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

You're probably not far off the mark - but let's not also forget that Lucas was the one who killed any more appearances of the TF freighter-battleships in CWAS....

 

Oh I'm not blaming Lucas for this. I'm blaming the less than creative people who will only use movie ships.

 

The Clone Wars is a dead end for EU production only now - prior to the CWAS, Acclamators were showing up as late as Dreadnaughts of Rendili. The HNN articles have a plethora of never-seen ships show up.

To give credit, they have had the Z-95s and the V-19s show up. And frankly, I don't need the CWAS to "Ryloth" my favorite EU ships - I'm fine with them never appearing on the show.

 

I honestly don't mind the Venator being prevalent in TCW. Acclamators, at least Mk 1s, are transports first. I don't mind them showing up in space combat early on when the Republic was still getting its act together, but the Republic not having significant numbers of a dedicated space-combat ship until practically the end of the war strikes me as silly.

 

Agreed. That they were the principal ships in Rendili had always bothered me. Throw some VSDs in there, Dark Horse!

 

Yeah, we need more Vic-Star love!

 

I was thinking about the VicStar. The other side of course is that TCW aims more for a general audience; ROTS ships and equipment make sense in that regard. We get compensated with things like the Warfare guide and Atlas.

This is a total divergent, but Apple, LFL, and Disney all do this. Apple has Idevices, LFL has TCW, and Disney has the parks. It makes it okay for them to produce stuff not a whole lot of people are going to buy because they have the mass-market to fall back on.

 

I'll give some slack to the creative people on this myself. The point is not that they refuse to use ships like the Vic Star, but that to design and render new designs takes time and money that could be used elsewhere. Once a design is rendered, though, they tend to reuse it, thus the more varied CIS and GAR fleets in newer episodes vs Season 1. If we want specific ships there needs to be a reason more than just "they'd look cool." Doing Dreadnoughts of Rendilli would encourage the addition of the Dreadnought, as well as with a tad of editing, be a decent 2-3 part story.

 

I personally would mind less if the Venator was not such an ugly design

 

Really? I quite like it! Reminds me a of a sword.

 

A very unwieldy sword The double bridge and huge hangars just mess it up for me.

 

I think the Venator is more of a carrier than most other SD designs, which I believe is the explanation for both elements.

 

I know, it still makes it ugly as sin.

 

I've said it before, I'll probably say it again...VSD FTW!!

 

Er...is that a Venator or a Vicstar?

 

Vicstar is VSD, Venstar is generally VnSD

 

Sadly, I think the Vicstar is much uglier, with the random extra sections hanging out the sides.

 

Their not random. In the original design, the wings (not random extra sections) housed repuslorlifts to allow the Vic to operate in atmosphere.

EDIT: Or actual wings. I've heard both.

 

I mean random aesthetically. I'm sure they have a function. They're just really, really ugly.

 

Oh well, I still love it.

 

double post- forum lag.

 

I've had a glance at the new Edge of the Empire Beta book- and a couple of things caught my eye.

First, that Long Range for ship to ship weapons- ranges from a few hundred km to a few thousand (it's abstracted)- which is a significant upgrade from Star Wars D6 which had it as on the order of 160 km maximum (In, I think, the Rebel Alliance Sourcebook).

Second- that laser cannon, turbo lasers, etc are described as a type of weapon predating blasters, and that they use "focused light" to create "long ranged, accurate, highly damaging blasts of energy" as opposed to blasters which generate "concentrated particle bursts".

In Essential Guide to Warfare it seemed like laser cannon and turbolasers were simply upscaled blasters- that the name is a misnomer and that, like blasters, they generate bursts of particles.

Are they retconning that?

 

Already retconning? Is that a record?

(if they are)

 

I remember the Endnotes saying something about the subject- though it focussed more on the notion that blasters, in early material, were portrayed as chemical lasers- and that they decided to retcon it to particle bolts:

http://jasonfry.tumblr.com/post/20907109370/eg-to-warfare-endnotes-pt-2

 

Effective ship weapons ranges have varied as time goes on anyhow ^^ though they generally do seem to lose effectiveness rather drastically over range, expect in the ICS which just once again didn’t really do research.

It’s all a little wobbly anyhow as Blasters do still have a laser component so you can argue they are based on it that way, though does the book explicitly say one is just energy and the other one partials?