popcorn2008 Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 I think its great that the Venator is in, but I wonder what he means by old tech, and I wonder how that will effect its perfomance against newer ships I would suspect that if/when it goes up against a newer ship, simply put, the newer ships wins. I would say its best to use old Clone War units in groupings with a few newer ships, such as an ISD.
Darth_Terros Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 Like renny said, the Acclamator isn't an SD, much the same way the 418-Immobilizer isn't one. Having a wedge shaped hull does not automatically qualify a ship to be an SD. Just wondering about this because in this book - Star Wars Attack Of The Clones: Incredible Cross-Sections - The Definitive Guide To The Craft From "Star Wars: Episode II" It has the acclamator but in brackets it has (Star destroyer)
Jan Gaarni Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 No it doesn't. I doubt very much that Curtis Saxton wrote that in the book, and then goes and contradicts it on his website. In fact, by opening the book and scaning thru it, it pretty much confirms my doubt.
Darth_Terros Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 well i just spoke to a friend who has the book *i dont but have read it multiple times* and he just confirmed to me it does he even went and got the book and read to me the entry i think its in the part where it tells you who made it and such
gamefreak Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 All I was saying is that the venator is a powerful ship and in terms of ships they dont update as often as cars
Mikan Delwynna Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 the real fleet junkies actually calculated that the Venator is probably slightly worse than a Imperator Star Destroyer and not alot.
Jan Gaarni Posted October 25, 2005 Posted October 25, 2005 DATA FILE Manufacturer: Rothana Heavy Engineering (subsidiary of Kuat Drive Yards (KDY)) Make: Acclamator-class trans-galactic military transport ship That's what it says. Either your friend is lying, or he has a different book than I have. Either way, the Accamator is not an SD. The fact it has a wedgeshaped hull and is a Kuat product has no bearing on the matter. The Victory-Class Star Destroyer is not a Kuat design, and it still is an SD for instance.
Darth Windu Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 Gotta agree with Jan here, the Republic Assault Ship isnt a Star Destroyer. As for how the Republic Star Destroyer goes, I doubt it will be much less powerful than the Imperial Star Destroyer. This is because really, the main armament of the RSD and ISD is exactly the same and really, the ISD is basically a combination of the RSD with its ship-to-ship fighting qualities, and the RAS with its troop transport qualities. Overall, in terms of cost, manpower etc the RSD should actually be better at ship-to-ship combat than the ISD.
lukeiamyourdad Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 It's going to end up being a combination of factors that determine its strength. I don't have specific data to back me up, but I would bet that the ISD is overall more powerful, having similar armament to the Venator but better armor and more fighter carrying capacity, leading to better versatility in combat. The Venator is probably faster though, having the advantage of outmaneuvering its opponent. I wish I had reliable sources of information to make a decent comparison. I found some articles on wikicities but I don't trust them.
Jan Gaarni Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 To me it seems the Venator is one big hangar ship, and that's where it's true strenght lies: the Fighter Wings. Half it's hull is one giant hangar bay after all, the ISD doesn't have that.
lukeiamyourdad Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 True. Perhaps its armament might be lower then a Star Destroyer's. Certainly, having such a large hangar, especially on the side, would leave it more vulnerable in terms of protection. Versatility might also suffer, being unable to carry the legion of Stormtroopers the ISD can. We do see the Republic using them to land on Kashyyyk though. Interesting discussion.
Darth_Terros Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 Either your friend is lying, or he has a different book than I have. I've seen it myself he's not lying maybe it was a different edition? but cant see that being it i'll try get a picture of it anyway like i said the star destroyer was in brackets so not sure if its kinda just letting you know its the same company or what? Another question a bit off topic was the victory able to land? so far it seems the star destroyers arnt capable of this?
lukeiamyourdad Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 Yes, the Victory is capable of landing on large bodies of water whereas the ISD cannot.
Darth_Terros Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 Ok cool cheers, i wasnt too sure on that
Jan Gaarni Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 Well, there isn't anything confirmed about landing on water. Some have suggested they can, and I don't see why not. Then again I'm thinking why would they. But it certaintly isn't built to land on flat ground. It's the largest SD we know that can enter an atmosphere.
gamefreak Posted October 26, 2005 Posted October 26, 2005 The VSD could land on water but it was also capable of atmospheric flight Imagine if your storm trooper army had a VSD backing it up
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.