ICS Stats

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2004-09-15 02:17pm

Anyone have a preference concerning the stats in the Cross-Sections books? Should they be scattered in the text around the ship or piece of equipment in question like the SW:ICS, or should there be a dedicated "Data File" in one corner of the page like in the AOTC:ICS?

I like the Data File. It summarizes all the stats of the ship on the page that the paragraphs give you more insight on. I also like all the pointers around the ship that gives even more detail to every aspect of the craft.

What do you think should be added, or changed? Should the Data File include more stats, or should there be one at all?

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-09-15 02:22pm

To have it all in one data-file is nice, because you can find all relevant things really quick, without too much seaching.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2004-09-15 02:25pm

I prefer the data file, and honestly as much as they can give.

It gives an interesting look to it all.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-09-15 04:19pm

I like the data file, but I would add: power output to engines, power output to shields, power output to weaponry, reactor volume, and approximate maximum superluminal velocity (in addition to hyperdrive class rating).

Also, a volume of the whole ship would be nice too.

Techno_Union · Post by **Techno_Union** » 2004-09-15 04:56pm

Going with the flow, I like the data files. Its easier to just look in one place for the stats then to be searching the pages.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2004-09-15 09:59pm

Data files. It's far more organized, and I like the look of it better. Perhaps add a few more stats in it for each ship.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-09-16 02:37am

Data file. It should definitely not be anything else- I like all the information in one place where I can find it ....

Why?

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-09-16 02:46am

It was only like the best thing that occurred to SW not counting the movies themselves!

Primus wrote:I like the data file, but I would add: power output to engines, power output to shields, power output to weaponry, reactor volume, and approximate maximum superluminal velocity (in addition to hyperdrive class rating).

You can estimate reactor volume by scaling the cut-away. Maximum superluminal velocity depends on region and astrogation data ('maximum' by be less useful than the RMAX shown in a missile brochure). Power output to each component is voluntary.

I'd prefer minature diagrammatics for fire arcs of the heavy guns. I want some statistics on Fuel consumption versus Hyperspace Point Factor - I want at least one set for Cruise and one for Flank. I want detailed crew stats (how many in Engineering, how many in Navigation). I want Sensor and Comm Ranges - either they give the standard of comparison or they can default to mean detecting a ship like themselves.

Preferably, I want the Data File and diagrammatics expanded to take up one whole column of the page. It needs to get taller, not wider. Or wider, but not taller.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-09-16 04:02am

If I have to choose between new stuff, and stuff we already got in ICS, I'd take the stuff we already got- remember there's a word limit to be adhered to.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-09-16 08:08am

I'd think that the data file isn't a great idea. Aside from making it seem like an RPG, you run the risk of getting a really dumb writer who puts in numbers you really don't like, and it will be canon, particularly in terms of speed and firepower. Not everyone who writes this stuff at LucasBook is as well read and well educated as Curt Saxton. A data file just begs some loser to say that a heavy turbolaser is twice the power of the Hiroshima bomb (as if it's a huge deal in StarWars) and George Lucas will sign off on it because he honestly doesn't care as long as it brings him more money.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-09-16 09:09am

Gil Hamilton wrote:I'd think that the data file isn't a great idea. Aside from making it seem like an RPG, you run the risk of getting a really dumb writer who puts in numbers you really don't like, and it will be canon, particularly in terms of speed and firepower. Not everyone who writes this stuff at LucasBook is as well read and well educated as Curt Saxton. A data file just begs some loser to say that a heavy turbolaser is twice the power of the Hiroshima bomb (as if it's a huge deal in StarWars) and George Lucas will sign off on it because he honestly doesn't care as long as it brings him more money.

We're talking the ICS books here Gil- of which there's only one more to come- the ROTS one- and I think we know who's writing it. There's no risk of stupid figures. The AOTC ICS already had a datafile.

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-09-16 09:36am

Vympel wrote:We're talking the ICS books here Gil- of which there's only one more to come- the ROTS one- and I think we know who's writing it. There's no risk of stupid figures. The AOTC ICS already had a datafile.

We aren't totally safe until the book comes out. Curtis Saxton might just have a falling out with LFL, who would then bring in a scientific ignoramus.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-09-16 09:39am

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:
We aren't totally safe until the book comes out. Curtis Saxton might just have a falling out with LFL, who would then bring in a scientific ignoramus.

Stop playing the pessimist, dammit

No, if that were to happen, they'd get Dr. David W. Reynolds back- he did the OT ICS and the Episode 1 ICS- though he didn't have any performance data, both of those ICS are good work.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-09-16 11:31am

Vympel wrote:Stop playing the pessimist, dammit

No, if that were to happen, they'd get Dr. David W. Reynolds back- he did the OT ICS and the Episode 1 ICS- though he didn't have any performance data, both of those ICS are good work.

Didn't he label the panels on TIEs as solar panels and write that godawful description of how they worked?

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-09-16 11:42am

Gil Hamilton wrote: Didn't he label the panels on TIEs as solar panels and write that godawful description of how they worked?

No- I'd quote the description, but I want to go to bed and it's hard quoting from such a big ass book (doesnt' fit on the desk)- will do so tomorrow- the OT ICS doesn't say that the TIEs run off solar power, I'm sure of it.

The good work he did was resolving the Tantive IV's and Millennium Falcon's internal layout issues.

the cool thing is that the OT:ICS has probably been used for ROTS (Tantive IV is in ROTS)

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-09-16 12:14pm

Vympel wrote:The good work he did was resolving the Tantive IV's and Millennium Falcon's internal layout issues.

But we lose any chance of getting 'Imperial' corrected back to what it should be.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-09-16 01:59pm

Datafile. And while IP brings up some good points, I'd rather just have a larger wordcount mean expanding to cover more of the vehicles and ships instead of just a little more data about a few. I'm still disappointed that a bunch of things gor cut from the AOTCICS (droids, hailfire droid, SPHA-T, etc)

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-09-16 04:28pm

Vympel wrote:No- I'd quote the description, but I want to go to bed and it's hard quoting from such a big ass book (doesnt' fit on the desk)- will do so tomorrow- the OT ICS doesn't say that the TIEs run off solar power, I'm sure of it.

The good work he did was resolving the Tantive IV's and Millennium Falcon's internal layout issues.

No, I'm looking at the original ICS right now and it clearly labels them as solar panels, for use in energizing the radioactive fuel in the tank under the cockpit.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-09-16 06:20pm

DWR's most shameful canon remarks.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-09-16 08:58pm

Here is the original ICS entry if you want to throw it around.

Hurtling thought space, the TIE fighters are the most visible image of the Empire's wide-reaching power. The TIE fight engine is the most precisely manufactured propulsion system in the galaxy. Solar ionization collects light energy and channels it through a reactor to fire emissions from a high-pressure radioactive gas. The engine has no moving parts, making it low-maintainance. To reduce the mass of the ship, TIE fighters are built without defensive shields, hyperdrive capability, and life support systems - so the pilots must wear spacesuits. The lightweight ship gains space and maneuverability at the price of fragility and dependance on nearby Imperial bases or larger craft for support.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2004-09-17 12:26am

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Vympel wrote:No- I'd quote the description, but I want to go to bed and it's hard quoting from such a big ass book (doesnt' fit on the desk)- will do so tomorrow- the OT ICS doesn't say that the TIEs run off solar power, I'm sure of it.

The good work he did was resolving the Tantive IV's and Millennium Falcon's internal layout issues.
No, I'm looking at the original ICS right now and it clearly labels them as solar panels, for use in energizing the radioactive fuel in the tank under the cockpit.

It says they power "solar ionization" by collecting light energy. It doesn't specify that the "light energy" comes from only one partticular source, though.

Further, the panels appear to be multi-function, as they do mention "heat exchange panels" which suggests radiator-like functions.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2004-09-19 01:11pm

I really like the Data File, the stats are easier to make out.

EDIT: I agree with IP, some more detailed stats would be welcome. I also agree with Ender about the things that didn't make it to the AOTC:ICS. I hope that DK will some day publish a really thick ICS with all the vechicles, ships etc. from both trilogies (not to mention a thick Inside the Worlds).

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-09-19 01:24pm

Connor MacLeod wrote:It says they power "solar ionization" by collecting light energy. It doesn't specify that the "light energy" comes from only one partticular source, though.

What else can "solar ionization" means except using solar energy to ionize stuff? Also, what else in there in space except star light and some solar wind/dust? You don't get light energy from dust, after all. It's pretty clear they are talking about solar panels there. Plus, they'd need heat exchangers in solar panels. Those devils can get hot, especially if they are doing it by using the light to heat liquid moving through those tubes.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

ICS Stats

ICS Stats

They can't be thinking of removing the Data File, could they