Jedi Council Forums - Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)

Post Reply | Active Topic Notification | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 516 | 517 | 518 | 519 | 520 | 521 | 522 | 523 | 524 | 525 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
Excellence Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 7/16 12:31am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Can we get pics next to the names, if possible? -----signature----- Rock-a-by baby, on the treetop, Beaming with pride, the filth they hold, But when the wind blows, my temper implodes, High above a pit, filled with sharkticons, Down will come hardcover addicts, beaming no more. ©
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Tzizvvt78 Registered: Jun '09	Date Posted: 7/16 1:55am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	blackmyron posted: YM-2800 Limpet Ship Assuming this is the Rebel limpet ships from Rebellion (the comic). blackmyron posted: Imperial Cargo Ship Same as above. blackmyron posted: Imperial II-class Frigate This might be the Imperial ship seen in Battlefront II. It was called Victory II-class there, though. Not that it made it better. More original names, please? Too bad there's no Marvel stuff. Again. I guess Galaxy At War might provide something new on that front, given there's only military ships on its ship list and everything prominent in the films and the EU have been featured already.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
blackmyron Registered: Oct '05	Date Posted: 7/16 7:08am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	The Imperial-II Frigate is probably the Rand Ecliptic. -----signature----- Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Come on Dave, you're taking this stuff too seriously." - George Lucas "Reality can rarely be explained without contradictions." - Karnak
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
AdmiralNick22 Registered: May '03	Date Posted: 7/16 8:31am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Hmm, in general that list seems light on Rebel Alliance starships. Of course, given the rather limited number of capital ship classes and starfighter varieties that the Rebel forces utilized, it is not that suprising. Hell, if you think about it, Starships of the Galaxy Vol. 2 listed nearly every major Rebel capital ship: Mon Calamari Star Cruiser Assault Frigate Mk.1 and Mk. 2 Dreadnaught Escort Frigate Corellian Corvette Corellian Gunship Only the not so common capital ships, like the Dauntless battle cruiser or Liberator cruiser are not statted so far. The MC30a frigate would of been nice, though. --Adm. Nick -----signature----- Fleet Junkie Founding Father Official Greatest Admiral Ackbar Fan "A peaceful Galactic Alliance is the strongest pillar of a peaceful galaxy." - Luke Skywalker "I will surrender, Admiral, when I can no longer fight!" - Admiral Gar Stazi A New Hope
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
AdmiralWesJanson Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 7/16 2:18pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Nice, the TIE Aggressor. I loved that ship when I still played Galaxies. Too bad they ruined the game -----signature----- Duke of Corellia Join the Corellian Browncoats in their fight against the evil Alliance! Fix the K-Wing! No more XJs! Make the next X-Wing a T-65K!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 7/16 2:45pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Excellence posted: The problem with all these megaships is that they never get used. Utter wasrte of page space every single Keralysing time. Look what they did with Lusy. Brand Luke butt with smiley emoticons, it was a stinking joke! That citysized supership should have ripped through the Borelaisian blockade like a my gaze through hardcovers. The torrent of gunfire that thing can rainshower alone should crush a miid roik in one salvo. A single volley of torpedoes alone... That duology was a serious waste of reading... I'm not sure I'd go that far Ex - Operation Emperor's Hammer was great, just a pity that was one of the few times we saw the NR unleash an SSD and inflict planetary bombardment on the Vong. Nonetheless, I do agree with your main point: Why bother showing us these new ships if they're going to spend their time off-page, off-stage or blown up elsewhere? Part of the cool factor isn't just that these ships exist, but what they'll do when they need to - oh and look! Alien horde invading! Heigh ho, lots of targets! Cremate the *&^%$£"! But no. -----signature----- Excellence: "You are the forum's Quick Ben." SW EU fans: John Ostrander needs your help! http://www.comix4sight.com
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
blackmyron Registered: Oct '05	Date Posted: 7/16 5:21pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Minor bit of new info - The Imperial-II frigate is described as "...a smaller, less powerful version of the Empire's feared Star Destroyers." -----signature----- Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Come on Dave, you're taking this stuff too seriously." - George Lucas "Reality can rarely be explained without contradictions." - Karnak
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Tzizvvt78 Registered: Jun '09	Date Posted: 7/16 5:34pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Jedi Ben posted: Why bother showing us these new ships if they're going to spend their time off-page, off-stage or blown up elsewhere? Since SW is fiction, seeing fictitious vehicles duke it out should be almost required, if they're introduced in a story. Nerfing their capabilities is interesting enough to give a small force some shot at victory, but not to use that as a crutch all the time. Takes away some of the epic scale SW was known for.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
AdmiralWesJanson Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 7/17 11:37am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Some time they really need to write the Orinda campaign in more detail. -----signature----- Duke of Corellia Join the Corellian Browncoats in their fight against the evil Alliance! Fix the K-Wing! No more XJs! Make the next X-Wing a T-65K!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Excellence Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 7/18 2:58am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	Exactly, Ben. We've never seen the full fun of a Superstar. Not in Solo Command, not in Tyrant's Test, and hell, not in the Battle of Thyferra. Burn's sleep, a single volley from a Star Defender should by rights crush an Impstar. I want to see it, not a hundreth X-wing fight scene. -----signature----- Rock-a-by baby, on the treetop, Beaming with pride, the filth they hold, But when the wind blows, my temper implodes, High above a pit, filled with sharkticons, Down will come hardcover addicts, beaming no more. ©
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
MynDonos Registered: Jan '02	Date Posted: 7/18 6:11pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II) - Date Edited: 7/18 6:11pm (1 edits total) Edited By: MynDonos
	This is my first post in several years, I think - its a miracle I remembered my l/p at all! wow I'm curious - did we ever conclusively determine the length of an SSD? That epic 20,000 post thread is one of my fondest memories from shameless online SW geekery come to think of it, is that thread archived somewhere? I skimmed around this thread looking for a link but come on..there's already a couple thousand posts here.. edit My avatar is proof of how long I've been away from these parts
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
IceHawk-181 Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 7/18 6:24pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	MynDonos posted: This is my first post in several years, I think - its a miracle I remembered my l/p at all! wow I'm curious - did we ever conclusively determine the length of an SSD? That epic 20,000 post thread is one of my fondest memories from shameless online SW geekery come to think of it, is that thread archived somewhere? I skimmed around this thread looking for a link but come on..there's already a couple thousand posts here.. edit My avatar is proof of how long I've been away from these parts You know not what you do... -----signature----- Proof is an interesting phenomena; there is seemingly always an abundance of it when it need not be presented.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
blackmyron Registered: Oct '05	Date Posted: 7/18 7:16pm Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	You may be thinking of this thread, the last time I'm aware that one was devoted solely to the length of the SSD. It is now generally accepted that the canonical length of the Executor-class is 19km. The arguments now usually revolve around the relationships of the terms "Super Star Destroyer", star dreadnaught, Super-class, and Executor-class. -----signature----- Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Come on Dave, you're taking this stuff too seriously." - George Lucas "Reality can rarely be explained without contradictions." - Karnak
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Tzizvvt78 Registered: Jun '09	Date Posted: 7/19 3:14am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II) - Date Edited: 7/19 3:16am (2 edits total) Edited By: Tzizvvt78
	MynDonos posted: I'm curious - did we ever conclusively determine the length of an SSD? If you're referring to the Executor-class, it's 19km long. blackmyron posted: The arguments now usually revolve around the relationships of the terms "Super Star Destroyer", star dreadnaught, Super-class, and Executor-class. The books so far have been consistent in referring to it as both Star Dreadnought, Super-class and Star Destroyer in the same paragraphs, with Executor-class Star Dreadnought being its official class name. Super-class Star Destroyer also seems to now be synonymous with SSD. Looking at its Wookieepedia article, it's used in various sources to refer to both the Eclipse, Sovereign and Megador types, in addition to the Executor.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
blackmyron Registered: Oct '05	Date Posted: 7/19 7:05am Subject: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
	The Wookiepedia entry is wrong on a number of points. The "Super-class" being a "fake" name has been trumpeted by people since the Starship Previews article, which had this to say: "Dwarfing even the feared and awe-inspiring Imperial-class Star Destroyer, the Executor-class star dreadnought was one of the largest and most powerful vessels ever built by the Empire. The ship was colloquially known as a "Super Star Destroyer" because the Imperial Navy listed it as a "Super-class Star Destroyer" in budget requests to hide its true nature from the Imperial Senate. Even the ship's size was reported incorrectly to conceal its role from oversight committees. Although the official designation was changed by the time the Executor was operational, the phrase "Super Star Destroyer" stuck, and it was even applied to later vessels such as the Sovereign-class and Eclipse-class." Super-class was the originalofficial designation for the line. Using it is similar to the usage of Imperator-class during the RE when the line had been Imperial-class for two decades. (Somehow the article has morphed in discussions to a single budget report - sometimes called "forged" - with an entire fake ship design that is explicitly 8km long, covering up the real ship line.) The Wookie statement that "The updated edition of Starships of the Galaxy repeated the information, even adding more SSD variants to the mix and using both "Super Star Destroyer" and "Super-class Star Destroyer" interchangably as general descriptions." is interesting in the light of this statement in SOTG2, p. 139: "At 17.5 kilometers in length, the Eclipse-class is shorter than the Super-class Star Destroyers, but it's a mistake to think of them as smaller. In fact, an Eclipse masses much more than any other Super Star Destroyer ever built..." There is no case within the SOTG2 where they are used "interchangably". Wookie also says that "One of these budget requests which included the "Super-class" and several other capital ship designs was sent to Palpatine's advisors on budgetary affairs. This document found its way into the hands of the Rebel Alliance, where it was used as a primary source regarding the Empire's capital ship capabilities by Arhul Hextrophon." which (unsourced as it is) I presume is original research attempting to explain the references in the Imperial Sourcebook, which needs no "explanation" unless somehow OOU authors got ahold of the same 'document' to refer to the Executors as 8km in earlier novels. Checking the actual source, the Capital Ships section is indeed taken from a budget report... with the reference of "Four of these massive vessels are now in service." Whoops, the report was written after these ships were already constructed... and it was the Imperial Senate (no longer in existence by this point) that was being deceived by budget reports in the WOTC article, not the Emperor's advisors. References to 8km Executors here are retconned just like any other old source was (like OOU references to 8km Executors in other WEG products, for instance). Fiction-wise, the term Super-class has been - not surprisingly - been used interchangably with the Executor-class... with one possible exception, which I'll mention below. As far as support for the idea - the Databank did use it interchangably with "Super Star Destroyer"... in an old entry for "gravity well projector". The main entry on "Super Star Destroyer" not only uses the term with just the Executor-class, but also uses the SSD as a term for the Executor only. In fact, the talk section on Wookie mentions that the SSD entry in Databank apparently said back in Jan 2006 (cited as evidence towards the usage as a category): "The Executor was the first of a new generation of immense warships, a Super-class Star Destroyer." That line now reads: "The Executor was the first of a new generation of immense warships, lending its name to the Executor-class Star Dreadnought. " There's the appearance (or mention, rather) of Super-class Star Destroyers that don't match the appearance of the Executor in Death Star, although they coincidentally match the number, build site and time frame and come from a nth-hand mention by an Imperial gunnery officer. The logistics of maintaining is a separate class became too much, and even Wookiepedia folded it into the Super-class Star Destroyer article. Then there is the Megador, which was first identified as a Super Star Destroyer by LFL at the sw.com message boards, and then referred to as a Super-class Star Destroyer in Invincible, and its uniqueness has been mentioned as proof that the Super-class has to mean a variety of terms. Unfortunately, the only description has been that it has more engines and (by the LOTF era) souped-up weapons, and it is never given its own "class name" (or length, for that matter). It could (for example) just be an upgrade to the unnamed Executor-class that appeared at Bastion in the NJO era; or a custom "variant" like the Vengeance, which is still technically the same class as the Executor. (We also know from BFT that the late-model Executors had physical changes from the earlier ones). For me, explicit references outweigh any circumstantial ones; and "x-class" will always have the meaning of one class of ships. The talk page for the Super-class on Wookie is worth a read for other arguments, although many are of a historical nature now. -----signature----- Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Come on Dave, you're taking this stuff too seriously." - George Lucas "Reality can rarely be explained without contradictions." - Karnak
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 516 | 517 | 518 | 519 | 520 | 521 | 522 | 523 | 524 | 525 » - Previous | Next | Reload