MC vs SD

FOG3 · Post by **FOG3** » 2003-07-09 11:47am

I did a search and didn't really find this so I decided I might as well do it.

1)Victory Mk.2-Class Star Destroyer vs MC40
2)Victory Mk.2-Class Star Destroyer vs MC80
3)Imperator-Class Star Destroyer vs MC80
4)Imperator Mk.2-Class Star Destroyer vs Winged MC80

I know captains would influence this but this is which is the superior vessel. Yes, carried support craft and fighters count as part of the match.

Anyone else have comparable classes with these two types of ships?

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-07-09 11:48am

Imperial wins all except number 2.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2003-07-09 12:14pm

It was said several times, that a ST mk.II could blow a MC80 to pieces, but would lost its shield and risking light to medium damage in the process....

Admiral Johnason · Post by **Admiral Johnason** » 2003-07-09 12:40pm

I am going to go with the MC-80 for all except the first one. The sheilds and armor on that thing rock andthey do have better fighters and pilots. The Victory takes the first senario though because it would be a battleship vs. a heavy cruiser. An MC-40 just doesn't pack enough power.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-07-09 01:00pm

Doesn't the MC-80 have only 2/3 the weapons complement of an ISD2? I know that the MC-80 has the best shielding in these scenarios.

Admiral Johnason · Post by **Admiral Johnason** » 2003-07-09 01:02pm

Darth Yoshi wrote:Doesn't the MC-80 have only 2/3 the weapons complement of an ISD2? I know that the MC-80 has the best shielding in these scenarios.

And the best fighters and really good pilots.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2003-07-09 01:44pm

Game mechanics aside, fighters are overrated in a slugging match between two cap ships. And the ISD2 fighter complement has a numerical advantage anyway.

Dark Primus · Post by **Dark Primus** » 2003-07-09 03:05pm

I think the MC cruisers rely heavy on their fighters, but in a real fight it will depend on the crews combat experience which will dictate the outcome of the battle.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-09 03:29pm

Admiral Johnason wrote:
Darth Yoshi wrote:Doesn't the MC-80 have only 2/3 the weapons complement of an ISD2? I know that the MC-80 has the best shielding in these scenarios.
And the best fighters and really good pilots.

TIEs are not inferior to X-wings. They are just as maneuverable, just as fast, and the firepower is sufficient. And there are a lot more of them.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-07-09 03:40pm

VSD1 vs. MC40: VSD1 wins with little or no damage.
VSD2 vs. MC80: VSD2 loses rather badly.
ISD1 vs. MC80: ISD1 wins, but probably takes a good amount of damage in the process.
ISD2 vs. Liberty: ISD2 wins but probably takes light to moderate damage in the process.

Admiral Johnason · Post by **Admiral Johnason** » 2003-07-09 03:50pm

Dark Primus wrote:I think the MC cruisers rely heavy on their fighters, but in a real fight it will depend on the crews combat experience which will dictate the outcome of the battle.

Is it true that the Mon Cals, as a race, are actually superior space combatants compaered to humans.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-07-09 04:01pm

We going by official or Canon gun compliments here?

And that MC40 gets stomped six ways from sunday, the thing is about on par with a strike cruiser at best from what I've seen.

FOG3 · Post by **FOG3** » 2003-07-09 04:26pm

Preferably canon, Ender.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-07-09 11:19pm

phongn wrote:VSD1 vs. MC40: VSD1 wins with little or no damage.
VSD2 vs. MC80: VSD2 loses rather badly.
ISD1 vs. MC80: ISD1 wins, but probably takes a good amount of damage in the process.
ISD2 vs. Liberty: ISD2 wins but probably takes light to moderate damage in the process.

What differences do you feel are between Liberty and the MC-80?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-07-09 11:22pm

Wings. One less engine.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-07-09 11:23pm

I meant in firepower and damage-taking ability.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2003-07-09 11:41pm

Howedar wrote:
Admiral Johnason wrote:
Darth Yoshi wrote:Doesn't the MC-80 have only 2/3 the weapons complement of an ISD2? I know that the MC-80 has the best shielding in these scenarios.
And the best fighters and really good pilots.
TIEs are not inferior to X-wings. They are just as maneuverable, just as fast, and the firepower is sufficient. And there are a lot more of them.

With ace pilots yes but with green pilots Tie do not fair as well. Remember the Ties In the Battle Of Yavin were Vader's Special Elite squadron. since a MC-80 would have B-Wings, A-Wings, X-Wings, and Y-wings and its fighter can be armed with Anti-Capitol Warheads they are not anything to laugh at. The A-wings can handle most Imperial Fighters with the exception of the Tie Defender but since it is not standard deployment it should not be included on the side of the Star Destroyer. the X-wings can also hold their own with Imperial fighter and also carry enough warheads to be a threat to the Star Destroyer. The B-Wings and Y-wings are Attack Bombers and they carry a large number of warheads they are quite capable of doing quite a bit of damage to the Star Destroyer when they are supporting their mothership.

The Star Destroyer's fighters are all fast but weak. It does not take much to down a Tie. The only unit the Star Destroyer carries Standard with a Warhead capacity is the Tie Bomber. This sluggish monster will get eaten alive by the A-Wings if the ties do not constantally cover them. They have a massive warhead capacity but they have to survive to use them. The Tie Interceptor is slightly slower than a A-wing but is better armed which helps it. The Tie/ln fighter is cannon fodder to cover the Tie Interceptors as it is anough of a threat to alliance fighters that it caqnnot be ignored. A Star Destroyer relies on its own offencive weapons in a Ship to ship engagement. It is better armed than the MC-80 but not better shielded than the Mon Cal ship. Is the winged MC-80 refeering to the Mon Romanda? If it is than that one could go either way.

vakundok · Post by **vakundok** » 2003-07-10 03:17am

Let's count 2 TIE Interceptors, 2 Tie/ln fihters, 1 TIE Bomber and a mixed squad of TIE fcs and recons on the imperial side and 1 X-wing, 1 A-wing and 1 B-wing squadron on the Alliance side:
1 TIE/ln and 1 Bomber against 1 B-wing,
1 TIE/ln and 1 Interceptor against 1 X-wing,
1 Interceptor and the mixed squad against 1 A-wing.
I think the imperial fighter force is superior. Most likely a sizeable portion of the Bomber squad will reach the cruiser. While the Bombers are officially very weak (IMO degraded to illogic level), they have large bombing bays (bombing capacity) unseen on alliance fighters. Besides, most likely one or two of the TIE/fcs will also survive the fighter battle and will provide pinpoint targeting ability to the already superior firepower of the ISD. (It is even more important for the ISD I.)

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2003-07-10 03:20am

vakundok wrote:Let's count 2 TIE Interceptors, 2 Tie/ln fihters, 1 TIE Bomber and a mixed squad of TIE fcs and recons on the imperial side and 1 X-wing, 1 A-wing and 1 B-wing squadron on the Alliance side:
1 TIE/ln and 1 Bomber against 1 B-wing,
1 TIE/ln and 1 Interceptor against 1 X-wing,
1 Interceptor and the mixed squad against 1 A-wing.
I think the imperial fighter force is superior. Most likely a sizeable portion of the Bomber squad will reach the cruiser. While the Bombers are officially very weak (IMO degraded to illogic level), they have large bombing bays (bombing capacity) unseen on alliance fighters. Besides, most likely one or two of the TIE/fcs will also survive the fighter battle and will provide pinpoint targeting ability to the already superior firepower of the ISD. (It is even more important for the ISD I.)

Not if the A-Wing uses its Missiles

vakundok · Post by **vakundok** » 2003-07-10 03:27am

Isolder74 wrote:Not if the A-Wing uses its Missiles

True, the point is yours. However do not forget that the Bombers can also carry a partial load of missiles without really decreasing their anti ship capability (against one mc80).

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2003-07-10 03:33am

vakundok wrote:
Isolder74 wrote:Not if the A-Wing uses its Missiles
True, the point is yours. However do not forget that the Bombers can also carry a partial load of missiles without really decreasing their anti ship capability (against one mc80).

The Empire never put much thought into their Starfighter designs, untill after they learned the hard way you know

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2003-07-10 03:37am

now I'm not saying the Mon Cal would win this I am just saying the Mon Cal would do enough damage to make it not worth the effort

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-07-10 03:55am

Isolder74 wrote:The Empire never put much thought into their Starfighter designs, untill after they learned the hard way you know

Bull. The TIE Fighter is a perfectly accpetable fighter for the role it plays: anti-starfighter weapon. In case you didn't notice at Yavin, those TIEs were doing a number on the Rebel fighters (we witness that they are too more maneuverable).

The TIE Interceptor again plays the role of an anti-starfighter ship, just beefed up a bit (speed and agility wise) to battle the superior A-Wing design.

The TIE Bomber carries the role of whoopin' the snot outta enemy capships.

How are these bad designs? Because they don't put missile launchers on their interceptors, which actually increase mass, and thus DECREASE overall speed and maneuverablility? So for all the effort the Rebels put into these superior missile launching designs, they'll get shot down before they even get to deliver their payload due to the greater speed and maneuverablility of Imperial fighters!

To that end, I forsee that the Imperial starfighters (given that they aren't crewed by what are essentially green pilots ala Rouge Squandron novels--where at the that time the Empire's inferior numbers caused them to lose thier experienced pilots much faster) would shoot down the Rebel ones, leaving the heavier ships like the bombers and gunboats (gunboats, oh I haven't even touched on those) to pound on the Rebel capship.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2003-07-10 04:45am

Then why do they have practically no armor?
Why is the Tie Bomber so poor at doing what it does without constant escort?
The Tie Bomber is one Model that would actually benefit from a Deflector shield system or at least it should be faster than it is.
Historically the Intercepter was built because of the loss of the Death Star At the Battle Of Yavin.
The Tie serie has it benifits but without a large numerical advantage they die.
The Bomber and the Tie/ln were designed before the advent of the Rebellion so those ships dificientcies are explainable. The Tie Intercepter is a excellent Star Fighter Killer but it is still a Death Trap. The Tie series are built for large production runs rather than high quality. The Fact that the Tie Avenger and the assault gunboat did not get general deployment as a high command's reluctance to deploy them. The Imperials until Yavin did not see Starfighters as a threat so built their design doctrine accordingly.

vakundok · Post by **vakundok** » 2003-07-10 05:07am

Side note:

Isolder74 wrote:Why is the Tie Bomber so poor at doing what it does without constant escort?

Personally, I think it came from (good-guy centered) games. The Bomber appear to be at least as large as an Y-wing in volume (and an even newer craft), but it has lower maneuverability, lower payload, no shield, no hyperdrive. It seems that for some reason the Bomber requires far more life support and avionics than any other fighter in the galaxy ...
However it is only my personal opinion.