We may need to reconsider the size of the eclipse guys (PIC)

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2006-09-16 07:09pm

If the Eclipse dominates the screen like that, I don't care how far away the Executor is to it. :P

Besides, it's a game where the TIEs are easily seen alongside the ISDs. Don't trust the visuals and their scaling only.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-16 07:11pm

EDITed for clarity

If the Eclipse dominates the screen like that, I don't care how far away the Executor is to it.

IOW you have NOTHING to base any scaling on.

Besides, it's a game where the TIEs are easily seen alongside the ISDs. Don't trust the visuals and their scaling only.

I'm reasonably certain that was my point.

Yoda · Post by **Yoda** » 2006-09-16 07:18pm

On another note, if pop caps that large are standard, we can look forward too some very large space battles

.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2006-09-16 07:34pm

IOW you have NOTHING to base any scaling on.

Other than the sense that it seems like a head-on confrontation with the Eclipse in the back, but that might be wrong. Conceeded.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-16 08:06pm

VT-16 wrote:
IOW you have NOTHING to base any scaling on.
Other than the sense that it seems like a head-on confrontation with the Eclipse in the back, but that might be wrong. Conceeded.

You still don't get it do you. It being a head-on confrontation doesn't say beans about the DISTANCE it's a head-on confrontation over.
The alleged Executor is in the front, the Eclipse is in the back (not discernable from the picture but if that's the intended setup I'll work with that for the moment). So, the distance between the two is-what?
Head-on confrontation doesn't indicate 'anything' beyond both parties are facing, and likely heading for, each other. The distances involved are completely up for grabs.

darthkommandant · Post by **darthkommandant** » 2006-09-16 11:00pm

The reason I brought this pic up was to see if the scaling was correct which it oviously isn't. Still I hope the real game is like this so I can have a real space battle unlike the ones int EAW in which ISD was like a capital ship.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-09-16 11:05pm

Play HW: Warlords. For it's flaws, it's way better space-battle wise than EaW.

darthkommandant · Post by **darthkommandant** » 2006-09-16 11:07pm

IIrc doesn't that game have a Star Wars Mod for it. Ill try to find it at my local game store.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-09-16 11:10pm

Oops, It's HW*2*:Warlords. I left out the important part there.

It needs a pretty beefy machine, though, so be warned.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-16 11:10pm

@darthkommandant:
It's the next best thing to impossible to determine wether or not the scaling is correct, what with there not being anything definite to scale against.
EVERY LAST SHIP in that picture is at a completely undetermined distance from the camera.

darthkommandant · Post by **darthkommandant** » 2006-09-16 11:14pm

I agree with you since we know the executor is below the ISD's VSD's Accalimator but not by how much. Still I just want to see the ecilpse fire at the ESD.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-16 11:20pm

darthkommandant still doesn't understand the 3rd dimension.

darthkommandant · Post by **darthkommandant** » 2006-09-16 11:25pm

Point conceded. There is no useful way determining any distance what so ever in that pic.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-16 11:43pm

That was a pretty low blow, you know. Here I am , prepared to show why you're a complete and utter fuckwit, and you go ahead and conceed.

Congratulations!!!!!!!!!!! This is the kind of behaviour that may grant you an extended stay around this place.

Zac Naloen · Post by **Zac Naloen** » 2006-09-17 07:24am

One thing i do know about that is that the Eclipse in that picture is on a lower plane than the SSD. The SSD is on a lower plane that the star destroyers etc etc. This is to prevent collisions with the big ships with the smaller ones.

Not that that means anything. besides i'm sure a day after this game is released there will be a canon correction for the size of all the ships.

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2006-09-17 08:24am

Scaling for EAW ships is pretty much total crap, so I wouldn't put much weight on it.

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2006-10-26 11:36am

Apology for reviving a month and a half old thread, but I did see something today which directly relates to the original question posed in this thread about the size of the Eclipse in Empire At War: Forces of Corruption.

The Official Site, Game Overview wrote:The ultimate prize awaits: An immense Super Star Destroyer known as the Eclipse. Spanning the lenght of nearly 11 of the Star Destroyers seen in the original Empire At War, the deadliest capital ship in the galaxy comes equipped with a superlaser rivalling that of the Death Star."

Linky

Nearly 11 means nearly 11*1600=17600. This seems to correspond to the scaling of the Eclipse by Dr. Saxton (17500 IIRC), rather than the Eclipse II, 16000.

Pelranius · Post by **Pelranius** » 2006-10-26 06:53pm

Hey there. My first post on the board.

I'm trying to determine if the Eclipse in Forces of Corruption is the same ship as the one Palpatine was using in DEI?

Since the FOC Eclipse looks pretty much completed, while the TEC and Wizards said that the Eclipse escaping from Kuat to Byss was only half finished.

Of course, the Imperial clashes with the Zann Consortium might have greatly damaged the Star Dreadnought and so she would have been towed back to Kuat for extensive repairs and refitting, apparently.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2006-10-26 06:57pm

Hey, Pelranius, Good to see you here!

I don't have the game yet, though I think Jello would know the story by now.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2006-10-26 08:41pm

nightmare wrote:Apology for reviving a month and a half old thread, but I did see something today which directly relates to the original question posed in this thread about the size of the Eclipse in Empire At War: Forces of Corruption.

The Official Site, Game Overview wrote:The ultimate prize awaits: An immense Super Star Destroyer known as the Eclipse. Spanning the lenght of nearly 11 of the Star Destroyers seen in the original Empire At War, the deadliest capital ship in the galaxy comes equipped with a superlaser rivalling that of the Death Star."
Linky

Nearly 11 means nearly 11*1600=17600. This seems to correspond to the scaling of the Eclipse by Dr. Saxton (17500 IIRC), rather than the Eclipse II, 16000.

17.5 km is the WEG stat, 16 km the DE text statement. Dr. Saxton never scaled the Eclipse.

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2006-10-27 01:13am

Ender wrote:17.5 km is the WEG stat, 16 km the DE text statement. Dr. Saxton never scaled the Eclipse.

I believe I recalled Saxton comparing the Allegiance types with the Eclipse. I stand slightly corrected due to hazy memory.

Pelranius · Post by **Pelranius** » 2006-10-27 12:52pm

Good to see you too, Fingolfin Noldor.

If the powers that be decide to upscale the Eclipse, would all those "Allegiance" type Star Destroyers surrounding it at Pinnacle Base require a similar size upgrade, or can their size discrepencies be resolved as "angle of view" differences?