Page 1 of 1
Independently Deployed Weapons Platforms
Posted: 2003-02-13 11:36pm
by consequences
On an average Imperial ship, you have a number of tractor beams, which normally don't serve much purpose in a straight fight. On the larger ships, you also have various large items of deathdealing equipment, like the AT-AT for example.
Could an Imperial ship tractor its complement of AT-ATs alongside it, and use them for additional firepower? Would this be useful for additional point-defense, or are the power levels involved just too different?
If you take this to the extreme, would it be possible to tractor a KDY v-150 for heavy antiship firepower?
Wouldn't an AT-AT make a respectable kinetic weapon if an ISD captain could tractor one alongside, accelerate to near-light speed while holding it, and let it go on a suitable trajectory?
Posted: 2003-02-14 02:24am
by meNNis
Posted: 2003-02-14 02:38am
by Connor MacLeod
Tractor beams would be used to not only hold your own opponent in check in combat, but it would act as an aid in turning your ship (Steering grapples - I believe a similar concept was alluded to on Dooku's sailor in the AOTC ICS)
Posted: 2003-02-14 02:43am
by Captain tycho
Not to mention they can be used to severely fuck up fighters.... just swing some across a fighter's path and it's twirling into space. (or into your ship)
Posted: 2003-02-14 04:13am
by Darth Fanboy
they'd be easy targets for fighters, and the tractor beams could be put into better use.
A point defense like you are saying though is not a ridiculous idea. Of course it is a tactic widely employed in Mobile Suit: Gundam and its sequels. I'm not necessairly saying that Mobile suits are the most effective weapon design in this sort of situation but a larger variation of War droid with anti fighter weapons would be incredibly useful and they'd be somewhat expendable.
Re: Independently Deployed Weapons Platforms
Posted: 2003-02-14 04:47am
by Boba Fett
consequences wrote:On an average Imperial ship, you have a number of tractor beams, which normally don't serve much purpose in a straight fight. On the larger ships, you also have various large items of deathdealing equipment, like the AT-AT for example.
Could an Imperial ship tractor its complement of AT-ATs alongside it, and use them for additional firepower? Would this be useful for additional point-defense, or are the power levels involved just too different?
If you take this to the extreme, would it be possible to tractor a KDY v-150 for heavy antiship firepower?
Wouldn't an AT-AT make a respectable kinetic weapon if an ISD captain could tractor one alongside, accelerate to near-light speed while holding it, and let it go on a suitable trajectory?
Strange idea...
If you want to tractor a KDY-v150 you have to tractor a huge generator as well. Or if you use the ISDs generator you reduce the ISD's combat efficiency dramatically. A few systems shold be off-line due to power shortage...
The problem with the tractored AT-ATs is that the can't manouver. So they will fire in one direction.
Their size is to small to rotate them with independant tractor beams.
The idea of using the AT-AT as a kinetic weapon should be similar to the technology the Weyland-Yutani warships used in ALIENS vs. Predator.
However I don't think it would be very effective in the SW universe. The speeded up object would move in a straight line with a relative low speed making an easy target for any tracking computer.
If an ISD is capable to vaporize a metal asteroid with a single blast then a hurled AT-AT won't be a big problem.
Re: Independently Deployed Weapons Platforms
Posted: 2003-02-14 07:22pm
by nightmare
consequences wrote:On an average Imperial ship, you have a number of tractor beams, which normally don't serve much purpose in a straight fight. On the larger ships, you also have various large items of deathdealing equipment, like the AT-AT for example.
Could an Imperial ship tractor its complement of AT-ATs alongside it, and use them for additional firepower?
Yes.
consequences wrote:Would this be useful for additional point-defense,
No.
consequences wrote:or are the power levels involved just too different?
Not against starfighters. The problem isn't firepower but design differences.
consequences wrote:
If you take this to the extreme, would it be possible to tractor a KDY v-150
Yes.
consequences wrote:
for heavy antiship firepower?
No. It equals about one of the ISDs ion cannons. Even if it is considerably much more powerful, there are targeting problems. It would be much more feasible to build a ship specifically for this, however it would either be a converted transport (read totally specialized ship), or a superlaser equipped command ship. Too bad no one thought of that. *cough* Eclipse *cough*
consequences wrote:
Wouldn't an AT-AT make a respectable kinetic weapon if an ISD captain could tractor one alongside, accelerate to near-light speed while holding it, and let it go on a suitable trajectory?
Why waste valuable equipement when you can move rocks? This is only useful against stationary targets btw. Besides, you'd have to move a
lot of rock unless you want them all vapourized.
Posted: 2003-03-04 05:46pm
by consequences
To reply to the last one, why not use up the valuable equipment if there are no rocks in the vicinity, and it improves your chances of not dying.
I was also under the impression that a KDY 150 was signifigantly more powerful than a Star Destroyer's Ion cannon armament.
Posted: 2003-03-04 07:43pm
by Darth Wong
Without the protection of capship shields, the satellites die immediately. Waste of resources. And if you start outfitting them with independent generators, capship-level shields, etc., you're doing an awful lot of work for something which does not have independent mobility. Isn't that what gunboats are for?
Posted: 2003-03-04 08:01pm
by Sea Skimmer
They'd be quickly destroyed and serve no point. Sure you likely could bring a Kd-150 along with you, but unless you can supply it with power there is no point. And if you can supply it, why not use that power with your mounted weapons?
Re: Independently Deployed Weapons Platforms
Posted: 2003-03-04 08:22pm
by Ubiqtorate
The honourable Member consequences:
On an average Imperial ship, you have a number of tractor beams, which normally don't serve much purpose in a straight fight.
In
Heir to the Empire, Grand Admiral Thrawn used turbolaserfire to disable one side of an assault frigate, and used tractor beams to position that side facing the
Chimaera, effectively rendering the frigate combat-inert, and using its own deflector shields to provide additional protection for the Star Destroyer.
The Ubiqtorate trusts that the honourable Member can see how this demonstrates that tractor beam projectors are far from useless in space combat, especially between or among capital ships.
Re: Independently Deployed Weapons Platforms
Posted: 2003-03-04 08:43pm
by Grand Admiral Thrawn
consequences wrote:On an average Imperial ship, you have a number of tractor beams, which normally don't serve much purpose in a straight fight.
The honourable member Ubiqtorate has disproven this.
On the larger ships, you also have various large items of deathdealing equipment, like the AT-AT for example.
Ooh! APCs used in space! Brilliant [/sarcasm]
Could an Imperial ship tractor its complement of AT-ATs alongside it, and use them for additional firepower? Would this be useful for additional point-defense, or are the power levels involved just too different?
Utterly useless. The AT-AT cannot acurately target tiny objects and is vulnerable. The ISD has better point defense weapons.
If you take this to the extreme, would it be possible to tractor a KDY v-150 for heavy antiship firepower?
If an ISD could power this, the gun would be useless as the ISD could simply use its own guns.
Wouldn't an AT-AT make a respectable kinetic weapon if an ISD captain could tractor one alongside, accelerate to near-light speed while holding it, and let it go on a suitable trajectory?
What kind of idiot are you? That's the most stupid idea I've heard in a while. DU, asteroids, etc. would be better, and you wouldn't be THROWING AWAY A PERFECTLY GOOD VEHICLE FOR NOTHING!
Posted: 2003-03-08 12:13pm
by consequences
On all of the points but using the AT-AT as a kinetic weapon, conceded.
All of your assumptions about using rocks instead implies having sufficient prep time and warning.
Scenario: You are an ISD captain, patrolling in an asteroid free environment, and you are jumped by superior forces, including at least one Interdictor, screened well enough that charging in to try and kill it would be suicide. Your options:
1. Surrender immediately.
2. Attempt to flee(and fail).
3. Fight it out conventionally in the sure and certain knowledge that you will lose.
4. Pick the largest enemy ship, accelerate to full, and ram it to try to take someone with you.
5. Unconventional tactics.
If your ship is destroyed, your oh so valuable AT-ATs, landing barges, and embarked Stormtrooper Legion will be destroyed as well. Use it or lose it.
Posted: 2003-03-08 02:40pm
by Jadeite
On all of the points but using the AT-AT as a kinetic weapon, conceded.
All of your assumptions about using rocks instead implies having sufficient prep time and warning.
Scenario: You are an ISD captain, patrolling in an asteroid free environment, and you are jumped by superior forces, including at least one Interdictor, screened well enough that charging in to try and kill it would be suicide. Your options:
1. Surrender immediately.
2. Attempt to flee(and fail).
3. Fight it out conventionally in the sure and certain knowledge that you will lose.
4. Pick the largest enemy ship, accelerate to full, and ram it to try to take someone with you.
5. Unconventional tactics.
If your ship is destroyed, your oh so valuable AT-ATs, landing barges, and embarked Stormtrooper Legion will be destroyed as well. Use it or lose it.
If the ISD is outgunned by a superior force, then hurling equipment at them isnt going to do anything. An AT-AT hitting a ship is going to do less damage than a turbolaser, if any. Also, an ISD is going to run out of equipment before the enemy runs out of shields.
Posted: 2003-03-08 05:54pm
by Admiral Johnason
You would be better off taking of the heads of AT-STs and using them as turrets. Now I alwasy thought that bringing along a few really small defense platforms (about the size of an AT-AT) would be a good idea for when your are in a crunch. They would be aremed with medium and light TLs and maybe some special one with LTLs and concussion missles. They would only have light thrusters and heavy sheilds.
Posted: 2003-03-09 09:20am
by consequences
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On all of the points but using the AT-AT as a kinetic weapon, conceded.
All of your assumptions about using rocks instead implies having sufficient prep time and warning.
Scenario: You are an ISD captain, patrolling in an asteroid free environment, and you are jumped by superior forces, including at least one Interdictor, screened well enough that charging in to try and kill it would be suicide. Your options:
1. Surrender immediately.
2. Attempt to flee(and fail).
3. Fight it out conventionally in the sure and certain knowledge that you will lose.
4. Pick the largest enemy ship, accelerate to full, and ram it to try to take someone with you.
5. Unconventional tactics.
If your ship is destroyed, your oh so valuable AT-ATs, landing barges, and embarked Stormtrooper Legion will be destroyed as well. Use it or lose it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the ISD is outgunned by a superior force, then hurling equipment at them isnt going to do anything. An AT-AT hitting a ship is going to do less damage than a turbolaser, if any. Also, an ISD is going to run out of equipment before the enemy runs out of shields.
An AT-AT accelerated to a signifigant fraction of light speed is a not inconsiderable threat. Remember that kinetic weapons have a much higher effect on shields in some ways than energy weapons(if you don't remember, then read Mike Wong's shield analysis page).
