Which would you prefer to use in combat?

[Alexus]

Which would you rather use in combat?

Despite these arguments:

"St00p1d! T3h xwinGs are 00b3r th3y c4n bl0w up sssds!!1"

"Y0ur gai! H4!"

I think I'll go with the TIE. Stylish.

[McC]

The TIE interceptor is a superior superiority starfighter. While the X-wing is classed as a superiority fighter, it's still built as a multi-role craft rather than a dedicated superiority starfighter. As such, the Interceptor has that edge over it.

TIE interceptors are faster (greater acceleration)
Excepting torpedoes, they share at least equal armament. There's some dispute over exactly how many guns the TIE interceptor carries.
All instances of TIE interceptor performance suggest that it is not only faster, but more maneuverable.

If someone made a realistic SW space-combat game, I'd gladly select a T/I over an XW.

There's also the little fact that a T/I requires a base ship. I like the idea of having a full Star Destroyer supporting my ass

[Crazedwraith]

X-Wing.

The TIE is superior if flown well but i'd rather have some margin for error. SO basically shields rocks.

Besides Protorps means I can smite TIEs before they can get in range to smite back.

[McC]

X-Wing.

The TIE is superior if flown well but i'd rather have some margin for error. SO basically shields rocks.

Besides Protorps means I can smite TIEs before they can get in range to smite back.

If your opponent is dumb enough to get hit by one.

And your shields have only demonstrated resistance to indirect hits. If I get a good shot right at you, g'bye

[Praxis]

Which would you rather use in combat?

Despite these arguments:

"St00p1d! T3h xwinGs are 00b3r th3y c4n bl0w up sssds!!1"

"Y0ur gai! H4!"

I think I'll go with the TIE. Stylish.

X-wing. Shields. The TIE might have better maneuverability, but if I slip up once and take a hit, I'm okay. If the TIE slips up once, he's dead.

Plus the seeking torpedoes are veeeeery useful

[Praxis]

X-Wing.

The TIE is superior if flown well but i'd rather have some margin for error. SO basically shields rocks.

Besides Protorps means I can smite TIEs before they can get in range to smite back.

If your opponent is dumb enough to get hit by one.

And your shields have only demonstrated resistance to indirect hits. If I get a good shot right at you, g'bye

Sure, any intelligent TIE pilot is able to avoid a SEEKING torpedo that can perform a turn at 7,200g...

[Praxis]

The TIE interceptor is a superior superiority starfighter. While the X-wing is classed as a superiority fighter, it's still built as a multi-role craft rather than a dedicated superiority starfighter. As such, the Interceptor has that edge over it.

TIE interceptors are faster (greater acceleration)
Excepting torpedoes, they share at least equal armament. There's some dispute over exactly how many guns the TIE interceptor carries.
All instances of TIE interceptor performance suggest that it is not only faster, but more maneuverable.

If someone made a realistic SW space-combat game, I'd gladly select a T/I over an XW.

There's also the little fact that a T/I requires a base ship. I like the idea of having a full Star Destroyer supporting my ass

Torpedoes make a big difference- you can take out six fighters from long range before you actually engage them. And you forgot shields.

[McC]

Torpedoes make a big difference- you can take out six fighters from long range before you actually engage them. And you forgot shields.

No, I omitted shields. There's a difference. Consider that TIE fighters and X-wings have relative parity based on everything we've ever seen about the two craft, and then pit an X-wing against a TIE interceptor. The X-wing loses. Period. Shields are vastly overrated (largely due to brainbugs planted by game mechcanics, I guess) when placed aboard starfighters based on G-level canon demonstrations of shielded starfighter performance.

I also invite you to show me in G-level canon (say, ROTJ) where an X-wing ever fires a proton torpedo at a TIE...or anything other than a fixed target, for that matter.

[Nick Lancaster]

Actually, I'd take the X-Wing over an Interceptor.

But I'd take a TIE Defender over an X-Wing.

[Rogue 9]

All instances of TIE interceptor performance suggest that it is not only faster, but more maneuverable.

Really?

Come now, you made that clip and it's on your site. I'd think you'd remember it. If the TIE is so much more maneuverable, why was Wedge cutting inside his turn instead of the other way around?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

If the TIE is so much more maneuverable, why was Wedge cutting inside his turn instead of the other way around?

It looks to me, though I may be wrong, as if the two pilots begin the hard turning at different points. Plus, the TIE pilot might have been concentrating too much on hitting Wedge, not on making the turn, until it was too late. I don't know if we can use that as a cut-and-dry statement for the relative maneuverabilities of the two crafts.

[Alexus]

I think the X-Wing was designed to be easy to fly. You can just read the manual, fly some simulators and you're ready, while TIE pilots have more time to hone their skills. That's why half a dozen TIEs owned the Rebels in ANH.

[Vanas]

With an hour's training, I'd take the X-wing. Plus, they do have the looks.

Given full training, again, the X-wing. If it were a sheilded T/I or TIE Defender, I'd take one of them.

Or, a remote controlled TIE/D (+Speed +maneuver -Getting killed)

[Alexus]

I'd take the X-wing. Plus, they do have the looks.

The X-Wings could do with a polish. And their paint touched up.

[Sephirius]

I like having a hyperdrive and an R2 that can repair me on the fly.

[Lord Zentei]

This was a toughy. What decided it was the limited usefulness of starfighter shields and the TIE-I's stylishness.

If it had been a Tie-D, there would have been no contest.

[Galvatron]

The X-wank.

[Vanas]

They look used. That's the important thing. Every TIE looks brand new.
I dunno, but that doesn't exactly inspire me with confidence.

[NecronLord]

The TIE is superior if flown well but i'd rather have some margin for error. SO basically shields rocks.

The films contradict that the TIE fighter (not Interceptor) lacks an ejector seat. It may well also have shields. Certainly there is filmatic evidence of TIE shields, but not enough to conclusively disprove in the same manner as the 'lack of an ejection seat' is disproven.

[Crazedwraith]

The TIE is superior if flown well but i'd rather have some margin for error. SO basically shields rocks.

The films contradict that the TIE fighter (not Interceptor) lacks an ejector seat. It may well also have shields. Certainly there is filmatic evidence of TIE shields, but not enough to conclusively disprove in the same manner as the 'lack of an ejection seat' is disproven.

Did I mention ejection seats at all?

Besides hull wise TIEs seem much more fragile. They're pilot rarely seem to survive to use the ejectors.

Look at ANH. When X-Wings and Y-Wing get blast they didn't to exploded and stay more or less in one peice. TIEs just go boom and theres nothing less.

When was the last we saw TIE take hits and actually survive. X-Wings even some piloted by noname flight officer survive hits.

TIEs just go boom.

[Wicked Pilot]

I'm suprised no one has posted numbers yet. Here is a quick canon analysis of Alliance vs Imperial fighter kill ratios in open space.

A New Hope

X-Wing vs TIE Fighter: 2-1

Return of the Jedi

X-Wing vs TIE Fighter: 0-1
X-Wing vs TIE Interceptor: 2-0
A-Wing vs TIE Interceptor: 2-1
Y-Wing vs TIE Fighter: 0-1
Y-Wing vs TIE Interceptor: 2-0

Final Tally

X-Wing: 4-2
A-Wing: 2-1
Y-Wing: 2-1
TIE Fighter: 3-2
TIE Interceptor: 1-6


There you have it, take it for what it's worth.

[Praxis]

Torpedoes make a big difference- you can take out six fighters from long range before you actually engage them. And you forgot shields.

No, I omitted shields. There's a difference. Consider that TIE fighters and X-wings have relative parity based on everything we've ever seen about the two craft, and then pit an X-wing against a TIE interceptor. The X-wing loses. Period. Shields are vastly overrated (largely due to brainbugs planted by game mechcanics, I guess) when placed aboard starfighters based on G-level canon demonstrations of shielded starfighter performance.

Read the Rogue Squadron books sometime. Sure, it can only take a couple hits, but it's better than taking NO hits.

I also invite you to show me in G-level canon (say, ROTJ) where an X-wing ever fires a proton torpedo at a TIE...or anything other than a fixed target, for that matter.

You sound like Darkstar
They never had a reason to- in all the big battles we see, the X-wings of course ALWAYS save the torpedoes to throw at the big ships. It's overkill vs a fighter.

However, in the case of X-wing vs TIE, if there are no capships to save torps for, it provides a huge advantage.

Go read some EU sometime.

[Crossroads Inc.]

All I know is that, depsite the Über wanking that happened in books like Rogue Squadron, and several nefarious X-Wing based video games...

All things being equal I would like a fighter with Shields, Torps, and a Hyperdrive over one that doesn’t, X-Wing or not. The TIE-Interceptor is an evil thing, and I’m not going to in any way belittle it’s awesome potential, but, I have my preferences,

I think 'Nick' sumed up how I feel best...

Actually, I'd take the X-Wing over an Interceptor.

But I'd take a TIE Defender over an X-Wing.

Glory to the TIE Defender!

[The Original Nex]

I'm suprised no one has posted numbers yet. Here is a quick canon analysis of Alliance vs Imperial fighter kill ratios in open space.

Snip Numbers


There you have it, take it for what it's worth.

Excepting that that's but a tiny fraction of kills scored throughout the whole battle. So those tallys are anything if not inaccurate.

[consequences]

Torpedoes make a big difference- you can take out six fighters from long range before you actually engage them. And you forgot shields.

No, I omitted shields. There's a difference. Consider that TIE fighters and X-wings have relative parity based on everything we've ever seen about the two craft, and then pit an X-wing against a TIE interceptor. The X-wing loses. Period. Shields are vastly overrated (largely due to brainbugs planted by game mechcanics, I guess) when placed aboard starfighters based on G-level canon demonstrations of shielded starfighter performance.

Read the Rogue Squadron books sometime. Sure, it can only take a couple hits, but it's better than taking NO hits.

I also invite you to show me in G-level canon (say, ROTJ) where an X-wing ever fires a proton torpedo at a TIE...or anything other than a fixed target, for that matter.

You sound like Darkstar
They never had a reason to- in all the big battles we see, the X-wings of course ALWAYS save the torpedoes to throw at the big ships. It's overkill vs a fighter.

However, in the case of X-wing vs TIE, if there are no capships to save torps for, it provides a huge advantage.

Go read some EU sometime.

Piss on the Rogue Squadron Books. Stackpole can't even make up his mind on how much shields protect fighters, we have instances of shielded fighters getting one-shotted as long as a named character isn't driving them. He even admitted that game mechanics were the primary source material used to determine fighter interaction.

If you want some EU examples, I could always go with Truce at Bakura, where the little automated fighters the Ssi-Ruuk have are said to be as difficult to implode as a TIE fighter, implying that its not the auto-splut that Stackpole likes to make it out to be.