an SW ship question

PSW: discuss Star Wars without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12238
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

an SW ship question

Post by Lord Revan »

Is there any SW ships that have exelent firepower, but little to no battlefield durability and they must rely on other ships to take the punishment or the first salvo to disable and/or destroy the enemy?
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n
User avatar
Tychu
Jedi Master
Posts: 1260
Joined: 2002-07-28 01:20am
Location: Deer Park, Long Island, New York
Contact:

Post by Tychu »

really the B-wing. It was made to destroy Star Destroyers but it really cant defend itself to well.

if your asking what i think your asking in the same terms you can say the Star Destroyers have excellent firepower but without its TIEs and other Destroyers it cant really protect itself from Snub fighters and other capital ships
"Boring Conversation anyway" Han Solo

"What kinda archeologist carries a weapon........Bad Example" Colonel Jack O'Neil

"My name is Olo... Hans Olo" -Dr. Daniel Jackson

"Well you did make the Farmingdale Run in less than 12 parsecs" --Personal Quote

"Just popped out for lunch" - Rowan Atkinson as Mr. Bean
User avatar
Ghost Rider
Spirit of Vengeance
Posts: 27779
Joined: 2002-09-24 01:48pm
Location: DC...looking up from the gutters to the stars

Post by Ghost Rider »

Frigates...not ISDs. While there is a picture of it destroying ISD, that's the same as saying we should accept Stormtroopers had hand held shields and swords.

And there is the inherent problem that if they can utilitze that amount of firepower with guns on a captial ship level, there is a limit given they still need to deal with recoil.
MM /CF/WG/BOTM/JL/Original Warsie/ACPATHNTDWATGODW FOREVER!!

Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all

Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete
User avatar
Isolder74
Official SD.Net Ace of Cakes
Posts: 6762
Joined: 2002-07-10 01:16am
Location: Weber State of Construction University
Contact:

Post by Isolder74 »

Ghost Rider wrote:Frigates...not ISDs. While there is a picture of it destroying ISD, that's the same as saying we should accept Stormtroopers had hand held shields and swords.

And there is the inherent problem that if they can utilitze that amount of firepower with guns on a captial ship level, there is a limit given they still need to deal with recoil.
And the picture is from The Battle Of Endor after all which is B-Wings WITH Capitol Ship support.


I would figure that the Endor B-Wings were trying not to use they ordinance in order to save the torpedoes for a possible attack on the Death Star.
Hapan Battle Dragons Rule!
When you want peace prepare for war! --Confusious
That was disapointing ..Should we show this Federation how to build a ship so we may have worthy foes? Typhonis 1
The Prince of The Writer's Guild|HAB Spacewolf Tank General| God Bless America!
User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12238
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

Post by Lord Revan »

Actually ISDs aren't a fish out of dry water wthout it's fighters (the VnSD aren't and they have a much larger fighter compliment so there's no reason to assume the ISDs would be) and they have reasonble good combat durability (it takes about 30 mins for MonCal Cruisers to destroy ISDs and a VnSD took a broadside from the Invisible Hand and survived.

A modern Supercarrier is good example of what I mean, they have massive firepower in the form of their fighter, but need a reasonble large fleet to escort them as they wouldn't survive a ship-to-ship encounter (or any other form of combat where the carrier takes hits)
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n
User avatar
Vanas
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1808
Joined: 2005-03-12 05:31pm
Location: Surfing the Moho
Contact:

Post by Vanas »

Hapan ships? IIRC, they've got sucky recharge times for their guns, so just have to go batshit insane with an opening volley and pray whatever's on the other side doesn't survive....
According to wikipedia, "the Mohorovičić discontinuity is the boundary between the Earth's crust and the mantle."
According to Starbound, it's a problem solvable with enough combat drugs to turn you into the Incredible Hulk.
User avatar
Doctor Doom
Padawan Learner
Posts: 189
Joined: 2005-10-12 05:02pm
Location: Latveria

Post by Doctor Doom »

Well, going back to the analogy of the modern supercarrier, there are pure carrier ships in Star Wars they require escort. I forget the technical designation, but many of the Star Wars computer games (TIE Fighter in particular) utilizes the Imperial Escort Carrier, which can carry a large load of fighters, but lacks much in the way of protection.
Friendship is like peeing in your pants. Everyone can see it, but only you can feel the warmth.
Grandmaster Jogurt
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1725
Joined: 2004-12-16 04:01am

Re: an SW ship question

Post by Grandmaster Jogurt »

Lord Revan wrote:Is there any SW ships that have exelent firepower, but little to no battlefield durability and they must rely on other ships to take the punishment or the first salvo to disable and/or destroy the enemy?
The Munificent-class star frigate can be seen as one of these. Its main gun can fire a shot powerful enough to take out a 10-km battlestation, but it then requires 20 minutes to recharge the capacitor to full, assuming it puts no power to anything else.
User avatar
Vanas
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1808
Joined: 2005-03-12 05:31pm
Location: Surfing the Moho
Contact:

Post by Vanas »

And the Flurry from Bakura. A modified Quasar Fire cruiser IIRC. Anyhow, basically a small bridge closely followed by a huge hangar bay. Actually, that's an awful design, as the bay was all open and pointing forwards. But I digress.
According to wikipedia, "the Mohorovičić discontinuity is the boundary between the Earth's crust and the mantle."
According to Starbound, it's a problem solvable with enough combat drugs to turn you into the Incredible Hulk.
User avatar
Coyote
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 12464
Joined: 2002-08-23 01:20am
Location: The glorious Sun-Barge! Isis, Isis, Ra,Ra,Ra!
Contact:

Post by Coyote »

The Lancer clas has excellent anti-starfighter combat ability, but crumples like tinfoil against a capship.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."


In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around!

If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!!
Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
Ypoknons
Jedi Knight
Posts: 999
Joined: 2003-05-13 06:02am
Location: Manhattan (school year), Hong Kong (vacations)
Contact:

Post by Ypoknons »

Coyote wrote:The Lancer clas has excellent anti-starfighter combat ability, but crumples like tinfoil against a capship.
How effect was it really though? Do we see any direct evidence of it wiping out large numbers of starfighters in combat?
Bromma_Herman
Redshirt
Posts: 21
Joined: 2005-10-25 02:54am

Post by Bromma_Herman »

The Lancer relies on low wattage cannons with a hight rate of fire wich can track a fast vessel. This makes it nearly useless against anything larger then a Corvette.
User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12238
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

Post by Lord Revan »

Well the Lancer is frigate (IIRC) so even if it had proper anti-capship weapons it would be able to deal with anything bigger then a frigate (one step above a corvette) one-on-one
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n
User avatar
Coyote
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 12464
Joined: 2002-08-23 01:20am
Location: The glorious Sun-Barge! Isis, Isis, Ra,Ra,Ra!
Contact:

Post by Coyote »

The Lancer is at frigate class, but part of the backstory on it is that the cannons are too weak for anything other than starfighters-- I guess in theory even a Corellian Gunship or a Corvette could give it trouble. It definitely is supposed to be near-useless against any capship.

The Lancer is an odd vessel-- it has numerous low-wattage cannons and is rather small, but supposedly costs as much as a ISD (although this is a WEG backstory, so be warned), hence they weren't built in great enough numbers ot counter the Rebel's fighter superiority. But they have docking space big enough for two shuttles only, and no other suport ships, so I guess the targeting system and othjer electonics are supposed to be what jacks up the price. No satisfactory answer is given (that I found) for the Lancer to be so expensive.

But the damn thing is 100% one-trick-pony.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."


In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around!

If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!!
Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
User avatar
Crossroads Inc.
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9233
Joined: 2005-03-20 06:26pm
Location: Defending Sparkeling Bishonen
Contact:

Post by Crossroads Inc. »

Coyote wrote:The Lancer is an odd vessel-- it has numerous low-wattage cannons and is rather small, but supposedly costs as much as a ISD (although this is a WEG backstory, so be warned)
And yet one more reason to hate all things WEG...

Lancer = 250 meters
ISD = 1600 meters

Lancer = cost of ISD? :roll:
Praying is another way of doing nothing helpful
"Congratulations, you get a cookie. You almost got a fundamental English word correct." Pick
"Outlaw star has spaceships that punch eachother" Joviwan
Read "Tales From The Crossroads"!
Read "One Wrong Turn"!
User avatar
Alan Bolte
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2611
Joined: 2002-07-05 12:17am
Location: Columbus, OH

Post by Alan Bolte »

You'd think they could just build a version with less expensive electronics, yeah.
Any job worth doing with a laser is worth doing with many, many lasers. -Khrima
There's just no arguing with some people once they've made their minds up about something, and I accept that. That's why I kill them. -Othar
Avatar credit
User avatar
The Original Nex
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1593
Joined: 2004-10-18 03:01pm
Location: Boston, MA

Post by The Original Nex »

You know, I always just figured the Empire could easily replace a few of those quad-laser emplacements with turbolasers to at least make the Lancer's capable of defending themselves. Always thought the the whole "it only fights fighters and needs a protector ALWAYS" was just more WEG stupidity.
User avatar
Crossroads Inc.
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9233
Joined: 2005-03-20 06:26pm
Location: Defending Sparkeling Bishonen
Contact:

Post by Crossroads Inc. »

The fact that cost is a factor is stupidf fin of itself... One of the things WEG goes back too time and again is:

"Well, this WOULD have been better then something the Rebels already have... But it was too expensive so The Empire didn't make many"

HELLO??? This is the Empire? The people who made a Death Star! You think the cost of things like Lancers and TIE-Defenders really matter?
Praying is another way of doing nothing helpful
"Congratulations, you get a cookie. You almost got a fundamental English word correct." Pick
"Outlaw star has spaceships that punch eachother" Joviwan
Read "Tales From The Crossroads"!
Read "One Wrong Turn"!
User avatar
Sea Skimmer
Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
Posts: 37390
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
Location: Passchendaele City, HAB

Post by Sea Skimmer »

The Original Nex wrote:You know, I always just figured the Empire could easily replace a few of those quad-laser emplacements with turbolasers to at least make the Lancer's capable of defending themselves. Always thought the the whole "it only fights fighters and needs a protector ALWAYS" was just more WEG stupidity.
Not necessarily, ships with purely AA and no real anti surface or ASW armament where fairly common as convoy escorts in WW2, in the Allied fleets anyway. They tended to be conversions rather then purpose built ships though.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
User avatar
Cykeisme
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2416
Joined: 2004-12-25 01:47pm
Contact:

Post by Cykeisme »

If they could have a Lancer studded with anti-fighter point defense quad-laser emplacements, why can't they cover an Imperator-class ship with those weapons? There's probably a limit to the effectiveness of point-defense guns, which is why they don't simply mount them by the gazillion, right?
Crossroads Inc. wrote:The fact that cost is a factor is stupidf fin of itself... One of the things WEG goes back too time and again is:

"Well, this WOULD have been better then something the Rebels already have... But it was too expensive so The Empire didn't make many"

HELLO??? This is the Empire? The people who made a Death Star! You think the cost of things like Lancers and TIE-Defenders really matter?
Never mind the stupidity about anythign having a prohibitive cost when it's a galactic government that makes Death Stars.. the whole idea that Imperial starfighters were inferior to Rebel fighters is a damn brainbug in and of itself. Judging from the movie visuals alone, the whole idea that TIEs are less durable than Rebel fighters doesn't gel, but they don't really seem more maneuverable either. Performance-wise they're not that disparate.

The whole "disposable fighter" idea is incredibly stupid anyway. It doesn't make sense for the Galactic Empire to field anything less than the best it can, regardless of the role, whether it's moon-sized planet-killing battle stations, capital ships or starfighters.
"..history has shown the best defense against heavy cavalry are pikemen, so aircraft should mount lances on their noses and fly in tight squares to fend off bombers". - RedImperator

"ha ha, raping puppies is FUN!" - Johonebesus

"It would just be Unicron with pew pew instead of nom nom". - Vendetta, explaining his justified disinterest in the idea of the movie Allspark affecting the Death Star
User avatar
Raxmei
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 2846
Joined: 2002-07-28 04:34pm
Location: Davis, CA
Contact:

Post by Raxmei »

Ypoknons wrote:How effect was it really though? Do we see any direct evidence of it wiping out large numbers of starfighters in combat?
I've only read one Lancer vs Fighter battle. The Lancer was destroyed and the fighter group suffered no losses. Of course this was an X-Wing book and if I recall correctly Corran Horn was involved so take it with a grain of salt.
I prepared Explosive Runes today.
User avatar
Kuja
The Dark Messenger
Posts: 19322
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:05am
Location: AZ

Post by Kuja »

Raxmei wrote:
Ypoknons wrote:How effect was it really though? Do we see any direct evidence of it wiping out large numbers of starfighters in combat?
I've only read one Lancer vs Fighter battle. The Lancer was destroyed and the fighter group suffered no losses. Of course this was an X-Wing book and if I recall correctly Corran Horn was involved so take it with a grain of salt.
About a metric ton's worth. As I recall Corran didn't even get HIT during his attack run.

~20 anti-starfighter cannons. All firing at one inbound X-wing. No hits.

The mind self-destructs trying to understand.
Image
JADAFETWA
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11952
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England

Post by Crazedwraith »

Kuja wrote:
About a metric ton's worth. As I recall Corran didn't even get HIT during his attack run.

~20 anti-starfighter cannons. All firing at one inbound X-wing. No hits.

The mind self-destructs trying to understand.
Presumbly not 20 guns seeing as some must have been the other side of the frigate. And the x-wing was dodging like crazy and wan't trying to anything other than dodge.
Srynerson
Jedi Knight
Posts: 697
Joined: 2005-05-15 12:45am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Srynerson »

Although I know it's a matter of game mechanics, Lancers can be reasonably effective on transport escort duty in Star Wars: Rebellion.
User avatar
Kuja
The Dark Messenger
Posts: 19322
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:05am
Location: AZ

Post by Kuja »

Crazedwraith wrote:
Kuja wrote:
About a metric ton's worth. As I recall Corran didn't even get HIT during his attack run.

~20 anti-starfighter cannons. All firing at one inbound X-wing. No hits.

The mind self-destructs trying to understand.
Presumbly not 20 guns seeing as some must have been the other side of the frigate. And the x-wing was dodging like crazy and wan't trying to anything other than dodge.
And? So? Therefore?


The Lancer failed at its primary purpose: it couldn't shoot down a single fighter coming right in at it. Even with only half the guns being brought to bear, Horn's X-wing should've been shredded.
Image
JADAFETWA
Post Reply