XM-1 Missile Boat
Posted: 2006-08-07 03:51pm
Was replaying TIE Fighter earlier and I was wondering, what is the canon status of this fighter? I'm assuming that it is considered canon, though the actual capabilities are toned down.
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=95983
In game it had 4 launchers. 2 were dedicated to Adv. Missiles, and carried 20 each. The other two could carry 15 Torpedos, 10 rockets, or 5 Bombs each.StarshipTitanic wrote:Doesn't it have around 40 concussion missiles per missile rack, plus whatever you choose to load it with in TIE Fighter?
I think it was more like twenty or so per rack and that the racks were it, though I'd have to look at a guide to be absolutly sure what with Tie Fighter being inoperable these days.StarshipTitanic wrote:The hull itself probably isn't large enough to contain the payload that it supposedly carries, though. Doesn't it have around 40 concussion missiles per missile rack, plus whatever you choose to load it with in TIE Fighter?
Wookiepedia XM-1 Article wrote:The XM-1 Nova Wing, commonly referred to as the missile boat, was an advanced Imperial starfighter built by Cygnus Spaceworks to counter Grand Admiral Zaarin's TIE Defenders.
It was designed by then Vice Admiral Thrawn and it is believed to be based upon the older, more common Alpha-class Xg-1 Star Wing. Its armament consisted of a single laser cannon, two advanced concussion missile launchers capable of holding 40 missiles, two additional projectile launchers which could also be equipped with concussion missiles, or a variety of other warheads, and an optional tractor beam projector. The XM-1 was also equipped with a revolutionary SLAM overdrive system which could double the ship's already impressive speed, but only by rapidly draining energy from its laser cannon.
Because of the fact that this fighter was designed as a missile carrier, it lacked primary firepower, only wielding one laser cannon. To balance this, the missile boat had shields stronger than the X-wing and an overpowering secondary capacity. In addition, the laser cannon had an unusually fast recharge rate compared to other starfighter lasers.
The design was also reasonably maneuverable and relatively difficult to hit. Unfortunately, due to its lack of primary firepower it could be easily eliminated in close combat by a more maneuverable opponent, so it was regularly deployed with support craft. The Nova Wing proved very capable in combat with Zaarin's stolen TIE Defenders.
Now, there is a contradiction in there. It can easily be eliminated in close combat, yet it dominates TIE Defenders? The most agile craft in the EU? Where is the logic? Game mechanics FTW I guess.rhoenix wrote:From Wookiepedia:
( link )
Wookiepedia XM-1 Article wrote:The XM-1 Nova Wing, commonly referred to as the missile boat, was an advanced Imperial starfighter built by Cygnus Spaceworks to counter Grand Admiral Zaarin's TIE Defenders.
It was designed by then Vice Admiral Thrawn and it is believed to be based upon the older, more common Alpha-class Xg-1 Star Wing. Its armament consisted of a single laser cannon, two advanced concussion missile launchers capable of holding 40 missiles, two additional projectile launchers which could also be equipped with concussion missiles, or a variety of other warheads, and an optional tractor beam projector. The XM-1 was also equipped with a revolutionary SLAM overdrive system which could double the ship's already impressive speed, but only by rapidly draining energy from its laser cannon.
Because of the fact that this fighter was designed as a missile carrier, it lacked primary firepower, only wielding one laser cannon. To balance this, the missile boat had shields stronger than the X-wing and an overpowering secondary capacity. In addition, the laser cannon had an unusually fast recharge rate compared to other starfighter lasers.
The design was also reasonably maneuverable and relatively difficult to hit. Unfortunately, due to its lack of primary firepower it could be easily eliminated in close combat by a more maneuverable opponent, so it was regularly deployed with support craft. The Nova Wing proved very capable in combat with Zaarin's stolen TIE Defenders.
Remember that this is Wiki, and even if something isn't outright fraud or BS, people have the tendency to put in assumptions or other unsuported statements. It doesn't even make sense:Vehrec wrote:Now, there is a contradiction in there. It can easily be eliminated in close combat, yet it dominates TIE Defenders? The most agile craft in the EU? Where is the logic? Game mechanics FTW I guess.
First it says that it was "reasonably maneuverable" and tough to hit (which it is in the actual game), then it says that its lack of firepower makes it vulnerable to more maneuverable opponents in close combat. How does only having one laser make you more vulnerable to maneuverability? Lack of firepower is a problem, but a separate one. Also, the G-canon movies show that one or two laser shots is sufficient to destroy even shielded starfighters. Missile boats also sometimes come with starfighter-scale tractor beams, which make dogfighting much easier.The design was also reasonably maneuverable and relatively difficult to hit. Unfortunately, due to its lack of primary firepower it could be easily eliminated in close combat by a more maneuverable opponent, so it was regularly deployed with support craft.
Its saying that with support from TIE defenders, it becomes a very good ship.Vehrec wrote: Now, there is a contradiction in there. It can easily be eliminated in close combat, yet it dominates TIE Defenders? The most agile craft in the EU? Where is the logic? Game mechanics FTW I guess.
No no no, in the game it was Thrawn's counter to Zairin's TIE Defenders, not that it was supported by TIE Defenders.PainRack wrote:Its saying that with support from TIE defenders, it becomes a very good ship.Vehrec wrote: Now, there is a contradiction in there. It can easily be eliminated in close combat, yet it dominates TIE Defenders? The most agile craft in the EU? Where is the logic? Game mechanics FTW I guess.
That's probably close to true. Missile Spam to overwhelm a target. Honestly, I kind of like the missile boat and giggle at the missile boat v Tie Defender senario. Wank ship v wank ship.Civil War Man wrote:I think the article is stating that in a close dogfight, the Missile Boat is at a disadvantage against more maneuverable fighters like the Defender because at short distances the TIE Defender is too agile to hold a missile lock. However, put a Defender and a Missile Boat a few clicks from each other, at a distance where the Missile Boat could hold a lock, and the Missile Boat wins. Even the best Defender pilots can evade an assload of concussion missile for only so long.
Just want to say, though, the Missile boat strikes me as something you get when you take the A-10 Warthog, give it Star Wars-level tech, and then hop it up on crack.
No no no, in the game it was Thrawn's counter to Zairin's TIE Defenders, not that it was supported by TIE Defenders.[/quote]AniThyng wrote: Its saying that with support from TIE defenders, it becomes a very good ship.
Confusion with the V-wing. I made the mi9stake of not checking.VF5SS wrote:I thought it was a SLAM engine that dumped cannon power into the engine. Where's with Scramjet business coming from?
Oops.. my bad. There was a Hapan ship that had the SLAM system of sorts.Ender wrote:Am I the only one who found it odd that you used a scram jet in space?
What ship was that? This is news to me.Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Oops.. my bad. There was a Hapan ship that had the SLAM system of sorts.Ender wrote:Am I the only one who found it odd that you used a scram jet in space?
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Mentioned somewhere in the old Essential Guide to Vehicles that the Hapan MyTil fighter had some generator that could give short bursts of power to give it greater speed.
This is one of many problems with the Wookieepedia format. Lack of proper documentation and an 'in universe' perspective make unsubstantiated speculation and outright fabrication indistinguishable from canonical fact, passing the whole thing off as though it were authoritative (which, as you well know, it is not).GrandAdmiralJello wrote:The game does say that it's designed to destroy TIE Defenders in one of the Combat Chamber briefings. The Wookieepedia entry is completely extrapolating everything about the fighter's manueverability, though.