Project: "EU-fic"

[Czechmate]

Excellent. Bear in mind that there's going to be a lot more overlap and a lot less exclusivity and distinction in our EU than in the official canon. For example, the T-65 series is NOT used exclusively by the Alliance/Republic. Imperial Remnants and the Empire proper will use it for long-range reconnaissance and strike missions. Obviously, they'll favor the Xg-1 for political reasons, but those won't always be available and politics will take a back seat to pragmatism in our EU.

Similarly, the majority of the New Republic's early military hardware will be inherited wholesale from fragments of the Empire. They won't balk at using TIEs, walkers or Star Destroyers. They'll just slap a Starbird and a Republic paint job on the things and throw them into service. Obviously the Mon Cals, Incom et al will get preferential treatment, but again, politics versus pragmatism. Our Republic is nowhere near as fucktarded as the canon NR.

In short, you should focus less on political affiliation and more on role/era. Obvious exceptions would be the kit-bashed civilian crap the Alliance was forced to use out of desperation. Most Imperials would scuttle a captured MC-80 before they'd use it themselves.

Understood and agreed on all points, save for one; I have trouble seeing the Alliance/NR make great use of basic, unmodified TIEs because of their emphasis on pilot skill, identity, and even a pilot coming to trust his fighter as if he were a knight of our Middle Ages and it was his horse. TIEs, especially the early TIE/Line (aka TIE Fighter) and TIE/Surface Assault (aka TIE Bomber), which were both rather fragile designs, designed to be mass-produced and rotated through pilots, with enough of the craft to allow a great deal of downtime for repairs on their unshielded, strained components.

Of course, for later craft like the Interceptor, Avenger, Scimitar &c, which either possessed internal shield systems or were designed with the capacity for such shielding modifications in mind, it is entirely possible for Rebel/NR fighter pilots to pilot the same craft through many battles without being parted from his trustworthy 'steed' for the frequent maintenance the Empire's earlier, most mass-produced designs required.

I also see the Imperials realizing the error of the 'unshielded TIE' idea and rapidly moving to refit and replace their fleet of unshielded fightercraft with newer, safer designs like the early T-65As and XG-1s. Perhaps even making use of the venerable Y-wing on lower-priority Outer Rim patrol vessels like old Venators and possibly those Rand Ecliptic-model carrier-Acclamators.

That would be awesome. The current thinking is that most designs would fall into one of four categories: The prewar, thousand-year-peace designs (e.g., Dreadnaughts, Mandators), emergency mobilization efforts (a hasty retooling and re-purposing of civilian ships, e.g. Lucrehulks, MC-80s), dedicated war-fighting ships and postwar counter-insurgency designs. This applies to both the Clone Wars and the Galactic Civil War.

I agree with this as well. As the Old Republic went through its' post-Ruusan golden age, the mindset of the vast majority of its' citizens pushed the idea of large-scale warfare further and further out of sight and out of mind. As such, when events like the Yinchorri rebellion and Stark Hyperspace War took place in the closing decades of the Republic's golden era, their forces were limited to what effectively amount to light cruisers and destroyers (several versions of CEC Consular-class light cruisers and a few basically mothballed Dreadnoughts and the vessels of various system navies, mostly), instead of the vast carrier-cruiser (carrier-battleship?) Star Destroyers the 'wartime Republic' would deploy in the Clone Wars.

Because of this decline in military concern, when the prospect of war with the Separatists came along, the Republic was vastly unprepared. Here is the second category of vessels; ships of the various local navies and the mothballed Judiciary Force dragged into service in an attempt to assuage the building fear of the Republic's citizens. It is here that we find the earliest of the dagger warships the Imperial Navy will continue using for decades to come. Perhaps this is where the...I believe the proto-SD was the Cantwell, yes, would first be found, as the Republic's first dedicated war vessel of the post-Ruusan era. If the Clone Wars are to be started early in our timeline, I would suggest the Cantwells be rushed into production and service perhaps one to three years before the Wars break out.

(more to come, i must run out to get coffee :v)

[Illuminatus Primus]

Understood and agreed on all points, save for one; I have trouble seeing the Alliance/NR make great use of basic, unmodified TIEs because of their emphasis on pilot skill, identity, and even a pilot coming to trust his fighter as if he were a knight of our Middle Ages and it was his horse. TIEs, especially the early TIE/Line (aka TIE Fighter) and TIE/Surface Assault (aka TIE Bomber), which were both rather fragile designs, designed to be mass-produced and rotated through pilots, with enough of the craft to allow a great deal of downtime for repairs on their unshielded, strained components.

The simple fact is the early conventional military of the New Republic will have to be composed of seized or defected Imperial hardware, and they will have no choice but to use TIEs and Star Destroyers. Furthermore, the idea that the TIEs are a swarm of balsa wood fighter Zero-analogs is an EU-brain bug. ANH has visual evidence of TIE shields, and their drive systems and various navigation concerns mandate basic shielding. Furthermore, filmic comparison between X-Wing and TIE survivability, as well as behind-the-scenes internal film making notes indicate the X-Wing and TIE were concieved as having similar acceleration and agility, and similar durability. If there is a difference, the TIE is more fragile and more agile, and the X-Wing the converse, but its a difference of degree, not one of radical difference. Furthermore, if the NR has a political or even philosophical or practical policy policy preference toward starfighters, it will simply be impractical to implement when they are depending on anything they can get to transit from a guerrilla rebel group employing primarily asymmetrical warfare to a competing state capable of waging conventional war. And even if they do have difference preferences or styles, it will be one of degree, not of kind. Not only that, but many of the pilots and sailors in the early New Republic might be grandfathered-in defectors from the Navy proper or the colonial auxiliaries.

Of course, for later craft like the Interceptor, Avenger, Scimitar &c, which either possessed internal shield systems or were designed with the capacity for such shielding modifications in mind, it is entirely possible for Rebel/NR fighter pilots to pilot the same craft through many battles without being parted from his trustworthy 'steed' for the frequent maintenance the Empire's earlier, most mass-produced designs required.

I also see the Imperials realizing the error of the 'unshielded TIE' idea and rapidly moving to refit and replace their fleet of unshielded fightercraft with newer, safer designs like the early T-65As and XG-1s. Perhaps even making use of the venerable Y-wing on lower-priority Outer Rim patrol vessels like old Venators and possibly those Rand Ecliptic-model carrier-Acclamators.

See above. All of this is the result of EU brainbugs from video games and Michael Stackpole; the retarded thinking of which this project is purposed with searing out.

I agree with this as well. As the Old Republic went through its' post-Ruusan golden age, the mindset of the vast majority of its' citizens pushed the idea of large-scale warfare further and further out of sight and out of mind. As such, when events like the Yinchorri rebellion and Stark Hyperspace War took place in the closing decades of the Republic's golden era, their forces were limited to what effectively amount to light cruisers and destroyers (several versions of CEC Consular-class light cruisers and a few basically mothballed Dreadnoughts and the vessels of various system navies, mostly), instead of the vast carrier-cruiser (carrier-battleship?) Star Destroyers the 'wartime Republic' would deploy in the Clone Wars.

We're discarded the comic book "light cruisers" (as cruisers anyway) and 600-m Dreadnaughts-only Old Republic fleet. I'm also discarding the gravity of Ruusan - we have no need to contrive an excuse for Lucas' latter-day editing of 25,000 year-Republic to 1,000 year-Republic.

Because of this decline in military concern, when the prospect of war with the Separatists came along, the Republic was vastly unprepared. Here is the second category of vessels; ships of the various local navies and the mothballed Judiciary Force dragged into service in an attempt to assuage the building fear of the Republic's citizens. It is here that we find the earliest of the dagger warships the Imperial Navy will continue using for decades to come. Perhaps this is where the...I believe the proto-SD was the Cantwell, yes, would first be found, as the Republic's first dedicated war vessel of the post-Ruusan era. If the Clone Wars are to be started early in our timeline, I would suggest the Cantwells be rushed into production and service perhaps one to three years before the Wars break out.

(more to come, i must run out to get coffee :v)

We're discussing specifics of the wars and Rise of the Empire in Fanfics, the EUFic Prequel era thread.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Frankly, I see the TIE, if adjusted in later production runs to NR specifications and doctrine, stubbornly sticking along through the NJO arc, in broad NR service, despite some political meddlers in the Defense Ministry and ideologues in general protests against it. I see them painted in lighter livery than the Imperial models, and with starbirds and insignia on them.

[Czechmate]

What a terribly dismissive way you have of handling things.

Anyhow. I CAN see the Rebels and NR using basic TIE models as long as they have to, but I cannot see them using them in their basic Imperial-stolen states for long. Surely the New Republic will be putting their own TIE variants into service. Perhaps the Defender could, ironically, be a New Republic TIE put into service to counter an Imperial XI-wing variant.

Also, I refer to 'Post-Ruusan' as the golden age of the republic, its' time of peace. I do NOT believe that the Republic only existed a thousand years, and I am quite sure I did not imply that. I simply meant that after the Ruusan Reformation, the Republic was in a very (comparatively) quiet period compared to the various major Sith-related wars of its' previous twenty-four thousand years of history.

As an aside, I would like to mention that I have no intention of obsessing over tiny details of how things were specifically portrayed in the movies, but I do believe the movies are the highest authority as far as sourcing goes. I do not enjoy, in any way, spending hours and hours poring over Saxton-like analyses of ten seconds of footage in the movies or a single panel from a single comic page. I believe it is a waste of time spent overanalyzing things when work on other parts of the project could be progressing. I do, however, enjoy rationalizing things based on broader information and logic and will accept the logical views of others. If it pleases you, replace 'unshielded' with 'lightly shielded' in my previous references to the TIE series.

And yes, the TIE series could easily be seen in many different models all across the galaxy, clear through the NJO era. I am kind of picturing New Republican clawcraft with starbirds and NR racing stripes, and it's a great image/

EDIT: I would also like to note that DrakaFic, as a group project, worked because all decently rationalized ideas were at least somewhat explored, to determine whether or not they did in fact possess a potential positive affect on the development of the timeline. Simply 'deciding' something without allowing the exploration, however minimal, of all views presented may end up costing you some gems. Just thought I'd mention that to you, IP.

[Illuminatus Primus]

What a terribly dismissive way you have of handling things.

I didn't mean to sound dismissive, I apologize if you felt that way.

Anyhow. I CAN see the Rebels and NR using basic TIE models as long as they have to, but I cannot see them using them in their basic Imperial-stolen states for long. Surely the New Republic will be putting their own TIE variants into service. Perhaps the Defender could, ironically, be a New Republic TIE put into service to counter an Imperial XI-wing variant.

I just don't see what's 'wrong' with the TIE Fighter other than the X-Wing games and Mike Stackpole and the Essential Guide to Vehicles and Ships saying so. My point is that while there may be different preferences and styles to warfare, scientifically there ought to be a right and wrong way generally to do it in specific circumstances. I think

Also, I refer to 'Post-Ruusan' as the golden age of the republic, its' time of peace. I do NOT believe that the Republic only existed a thousand years, and I am quite sure I did not imply that. I simply meant that after the Ruusan Reformation, the Republic was in a very (comparatively) quiet period compared to the various major Sith-related wars of its' previous twenty-four thousand years of history.

I'm trying to bring you up to speed. The "Ruusan Reformation" was an in-universe cludge to fix and qualify the AOTC comments that the Republic had not suffered a major war since its foundation and that it was a thousand years old. Since we're no longer bound by either of those, there's no reason to suppose that either is true. Personally, I prefer the idea the Clone Wars were unprecedentedly major, "full scale" wars of the like the Republic had not experienced since its foundation 25,000 years prior.

As an aside, I would like to mention that I have no intention of obsessing over tiny details of how things were specifically portrayed in the movies, but I do believe the movies are the highest authority as far as sourcing goes. I do not enjoy, in any way, spending hours and hours poring over Saxton-like analyses of ten seconds of footage in the movies or a single panel from a single comic page. I believe it is a waste of time spent overanalyzing things when work on other parts of the project could be progressing. I do, however, enjoy rationalizing things based on broader information and logic and will accept the logical views of others. If it pleases you, replace 'unshielded' with 'lightly shielded' in my previous references to the TIE series.

I think this is dismissive in itself, if you ask me. On the other hand, thankfully Dr. Saxton, Publius, Mike, and many others have taken the time to actually do the dirty work for us. But given we do have it, and its conclusions are rational, I don't see why we shouldn't use it. Especially if its from the OT and therefore authoritative. To be brief, the idea the Old Republic could only field Dreadnaughts and Consular couriers is not credible.

EDIT: I would also like to note that DrakaFic, as a group project, worked because all decently rationalized ideas were at least somewhat explored, to determine whether or not they did in fact possess a potential positive affect on the development of the timeline. Simply 'deciding' something without allowing the exploration, however minimal, of all views presented may end up costing you some gems. Just thought I'd mention that to you, IP.

I didn't just "decide." I don't run the project, so the idea I can "decide" anything is silly. What I did was point out what my point of view was, and I supported it with references to filmic evidence and other sources. I gave a case for ignoring the precedent set in the EU, which I find inferior to movie-only perspective and poorly researched. I also think its based on superficial ideas like aping the movies and making sure the audience doesn't get confused by having common equipment. My opinion was actually shared by many others, among them - Galvatron, Raptor, Hoth. Raptor himself stated and substantiated his opinion. Now if you state an opinion and support it well, and everyone agrees to run with it, I just have to live with it. As for DrakaFic, I think what you described is exactly what we're doing. And I think Stackpole logic about TIE Fighters is just as silly as Stirling's fantasies regarding Drakan technology. A military colossus like the Empire is not going to produce worse equipment than the rebel Alliance. Of course, I'm willing to rationalize the Stackpole/game TIEs as ones built on the cheap or locally and assigned to auxiliaries and what have you.

If you'd like to bury the this little disagreement, I'm happy to do so. But I resent any implication that I'm somehow playing "unfair". I explained my arguments in detail, and really in support of Raptor's statements, not my own.

[Czechmate]

I didn't mean to sound dismissive, I apologize if you felt that way.

Water under the Mon Cal, friend.

I just don't see what's 'wrong' with the TIE Fighter other than the X-Wing games and Mike Stackpole and the Essential Guide to Vehicles and Ships saying so. My point is that while there may be different preferences and styles to warfare, scientifically there ought to be a right and wrong way generally to do it in specific circumstances.

There isn't anything wrong with it, per se. It is just rapidly made obsolete as a frontline combat craft due to its' blindspots, atmospheric manueving issues, etc. The TIE series of craft, however, is quite interesting and an effective line of craft. It is just that the first, the TIE Fighter itself, is quickly made outclassed and obsolescent (obsolete? never sure which word to use) by its' own successors. I can easily see the NR using Interceptors for decades after Endor, but not the Fighter. The TIE cockpit section being modular, I could easily see the Rebels/NR fabricating Interceptor, Retaliator, or other wing modules for their large number of TIE Fighter cockpit sections and discarding their captured TIE Fighters' primary weakness, its' large array wings, for the advanced components of later versions.

I'm trying to bring you up to speed. The "Ruusan Reformation" was an in-universe cludge to fix and qualify the AOTC comments that the Republic had not suffered a major war since its foundation and that it was a thousand years old. Since we're no longer bound by either of those, there's no reason to suppose that either is true. Personally, I prefer the idea the Clone Wars were unprecedentedly major, "full scale" wars of the like the Republic had not experienced since its foundation 25,000 years prior.

I think this is dismissive in itself, if you ask me. On the other hand, thankfully Dr. Saxton, Publius, Mike, and many others have taken the time to actually do the dirty work for us. But given we do have it, and its conclusions are rational, I don't see why we shouldn't use it. Especially if its from the OT and therefore authoritative. To be brief, the idea the Old Republic could only field Dreadnaughts and Consular couriers is not credible.

I have always believed that Saxton was doing brilliant work. I simply have also come to believe that his work has led to some rather silly over-analysis of the universe. Most specifically the fact that all vessels are now Star Something, based on Earth naval classes; I'd always believed 'Star Destroyer' was a Blissex designer's brand name for a product. both Walex and Lira used it for their respective wedge-shaped vessels. This makes a great deal more sense than having mile-long carrier-battleships designated as 'destroyers' in the Earth sense of being a small escort. Maybe compared to the astounding excess of such designs as the Executor and Eclipse, but in most cases really not at all appropriate.

As far as the dreads and consulars and other low-key vessels, it is not that I propose they -could- only field them, but they simply did not believe they even -needed- to field greater vessels, because such forces had, broadly speaking, been able to deal with the Republic's few semi-major conflicts. I believe that this lack of forward planning, their longtime belief that that's all they needed, is what led to the chaos of the Republic's attempts to cope with the beginnings of the Clone Wars. They were unprepared because they simply never foresaw the need to be prepared for such a conflict.

If you'd like to bury the this little disagreement, I'm happy to do so. But I resent any implication that I'm somehow playing "unfair". I explained my arguments in detail, and really in support of Raptor's statements, not my own.

I apologize. Let us continue on good terms.

[Karmic Knight]

There isn't anything wrong with it, per se. It is just rapidly made obsolete as a frontline combat craft due to its' blindspots, atmospheric manueving issues, etc. The TIE series of craft, however, is quite interesting and an effective line of craft. It is just that the first, the TIE Fighter itself, is quickly made outclassed and obsolescent (obsolete? never sure which word to use) by its' own successors. I can easily see the NR using Interceptors for decades after Endor, but not the Fighter. The TIE cockpit section being modular, I could easily see the Rebels/NR fabricating Interceptor, Retaliator, or other wing modules for their large number of TIE Fighter cockpit sections and discarding their captured TIE Fighters' primary weakness, its' large array wings, for the advanced components of later versions.

I like this idea, it makes sense for both sides to field the highest end fighters they can gather, but I don't think that would mean that the Rebels wouldn't field stock ties at all, it would only mean that they would be replaced when applicable.

As far as the dreads and consulars and other low-key vessels, it is not that I propose they -could- only field them, but they simply did not believe they even -needed- to, because such forces had, broadly speaking, been able to deal with the Republic's few semi-major conflicts. I believe that this lack of forward planning, their longtime belief that that's all they needed, is what led to the chaos of the Republic's attempts to cope with the beginnings of the Clone Wars. They were unprepared because they simply never foresaw the need to be prepared for such a conflict.

What about any posturing by the "Separatist" side of the Clone Wars, wouldn't that lead to an mobilization program by the Republic, thus arming the Republic with a minor amount of Star Destroyer level craft?

[Illuminatus Primus]

There isn't anything wrong with it, per se. It is just rapidly made obsolete as a frontline combat craft due to its' blindspots, atmospheric manueving issues, etc.

Whoa whoa whoa. Who says that starfighters operating in close air support makes sense? It should be a huge collateral damage problem unless they're running at tiny percentages of drive intensity and relying on repulsorlifts mostly. In which case, what are they doing in that role? These ships must put out many megatons per second to move the way they do. What makes you think they rely on aerodynamics at all? Why can't the TIE's blindspots be addressed with sensors across the radiator panels - I doubt these ships are flown by eye alone anyway. And the idea of a ship being "obsolete" in a civilization static for 25,000 years is hard to understand.

The TIE series of craft, however, is quite interesting and an effective line of craft. It is just that the first, the TIE Fighter itself, is quickly made outclassed and obsolescent (obsolete? never sure which word to use) by its' own successors. I can easily see the NR using Interceptors for decades after Endor, but not the Fighter.

Perhaps there are other reasons why the Fighter existing in conjunction with the Interceptor? Lower maintenance and fuel cost? Lower complexity? Less training for pilots required? The Fighter is for a different niche than the Interceptor.

The TIE cockpit section being modular, I could easily see the Rebels/NR fabricating Interceptor, Retaliator, or other wing modules for their large number of TIE Fighter cockpit sections and discarding their captured TIE Fighters' primary weakness, its' large array wings, for the advanced components of later versions.

What makes you assume the eyeball is exactly the same? How is the Interceptor hauling more weapons faster, and with a shielding option unless its eyeball has more robust reactors? Or burns them hotter (more dangerous? lower range and endurance?)?

I have always believed that Saxton was doing brilliant work. I simply have also come to believe that his work has led to some rather silly over-analysis of the universe. Most specifically the fact that all vessels are now Star Something, based on Earth naval classes; I'd always believed 'Star Destroyer' was a Blissex designer's brand name for a product. both Walex and Lira used it for their respective wedge-shaped vessels. This makes a great deal more sense than having mile-long carrier-battleships designated as 'destroyers' in the Earth sense of being a small escort. Maybe compared to the astounding excess of such designs as the Executor and Eclipse, but in most cases really not at all appropriate.

Lucas' Star Destroyer are pretty silly cartoon ships that do-all, go-all, and with no drawbacks. I applaud Saxton for pointing clearly the in-universe powers can and do build intermediate from the "cyclopean" warships of Eclipse and Executor to the diminutive, common, and factotum ISD. And to apply SOME logic across the system and to develop an idea of role. Yes his is contrived and excessively and artificially terrestrially naval. But its a better try and dreck like the Venator "Jedi Cruiser" and the Lucrehulk "Battleship". The idea of carrier battleships itself is pretty stupid.

As far as the dreads and consulars and other low-key vessels, it is not that I propose they -could- only field them, but they simply did not believe they even -needed- to field greater vessels, because such forces had, broadly speaking, been able to deal with the Republic's few semi-major conflicts.

Large freighters will be capable of dusting the Republic's "naval" ships with their drives, then.

I believe that this lack of forward planning, their longtime belief that that's all they needed, is what led to the chaos of the Republic's attempts to cope with the beginnings of the Clone Wars. They were unprepared because they simply never foresaw the need to be prepared for such a conflict.

Why can't they have big ships, but have them unprepared in less utterly stupid (on their behalf) and more subtle ways, such as them being poorly laid out, ceremonially or politically compromised, slow to mobilize for mass-production, or deployed according to peacekeeping and anti-piracy doctrine? This is simplicity and superficial thinking on the behalf of Lucas and EU writers, why should we stick by it if we're holding ourselves to higher standards of rigor?

I really need to start making a FAQ with Raptor about common questions and issues and why we're disowning Lucas or EU brainbugs.

[Czechmate]

I like this idea, it makes sense for both sides to field the highest end fighters they can gather, but I don't think that would mean that the Rebels wouldn't field stock ties at all, it would only mean that they would be replaced when applicable.

Indeed, this was my intent. Many people seem to forget that TIE cockpit modules, at least the spherical ones on most TIEs, are designed to be modular. You can replace the wings of a Fighter or Interceptor with any number of other TIE-variant wings. It simply becomes more complex when you're talking about bombers or TIE Defenders. And I really do like the idea of the Defender being a Republic design.

What about any posturing by the "Separatist" side of the Clone Wars, wouldn't that lead to an mobilization program by the Republic, thus arming the Republic with a minor amount of Star Destroyer level craft?

Well, I was thinking that in the chaos of the prewar and early war period, the Republic would throw through design and into production what I reckon should be the earliest class of Star Destroyers, the 'Cantwell'. I know this is a fansite link, but it's also a decent explanation of what the Cantwell is.
http://www.rpggamer.org/stats.php?page= ... royer.html
The design itself was one of the earliest design concepts for the ISD for Episode IV. I think it would be appropriate.

I also believe the Republic would rush such craft as the V-19 Torrent and the various Republic Navy landing equipment, like early Acclamators and most assuredly the LAATs that are essentially unique in Star Wars. As time progressed and the War worsened, the Navy would grow progressively larger and more advanced as the Republic attempted to keep up with the number of fronts cropping up and the technology their enemies' clone forces are fielding.

[Czechmate]

Lucas' Star Destroyer are pretty silly cartoon ships that do-all, go-all, and with no drawbacks. I applaud Saxton for pointing clearly the in-universe powers can and do build intermediate from the "cyclopean" warships of Eclipse and Executor to the diminutive, common, and factotum ISD. And to apply SOME logic across the system and to develop an idea of role. Yes his is contrived and excessively and artificially terrestrially naval. But its a better try and dreck like the Venator "Jedi Cruiser" and the Lucrehulk "Battleship". The idea of carrier battleships itself is pretty stupid.

I did not say they did not build intermediary vessels. Please stop assuming things. I say precisely the things I mean to and generally little more.

What I find flaw in is the Star (blank) naming system being based on the 'Star Destroyer' name. I find it quite ridiculous. Different kinds of SDs generally have specific purposes; Victories were early command and heavy fleet-engagement vessels, Venators were carriers with a secondary ability to engage in limited close combat, Imperators were jack-of-all-trades ships which did, in fact, have their drawbacks; they were unable to do any of their duties better than a dedicated vessel of that type, save perhaps bombardment.

The only real draw of the ISD is that it is able to bring a legion of troops, a wing of fighters, and a reasonably effective bombardment capacity to a single place in a single ship. They are, essentially, multipurpose armored cruisers which can do many things with a single vessel but not as well as a dedicated one could. Dedicated battleships (the Allegiance is a good example of what should be a 'battleship' in Star Wars) can decimate them, dedicated carriers (even TWO escort carriers, ships a tenth their size, carry twice their airwing) can outnumber their fighter group, and dedicated troopships can bring more troops in a smaller volume AND, generally speaking, do it in a much smaller, much less expensive package.

I was going to respond to the rest of your post in detail, but...sheesh. You need to relax. This is a timeline being developed, not a life-or-death college paper.

TIE Fighters have their uses, for a while, sure. But I don't see them in NR service past perhaps the Dark Empire crisis. in service all across the galaxy in planetary navies, sure, but not in a navy that can easily replace them once it has gained legitimacy after Endor and even more after the capture of Coruscant.

I will, however, concede that they should see heavy use by the Rebellion before Endor's great victory and certainly until the capture of Coruscant lends them true legitimacy and the increasing number of Interceptors in service relative to Fighters renders them less and less effective. I hope that this concession can end this particular bone of contention.

Lastly, and since it just came to mind, I do agree that names like 'Jedi Cruiser' and a freighter being named a 'battleship' before its' even uparmed for the clone wars is ridiculous. Saxton has done a great job of giving the ships of star wars real legitimacy and I can never really bring myself to deny that.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Look, you might be new to SD.net, but we're pretty no-holds-barred here. This is real weak sauce compared to what you'll get wandering into the average non-speculative thread in PSW or the rest of the forum. I realize our style may seem jarring and it may seem like I'm angrily haranguing you. I'm not, I'm calm. But a lot of us have thought these things out and defended them in debates before. We're open to argument, but arguments must be substantiated. I queried you on the multiple things I felt you're overlooking or I sensed at the heart of our disagreement.

Probably the central one is this conception that the TIE is "obsolete" as opposed to built and bought to serve a particular niche, and if the NR has that niche anywhere (maybe less so on the Empire if its doctrine style is different, but it ought to still be there), then I don't see why the TIE couldn't serve. What I'm getting at is there should be no "advancement" only trends and fashions. SW has been technologically and developmentally static for 25,000 years. Modern paradigms of progress and revolutionary paradigms are completely foreign to SW.

[Darth Raptor]

It's all about costs and trade-offs, not actual technology. The TIE/In has better acceleration and maneuverability than the TIE/ln either because it costs more or because it makes sacrifices in other areas. I bet it has heat management issues. The TIE/ad and TIE/D aren't bleeding edge, they're bloody expensive and configured for different roles besides. There's no reason the TIE/ln can't do in the Republican Navy what it did in the Imperial Navy and presumably the (Old) Republican Navy before that. Obi-Wan recognized the design on sight.

[Czechmate]

I did just admit the basic TIE Fighter has its' use until roughly ten years after Endor, which is when E-wings and Imperial equivalents are coming into wide-spread use. And that's just the basic TIE Fighter. You seem to believe I am referring to all TIEs.

And while technological advancement is largely alien to SW, refinement thereof is not. Better turbolasers, more efficient engines, et cetera. No really new things being invented, but their uses are being refined, made more efficient, put to different uses with the same technology.

Now. I conceded the basic TIE Fighter could easily be used by the Rebels (and Imperials for that matter) for more than half the Galactic Civil War before becoming just a little too outdated for frontline service in the New Republic Navy. From there it could easily be sent into planetary militaries to replace obsolete Headhunters and R-41s and such. It'll be used, in some way or another, for decades after that. It just won't be the bleeding edge anymore.

I'm not sure how much more I can concede to end this point and move on. So shall we go to greener pastures? Perhaps the Mon Cal designs could use some refinement. Or we could determine precisely how long Executors will be in our timeline. Or we could decide how to treat such things as Palpatine's rebirths in 10 and 11 ABY. Or... see where i'm going with this?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Hence diversity. I'd like to see the Actis, Aethersprite, and Nimbus still in Imperial service and New Republic/Rebel service in some role. Likewise for the V-19 Torrent, ARC-170, and the NTB and PTB Incom bombers (I'd really like to flesh these out from the bit blurb they got in ROTS ICS, by analogy with ARC they ought ot be Naval Tactical Bombers and Planetary Tactical Bombers, respectively ).

EDIT: Its just details, but as you see, they are important ones. Also, as you see, we've moved on to discuss other interesting things. But I do think that refinement is very very slight (to be unnoticable in human timeframes, or that they just get lazy, bad, or inexperienced with warcraft until wartime, and then they push everything back up a little bit to its limits). Overall, there can't be net refinement especially over human time frames or there would be major technological shifts over 25,000 years. Overall, I think the best way to address different capabilities are trade-offs.

[Czechmate]

Hence diversity. I'd like to see the Actis, Aethersprite, and Nimbus still in Imperial service and New Republic/Rebel service in some role. Likewise for the V-19 Torrent, ARC-170, and the NTB and PTB Incom bombers (I'd really like to flesh these out from the bit blurb they got in ROTS ICS, by analogy with ARC they ought ot be Naval Tactical Bombers and Planetary Tactical Bombers, respectively ).

EDIT: Its just details, but as you see, they are important ones. Also, as you see, we've moved on to discuss other interesting things. But I do think that refinement is very very slight (to be unnoticable in human timeframes, or that they just get lazy, bad, or inexperienced with warcraft until wartime, and then they push everything back up a little bit to its limits). Overall, there can't be net refinement especially over human time frames or there would be major technological shifts over 25,000 years. Overall, I think the best way to address different capabilities are trade-offs.

Do we know what the Incom bombers look like? I keep picturing a sort of four-winged, four-man (and a droid) ARC-170, with the bottom wing's lower surface studded with weapons pylons, sort of like a reverse K-Wing. The Naval version has extra wingtip maneuvering thrusters, whereas the Planetary has extra airfoils and such. And I'd love to see the Actis still in service.

[Darth Hoth]

Probably the central one is this conception that the TIE is "obsolete" as opposed to built and bought to serve a particular niche, and if the NR has that niche anywhere (maybe less so on the Empire if its doctrine style is different, but it ought to still be there), then I don't see why the TIE couldn't serve. What I'm getting at is there should be no "advancement" only trends and fashions. SW has been technologically and developmentally static for 25,000 years. Modern paradigms of progress and revolutionary paradigms are completely foreign to SW.

How do we explain things that are completely new and unparallelled, like Galaxy Guns, "molecular shielding" and basically every comic/KJA superweapon of the week? They make up a large enough part of the EU that we cannot readily throw them out.

I suppose one way to reason is that the technological stasis is due only partly to the galaxy "reaching the limit" of development. Perhaps it is possible to research new technology, but it is prohibitively expensive, with only the Empire having the credits for it to throw around (something the Republic would not have done, due to institutional inertia, corporate pressures (Baroness Tagge: "No, Senator, we don't want technobabble x to solve problem y and put all our highly paid specialists out of business. Oh, you'll not approve of funding it, will you? I knew we could count on you.") and their general anti-big government mentality. Basically, conservatism (at times maybe close to outright Luddism) might be as big a bottleneck as the technological constraints as such, for reasons of economics and the balance of power (like, why most High Lords of Terra in 40k might kill entire Sectors rather than see the Emperor rise again - it disrupts their power plays when new factors are introduced, even beneficial ones). I imagine every one of the Great Powers would be keen on preserving the status quo (except perhaps idealists like Alderaan, and they would be few and far between).

In wartime, development might also increase, as the pressure mounts for new military technologies. Which might partially explain all the new designs during the Clone Wars, if we keep them.

[Darth Hoth]

I really need to start making a FAQ with Raptor about common questions and issues and why we're disowning Lucas or EU brainbugs.

I could contribute a few arguments, if you like. Either way, good idea.

On the particular issue of TIEs, I never understood the EU there; how would it be reasonable that Rimmer terrorists had better fighters than the dominant galactic political entity? Rather, the Rebels would be using leftovers, local designs and obsolete surplus equipment. Sure, the Empire might not be great war spenders, but their stuff tends to be over-engineered, not shitty by default to cut corners (which makes no sense either way in this case; pilots are and will always be a much worse bottleneck than the fighters as such, and it is frankly insane, especially for a polity with the Empire's industrial resources, to expend them frivolously in bad craft for the hell of it). They were not the (popularly exaggerated conception of) the Soviet Union.

God bless the shielded film TIE that lets us discard such nonsense!

[Illuminatus Primus]

Probably the central one is this conception that the TIE is "obsolete" as opposed to built and bought to serve a particular niche, and if the NR has that niche anywhere (maybe less so on the Empire if its doctrine style is different, but it ought to still be there), then I don't see why the TIE couldn't serve. What I'm getting at is there should be no "advancement" only trends and fashions. SW has been technologically and developmentally static for 25,000 years. Modern paradigms of progress and revolutionary paradigms are completely foreign to SW.

How do we explain things that are completely new and unparallelled, like Galaxy Guns, "molecular shielding" and basically every comic/KJA superweapon of the week? They make up a large enough part of the EU that we cannot readily throw them out.

I don't see why the Galaxy Gun cannot be simply a unique application of existing technologies. All of its basic technologies - special shielding, fast hyperdrive, shield-penetration aids, and matter-to-energy chain-reaction warheads have been seen before. I very much doubt its fundamental firepower is comparable to the Death Star. My own personal little notes for an AU if the Palpatine successfully won Skywalker at Da Soocha V or later or if the Empire survives the death of Palpatine at Onderon, the Death Star still serves a role. The Galaxy Gun is powerful, to be sure, but I think that it represents a combination of pushing bleeding-edge, unique application, and surprise (the galaxy hadn't seen the use of galactic artillery in eons). Because it relies on "tricks" like penetrating shields, matter-to-energy chain reaction, and dissipating unusual intensity of firepower relative to size, it probably has countermeasures (relative to the utter brute strength of the Death Star; there's no countermeasure for managing the power to obliterate a planet).

As for the Sun Crusher, I knew this was coming, but I don't know if it can really be rehabilitated. Maybe in some much-modified context. The Jedi Academy Trilogy becomes the point of least acceptability in the post-ROTJ context. It really is terrible and silly.

I suppose one way to reason is that the technological stasis is due only partly to the galaxy "reaching the limit" of development. Perhaps it is possible to research new technology, but it is prohibitively expensive, with only the Empire having the credits for it to throw around (something the Republic would not have done, due to institutional inertia, corporate pressures (Baroness Tagge: "No, Senator, we don't want technobabble x to solve problem y and put all our highly paid specialists out of business. Oh, you'll not approve of funding it, will you? I knew we could count on you.") and their general anti-big government mentality. Basically, conservatism (at times maybe close to outright Luddism) might be as big a bottleneck as the technological constraints as such, for reasons of economics and the balance of power (like, why most High Lords of Terra in 40k might kill entire Sectors rather than see the Emperor rise again - it disrupts their power plays when new factors are introduced, even beneficial ones). I imagine every one of the Great Powers would be keen on preserving the status quo (except perhaps idealists like Alderaan, and they would be few and far between).

In wartime, development might also increase, as the pressure mounts for new military technologies. Which might partially explain all the new designs during the Clone Wars, if we keep them.

I still like to believe that the fundamental technological base is fully formed, and science is pretty static. I just cannot see scientific research being manipulated in the manner you describe. I think the best example if they've figured out nearly everything, but they do get lazy and inexperienced and formulaic, so it takes strong pressures like the Clone War to push tech from a peacetime (relative) mediocrity back to the limits, in conjunction with a few freak discoveries and applications that happen seemingly randomly or no one ever thought of by lucky or super-brilliant scientists and engineers.

[Darth Hoth]

I don't see why the Galaxy Gun cannot be simply a unique application of existing technologies. All of its basic technologies - special shielding, fast hyperdrive, shield-penetration aids, and matter-to-energy chain-reaction warheads have been seen before. I very much doubt its fundamental firepower is comparable to the Death Star. My own personal little notes for an AU if the Palpatine successfully won Skywalker at Da Soocha V or later or if the Empire survives the death of Palpatine at Onderon, the Death Star still serves a role. The Galaxy Gun is powerful, to be sure, but I think that it represents a combination of pushing bleeding-edge, unique application, and surprise (the galaxy hadn't seen the use of galactic artillery in eons). Because it relies on "tricks" like penetrating shields, matter-to-energy chain reaction, and dissipating unusual intensity of firepower relative to size, it probably has countermeasures (relative to the utter brute strength of the Death Star; there's no countermeasure for managing the power to obliterate a planet).

My problem would then be that if those technologies were not essentially unique, why were they never used before and after? Just something breaking planetary shields on fiat is shown to be unobtainable by standard SW science at every other occasion (except Coruscant's shields failing to some weird Vong technobabble in Star by Star, but I chalk that down to bog-standard NR incompetence in maintaining their defences). If the technology is around, why is it not in broader use? For example, Luke wishing for a Galaxy Gun in NJO implies that it cannot be replicated. One might retcon it away afterwards by saying that countermeasures were brought up, but why would it then be so utterly surprising beforehand? (I really hate the sci-fi/fantasy "lost tech/magic" explanation; if it was around before and in common use, why did it disappear even when the polity that deployed it survived? Outmined unique crystals? Give me a break.) It feels more reasonable to simply assume that it was newly invented and that its designs went to hell with Byss.

As for the Sun Crusher, I knew this was coming, but I don't know if it can really be rehabilitated. Maybe in some much-modified context. The Jedi Academy Trilogy becomes the point of least acceptability in the post-ROTJ context. It really is terrible and silly.

I do not really have any ideas at the moment. Nor have I read any of those books recently (one read was plenty enough). I suppose I should check hem and see what we can do with them.

I still like to believe that the fundamental technological base is fully formed, and science is pretty static. I just cannot see scientific research being manipulated in the manner you describe. I think the best example if they've figured out nearly everything, but they do get lazy and inexperienced and formulaic, so it takes strong pressures like the Clone War to push tech from a peacetime (relative) mediocrity back to the limits, in conjunction with a few freak discoveries and applications that happen seemingly randomly or no one ever thought of by lucky or super-brilliant scientists and engineers.

As I see it, OOU we have a problem in the EU, in that it posits development on a real-world timescale (new superweapons of the week, new fighters ever few years - heck, that is even worse than real life in terms of speed - new war 'droids, molecular shielding, stealth fighters &c. &c. Because it focuses on the Galactic Civil War period, tech development as shown is arbitrarily much faster in that era than at any other point in history. I am trying to rationalise this by positing that science as such has not reached its evolutionary endpoint, but that it is straining the limits, making research something that is prodigiously difficult and expensive, requiring very exceptional people and circumstances to progress further - scientific geniuses, phenomenal political will, and so forth. I imagine that in this world, actual research would be rare, with conservative academics, politicians, and business leaders thinking that further research is not cost-effective - most "scientists" would be teachers or actually have skills for practical work (Koyi Komad, physics major, notably ended up a mechanic). The issue is how to shoehorn in the downright revolutionary developments of the EU in the model for the existing technological stasis.

[Illuminatus Primus]

My problem would then be that if those technologies were not essentially unique, why were they never used before and after? Just something breaking planetary shields on fiat is shown to be unobtainable by standard SW science at every other occasion (except Coruscant's shields failing to some weird Vong technobabble in Star by Star, but I chalk that down to bog-standard NR incompetence in maintaining their defences). If the technology is around, why is it not in broader use? For example, Luke wishing for a Galaxy Gun in NJO implies that it cannot be replicated. One might retcon it away afterwards by saying that countermeasures were brought up, but why would it then be so utterly surprising beforehand? (I really hate the sci-fi/fantasy "lost tech/magic" explanation; if it was around before and in common use, why did it disappear even when the polity that deployed it survived? Outmined unique crystals? Give me a break.) It feels more reasonable to simply assume that it was newly invented and that its designs went to hell with Byss.

The problem is that "the designs were lost" is really no more satisfactory than the other SF shlock you denounce. Science really doesn't work like that. Even if the actual engineering solutions were secret, the basic science should be journals and such. As for shield penetrators, there are several examples, from the T-33 "egg" torpedoes and the Torpedo Sphere torpedoes. The surprising thing is that they simply did not anticipate it because galactic artillery had been unheard of and they didn't anticipate the (extremely expensive, difficult, etc.) unique combination and aggressive application of technologies. Furthermore, its a no-limit fallacy to assume the Galaxy Gun could do whatever the Death Star did. We really know nothing about the the shielding of Da Soocha V, Nespis VII, and NRS Pelagia. These locales could have had weaknesses or not been equipped with fully-developed hard defenses on the order of Alderaan.

I do not really have any ideas at the moment. Nor have I read any of those books recently (one read was plenty enough). I suppose I should check hem and see what we can do with them.

Ideas: maybe we can do something more interesting with glitterstim spice and the spice trade? I just got done watching Lynch's Dune film and the SciFi Channel's miniseries. Also, maybe flesh out the deteriorating, pre-usurpation political situation amongst the Empire's death. As for a plot device that threatens and gives an excuse for Durron to indulge his revengeful desires, I am not sure.

As I see it, OOU we have a problem in the EU, in that it posits development on a real-world timescale (new superweapons of the week, new fighters ever few years - heck, that is even worse than real life in terms of speed - new war 'droids, molecular shielding, stealth fighters &c. &c. Because it focuses on the Galactic Civil War period, tech development as shown is arbitrarily much faster in that era than at any other point in history. I am trying to rationalise this by positing that science as such has not reached its evolutionary endpoint, but that it is straining the limits, making research something that is prodigiously difficult and expensive, requiring very exceptional people and circumstances to progress further - scientific geniuses, phenomenal political will, and so forth. I imagine that in this world, actual research would be rare, with conservative academics, politicians, and business leaders thinking that further research is not cost-effective - most "scientists" would be teachers or actually have skills for practical work (Koyi Komad, physics major, notably ended up a mechanic). The issue is how to shoehorn in the downright revolutionary developments of the EU in the model for the existing technological stasis.

I say fuck the EU. Besides, we're retconning many of the designs to serve in "parallel" with Rebel TIEs and Imperial X and Y wings and Prequel fighters throughout. Like history, I generally think its flat. Certain small details and things get forgotten and underused and things become somewhat mediocre in long times of peace, and these things get redeveloped in times of war and transition (overall these things should be much more minor than the technological advancement we're accustomed to, and then it should be maxed out). Other than that, like our historical model, I do think occasionally, very rarely in the big scale, exceptionally lucky or brilliant people discover an application or concept no one had thought of before. Generally, these should be pretty narrow and not meaningful enough to change galactic balances of power.

[Darth Hoth]

The problem is that "the designs were lost" is really no more satisfactory than the other SF shlock you denounce. Science really doesn't work like that. Even if the actual engineering solutions were secret, the basic science should be journals and such.

Well, but most people do not know that, so at least it is less obviously stupid.

As for the topic, I did not mean to say that he researched an entirely new field of physics or somesuch to build it. I do imagine that the engineering would be revolutionary, akin to the Manhattan project - the theory would be known, its basics at least, but the practical stuff would be immensely expensive and take years to develop and perfect.

As for shield penetrators, there are several examples, from the T-33 "egg" torpedoes and the Torpedo Sphere torpedoes. The surprising thing is that they simply did not anticipate it because galactic artillery had been unheard of and they didn't anticipate the (extremely expensive, difficult, etc.) unique combination and aggressive application of technologies.

Hence why I wrote "on fiat"; those still do it by application of force and precision, not arbitrary technobabble mechanisms. Unless we go by the DESB, that is, which makes superlasers arbitrary technobabble as well.

Furthermore, its a no-limit fallacy to assume the Galaxy Gun could do whatever the Death Star did. We really know nothing about the the shielding of Da Soocha V, Nespis VII, and NRS Pelagia. These locales could have had weaknesses or not been equipped with fully-developed hard defenses on the order of Alderaan.

Perhaps, but given its implied use as a strategic deterrent (as per the afterwords to DE II), it appears unreasonable that it would not be effective against at least the averagely defended world.

Ideas: maybe we can do something more interesting with glitterstim spice and the spice trade? I just got done watching Lynch's Dune film and the SciFi Channel's miniseries. Also, maybe flesh out the deteriorating, pre-usurpation political situation amongst the Empire's death. As for a plot device that threatens and gives an excuse for Durron to indulge his revengeful desires, I am not sure.

I shall have to get back to you on that.

I say fuck the EU. Besides, we're retconning many of the designs to serve in "parallel" with Rebel TIEs and Imperial X and Y wings and Prequel fighters throughout. Like history, I generally think its flat. Certain small details and things get forgotten and underused and things become somewhat mediocre in long times of peace, and these things get redeveloped in times of war and transition (overall these things should be much more minor than the technological advancement we're accustomed to, and then it should be maxed out). Other than that, like our historical model, I do think occasionally, very rarely in the big scale, exceptionally lucky or brilliant people discover an application or concept no one had thought of before. Generally, these should be pretty narrow and not meaningful enough to change galactic balances of power.

Well, all right; that does make sense.

[Illuminatus Primus]

As for the topic, I did not mean to say that he researched an entirely new field of physics or somesuch to build it. I do imagine that the engineering would be revolutionary, akin to the Manhattan project - the theory would be known, its basics at least, but the practical stuff would be immensely expensive and take years to develop and perfect.

Well that's fair, then its just a problem of time, money, and engineering will.

Hence why I wrote "on fiat"; those still do it by application of force and precision, not arbitrary technobabble mechanisms. Unless we go by the DESB, that is, which makes superlasers arbitrary technobabble as well.

Well we'll have to rationalize and make the Galaxy Gun a more credibly robust plot device.

Perhaps, but given its implied use as a strategic deterrent (as per the afterwords to DE II), it appears unreasonable that it would not be effective against at least the averagely defended world.

Its not so much a nuke as it is a pre-modern analogy; it is what early heavy artillery was to primitive formations. It was devestating because it was unpredictable and there was no defense against random death, even if it could not be everywhere at once. Its the lightning of God (its reach is far, but very narrow considering the breadth of galactic civilization), not massive retaliation.

[Crayz9000]

Illuminatus,

I added an EU-Fic FAQ page to the main EU-Fic page if you want to start there.

[Ender]

*blows tech-ref whistle*

There isn't anything wrong with it, per se. It is just rapidly made obsolete as a frontline combat craft due to its' blindspots, atmospheric manueving issues, etc.

Whoa whoa whoa. Who says that starfighters operating in close air support makes sense? It should be a huge collateral damage problem unless they're running at tiny percentages of drive intensity and relying on repulsorlifts mostly. In which case, what are they doing in that role? These ships must put out many megatons per second to move the way they do. What makes you think they rely on aerodynamics at all?

1) Starfighters acting as air support not only makes sense, it is the only really good way to make sense of bombers. Energy weapons on these levels have limits one can't really mess with. Barring Traviss level stupidity, I think it can be widely agreed that hitting a position a hundred meters away with from your troops with a several megaton-several gigaton shot is a pretty bad idea. While energy weapons are easily adjusted, there are limits to how fine the control on such adjustments can be and what you adjust - energy, power, and intensity are all important, and need to be finely managed. Simply dropping ordinance is far simpler. Additionally, ordinance gives you many options that energy weapons do not - you can vary the pay load from willie pete to napalm to nukes to steel rain to a block of concrete. Compare the incredible utility here to the disparity bombers have in space against warships - we can scramble all we want, but at the end of the day explaining away how tiny warheads pack such punch is futile. If bombers are primarily meant for planetary engagement and have a secondary role as torpedo boats for light escorts (eg corellian corvettes, carrack cruisers, etc) this becomes much easier to explain.

2) We don't know how repulsorlifts work exactly (beyond a few simple notes about range attenuation and such that are irrelevant here). In which case we can figure out the power to overcome aerodynamic drag and use that as a lower limit. This is a tiny sliver of what the craft must be capable of - for an ARC-170, assuming standard atmospheric density and a drag coefficient of 2 (that of a brick) it takes 200 TW to hit its state peak velocity of 44,000 kph (12,000 m/s). This is such a sliver of the overall power that it can be considered not a power drain, but a rounding error. Running on repulsorlifts on a fraction of power is certainly feasible.

3) Aerodynamics appear to still be a factor - note that the craft with shields are able to far and away out perform those without them in atmosphere and we are told that shields are used to enhance aerodynamics.

Why can't the TIE's blindspots be addressed with sensors across the radiator panels - I doubt these ships are flown by eye alone anyway. And the idea of a ship being "obsolete" in a civilization static for 25,000 years is hard to understand.

Given that the role of starfighters is likely to primarily be sensor gathering in space (they are fairly combat useless in any real engagement and we know that some TIEs are specifically outfitted to enhance this role) the idea of a blindspot is indefensible.

The TIE series of craft, however, is quite interesting and an effective line of craft. It is just that the first, the TIE Fighter itself, is quickly made outclassed and obsolescent (obsolete? never sure which word to use) by its' own successors. I can easily see the NR using Interceptors for decades after Endor, but not the Fighter.

Perhaps there are other reasons why the Fighter existing in conjunction with the Interceptor? Lower maintenance and fuel cost? Lower complexity? Less training for pilots required? The Fighter is for a different niche than the Interceptor.

Also enhanced performance goes with increased complexity, which increases maintenance. An increase in maintenance increases downtime for the craft while at the same time requiring more space for additional tools, parts, workspace, and maintenance men. This means you can carry fewer of them and have less in the air at a given time then you can a simpler fighter, unless you wish to invest in more personnel and bigger craft to carry them.

The TIE cockpit section being modular, I could easily see the Rebels/NR fabricating Interceptor, Retaliator, or other wing modules for their large number of TIE Fighter cockpit sections and discarding their captured TIE Fighters' primary weakness, its' large array wings, for the advanced components of later versions.

What makes you assume the eyeball is exactly the same? How is the Interceptor hauling more weapons faster, and with a shielding option unless its eyeball has more robust reactors? Or burns them hotter (more dangerous? lower range and endurance?)? [/quote]Stupidly, TIE cockpits are said to be the same. Realistically it makes no sense for the reasons you listed.

*TWEET*

Game on!

[Illuminatus Primus]

Just to point out, I'm not saying that starfighters can't be used to support in atmosphere, just not the way I'm sure he's thinking if he's talking about aerodynamics. The kind of light air support close to light infantry (I imagine he's thinking TESB esque) is to be handled by speeders and the like. Starfighters burning drives and throwing around their firepower is bad for everyone's day if its only that level of engagement. Secondly, aerodynamics matter, but that doesn't mean the TIE is useless. I'm aware that there are greater issues, but I was generalizing. I think it was clear that he thought TIEs are shitty because Stackpole says so, and they can't fight in atmospheres like Stackpole says fighters should and how he shows it (weak sauce, unrealistic). Plus, why get into details when you'll appear anyway? The big thing with some of the power output on drives and speed in atmosphere, these things moving risks collateral damage. Stackpole combat is completely without basis. And of course the bog-standard reasons why the TIE isn't its video game counterpart.