mandead Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 @Adonnay: I'd give Piett a Victory and move him to level 3, perhaps even 4. Level 2 is too low, and he should be in something better than an Acclamator. @mandead: The Interdictor, according to canon, costs about the same as a Victory, or about 1/3 of an ISD. That's quite expensive. Which 'canon' source would this be? I'm not disputing your argument, I merely want to know where you read your ship 'prices' and whatnot I'll try and find out where I read about the Interdictor price. I forget now. I'll paste when I find it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haard Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Which 'canon' source would this be? I'm not disputing your argument, I merely want to know where you read your ship 'prices' and whatnot I'll try and find out where I read about the Interdictor price. I forget now. I'll paste when I find it again. FWIW, Wikipedia (which is a wealth of SW info, mostly correct) says (about the 418): "During the Galactic Civil War, only a few hundred Interdictors were built, as they were more expensive than a regular Star Destroyer of comparable size, were less effective in battle, and their primary use was strategic." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 @Adonnay: I'd give Piett a Victory and move him to level 3, perhaps even 4. Level 2 is too low, and he should be in something better than an Acclamator. People are complaining that the victory is too powerful and you want to make it a hero vessel in addition to the Accuser? *g* Think of what will happen if both show up together. Two different combat boni and two butcher-class heavy battleships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 FWIW, Wikipedia (which is a wealth of SW info, mostly correct) says (about the 418): "During the Galactic Civil War, only a few hundred Interdictors were built, as they were more expensive than a regular Star Destroyer of comparable size, were less effective in battle, and their primary use was strategic." The key part of that phrase is "more expensive than a regular Star Destroyer of comparable size". At the time the Interdictors were built, there are no SDs that small (unless you count mothballed Venators and obsolete lumbering Dreadnaughts). Only cruisers. And cruisers of the same size as an Interdictor pack more firepower and cost less. BTW, Wikis in general are not 100% accurate. With regards to what I'm using as "canon" in the case of the Interdictor, it's the materials published by WotC for the RPG, the contents of which have LucasArts official approval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 @rocketeer: To counter the Piett Acclamator I put Dodonna in a Venator (which seems to be so popular) and made him tech level 2 as well. I've yet to decide on his weapons though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Adonnay, you really should put both Piett and Dodonna at level 3. IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Canon is if its approved by Lucasarts AND makes sense ... after all this game is approved by lucasarts too, and if it where canon we wouldnt have to deal with weird ships like the tartans, or totally wrong shipsizes. On a more serious note, canon is what George Lucas has shown in his movies. Sources like books rpgs whatever can be used as canon aslong as they do not contradict the movies. But they are second class canon at the best . They also raise the problem that they often contradict each other. The rpg Tal uses is still the best source, cause a)it contains all relevant units and their stats(unlike movies and other games), and b) its consistant and balanced in itself. So using that we should atleast be able to get the relative ship strenght right, that and the correct weapon systems is 90% of the canon imho . Problems are gamemechanics vs canon, for example the victory cruisers 3 hardpoints. We can give it the relative strenght it should have, but concentrating that kind of firepower in 3 hardpoints that can fire the same direction, means it will actually be more powerful than for example a similar ship with the same firepower but more hardpoints that maybe even have different firearcs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 @rocketeer: To counter the Piett Acclamator I put Dodonna in a Venator (which seems to be so popular) and made him tech level 2 as well. I've yet to decide on his weapons though. Yay, as for weapons just give him some longrange stuff. A carrier shouldnt have to get into the midst of a fight to lay down some support fire, besides that would greatly help his alignment problem(you know those venators think they are naval battleships for some reason ...). It would also be nice if the firearc of the launchers would be a tad bit wider on the normal venators, often only one launcher fires. Edit: Not sure wether Venators are really that popular, but they have vocal fans . Edit2: Well not really longrange like artillery missiles, but long range turbolasers. They should have similar range to the ion cannon of victorys and should be able to kill them. The ship could then be called Dodonnas pimp.. ehrm modified Venator, that gives us a excuse to fit pretty much anything on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Just so you know, the editors that write the RPG books check their "facts" with LucasArts before publication. LucasArts is the final arbiter of what's canon (even if they do contradict themselves all too often). Of course, Lucas himself is the ultimate arbiter, but he's not directly involved in all the minor details of the empire he created. The problem with LucasArts is that, unless it's concerning a movie, they simply don't pay that close attention to what's going on. RPGs get reasonably close scrutiny, since they are supposed to accurately model their universe. Books get much looser overview due to making allowances for artistic license. Alas, computer games are at the very bottom of the food chain. They aren't taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 Sadly Dodonna has no picture. I temporarily used the normal fleet commander *sigh*. As for his Venator (quickly named it Iron Fist), I gave him two additional batteries of turbolasers on the rear part of the ship (where the medium lasers are). It's hardpoints are not stronger, but he has better shields and a better shield recharge rate. Btw... for skirmish matches I added a fortified mining base. It looks like a pirate asteroid base (and thus not exactly like a mining asteroid) and sports a few laser cannons and a shield. On the downside (of course there has to be one) it's quite expensive and only produces half the income. Sadly the AI won't build it until we get to edit the scripts I suppose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Well i just think something cant really be 100% canon without lucas consent. Everything else can just make sense and fit into the picture. Especially because we have different levels of canon. We might think movies > rpgs > books > games in regards to canon, but in reality canon is what george lucas says that canon is, and he said the movies are canon, everything else he called EU(expanded universe), and regards that as some sort of parralell universe. That being said i dont think its important wether a ship has 52xturbolasers or 50xturbolasers(try counting them in the movies ), important are the relations between the ships and that it all makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endo224 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Hey guys, great work!! But i was curious as why you would would put Dodonna in a Venator. To me that seems like your putting a rebel in an imperial ship instead of a rebel ship. What i think would be better would be to put him in an Assault Frigate. Besides there were the Doddanna Class Assault frigates, and this could be forerunner/reason for naming them so. Also i think it would match up better with the Hero Victory for the imperials. Besides, the Venator hero would be way overpowered i think as it is a Capital ship. Thats just my two cents worth. i just dont like the idea of the Venator in Rebel hands becuase i always assumed that the Empire would have kept stict records of those ships to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. Thanks for listening!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Sadly Dodonna has no picture. I temporarily used the normal fleet commander *sigh*. As for his Venator (quickly named it Iron Fist), I gave him two additional batteries of turbolasers on the rear part of the ship (where the medium lasers are). It's hardpoints are not stronger, but he has better shields and a better shield recharge rate. Btw... for skirmish matches I added a fortified mining base. It looks like a pirate asteroid base (and thus not exactly like a mining asteroid) and sports a few laser cannons and a shield. On the downside (of course there has to be one) it's quite expensive and only produces half the income. Sadly the AI won't build it until we get to edit the scripts I suppose... Hehe you are aware that Iron Fist was the name of a SSD in the EU? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 Hey guys, great work!! But i was curious as why you would would put Dodonna in a Venator. To me that seems like your putting a rebel in an imperial ship instead of a rebel ship. What i think would be better would be to put him in an Assault Frigate. Besides there were the Doddanna Class Assault frigates, and this could be forerunner/reason for naming them so. Also i think it would match up better with the Hero Victory for the imperials. Besides, the Venator hero would be way overpowered i think as it is a Capital ship. Thats just my two cents worth. i just dont like the idea of the Venator in Rebel hands becuase i always assumed that the Empire would have kept stict records of those ships to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. Thanks for listening!! While I don't see the Venator as an imperial ship (since the empire as we know it doesn't really use them anymore) I can see your point about it beeing too powerful. @rocketeer: I didn't know that, no. I have hardly any knowledge about the EU. I've read a few novels (Thrawn) but that's all... and none of them really captured the atmosphere of the movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Hey guys, great work!! But i was curious as why you would would put Dodonna in a Venator. To me that seems like your putting a rebel in an imperial ship instead of a rebel ship. What i think would be better would be to put him in an Assault Frigate. Besides there were the Doddanna Class Assault frigates, and this could be forerunner/reason for naming them so. Also i think it would match up better with the Hero Victory for the imperials. Besides, the Venator hero would be way overpowered i think as it is a Capital ship. Thats just my two cents worth. i just dont like the idea of the Venator in Rebel hands becuase i always assumed that the Empire would have kept stict records of those ships to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. Thanks for listening!! Actually its not imperial ship, atleast not in the sense that a ISD is a imperial ship. Its a ship out of the clonewars, and by that precedes the Empire. It was put out of service in favour of the ISD, the canon background would be either that we assume the rebels salvaged a few from junkyards/private service, or that the blueprint to built them got somehow into the hands of the rebels since its such a old design. Canon is that they where used in the clonewars, and not used by the empire anymore by the time of episode 4. They make asmuch sense being in the game as the Acclamator . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 While I don't see the Venator as an imperial ship (since the empire as we know it doesn't really use them anymore) I can see your point about it beeing too powerful. @rocketeer: I didn't know that, no. I have hardly any knowledge about the EU. I've read a few novels (Thrawn) but that's all... and none of them really captured the atmosphere of the movies. The victory is atleast as strong as the Venator. You need luck to defeat a victory with it, if the fight already starts in firerange or before you have launched more than two fighter squads for example the Victory will chew the venator up and spit it out. The Venator should be a capital ship, but it doesnt has the firepower of a capital ship, and has the weakest armor and shields out of all capital ships. A lvl 2 or 3 space station WILL kill your Venator if you get to close. The Venator being a carrier will only have its full potentiel in the hypothetical situation that it has the time to launch all his fighters/bombers and that there are not to many anti fighter ships around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 What annoys me most about LA using anachronistic ships (such as the Acclamator and Venator) in EAW is that it was totally unnecessary. They could have used Lancer frigates (in place of the made-up Tartan), Carrack and Strike cruisers (in place of the Acclamator), and Dreadnaughts (in place of the Venator). grrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 What annoys me most about LA using anachronistic ships (such as the Acclamator and Venator) in EAW is that it was totally unnecessary. They could have used Lancer frigates (in place of the made-up Tartan), Carrack and Strike cruisers (in place of the Acclamator), and Dreadnaughts (in place of the Venator). grrr Are these the ships you mean? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadnaught-class_heavy_cruiser The Rebel Alliance/New Republic also made use of these antiquated vessels, but most commonly subjected them to extensive modification. Re-engineered Rebel dreadnaughts, known as Assault Frigates, featured lighter superstructures, to increase fuel efficiency and speed, additional dorsal fin-mounted maneuvering thrusters, and large-scale automated systems that reduced the crew requirements to just under 5,000 personnel. Hangar space was sacrificed, but their standard armament included fifteen laser cannons, twenty quadlaser cannons, and fifteen turbolaser batteries. Unfortunately, the number of active Rebel Assault Frigates was heavily restricted due to the costly and time-intensive nature of the modifications. That sounds awefully familar, are the assault MK 2 frigates maybe the mentioned refitted dreadnoughts? Or are there different kind of dreadnaughts? P.S. Actually im also not very familar with the EU, i just played a few games, read a few books, and are browsing wikipedia wideyed . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 About the holy Venator ... there surely is a reason why it has been taken out of comission. They can't compete with the more modern capital class ships so there's no point in comparing them to each other (in my opinion). As for now... a new testversion is up: -> Version .007c <- rejoice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 About the holy Venator ... there surely is a reason why it has been taken out of comission. They can't compete with the more modern capital class ships so there's no point in comparing them to each other (in my opinion). As for now... a new testversion is up: -> Version .007c <- rejoice! Hehe yes the holy Venator cant compete with a ISD on Mon Cal, but it is a successor design and should be superior to the heretical Victory. But according to canon both ships where made obsolete by the ISD . P.S. Can we get a hint as to what got changed? I dont want o miss anything while testing . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfshadow Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 HOLY POP CAP increase Batman~@! I went from being under 690, to 859 with a 693 unit cap... Edit: MC80/Liberty's icon dissappeared. Still showing on galactic, but no icon at planetary level... Wierd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haard Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 On the matter of canon, I thought it generally true that the Holocron (which we cannot look into) is the tracker of canon, and generally A) The movies are canon. What Gerorge says is canon. B) The novels and RPG background (not the rules) is canon where they don't contradict A C) Anything else released under the licence are canon unless they contradict A or B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Holy cow ... so you put dodonna into a MK 2 cause he would have been to strong in an Venator? That guy is now like a Venator x2 . Just attacked a pirate base with him, cant wait to meet this piett guy(tough i have a bad feeling, he prolly is in a pimped victory) ... even though i would have preferred the venator to the giant fish, its certainly a worthy additon to my fleet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfshadow Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Where's Dodanna? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Tbh i think dodonna is to strong, i dont know about the numbers but in actual use he is more powerful than a MC 80. Just attack a pirate base with him, and then with a MC 80. He kills both the frigates ad the base faster then the mon cal. Tbh im more in favour with heroes that are in slightly improved ships(light armament changes, slightly improved shields) than heros being in ships that perform way beyond their class. If we give a hero in a frigate the firepower and shields of a capital ship, we might aswell just give him a capital ship and just dont change it that much, that would be more realistic. I dont want this to sound like im dissatisfied with your mod, cause its really great, but if we try to be closer to canon it doesnt make much sense for a frigate to perform like a capital ship just cause a well know person commands it . please dont get me wrong, i really like your work. Edit: @wolfshadow Hes the fleet commander pic Edit2: Couldnt we use give Obi-wan instead of dodonna? He has a pic, and it wouldnt disturb the balance as much as adding a new hero. You would have to decide wether to use him in space or land combat, and you would have to wait if you lost him in either. Besides if my memory serves me right he has some history in the military, isnt he even a general? Edit3: The Accuser is a nice example, it performs way better than a normal ISD to counter the home one i assume. But its still a ISD and not supposed to be able to counter the home one. Edit4: Just as a idea would it be possible to add a ISD as a garrison unit to the accuser? So that each time you enter a fight with it it would spawn a ISD, that way tarkin(together with the second ISD) could be as strong as ackbar without having to create a unreasonably strong ISD Edit5(the last one ): Shame on lucasarts for not being able to play galactic conflict without heros Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.