Jan Gaarni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 The Alliance to Restore the Republic wasn't formed until about 2 years prior to ANH. I never said rebellious groups didn't pop up earlier. Mon Mothma was not the single person to form the Rebel Alliance. The Rebel Alliance was formed by the, at the time, 3 biggest rebellious groups, one of which was headed by Mon Mothma. The other 2 was lead by Garm Bel-Iblis from Corellia, and Bail Organa from Alderaan. Again, Star Wars is alittle more complicated than you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foshjedi2004 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 And NEEEH Wrong Answer. Rebellion began with the treaty of 2000. And the Rebellion began 4 years PRE ANH. Garm Bel-Iblis united 3 pirate groups with the help of Mon Mothma and Bail Organa in an effort to thwart the Empire. After The Ghorman Massacre Bail Fully threw his efforts into the Rebellion resigning from the Imperial Senate to allow himself to be free-er to go and spread the fire. Leia was his replacement. Bail was killed and Garm was pushed out of the limelight as Mon Mothma became the holographic face of the Alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. DancyRobot Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 i thaught this thread was about the Venator?... and why it was first shown to be in the game and now, is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRF_Vader Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I thought it was self explanatory. This game takes place several years before ANH, so by then all Venator's would be decomissioned in favor of the newer models. The Acclamator however, has no true replacement so far as i can tell, its a simple, armed troop transport, and is *NOT* a pre-cursor to the Star-Destroyer class. The Venator was replaced by the newer model, the Imperator-Star Destroyer, and after its inventon it is obvious they would begin phasing out the Venator, and by EaW's timeline all Venator's would be gone. But again, the acclamator doesnt really have much of a replacement so no need arose for the Acclamators to be decomissioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamefreak Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 There a thing called gameplay and realism, in this case you might be right the venaters were scratched and replace but I dont care. Its a game, all in all I dont give a rats a** who built what when were or why. As long as it makes sence and has a little truth(no Empire with Mon Cals) but they could have or Nebulan-b's and the rebels can have some clone wars era stuff as long as its A Fun game to play. edit: Mr.DancyRobots right this thread is about how we wish it was in and to inform people its not. So its NOT IN cry a little and look forward to every thing that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xtreme Muppet Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Back on topic if we would? I think the removal of the Venator is disappointing, for me anyway, as it was my favorite Republic ship. I don't think however that it will ruin the entire game and I also don't think it was done so Lucas Arts could suck us for all our money. I am going to say that I simply trust the Devs to be doing the best that they can to bring us a good, solid, well-balanced game. If they too the Venator out, they probably have a reason that they think is good and I'll back them on that even if I don't know what it is. They also say blind faith get people killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Well, Fosh, unless there's been a change recently in the history of the Rebel Alliance, all my sources state it started formally with the signing of the Corellian Treaty, where Garm united the 3 largest revolutionary groups, not pirate groups, with the help of Mon Mothma and Bail Organa. So I got that last part abit wrong. Now, I may not have the most recent books that has come out yet, so I don't mind being corrected upon. But if you continue to be a wiseass about it towards me or anyone here again in the future, I will start deleting your posts. Do I make myself perfectly clear? You're starting to push my buttons. Now, everybody start to calm down please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foshjedi2004 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I'm sorry Jan. I'll stay away from Debating over SW Lore with you :twoguns: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OOM-911 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 i agree with muppet we would LIKE it but we don't NEED it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DS_Vespidbat Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 well even though im not a big fan of the venator,but the more i look into this i more realize the game doesnt start between 3 and 4 it starts in 4.What im saying is that we do kinda need the venator so it can atleast looks like its between 3 and 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I'm sorry Jan. I'll stay away from Debating over SW Lore with you :twoguns: By all means, debate, discuss, and argue away with me to your hearts content. But don't shove it in my, or others face, when we're wrong. ****, Fosh, you've been a moderator, and may still be one somewhere (I don't know, did you get your Mod status back over at PFF?). You should know propper forum conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. DancyRobot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 which timeperiod is this officially set in? If its set closer to 4 then the venator SHOULD be left out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foshjedi2004 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 By all means, debate, discuss, and argue away with me to your hearts content. But don't shove it in my, or others face, when we're wrong. ****, Fosh, you've been a moderator, and may still be one somewhere (I don't know, did you get your Mod status back over at PFF?). You should know propper forum conduct. Ya well Conduct was never well thrust upon me on PFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 It's set closer to 4 than 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. DancyRobot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 It's set closer to 4 than 3. then why is there a debate, the empire would have decommisioned the venator at this time, in favor of the SD. they had the Acc and the SD, they didnt need the venator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T10 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Well, the Venator replaced the Acclamator, really. The Acclamator isn't the only ship that can land on planets. You had Venators in dry dock and on Kashyyyk, so there was no need for the Accs. Venators are superior in every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleDamage Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Well, the Venator replaced the Acclamator, really. The Acclamator isn't the only ship that can land on planets. You had Venators in dry dock and on Kashyyyk, so there was no need for the Accs. Venators are superior in every way. ummm, no it didnt. THe acclamator is a troop transport, the venator is a combat cruiser and fighter carrier, not a transport ship. Just because the venator was on the planet doesnt mean it replaced acclamator, in fact far from it. Never in the history of any military, fictional or non fictional, replaced a troop carrier with a combat vessel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Alec Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Well, I don't really care about the venerator. Never liked that ship. But, as I know, there will be atleast 10 different mods and 249 topics on getting the venrator back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. DancyRobot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Well, the Venator replaced the Acclamator, really. The Acclamator isn't the only ship that can land on planets. You had Venators in dry dock and on Kashyyyk, so there was no need for the Accs. Venators are superior in every way. BattleDamage is right the venator never replaced the Acc, the reason the Acc is still in the game is because a better transport was never created, thus showing a need for the Acc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T10 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Then please explain why there was a Venator, and not an Acclamator in the background, during the first few shots of Kashyyyk beach. Where did the Juggernauts and AT-TPs (I think that's what they're called) come from? LAATs and AT-TEs were still in EP3, so Lucas wasn't changing everything. The Venator is better than the Acclamator in every respect. It's bigger, faster, more heavily armed and armoured....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. DancyRobot Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 even thou i havnt seen that, there could be many plausable reasons why the venator was on the ground, but im sure if you talk to LA they would say the same thing i did about the venator. now i thaught that the venator was the predesecor to the VSD (victory class star destroyer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 The VSD and the Venator was developed at the same time, by 2 different companies. Neither was the predecessor to the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostlyYouki Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 The VSD and the Venator was developed at the same time, by 2 different companies. Neither was the predecessor to the other. Well one could of been if it was created 5 min after the other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Ehm, no. It first of all requires to have been built by the same manufacturer. Secondly, it has to have been in service for so and so long period before something new comes to replace it. These were competing designs and companies. Kuat was already strong, but at this point Rendili (the creaters of the Victory) was struggling to survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. DancyRobot Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 The VSD and the Venator was developed at the same time, by 2 different companies. Neither was the predecessor to the other. oh yea thats right, but which company made the ven, and VSD, and ACC. the company that made the Acc, and the Ven would not have made the ven to replace the Acc because the ven is a carrier and not a transport. you cant replace a transport with a carrier, thats just dumb. you cant compare the ven to the Acc, its like comparing a sports car to a mini-van. if you were to compare the ven to something it would have to be a SD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.