Victory-SD Firepower

[Crossroads Inc.]

Ok,

While they do not seem to be favourites among everyone, I personally am quite fond of the old Victories. And, while not shown in the last StarWars film, they are at least casually mentioned in the RotS-ICS book. As such, the Question I pose to you is what sort of fire-power did they have?

There’s never a good image of them, so we never get to see what sort of guns they \, but I would imagine they have two banks of four TurboLasers as All SD type ships possessed. Obviously less powerful then the big guns on an ISD-I, but perhaps slightly stronger then those on the Venator Ships.

However, does anyone have any idea of a more substantial list of their overall weapons and what class they are?

[Illuminatus Primus]

I imagine they are two-barreled weapons similar to those envisioned in early, smaller concepts of the Imperator.

[Firefox]

Wouldn't the fact that the VicStar lacks the expansive hangar facilities of the Venator indicate that it's a more powerful ship? They're supposed to sport a ventral reactor bulb, which is indicative of a fairly large power source.

Of course, they're 237m shorter than the Venator class, but again, they don't have the large hangar space that can otherwise be used for power generation.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Wouldn't the fact that the VicStar lacks the expansive hangar facilities of the Venator indicate that it's a more powerful ship? They're supposed to sport a ventral reactor bulb, which is indicative of a fairly large power source.

Of course, they're 237m shorter than the Venator class, but again, they don't have the large hangar space that can otherwise be used for power generation.

I'm willing to venture they'd be at least as powerful as, and possibly more powerful, than the Venator-class.

[White Haven]

Dedicated warship as opposed to some 'I carry more fighters than God' wannabe destroyer? It better bloody outpower a Venator.

[Firefox]

I'm inclined to agree that they're at least as powerful as the VenStar, though my gut suggests they possess greater firepower, given their pure capship role. The VicStar also has only two primary thrusters which seem to be little bigger than each of the four on the VenStar. Perhaps the glorified carrier has better propulsion to trade off her reduced firepower?

[Imperator Galacticus]

Aright, here are the specifications of the Victory-class as follows:

Victory I

Length: 900 m
crew: 5,200 (2,040 stormtroopers)
weapons:

10 quad turbolaser batteries
40 double turbolaser batteries
unknown amount of concussion missles(are capital scale though)
10 tractor beam projectors

Miscelleneous: No mention of model of turbolaser. Ship's role is centered more toward planetary assault, defense, troop transport. Can enter atmosphere.

Victory II

crew: 6,107(1,600 stormtroopers)
weapons:

20 turbolaser batteries
20 double turbolaser batteries
10 ion cannons
10 tractor beam projectors

shields: increased shield strength over Victory I

Miscelleneous: Victory II is geared towards anti-ship combat and has significantly superior sublight acceleration and tractor beams over Victory I, and comes readily available with two full squadrons of TIEs.

Pictures of said craft:

http://theforce.net/swtc/Pix/books/art/anhvsd.jpg
http://theforce.net/swtc/Pix/books/egvv/vsd-eg1.gif

If I'm not mistaken those four dark notches near the bridge tower in picture #1 appear to be HTL turrets. What are specs for the Venator?

[Lord Revan]

Well both the Victory and the Vendator have reactor Bulb (IIRC) true that Victory is shorter but it also lack the Huge hargar of the Vendator (VSDI had only 2 fighter squad (IIRC)). So I would that a VSD is at least as powerfull as a Vendator (if not more powerfull).

[Firefox]

As far as I've been able to tell, the VenStar doesn't have a ventral bulb. The reactor's located higher up, taking up most of the superstructure.

The specs for the Venator are as follows (for those lacking the ICS):

Manufacturer: Kuat Drive Yards
Make: Venator-class Star Destroyer
Dimensions: length 1,137m (3,729 ft); wingspan 548m (1,797 ft); height (in flight) 268m (879 ft)
Max. acceleration (linear, in open space): 3,000G
Hyperdrive: class 1.0; 60,000 light year effective range
Crew: 7,400
Armament: 8 heavy turbolaser turrets; 2 medium dual turbolaser cannons; 52 point-defense laser cannons; 4 proton torpedo tubes; 6 tractor beam projectors
Complement: 192 V-wing fighters; 192 Eta-2 Actis Interceptors; 36 ARC-170 fighters; 24 military walkers; 40 LAAT/i gunships; miscellaneous shuttles

[Lord Revan]

snip

so even if ignore the Eta-2s an Venator has 19 fighter squad (for comparison a VSD has 2 and an ISD has 6) (if include the Eta-2s a Venator has 36 fighter squads) so it looks like a Venator has more fighter but less guns then a VSD.

EDIT:corrected some typos (thanks Firefox for spotting them.)

[Firefox]

That's Venator, actually.

It looks like a tradeoff, though. More fighters for less guns, while they seem to have a larger sublight suite to accelerate the beast. Even if the VicStar has a larger reactor, it would be needed to push its presumably larger bulk through space. Because it's lighter, the Venator can probably out-accelerate the older VicStar.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Even if the VicStar has a larger reactor, it would be needed to push its presumably larger bulk through space. Because it's lighter, the Venator can probably out-accelerate the older VicStar.

This makes sense, The Victory-SD is shorter, but far far more dense. The Venator Is longer and larger, but much lighter as it is largely Hollow inside.

And seeing the full stats of the Victories is really informative, but of course, where the problem is is it doesn't say what types or how many. What we really need is a run-down of the weapons by Turret size and type like the: 8 heavy turbolaser turrets; 2 medium dual turbolaser cannons; 52 point-defense laser cannons we get for the Venator in RotS-ICS.

Oh! how we needed a Victory at the battle of courscant, just ONE! And we could have had an excuse to see one in the ICS!

[Chris OFarrell]

I think in ROTS:ICS they are mentioned as being roughly on par with each other. I am guessing this factors in the VSD's heavy firepower against its small fighter support as well as the VNSD's massive fighter wing and point defence layout to reduce or nullify the huge concussion missile throw weight of the VSD.

[Firefox]

The only real mention of the VSD in the ICS is that its hangar space is less than that of the VenStar. No comparison of size or power generation is made, unfortunately.

[Chris OFarrell]

The only real mention of the VSD in the ICS is that its hangar space is less than that of the VenStar. No comparison of size or power generation is made, unfortunately.

Yes it is, if indirectly. When talking about that small CIS Destroyer thing. How it would take 6-8 of them to match up against either a VSD or VNSD. Clearly putting them on roughly the same level, just different jobs,

[Firefox]

You're correct. I'd forgotten about that entry. That seems to put them on equal terms.

[nesaminos]

How come the weapons description of the Venator mentions 52 point defense lasers, but the victory doesn't seem to have any?

[Lord Revan]

How come the weapons description of the Venator mentions 52 point defense lasers, but the victory doesn't seem to have any?

older material plus the VSD stats might be from WEG (and as such might be inaccurate) (IIRC) most stats for ISD does mention PD-lasers, but that doesn't mean there isn't any.

[Alan Bolte]

I would ignore the WEG stats entirely. They didn't mean 10 quad turbolasers total, they meant 10 identical quad turbolasers. They list the ISD I as having 60 identical turbolasers, and no other laser weapons. It's basically just game mechanics with some meaningless fluff (name, manufacturer) tacked on.

[President Sharky]

The guns labelled as "point defence laser canons" on the Venator are large enough, im my opinon, to be light turbolasers. They truly dwarf the similar laser cannons on an Acclamator. Saxton probably meant that they were heavy PDGs, with short range, but high firepower on par with LTLs.

[Stark]

I thought VSDs didn't have any visible weapons at all?

[FTeik]

According to the ROTS:ICS it takes 4-6 CommerceGuildDestroyers (Recusant-Class) to fight a Victory or a Venator.

The Recusant annihilates 8,600 tons of fuel at maximum, the Venator 40,000 so the Venator roughly equals 4.6 Recusants. If the Victory equals 6 Recusant we get a fuel-annihilation of 51,600 tons of fuel per second at maximum output.

So we get:

Recusant: 7.74*10E23 Watt
Venator: 3.6*10E24 Watt
Victory: 4.64*10E24 Watt

However, as far as firepower is concerned much of the firepower of the Victory comes from its 80 missiles.

[Firefox]

Not wanting to start another topic, I've started having thoughts about the VicStar's true configuration. For example, I've seen two different engine arrangements (two primary/two secondary; three primary/four secondary) as well as other features, such as the brim extensions.

This site, devoted to creating higher-quality and more accurate ship models for the game X-Wing Alliance, has a configuration that I like. Are there any disagreements concerning this design?

And to reveal a secondary motivation for this, I'm interested in converting an AMT Star Destroyer kit into a VicStar. If it's the same size as my Hasbro ISD, the hull would lend itself nicely to a VSD of the same scale as the Venator class Revell's putting out. At least it would be a cool comparison between the two Star Destroyer types from the Clone Wars, and serve as an explainer of the differing design philosophies. (I'm starting to wonder if, using SoD, KDY dumped the Acclamator-Venator design lineage in favor of Rendili's design when creating the Imperator class.)


EDIT: I went over Saxton's writing on the VSD, and I accept his interpretation of the design (two primary, two secondary sublights). Are there any opinions on XWA Upgrade's rendition?

[Crossroads Inc.]

-snip-

FireFox? if you are able to make a Modle of a Victory-SD you will SO Be my Hero! *hugs FireFox*

[Vanas]

I think the HW2 Warlords VSDI has engines of pretty much the same arrangement. I do like the design, personally.

I'd imagine their 'official' firepower would be rather impressive, if not quite BDZ level.