sw2dude Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 How can anyone on Earth not grasp the fact that the singularly unique Venator was not shown in full glory in Ep.3? And now even EaW can't present it too... I'm just so disappointed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 mean, people who have seen that movie original in cinema are now about 40, 45 years old, most of them dont play a game like that. QUOTE] How dare you! People who watched the original trilogy arent that old and there are alot of 'mature' people playing RTS games out there. DMUK sry, in switzerland, i beleve, it was set for over 16 year old.... so first movie came out 1977 you had to be atleast 16. so 1977 is 28 years away plus 16 years makes 44 years....^^ i dont know, if it was ratet for teens in the usa, so im very sorry, if most of the us fans are much jounger... i just calculatet of swiss dates^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athanasios Posted January 5, 2006 Author Share Posted January 5, 2006 You replace a transport ship with a newer transport ship, and or better one, not a warship. And you replace a warship with another, newer and/or better warship, not a transport ship. True, in the way you state it. Yet, technology tries to implement most (war) funtions to an all-purpose single unit, making it versatile to all kind of missions. Normally, firepower, loading capacity and speed difficulty go together, but this happens in reallity; venator is out of reality. In simple words, a carrier can also be used as a warship and big warships as a carrier. Venator, with the many fighters and troops that could carry, can obviously used as a carrier while remaining a warship (warship in the meaning of pure firepower coverarge). Again, i emphasize that the point (in my opinion) is not Venator itself, i can without play it, but the Ep3-Ep4 linking. Venator's exclusion was the final trigger killing the connection between Ep3 - Ep4 and the confirmation of an upcoming expansion. If EaW takes action precisely 2 years before Ep4, then Ep3 should not even be mentioned in any press/magazine release/preview; doing that, you promise RTS players (that won't even look the exact time-gap) a lot of features of Ep3, something that we currently see to have problems in materalisation. Finally, the poll has no intention of blaming Lec or Petro; blaming makes things worst and helps noone. We try to avoid unpleasant outcomes (marketting, mp community growth, single player campaign fun) by constructive critisism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 But if you remove the fighter compliment of the Venator to turn it into a troop transport instead, you remove much of the firepower of the Venator. It's a carrier, much like the carriers of the US, except the Venator can still give a good fight to the opposition. But its main fire power is in its fighter compliment. Half the ship is dedicated to store the fighters. That doesn't lave much left for troops, as you need crew compartments for the pilots, support crews working on the fighters, fuel, water, food, etc .... not to mention the ship itselfs crew, supportcrews, security force, gunnery crews, etc ..... The ISD, while its fighter compliment was dramatically reduced compared to the Venator, was a much more multipurpose ship, able to carry a fair amount of fighters, excellent firepower gun-wise, and enough troops and equipment to start an invasion. A perfect replacement of the more specialised Venator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DarthMaulUK Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 i dont know, if it was ratet for teens in the usa, so im very sorry, if most of the us fans are much jounger... i just calculatet of swiss dates^^ Im in the UK and it was a U, so you could be any age to watch it. DMUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 oh... uk, im blind, sry.... (****ing beer ) yea well so u can be happy! the swizz goverment for games and films is *@#|* even ep. 1 was usk10= you must be 10yo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quickshot14 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Ok I have to give my 2 cents about this. First my opinon is really whatever, i don't think having the ship not included will hurt but including it might be due to balance reasons. But heres my theroy on why it LA cut the ship. Ok we know this happens before ANH and sometime after episode 3. If we go by the offical timeline, ANH happens 19 years after episode 3. Thats from the OFFICAL timeline. So lets just say for the sake of argument that Empire at war starts 10 years after episode 3 ok? The Ventaor is the predescor to the star destoryer, namely the imperial star destroyer. As it states in the databank, this means since the ISD is in it's is now obsolte. Now as to way the accumlator is still in. The accumlator may be cut as well if the above follows since the accumator is a director predsecor to the VSD as also stated in the databank. (Looks for the ships, ventaor is republic attack crusier, accumator is republic assualt ship.) So the accumator may also be cut the reasoni don't think it will is because unlike the direct relation to the ISD and ventator, ie they were both heavy space capital warships, the accumator was not like the VSD is direct design, namley the accumator primary and sole function was assualt, ie ground assualt carrying large number of troops. It would make sense to me that hese ships would still be in service at this time to ethier fufil the orignal role as assault ships since galleons probley havn't come on-line at this time yet, or be refited to a heavy carrier role, ie carrying large number of fighters untill more ISD's can come on line. Ethier way theres still the possiblity the accumlator may be cut, but they probley decided to keep it to have that connection to epsiode 3, but LA decided that it would be pointless to keep both. In ethier case i'm really imparitale to ethier. It would of been cool to have good large capital ships to support VSDs and the like when purchasing ISD's weren't possible. but it does make sense from at least a cannon standpoint. Is this why LA decided to cut it, I wouldnt be suprised if it was something simlar but you never can tell. For all thoese angered by this try not to worry, even if the model/ship is not included in the release i'm sure someone will come up with a mod to add the ship back in. This is why i'm not to mad abou SSD's and Tie Interceptors/Defenders not being it, i know the mod community will do it's thing Anywayz thats may idea on this LONG LIVE THE EMPIRE!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 ok well, now im confused.... is your "accumlator" same as te official Acclamator-Class? or is it something different i dont know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foshjedi2004 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 To Calm Everyone down. Here New Years Presents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 so what? THATS NOT VENATOR CLASS!!!!!! I WANNA HAVE VENATOR CLASS, IF YOU POST PICS WITHOUT=> GO HOME!! sniff....... venator.... buhuhuhu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foshjedi2004 Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 But they are the Venator's GrandChildren!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BattleDamage Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 mmm, those r some big grandkinders............ I still am trying to figure out why this is such a big deal. The venator will be included in a ton of mods, looking just as good or nearly as good as petro's model. And yes, I understand, its the principle that they told you it was in and then took it out again. Big deal!!! This has happened in a ton of games!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DS_Vespidbat Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 There u go better? ^)_(^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Zeni, calm down! Don't yell! The Acclamator is not the predecessor to the VSD. The VSD wasn't even designed and produced by Kuat, unlike the Acclamator (Well, technically, neither was the Acclamator either, it was produced by Rothana, but it's a subsidiary of Kuat), so it can't be the predecessor to the VSD. There are other reasons why it can't be the predecessor also, mainly, one is a warship, the other a large transport/assault ship. The VSD was designed by Walex Blissex, and produced by the manufacturer Rendili StarDrives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magna mandaloe Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 He's Right Half the reason this is Removed? Petrogoly (Or what ever) had to be alittle stupid. This game is not Molded out of Episode 4 (WHAT THEY REALLY NEED IS TIE-DEFENDER OR AVENGER maybe a Soverign Class Super star destroyer I like Leagacy of War Eclipse) the Strange This is that Victories are only introduced in the Comics and XvsT XWA BOP. But how they could get away with it is with a model i made of a VSD I with Republic Markings and Later it was modifed to Imperial Standards over all I WOULD RATHER SEE VSD INT OR VEN AND OTHER EU STUFF with venator it can be buildible in like Tech lvl 1 to 2 or 3 (Depeneds how LA wants it) SDs are introduced and Venators are then made out of star ship Reckage (Be mindful i have more models a have a Venator CAN be a support ship (Has a bombarment Special like how Invisible hand got PWNed by that Venator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeni Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 texture could be better, but realy nyce... thx @battle damage: yea, for you but there are a few people (like me) who are only intersetet in the ships! so i dont care about an soldier! or if its just a game, if i wanna have just a game i can play c&c starwars mod..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magna mandaloe Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 That Idea is an alternitave ACC can be replaced TL2 (Again only made out of reckage after words) by like Mandragora Corvette, AT-AT barge, Lander, or Some sort of cool Imperial SD land like VSD. Venators can be lander (ACC is no longer in use Venator is Refitted and recolored to support ship.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xSiri_Tachix Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 I understand your logic when you state that: If the Acclamator is in the Venator should be in, and if the Venator isn’t in the Acclamator shouldn’t be in. Maybe it is based on fuction and balance rather then just the timeline? BUT… I don’t want to see either ship go, especially the Venator, because It happens to be one of my favorite ships. I don’t know their reasons, so maybe they have a good one for leaving it out? I don’t know. I just don’t want this game to be ruined by yet another drudged down debate over “cannon” and technicalities. I want a reasonably accurate game that is a lot of fun, however I will have to take the wait and see approach because I don't know much about their line of thought. I watched the first trilogy when I was really young, but I like both trilogies. My parents never followed all those age restrictions, so I got to see the original trilogy before the rating said I could Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Sith Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Simply, stop using the outdated argument. The Empire doesn't have enough resources to mothball it's entire fleet becuase it's getting old, then come up with a whole new fleet without leaving any holes in it's security he he, the Empire decommisioned over 720 Victorys to make room for not-yet-made ISDs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrAvEmInD Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 The Venator has too much support for it to be cut. There is no reason to cut it anyways, it is the ONLY carrier unit, and we need a carrier unit for stategies. It is also a very popular unit, I know this is only my opinion but I'd rather have a unit like the Victory cut (i dont want any unit cut) rather then the Venator which is by far my favorite ship. Just seeing it in battle makes us happy and for those people who first time getting into star wars will know that thats the ship from episode 3. All I can say is put the Venator back in because unlike most people i absolutely hate mods for too many reason to explain here and I want my ship in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star wars lover Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 There u go better? ^)_(^ WOO-HOO! VENATOR!!!!! YAY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddyboom Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 yes ppl the venator probably won't come back, so stop complaning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nisomer Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Zeni, calm down! Don't yell! The Acclamator is not the predecessor to the VSD. The VSD wasn't even designed and produced by Kuat, unlike the Acclamator (Well, technically, neither was the Acclamator either, it was produced by Rothana, but it's a subsidiary of Kuat), so it can't be the predecessor to the VSD. There are other reasons why it can't be the predecessor also, mainly, one is a warship, the other a large transport/assault ship. The VSD was designed by Walex Blissex, and produced by the manufacturer Rendili StarDrives. Actually the Venator WAS manufactured by Kuat, and designed by LIRA Blissex. Walex (her father) designed the Victory SDs and they were manufactured by Rendili Stardrive (unless you were talking about the Victories when you said VSD, then forget everything I just said!), although I don't remember why they only manufactured the Victories, I seem to remember something about Kuat steeling their plans, or the Empire got rid of them, or someting...can't remember lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silencez Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 it's in! check the screenies at gamespot: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/starwarsrts/news.html?sid=6141818 although it looks o be Rebel, so the Rebels can capture ships it seems.... btw, the Acclamator was the Predessor for the VSD. (as the acclamator was so succusfull, a concurring company designed the VSD from it) the Venator was the testcase for the ISD. "While the Venator Star Destroyer offered much for its developers to take pride in, the relentless taskmaster Blissex was not content. She had bigger plans in mind. She used her past successes to green-light the ultimate warship of her dreams, the Imperator-class Star Destroyer. Shortly after the end of the Clone Wars, the first test-bed models of this mighty warship were already functioning in classified Imperial shipyards accessible only the New Order's elite. After Blissex's marriage to Denn Wessex, one of Palpatine's first regional governors to be installed, she used her newfound political clout to prioritize the expansion of the Star Destroyer program. From these early designs, the final Imperial-class would forever change the way order was maintained in the galaxy." "So effective and impressive were the Acclamator designs that many leading shipbuilders looked on with envy, and began incorporating similar concepts into their own fleets. Rendili Stardrive followed a few short years later with the development of their historic Victory-class Star Destroyers." more info: http://www.starwars.com/databank/starship/republicattackcruiser/index.html http://www.starwars.com/databank/starship/republicassaultship/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athanasios Posted January 6, 2006 Author Share Posted January 6, 2006 To Silencez: The image is old, in the meaning that Venator class was excluded just after the image was taken. Read the relative threads in the forums for more info. To all modders: We all know that a mod can enhance by far a game (any game, especially if they're made fully moddable), yet, this is not a strategy for companies that make no profit by mods and gain only dissatisfied customers (who look for mods to fill their "unfinished" game). Personally, i like to see the game pure, directly made by Petro and see how good it is by itself, not by adding mods. The core code of the game is the one which is in the official top-hits game charts, not the mods. Mods are in the top-hits mod charts, which are somewhat unofficial for the press. Sure, after a while i'll seek for a good mod, but not just as soon as i get the game. The only "mod" i download for RTS just as i get the game is the custom-made multiplayer maps which are played mostly on internet. So, in conclusion, modding is not the solution (from a dev-producer aspect and not only), because many people cannot even mess up with external files/directories etc etc, unless EaW does not support an in-game "easy-to-add-mods" option. Just imagine a customer that buys EaW just as soon as it hits the stores; he makes a round-about on the fan forums and see over 10 suggestions for mod downloading for many serious reasons; do you think that his first excitement will not drop down? Ofcourse, the worse is to see that, as soon as game is out, there's a crusial update of 100++ MB to download; this is "headshot" for people with 56k modems, but this is another story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.