Which side are you on?

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-02-11 11:48pm

phongn wrote:
Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:If you do, you are going to win. For one, it is a kickass fighter. For two, you getting it means you are in the top 1% of 1% of the Imperial Fighter Corps. Unless you bump into someone like Wedge - and even then, you would have to make a mistake for him to have a chance.
Even if you're the cream of the crop, well, Wedge is also that far up and might just outclass you anyways. Given roughly equal technology, the better pilot will probably win. There isn't that much difference between his X-Wing and your TIE/D.

In pure principle, if you are in a one-on-one, with a fighter that's faster, better-shielded and more agile, you will have to make a mistake to lose. For instance, in Starfighters of Adumar the first TIE Defender pilot Wedge went up against made a mistake of predictability, and thus Wedge could gain the Initiative advantage to win.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-11 11:57pm

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:
Rogue 9 wrote:*Fires up my X-wing.* The Alliance has superior starfighters. *Shoots down a squadron of TIEs just for kicks.*
Work hard. You might get a TIE Defender

If you do, you are going to win. For one, it is a kickass fighter. For two, you getting it means you are in the top 1% of 1% of the Imperial Fighter Corps. Unless you bump into someone like Wedge - and even then, you would have to make a mistake for him to have a chance.

I've killed TIE Defenders from a B-wing.

Two of them in one pass. Fear the awesome firepower of sextuple linked cannons!

And they have the same fire rate in that configuration as an X-wing has in dual fire mode.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2004-02-11 11:58pm

The Empire, hands down. Since I'm a normal guy, life to me would be pretty much the same under either side, but the Empire offers more security. That is to say, if the Vong or some other chump bitches come around trying to eat my brains or something, there'll be an Imperial fleet waiting to provide the appropriate Smackdown.

All you reb supporters think about it...because of the Empire's policy of not interfering with most of its constituent planetary governments, chances are your average ass wouldn't be bothered by any of this "evil empire" business, unless you decide to act a fool and go scoundreling about, or join the military. Plus you have the added benefit of protection from crazy-ass mofos, with the only real cost being that you probably pay relatively more taxes than you would in the USA. But hey, Europe seems to get along fine with that.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 12:24am

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:In pure principle, if you are in a one-on-one, with a fighter that's faster, better-shielded and more agile, you will have to make a mistake to lose. For instance, in Starfighters of Adumar the first TIE Defender pilot Wedge went up against made a mistake of predictability, and thus Wedge could gain the Initiative advantage to win.

Given equal pilots, yes, the superior ship will probably win. But I wasn't arguing that, I was arguing that Wedge could be a superior pilot and thus compensate for the shortcomings of his fighter.

In real life, compare the dogfights over Korea between the MiG-15 and the F-86 -- the MiG-15 was actually superior in performance, but the USAF pilots got more kills.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-02-12 12:25am

Robert Treder wrote:The Empire, hands down. Since I'm a normal guy, life to me would be pretty much the same under either side, but the Empire offers more security. That is to say, if the Vong or some other chump bitches come around trying to eat my brains or something, there'll be an Imperial fleet waiting to provide the appropriate Smackdown.

All you reb supporters think about it...because of the Empire's policy of not interfering with most of its constituent planetary governments, chances are your average ass wouldn't be bothered by any of this "evil empire" business, unless you decide to act a fool and go scoundreling about, or join the military. Plus you have the added benefit of protection from crazy-ass mofos, with the only real cost being that you probably pay relatively more taxes than you would in the USA. But hey, Europe seems to get along fine with that.

Until Phase Three goes up and the Dark Side Adepts move in and set up shop....

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2004-02-12 12:30am

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Robert Treder wrote:The Empire, hands down. Since I'm a normal guy, life to me would be pretty much the same under either side, but the Empire offers more security. That is to say, if the Vong or some other chump bitches come around trying to eat my brains or something, there'll be an Imperial fleet waiting to provide the appropriate Smackdown.

All you reb supporters think about it...because of the Empire's policy of not interfering with most of its constituent planetary governments, chances are your average ass wouldn't be bothered by any of this "evil empire" business, unless you decide to act a fool and go scoundreling about, or join the military. Plus you have the added benefit of protection from crazy-ass mofos, with the only real cost being that you probably pay relatively more taxes than you would in the USA. But hey, Europe seems to get along fine with that.
Until Phase Three goes up and the Dark Side Adepts move in and set up shop....

Yeah, but how would we know that? And even then, it'd be better than the motherfucking Vong. I'd like to point out that CORUSCANT WAS DESTROYED under the dumbass-itude of the rebs and their ilk.

The Star Wars equivalent of me...a middle-class, shiftless, lazy bastard working retail and half-assedly going to community college...is likely to be fine, even under the Dark Side Adepts.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-02-12 12:35am

Not really. The Dark Side Adepts do nasty stuff, like suck out your life force and practice the Dark Side on you.

Byss was a model for the future of the rest of the galaxy.

Billions of inhabitants--having no idea where they were or where they were going. Gleefully remaining strapped to their megalopolis as slaves to the Empire.

Eventually it would've become something like the Sith Empire, where "citizen" became something between Oceanian prole and chattel slave.

dworkin · Post by **dworkin** » 2004-02-12 12:45am

Rogue 9 wrote:And win, too.

Yeah, bit of a bugger that.

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-02-12 01:57am

phongn wrote:Given equal pilots, yes, the superior ship will probably win. But I wasn't arguing that, I was arguing that Wedge could be a superior pilot and thus compensate for the shortcomings of his fighter.

In real life, compare the dogfights over Korea between the MiG-15 and the F-86 -- the MiG-15 was actually superior in performance, but the USAF pilots got more kills.

The F-86 actually had some places of superiority in certain altitude regimes (IIRC it was lower) and was better at transonic. Plus it supposedly had better sights and all that.

Most of these stories involve the supposedly weaker side having advantages in some usable areas. For instance, you could force a Zero to lose its famous maneuverability edge simply by arranging the fight at higher speed. Or you can use your superior dive. Most people think a Zero's superior to a P-40 AFAIK (though not all,) but by using its dive advantage, a P-40 can win against a Zero.

It is hard to see where the advantage is for the X-Wing versus TIE Defender in space. The enemy's supposed to be faster (which by itself used well could compensate for a maneuverability DISADVANTAGE, as many US WWII pilots no doubt found out,) and is more maneuverable, with roughly equal firepower and at least equal shields (IIRC, it varied from Equality to Defender Superiority depending on the source.)

Dogfights between identical aircraft are won on mistakes. The tiniest delay. The tiniest failure to use your plane to the full. But a signficantly superior fighter can change that equation.

There's a famous story about a Ki-100 squadron going up against an American Hellcat squadron late in the war. The story went that the Ki-100 squadron won by a mile - 14 to 0. I doubt that at that date in the war they had numerical superiority, and the US pilots are better trained. At some point, the superior plane takes over, and the Ki-100 is not all THAT much better than the Hellcat (it is even slower for one thing.)

If your turn rate is twice that of your opposition (to use an example,) you could delay turning until the guy's almost on your tail and still have a chance. In principle anyway.

Besides, I doubt that the MiG-15 is TWICE as maneuverable and 50% faster than the F-86 (yes, if you believe game DPF maneuverability statistics, the Defender is 175 and the X-Wing is 75.)

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-02-12 02:01am

Rogue 9 wrote:I've killed TIE Defenders from a B-wing. Two of them in one pass. Fear the awesome firepower of sextuple linked cannons! And they have the same fire rate in that configuration as an X-wing has in dual fire mode.

I see. You won by managing to get yourself in the perfect location before the fight even was supposed to start. And the dumb AI pilots let you shoot them down. A Y-Wing could probably have won in that setup.

By the time you get to that kind of advantage, the X-Wing is little better than the B-Wing. You are not going to win running or dogfighting. You might as well try the B-Wing, and hope you happen to have a position advantage and your first shot does it.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-12 02:04am

I'd still hand your average newbie in a Defender his ass from an X-wing. An A-wing would be even better, though I don't like how fragile the dang things are. In XWA try the A-wing vs. TIE Advanced Melee scenario that comes with the game. Gives you 20 minutes, IIRC. I took A-wing. A-wing: 32, TIE Advanced: 0. TIE Advanced has more guns and a considerable speed advantage. They're about the same in terms of durability.

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-02-12 04:11am

Rogue 9 wrote:I'd still hand your average newbie in a Defender his ass from an X-wing.

Ahem. Yes, experience can make up for a lot, even the huge technology gap between an X-wing and a Defender. I could beat anyone who doesn't know how to get his shields up from any craft too.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-12 04:21am

Shields up is rarely a problem. Remember, pair of Defenders from an assault bomber in one pass. I think I was running the flight data recorder. If I ever replace the CD I might take screenshots. They were dumb enough to go head to head, true, but still...

Comosicus · Post by **Comosicus** » 2004-02-12 04:21am

In my opinion the Empire is pretty simillar with the Nazi regime. And unless you play by their side, the average guy will have to suffer sooner or later. I didn't read anything EU about Star Wars and as I understand the New Republic was lead by a bunch of morons. But this thread is about Rebel Alliance vs GE not NR vs Imperial Remnant.

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-02-12 05:10am

Rogue 9 wrote:I'd still hand your average newbie in a Defender his ass from an X-wing. An A-wing would be even better, though I don't like how fragile the dang things are. In XWA try the A-wing vs. TIE Advanced Melee scenario that comes with the game. Gives you 20 minutes, IIRC. I took A-wing. A-wing: 32, TIE Advanced: 0. TIE Advanced has more guns and a considerable speed advantage. They're about the same in terms of durability.

Well, umm. Given that the AI's quality would be a relative constant, go and try playing the TIE Advanced and tell me what you got.

The X-Wing is probably the least advantageous craft to play it with.

With the B-Wing, at least you have one point of advantage - your gunpower and your shielding that's fitting for a bomber. If they are obliging enough to do a head-head, yes I can actually see you shooting down two of them. Tells me something about this AI, though.

The A-Wing got its movable laser cannons. If you can use them in a fight, you might have a chance.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-02-12 07:52am

The Rebel alliance fights for good while the Empire represents the dark side. So I choose the Rebels.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2004-02-12 09:42am

The best way to settle the Rebel Fighter vs Imperial fighter debate is simple

Everyone dig up your copies of X-Wing vs Tie Fighter (w/Balance of Power) and find that damn patch that lets you also fly B-Wings, Tie Defenders, Missile Boats, and all the othe nice fighters.

Everyone practice for about a month on there favourite fighter, and then

STARDESTROYER.NET Starfighter Tournament!

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 10:10am

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:Well, umm. Given that the AI's quality would be a relative constant, go and try playing the TIE Advanced and tell me what you got.

Depends on what you set the enemy to. There are multiple AI levels in the game.

The A-Wing got its movable laser cannons. If you can use them in a fight, you might have a chance.

AFAIK, the X-Wing series did not allow for the rotating laser cannons.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 10:36am

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:The F-86 actually had some places of superiority in certain altitude regimes (IIRC it was lower) and was better at transonic. Plus it supposedly had better sights and all that.

Yes, but overall the MiG-15 was the superior ship all things told. Later tests with captured MiG-15s, IIRC, showed that given roughly equal pilots, the MiG would win. Plus it isn't as if they fought it out at the F-86's optimal altitude all the time! A ~10:1 kill ratio in favor of the Sabre strongly suggests that pilot skill is the important factor here.

Most of these stories involve the supposedly weaker side having advantages in some usable areas. For instance, you could force a Zero to lose its famous maneuverability edge simply by arranging the fight at higher speed. Or you can use your superior dive. Most people think a Zero's superior to a P-40 AFAIK (though not all,) but by using its dive advantage, a P-40 can win against a Zero.

Yes, boom and zoom generally beats turn and burn (again, with equal pilots). If the USAAF P-40 crews had the experience of the Flying Tigers, things might have gone a bit differently in the early parts of the war.

It is hard to see where the advantage is for the X-Wing versus TIE Defender in space. The enemy's supposed to be faster (which by itself used well could compensate for a maneuverability DISADVANTAGE, as many US WWII pilots no doubt found out,) and is more maneuverable, with roughly equal firepower and at least equal shields (IIRC, it varied from Equality to Defender Superiority depending on the source.)

It has no advantages. I have never said as much.

Dogfights between identical aircraft are won on mistakes. The tiniest delay. The tiniest failure to use your plane to the full. But a signficantly superior fighter can change that equation.

Isn't that more or less restating who has more experience/skill will likely win?

There's a famous story about a Ki-100 squadron going up against an American Hellcat squadron late in the war. The story went that the Ki-100 squadron won by a mile - 14 to 0. I doubt that at that date in the war they had numerical superiority, and the US pilots are better trained. At some point, the superior plane takes over, and the Ki-100 is not all THAT much better than the Hellcat (it is even slower for one thing.)

Overall, by that phase in the war the US pilots had better skill than their IJA/IJN counterparts. However, that tells us nothing about the actual pilots who flew in those birds on either mission. Where the US pilots relatively green while the Japanse pilots hardened veterans?

I could also take the example of McCampbell and his wingman engaging fourty enemy fighters by themselves while not being shot down and taking down 15 combined (McCampbell personally shooting down 9). I doubt the Japanese fighters were that much inferior either. Skill carried the day, not the superiority of the Hellcat.

If your turn rate is twice that of your opposition (to use an example,) you could delay turning until the guy's almost on your tail and still have a chance. In principle anyway.

In principle.

Besides, I doubt that the MiG-15 is TWICE as maneuverable and 50% faster than the F-86 (yes, if you believe game DPF maneuverability statistics, the Defender is 175 and the X-Wing is 75.)

No, the MiG-15 didn't have anywhere near that advantage. However, it is still a valid example of how pilot skill can very much carry the day.

Also, consider the VF-121, one of the adversary squadrons of the USN. They fly A-4 Skyhawks against Tomcats and Hornets, but I doubt they get shot down in droves either, despite a rather sizable speed and energy disadvantage.

Now, clearly there is a point where a ship will be so superior that no amount of flying skill will save you (like throwing an F-4 against an F/A-22, for example), but it doesn't appear that the TIE/D is that much superior over the various T-65 ships. Also, the in-game stats don't account for the numerous production improvements to the X-Wing over its lifetime.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-02-12 10:37am

Looks like a landslide victory for the Empire.

By the way, the Rebel fighters are nearly all CRAP! I had no problems, destroying them. Here the points of idiocy to rebel fighters:

X-Wing:
-Propably the only usefull fighter of the Rebels.

Y-Wing:
-too slow

A-Wing:
-too weak weaponany
-pathetic shields and armor (two full hits from my quadlaser, and they were dead)

B-Wing:
-FAR too slow (the slowest fighter, a deathtrap)
-manevourable like a stone

Z-95:
-a flying coffin (I don't need more to say)

GySgt. Hartman · Post by **GySgt. Hartman** » 2004-02-12 11:23am

evilcat4000 wrote:The Rebel alliance fights for good while the Empire represents the dark side. So I choose the Rebels.

Nah, good and bad are soo relative; the empire represents order, while the rebels stand for chaos and destruction, they are not obeying the laws, they have pirates and smugglers in their ranks, they are responsible for countless atrocities, among them the death of millions of imperial and civilian personnel aboard two Imperial defensive platforms.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-02-12 11:33am

Well, what would the Rebellion do, if they were the government
Let's see:

-Fighting rebellion and threads to thier state.
100% true, so good-bye Rebellion
-Putting scum and law-breakers behind jail
100% true, so Solo, Hero of the Rebellion, would be jailed as a simple criminal.
-Punish traitors to the state
100% true, Madine, Mothma, Leia & Co. would be seen as traitors.
And the list could ge on an on.......

The make the point, the Rebllion is hypochite pure. It is no wonder that the NR hadn't functioned, because they couldn't really act in the points above, because they only would incriminate themselves. And because the NR was born out of chaos, and not order (you can say what you want against the EMperor, but his Ermächtigunggesetz made it legal for him to become Emperor), it could not act against the chotical elements, because it would bring the whole New Republic ad absurdum.

No wonder that it had given up the ghost.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 11:57am

Tribun wrote:By the way, the Rebel fighters are nearly all CRAP! I had no problems, destroying them. Here the points of idiocy to rebel fighters:

What did you expect? They're a bunch of insurrectionists with access to very limited resources, did you want them to suddenly make a TIE/A or TIE/D they could not afford to mass produce?

Y-Wing:
-too slow

And still better than the TIE/B which more or less was its counterpart.

A-Wing:
-too weak weaponany
-pathetic shields and armor (two full hits from my quadlaser, and they were dead)

It was a light interceptor latter pressed into service for hit-and-run strikes. And, hell, its shields were still superior to the TIE/I, plus some varients had that rotating gun mount.

B-Wing:
-FAR too slow (the slowest fighter, a deathtrap)
-manevourable like a stone

It is a strike bomber! You don't see A-6s moving at Mach 2, do you?

Z-95:
-a flying coffin (I don't need more to say)

Well, yes, it was a grossly obsolete fighter not used by front-line Rebel forces.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 12:02pm

Tribun wrote:The make the point, the Rebllion is hypochite pure.

Most insurrections have the element of hypocrisy about that. Do blast the USA for its hypocrisy when it refused to allow the South to secede, even though the nation itself had seceded not even 100 years ago?

It is no wonder that the NR hadn't functioned, because they couldn't really act in the points above, because they only would incriminate themselves. And because the NR was born out of chaos, and not order (you can say what you want against the EMperor, but his Ermächtigunggesetz made it legal for him to become Emperor), it could not act against the chotical elements, because it would bring the whole New Republic ad absurdum.

The United States was, by your perspective, "born out of chaos" as well. Does that mean it could not act against "chotical elements" such as the Whiskey Rebellion?

No wonder that it had given up the ghost.

No, it gave up the ghost because they had learned nothing from the Empire's reforms and arguably instituted a model even worse than the Old Republic's.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-02-12 12:07pm

GySgt. Hartman wrote:
evilcat4000 wrote:The Rebel alliance fights for good while the Empire represents the dark side. So I choose the Rebels.
Nah, good and bad are soo relative; the empire represents order, while the rebels stand for chaos and destruction, they are not obeying the laws, they have pirates and smugglers in their ranks, they are responsible for countless atrocities, among them the death of millions of imperial and civilian personnel aboard two Imperial defensive platforms.

Yes, "defensive" platforms. propaganda++