Tie Avengers and Tie Advanced

IDMR · Post by **IDMR** » 2002-07-11 05:24am

I was under the impression that the Tie Avenger is an improved version of the prototype Tie Advanced. Am I correct?

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-11 05:41am

Seems correct. At least to me.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-11 07:32am

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG! ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL WRONG!
Acutal I'm not sure myself

Tie Defender acutal was based of the Tie Bomber Body, Tie Fighter was used as a baseline for the Tie Advanced
Then ask which does it look more like
Defender or Advanced?(Me forgets what Avenger looks like)

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-11 08:28am

http://www.decipher.com/starwars/cardli ... enger.html
TIE Avenger, aka TIE MKII
Although contrary to Vader'S TIE Andvanced X1 the Avenger features 2 instead of 4 engines, it's clear they're related.
Both feature the standard TIE cockpit ball as the base.

IDMR · Post by **IDMR** » 2002-07-11 08:58am

If it has four engines, should it not be a QIE?

At any rate, thank you. You have been most helpful.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-11 08:59am

Who me? No problem

Oh, and btw: the TIE defender features three engines.
that should be called TrIE.
But I guess they'll name all the craft build on the basis of the TIE cockpit ball TIE s, regardless of wether they feature 2 engines or not.

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-11 12:28pm

TIE Avenger was based on the TIE Advanced methinks.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2002-07-11 03:24pm

If they're all called TIEs, now you have to wonder, why aren't the Scimitar assault bombers, based on the TIE/B design, called TIEBomber version 2?

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-07-11 04:04pm

Yep, Avenger is a faster, more maneuverable and heavier armed version

BenRG · Post by **BenRG** » 2002-07-11 05:12pm

This is probably wayyy off-topic, but I thought that I would take a moment to blow my own horn.

I've designed a TIE fighter of my own, basically a hybrid between the TIE Raptor from the X-Wing novels and the TIE Advanced. Basically the TIE Advanced's body with x-shaped solar arrays like the Raptor. Fast, horrifyingly manoeuvrable with eight lasers, two auto-blasters, to ion cannon, eight torps and four concussion missiles. Oh, and a cloaking device. Designed for special-forces ops only due to the cost and amount of specialised training needed. Call it the TIE Dragon.

The 'TIE' designation seems to stick whether or not the vehicle in question has two, three or whatever ion engines.

A question: Why does the TIE Bomber not have a rear turret? Given that it is unshielded, I thought that this would be obvious... Maybe I don't think enough like an Imp...

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-07-11 05:20pm

Quote: "If they're all called TIEs, now you have to wonder, why aren't the Scimitar assault bombers, based on the TIE/B design, called TIEBomber version 2?"

Actually, it was called the TIE Bomber Mk. II at first. They renamed after their testing/development team: the elite Scimitar Wing.

As for the bomber not having a turret, well its supposed to make the pilots rely on each other more, since TIE fighters are supposed to be watching a bomber's arse while it's pounding enemy ships

.

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-11 05:28pm

TIE fighters are supposed to be watching a bomber's arse while it's pounding enemy ships

Sadly they don't do a very good job watching each other's arses, much less the bomber's arse.

BenRG · Post by **BenRG** » 2002-07-11 05:29pm

IG-88E wrote:As for the bomber not having a turret, well its supposed to make the pilots rely on each other more, since TIE fighters are supposed to be watching a bomber's arse while it's pounding enemy ships .

Kind of difficult when they are busy fighting off two or four squadrons of A2-Wings and X-Wings as well as the flak from the capships.

I'm all for combined co-operative operations, but before the Advanced, Seinar Fleet Systems doesn't seem to have considered the battlefield survivability vs. cost of new production and crew equation.

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-07-11 05:31pm

One word'll explain that mistake:

oops.

BenRG · Post by **BenRG** » 2002-07-11 06:06pm

IG-88E wrote:One word'll explain that mistake:

oops.

Is this an example of the Imperial Orthodoxy Arrogance (tm)? "We say that our ships and pilots are better. The rumour that they are getting slaughtered at a ratio of about 4-to-1 is a horrible Rebel slander that we will prove... as soon as we retake Coruscant."

Seriously, I've always thought that the TIE Fighters were the MiG-21 of the Star Wars universe. Cheap, easy-to-build and easy-to-fly, designed to overwhelm with manoeuvreability and sheer numbers rather than quality. In that comparison, the X-Wing is the F-4E, the A-Wing is the first-generation F-16, the B-Wing is a F-15E and the TIE-Defender is a MiG-29 or a Su-27. So, what will be the Rebel answer to the F-22?

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-07-11 06:09pm

Actually, TIEs aren't very easy to fly. The controls (supposedly) are really squirrelly, and cadets attempting advenced manuevers end up slamming into the simulated ground.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2002-07-12 01:15am

The Scimitar Assualt Bomber is not in any way based on the TIE Bomber. Look in the guide about ships for a picture. Here's the breakdown on TIE superiority fighter designs according to the X-Wing games:

TIE Fighter=standard
TIE Advancedx1=Only deployed to elite squadrons, replaced by Avenger. Not many made.
TIE Advanced/Avenger=Replaced x1 as fighter of elite squadrons.
TIE Interceptor="Avenger Lite" intended to replace Fighter.
TIE Defender=Ultra-powerful fighter; awarded to the creme of the crop of Avenger squadrons.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-07-12 03:56am

They don't get slaughtered that badly. Watch the movies, they fare quite good against the Rebel scum. It'S the fucking EU which tries to make us believe it is so.

BenRG · Post by **BenRG** » 2002-07-12 04:27am

Cpt_Frank wrote:They don't get slaughtered that badly. Watch the movies, they fare quite good against the Rebel scum. It'S the fucking EU which tries to make us believe it is so.

I'm not convinced of that. The only movies that show fighter-vs-fighter battles have the Starfighter Legion starting with such immense tactical advantages that you would expect them to perform well.

An ANH, the TIE Fighters have the advantage of manouevrability and the rebels having extremely specific mission objectives. The Y-wings of Gold Squadron were wiped out because they were forced to fly down a narrow trench in line abreast waiting for a TIE to sneak up behind them and pick them off one-by-one.

The only dogfights shown outside the trench and independent of the attack on the trench come out with 2 TIE Fighters destroyed for 1 X-Wing. All other losses shown on-screen were due to ground fire, or were somehow related to the trench attack where even the X-Wings were at an extreme disadvantage.

In RotJ, the Imperial Starfighter Leagion starts off with an immense numerical advantage and surprise, scoring several kills in the first head-to-head pass. Later parts of the battle show that the Rebel fighters performing better, destroying several enemy fighters even when at a performance disadvantage. One Squint is killed by a Y-Wing for goodness' sake! And a bomber crashes into a Mon Calamari cruiser.

Don't mention the EU comments about the Emperor being personally in control of the Imperial forces and his death impeding them. If you don't accept the EU insistance that Rebel starfighters and fighter crews generally perform better, then you can't accept the revisionist explanation of the TIE pilots' incompetence.

Please note that the X-Wing books concentrate on the exploits of two elite squadrons: Rogue and Wraith. They are qualitatively far better than the average fighter jock, so you should expect their performance advantage against conscripted Imperial pilots to be that much more dramatic.

My favorite quote about the eyeball:

Anonymous TIE Fighter pilot at the time of 'Visions of the Future'
The TIE Fighter is a disposable fighter for a disposable pilot. To tell the truth, I never felt particularly 'disposable'.

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-12 04:36am

Please note that the X-Wing books concentrate on the exploits of two elite squadrons: Rogue and Wraith. They are qualitatively far better than the average fighter jock, so you should expect their performance advantage against conscripted Imperial pilots to be that much more dramatic.

I said something almost exactly like that a few pages back.

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-07-12 02:09pm

Quote: "In RotJ, the Imperial Starfighter Leagion starts off with an immense numerical advantage and surprise, scoring several kills in the first head-to-head pass. Later parts of the battle show that the Rebel fighters performing better, destroying several enemy fighters even when at a performance disadvantage. One Squint is killed by a Y-Wing for goodness' sake! And a bomber crashes into a Mon Calamari cruiser."

Mike Wong would probably say something about a pro-New Republic
spin on the movies, and not showing as many dead Rebel pilots.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2002-07-12 02:16pm

Or maybe because the Rebels have more motivation since they'll NEVER get another chance at doing it.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-07-12 02:22pm

IDMR wrote:I was under the impression that the Tie Avenger is an improved version of the prototype Tie Advanced. Am I correct?

Yes, but the TIE advanced looked cooler.

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-07-12 02:26pm

Yeah, I think you're right, but who cares? Give me a TIE Defender any day!

mwa hahahahaaaa!

One question here: in the book "Isard's Revenge" Rogue Squadron flies Defenders equipped with tracton beams. Intersting addition, that. Have there been any other sightings of tractor-equipped Defenders?

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-07-12 02:31pm

IG-88E wrote:Yeah, I think you're right, but who cares? Give me a TIE Defender any day! mwa hahahahaaaa!

Bah, capships rule space.
*ISD-II opens fire*

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Tie Avengers and Tie Advanced

Tie Avengers and Tie Advanced

Re: Tie Avengers and Tie Advanced