9
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
I understand what you mean. The question is how vulnerable they shoud be without being too vulnerable.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-17-2005, 06:10 AM   #10
Nokill
Veteran
 
Nokill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Unknown
Posts: 832
Quote:
Originally posted by SirPantsAlot
Woah, short post, hell of a lot of typos
ho cares your an english teatcher?



Site: Clicky
Nokill is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-17-2005, 06:44 AM   #11
lonepadawan
 
lonepadawan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 363
People like to be able to understand posts.


"Your life does flash before your eyes before you die..... the process is called LIVING"
lonepadawan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-17-2005, 09:58 AM   #12
Nokill
Veteran
 
Nokill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Unknown
Posts: 832
well he dos only there are a few mistakes in it he can still read it
and enuf of this off topic stuf



Site: Clicky
Nokill is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-17-2005, 03:19 PM   #13
H0WARD
Rookie
 
H0WARD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 52
well, other than completly unbalancing the game, SSDs aren't in use during the game's timeline, so it wouldn't even make sense.
H0WARD is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-17-2005, 07:00 PM   #14
Darth Windu
TSLRP Beta Tester
 
Darth Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 1,973
HOWARD - the TIE Interceptor, TIE Bomber, A-wing, Mon Cal Cruiser, Escort Frigate, Rebel Heavy Transport, TIE Crawler, AT-ST, AT-AT, Speeder Bikes etc would all have to be removed if the devs wanted the game to fit in RotS-ANH. Then again, you could also argue that just because we didn't see these units doesnt mean they didnt exist with a few exceptions (for example, the A-wing and B-wing would have been used at Yavin, whereas the AT-AT could not have appeared).

So really, there is nothing to stop the SSD being in the game, because we don't know when it was built.

luke - i would say let it have lots of weapons to inflict heavy casulties on attacking starfighters, but also be very vulnerable to their weapons, so you dont just have this invincible weapon. Basically make it so it needs to be protected but can be defeated by an economically cheaper force.


Dark Lord of the Purists

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Darth Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2005, 12:25 AM   #15
DarthMaulUK
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by lonepadawan
People like to be able to understand posts.
Remember. Not everyones native tongue is English.

DMUK
  you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2005, 01:56 AM   #16
Nokill
Veteran
 
Nokill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Unknown
Posts: 832
can't the ppl making the game tell us what thay are all planning to do so we can give some tips
maby thay already got a super starD and there now laughing there ***es off on this topic

i agree whit maul on this one
some ppl are from nice country's like Fryslân
*no offence*



Site: Clicky
Nokill is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2005, 04:33 AM   #17
lonepadawan
 
lonepadawan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 363
Capital ships main defence against fighters should be.. fighters!

Quote:
can't the ppl making the game tell us what thay are all planning to do so we can give some tips
I'm preeetty sure they know what they're doing... being game designers and all. And yes, they probably have a lot of stuff they haven't show us yet...


"Your life does flash before your eyes before you die..... the process is called LIVING"
lonepadawan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2005, 05:03 AM   #18
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by lonepadawan
Capital ships main defence against fighters should be.. fighters!
However, what will small-medium size ships do? Like Blockade Runner? Will they simply be murdered by starfighters?


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2005, 05:55 AM   #19
lonepadawan
 
lonepadawan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 363
just because it doesn't have a hanger on board doesn't mean it can't have fighter escort. And yes. An isolated small-medium size ship should get mulched by fighters and bombers. In terms of realism. But Gameplay>Realism. So I'm not sure. Prehaps they could handle themselves against fighters slightly better due to being faster/more agile?


"Your life does flash before your eyes before you die..... the process is called LIVING"
lonepadawan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-18-2005, 01:07 PM   #20
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
if you get something like a corellian corvette (a small-medium size capital ship) trying to "blockade run", it's going to have a tough time fighting off fighters because they fly faster, and they do have some protection, but not nearly enough to stop a set of determined x-wings.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2005, 11:38 AM   #21
Darth Alec
Forumite
 
Darth Alec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Searching for the Death Star blueprints....
Posts: 591
The SSD should be a strong VS. anything bigger then an X-Wing since..... well there BIG and there's a bigger chance getting hit by it. And once the shield is down then the bridge should be really vuneral against fire from ships.


I am a High Admiral of the Imperial fleet.

Serving the Empire is my destiny, and only Sidious is my lord.

Two starwars parodys...

Starwars gangsta rap

Robot chicken
Darth Alec is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2005, 01:28 PM   #22
Nokill
Veteran
 
Nokill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Unknown
Posts: 832
Quote:
Originally posted by lonepadawan
I'm preeetty sure they know what they're doing... being game designers and all. And yes, they probably have a lot of stuff they haven't show us yet...
well i know that well we will see screens from it soon i think



Site: Clicky
Nokill is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-19-2005, 09:35 PM   #23
stingerhs
Follow the Wolves
 
stingerhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: between my ears
Posts: 4,641
Current Game: Dead Space
Forum Veteran Roleplayer LFN Staff Member Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally posted by Darth Windu
Also, Heavyarms is correct, it should be vulnerable to Starfighters, as should all battleships. To use an example, the Musashi and Yamato were extremely heavily armed and armoured, and could easily take on any other battleship in the world at the time. However, the US was able to destroy them using airpower, and although there were losses, they were insignificant compared to the Japanese losses. This also raises the point that the most effective anti-Starfighter weapons should be Starfighters.
yay, now where comparing apples to oranges.

first off, aircraft pretty much ended the reign of the battleship because of the battleship's design. remember, the battleship was designed to take massive hits from the sides of the ship from other battleships (thus, take hits from shells 14" to 18" in diameter). this kind of protection is actually quite good against other battleships, but its weakness was that you could drop bombs on top of the ship where the armor was the weakest. thus, aircraft (more specifically, dive bombers) brought about the demise of the battleship.

in the star wars universe, however, large capital ships (like the SSD) have large amounts of both sheilding and armor just about everywhere imaginable. the best weapons that the small starfighters could carry is concussion missiles and proton torpedos. you could do a little bit of damage with those weapons, but thats only if you penetrated the sheilds and hit something thats a bit vulnerable to taking damage.

every ship has individual vulnerablities, and you'd have to exploit them in order to take it down. just simply throwing a couple of squadrons of fighters at it won't do you much good. instead, you should have to focus on one particular area of the ship to bring it down (like the shield generators in ROTJ).


See the struggle of the faithless lot as they negate their time
How low to sink to the depths of their frame of mind

stingerhs is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 01:12 AM   #24
Darth Windu
TSLRP Beta Tester
 
Darth Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 1,973
sting - ISD's and SSD's are futuristic Battleships, and X-wings and Y-wing's are futuristic fighters - whats your point? In addition, you are incorrect. In naval combat, guns fire their shells on ballistic paths except under very rare instances (ie Battle of Sarrigio Strait - or however it is spelt) much like land-based artillery. For example, the Bismark was able to sink HMS Hood because a 15-inch shell hit the ammo storage area of the DECK, not the sides, of Hood leading to an explosion. Therefore, in Battleship engagements, shells will actually land on the deck, not hit the sides.

As a result of this, the only difference between Battleships vs Battleships and Aircraft vs Battleships is the effectiveness of the latter attack, not where the weapons are being delivered. Hence, my example stands as to why the SSD should be vulnerable to starfighters but good against large warships.


Dark Lord of the Purists

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Darth Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 07:26 AM   #25
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Bloody hell...not another WWII debate.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 08:19 AM   #26
stingerhs
Follow the Wolves
 
stingerhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: between my ears
Posts: 4,641
Current Game: Dead Space
Forum Veteran Roleplayer LFN Staff Member Helpful! 
hey, i didn't start it. i just said that its a bad example to use WWII comparisons of battleships vs aircraft to star wars. let me spell it out for you:

1. battleships were designed to fight on a two dimensional battlefield. the ships fire salvos of shells at another ship why randomly maneuvering to help prevent direct hits.

2. direct hits are very difficult to land. the same bismark vs hood battle proves this. the hood was sunk by a single direct hit. the bismark took a couple of near misses during the engagement.

3. for the above reason, battleships could take a decent amount of damage depending on the exact ship, but it is difficult for any ship to take repeated direct hits from bombs dropped from aircraft. this is why the battleships were vulnerable to aircraft. a single aircraft can land several direct hits to either the main structure or the deck.

4. since battleships were designed to take mostly near misses, the thickest armor of the ship is on the hull of the ship, not the deck or main structure. the only attack that this protects against is torpedos, not bombs or machine gun strafing.

5. strafing with machine guns is useful in almost any attack on a ship. not because of the damage, but rather the fact that you're killing the crew of the ship.

now, having said all of that, the ships of star wars are very different from WWII ships for the exact same reasons that i specified in my previous post. SD's and SSD's just don't have the same weakness against fighters and bombers that the WWII battleships did.

they do have weaknesses, but they require precision strikes, not random bombing runs.


See the struggle of the faithless lot as they negate their time
How low to sink to the depths of their frame of mind

stingerhs is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 10:01 AM   #27
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
for the argument of starfighters vs capital ships:

In the first movie, vader asks some guy for a status report on the battle, and he says that the small ships are evading their turbolasers, and vader's response is to release the fighters. That is what should be the strategy here.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 07:35 PM   #28
Darth Windu
TSLRP Beta Tester
 
Darth Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 1,973
sting -
1. wrong, they were designed to fight in a three-dimensional battlefield, and must because of the ballistic nature of artillery

2. True, and if you notice direct hits are very hard to land in the space battles in SW unless they are at point-blank range

3. So can Battleship guns - the only difference is that aircraft are more accurate and can attack from more directions than a Battleship can

4. Again, Wrong. Shells do not explode if they hit water. The reason for BB's having a lot of armour around the sides is so that they are more stable in the water, and it provides protection from torpedoes which are the greatest threat to a BB. After all, the whole concept of the 'Destroyer' was to be a 'Torpedo Boat Destroyer' (hence the name) because BB's could not defend themselves against small torpedo boats.

5. Not really. While you might get some of the crew, it is generally a waste of time to strafe with Machine Guns, particually a BB. However, there was one recorded instance of a P-51 in the pacific starfing and destroying a Japanese Destroyer.

Now having said all of that, the ships in SW are very similar to those in WW2.

Look at it this way, in SW the blaster bolts are linear, ie not ballistic, and hence to get the most amount of batteries onto your target you will fire broadsides - so where will most of your armour be? Armound the sides of the ship. In addition, the dorsal and ventral areas of a SW BB would be a lot larger than the sides and hence you would not want to expose them to the enemy as you would be presenting a larger profile.
Hence, it makes sense that shields and armour would be weaker on the dorsal and ventral surfaces, and therefore starfighters would be effective because they would be able to hit those surfaces with torpedoes that the larger ships could not.


Heavy - quite true, also notice how hard it was for the ISD's to hit the Falcon both at Tatooine and Hoth.


Dark Lord of the Purists

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Darth Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 10:13 PM   #29
Jan Gaarni
Grand Moff
 
Jan Gaarni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,806
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally posted by Darth Windu


Now having said all of that, the ships in SW are very similar to those in WW2.

Look at it this way, in SW the blaster bolts are linear, ie not ballistic, and hence to get the most amount of batteries onto your target you will fire broadsides - so where will most of your armour be? Armound the sides of the ship. In addition, the dorsal and ventral areas of a SW BB would be a lot larger than the sides and hence you would not want to expose them to the enemy as you would be presenting a larger profile.
Hence, it makes sense that shields and armour would be weaker on the dorsal and ventral surfaces, and therefore starfighters would be effective because they would be able to hit those surfaces with torpedoes that the larger ships could not.
Errr, that doesn't make any sence what so ever.

We're in space now. There are no restrictions to where you can go, thus, a starship, battleship or not, can attack another ship from pretty much any angel. And the target have no way of positioning their broadside towards alll of it's attacking foes all the time.

I'm sorry, but this is the poorest design flaw logic I have heard of for Star Wars so far.




Empire At War Moderator
&
SWGalaxies Moderator

- What we do in life, echoes in eternity!
- May the pants be with you!

A smile is the shortest distance between people - Victor Borge!


Custom Avatar by Wraith 8
Jan Gaarni is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-21-2005, 10:48 PM   #30
stingerhs
Follow the Wolves
 
stingerhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: between my ears
Posts: 4,641
Current Game: Dead Space
Forum Veteran Roleplayer LFN Staff Member Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally posted by Jan Gaarni
We're in space now. There are no restrictions to where you can go, thus, a starship, battleship or not, can attack another ship from pretty much any angel. And the target have no way of positioning their broadside towards alll of it's attacking foes all the time.

I'm sorry, but this is the poorest design flaw logic I have heard of for Star Wars so far.
which was my point about the WWII battleships only fighting in 2 dimensions. yes, you have to "lob" the shells in the appropriate trajectory, but that's almost meaningless. consider this, when is the last time you saw a surface ship moving like an aircraft?? to cite a simple example: just think about the coordinate system used in the Battleship Board Game.

thus, the battleships were designed for two dimensions, not three. and in star wars, everything is in space where orientation and direction is all based in a three dimensional space. if you don't design it for three dimensions, then it deserves to be shot out of the sky (or space, depending on where you are).

Quote:
Look at it this way, in SW the blaster bolts are linear, ie not ballistic, and hence to get the most amount of batteries onto your target you will fire broadsides - so where will most of your armour be? Armound the sides of the ship. In addition, the dorsal and ventral areas of a SW BB would be a lot larger than the sides and hence you would not want to expose them to the enemy as you would be presenting a larger profile.
Hence, it makes sense that shields and armour would be weaker on the dorsal and ventral surfaces, and therefore starfighters would be effective because they would be able to hit those surfaces with torpedoes that the larger ships could not.
and consider that a ship with those kinds of weaknesses would be even more vulnerable to opposing capital ships just simply because the capital ship could maneuver itself into the angle and open fire.


See the struggle of the faithless lot as they negate their time
How low to sink to the depths of their frame of mind

stingerhs is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2005, 12:51 AM   #31
Master_Cain
Rookie
 
Master_Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 89
I have only one question....how many of you played the Rebellion game and still fully remember it from '98 ?! I have made an article for a game magazine in my country about EaW....and belive me I've readed all that has been written about EaW. Its quite easy to see 80% of the game and understand it. If The article comes out I will post it here and i will translate it....This way all this disscutions about the "What it will be in the game ?!" will be more focused and productive.

Master_Cain is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2005, 01:46 AM   #32
Darth Windu
TSLRP Beta Tester
 
Darth Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 1,973
Jan - actually, there are restrictions as to where you can go, and particually with reference to the game, having big ships only able to move in 2D makes my example VERY relevant. Also, I can't confirm or deny if ships uses 'angels' but they could attack from any angle. Having said that, if a ship is being attacked, it would logically present the smallest target while bringing the maximum number of guns to bear, which goes back to my previous example. Also, I should point out that just because you fail to understand my argument does not change the logic or truthfulness of said argument.

stinger - as said above, since the game only allows big ships to move in 2D, what is your point? By making fighters move in 3D, with the bigger guns only 2D, it is EXACTLY the same situation as how a modern (WW1-present) naval engagement would occur with aircraft involved.


Dark Lord of the Purists

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Darth Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2005, 05:04 AM   #33
stingerhs
Follow the Wolves
 
stingerhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: between my ears
Posts: 4,641
Current Game: Dead Space
Forum Veteran Roleplayer LFN Staff Member Helpful! 
^^^^
even accounting for the game, the concept should be quite simple for someone trying to stay true to form. in a real and truely three-dimensional battle, a ship cannot have the kinds of weaknesses that you described earlier because it just simply wouldn't last a large scale engagement. thus, things boil down to the ship's original design, which was to be able to take hits from any direction and take hits on any part of the ship itself.

with you being a 'purist' of sorts, surely you would want something to be in the game that is true to its original design. and the SSD's original design made it nearly invulnerable to fighters. the only reason the Executor was destroyed was by luck (or the Force, depending on your point of view). for those reasons:
Quote:
Originally posted by Sith4ever99
Agreed. Also, if you notice the A-Wing that took out the bridge had been shot down, along with every other starfighter that was attacking. It just happend to fly straight into the bridge. If you are getting this from the A-Wings that took out the shield generators, then maybe the shields could be vulnerable, but the SSD would still have armor.


See the struggle of the faithless lot as they negate their time
How low to sink to the depths of their frame of mind

stingerhs is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2005, 05:39 AM   #34
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
Like I posted before, turbolasers are the main armament of a Star Destroyer and they have a tough time hitting a starfighter. The frequent destruction of starfighters at Endor more likely resulted in TIE fighters and Interceptors.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2005, 08:26 AM   #35
Darth Alec
Forumite
 
Darth Alec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Searching for the Death Star blueprints....
Posts: 591
Turbolasers have a hard time hitting small aircraft, ok? They have good chances of hitting medium-big ships and therefor have fighters mainly as anti-fighter/bomber support. They are heavily armed and armored with strong sheilds, but fighters can destroy the sheild generators and bombers go threw the armor of a SSD that's why there are small-medium ships to take them down.
Mainly a thieory though, but it does seem likely (atleast to me).


I am a High Admiral of the Imperial fleet.

Serving the Empire is my destiny, and only Sidious is my lord.

Two starwars parodys...

Starwars gangsta rap

Robot chicken
Darth Alec is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-22-2005, 08:55 PM   #36
Darth Windu
TSLRP Beta Tester
 
Darth Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 1,973
stinger - the problem here is that we simply do not know one way or the other. From the way I see it, it makes sense militarily and economically to have the most armour and shielding on the sides of the ships, with the least on the ventral and dorsal surfaces. This is because when you engage a big ship, you will present the smallest area while bringing the most number of guns to bear, which is your broadsides. Also note that even in the SW films the big ships only fight in 2D. Economically it would makes sense because it would reduce construction time and cost for the extra armour and shielding. Furthermore, while these areas would be the most vulnerable to starfighters, that is why ISD's carry starfighter squadrons.

As for the attack on the Executor, we saw it shoot down what, two fighters? Not a huge success rate. I should point out that while the quote you included was quite correct, but if the SSD's defences were so great how did any starfighters get that close without being destroyed? Furthermore, if you look at the shield generators near the bridge, they are large enough to be a good target for small vessels, but far too small to be hit on purpose by two battleships engaged in anything other than point-blank combat.


Dark Lord of the Purists

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Darth Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-23-2005, 12:20 AM   #37
DK_Viceroy
Viceroy of the Truist Way
 
DK_Viceroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: My Secret Island Base Plotting World Domination
Posts: 1,313
Oh Ho how rare it is to use Vostok's words against the over pompous Purist Jester.

Gameplay > Realism

once again your "ideas" show neither.


I AM the prophet of the truth the protector of Star Wars Truism

Star Wars Truism by it's very nature is eternal and will outlive Star Wars Purism

Everything I say is a lie for the Truth is always greater than the words we use to describe it

Do you have any last words?

DK_Viceroy is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-23-2005, 05:13 AM   #38
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally posted by Darth Windu

As for the attack on the Executor, we saw it shoot down what, two fighters?
I don't disagree with everything else you've said, but you simply can't use this as fact. You haven't seen the whole battle, you can't say the Executor only shot down two fighters.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-23-2005, 05:38 AM   #39
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
Quote:
Originally posted by DK_Viceroy
Oh Ho how rare it is to use Vostok's words against the over pompous Purist Jester.

Gameplay > Realism

once again your "ideas" show neither.

I am a beta tester for updates for the game "Joint Operations: Escalation." That equation up there, is completely wrong in most of the players' eyes. They would rather have realistic weapons (there's somewhat a netcode problem with the game) and realistic vehicle physics than the ones now, and some things for realism's sake, and some not. I'd be more willing to say gameplay and realism is something more like a slidebar, in which you try to get it going one way and find a balance in which you want to get those who are looking for a fun game and those who want a game that is realistic and you can please both.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-23-2005, 05:42 AM   #40
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
That's not really what Gameplay>Realism means.

Games try to be as realistic as possible with totally unbalancing everything.

It was a response to most of Windu's proposals that highly overpowered one side over the others.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Empire At War > EaW General Discussion > Galactic Discussion > Super Star Destroyer?

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:09 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.