StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Tanasinn wrote:(Further, the idea of fighters "retiring" after the war to live in the ocean is just silly, especially considering that the civil war droids seem to be represented being universally dim or lacking in independence.)

It's possible that those submarine droids are more intelligent than the average infantry or starfighter droid.

For one thing, they were probably produced in more limited numbers than the more common infantry and fighter droids, so the fear of mass droid rebellion would have been far less prevalent.

The more unpredictable nature of the environment they're designed to operate in (in oceans) might also have warranted a higher degree of intelligence and independence than the ranks of B1/B2 infantry and swarms of starfighter droids.

IF the Grand Army used clone infantry and clone pilots, I don't see why the Empire would have stopped using either.

Insofar as I know, the current canon has the Galactic Empire's military consisting of leftover clones, new clones, conscripts, volunteers, and the occasional aristocrat. I expect that a military consisting entirely of clones would be considered, in the long run, cost-inefficient and a bit too slow for a society as militarily oriented as the Galactic Empire.

I can't really speculate on the intelligence of sub-droids, though.

My theory on Imperial military makeup, is as follows:

Stormtroopers/Imperial Marines, the Pilot's Corps, and the Naval Pilots are, at the non-com level are mostly clones, while officers are these groups are primarily recruits. Officers who define themselves as exceptional may be used a template for future noncom clones. The conscripts would go into the Imperial Army or Navy, these branches would also include recruits as well.

We know as of the invasion of Kashyyk in the inter-PT/OT period that 40% of all Imperial Marines belonged to a single clone template and there was at least one other Stormtrooper clone template. There existed at one other specialized template for scout troopers. And there were "dumber" leftover clones (like Jango or improved Jango Kaminoan-type clones). The art of Crimson Empire implies that there were Force sensitive clone lines constituting the make up of the Imperial and Royal Guard. Since they did not apparently realize they were clones - much less clones of the same template - it stands to reason that those clones were of the GeNode type, somehow conditioned to ignore their own existance as clones.

Tanasinn wrote:

IF the Grand Army used clone infantry and clone pilots, I don't see why the Empire would have stopped using either.

Insofar as I know, the current canon has the Galactic Empire's military consisting of leftover clones, new clones, conscripts, volunteers, and the occasional aristocrat. I expect that a military consisting entirely of clones would be considered, in the long run, cost-inefficient and a bit too slow for a society as militarily oriented as the Galactic Empire.

I can't really speculate on the intelligence of sub-droids, though.

Also people might be less willing to support a rebellion when their sons and daughters are serving in the Imperial navy.

It's a cheep and efficient way for Palpatine to keep uprising from starting.

Not a notable success although the sheer numbers were able to overwhelm quite a few Rebel fighters.

Um...in Dark Empire, the TIE/Ds seem extraordinarily effective. While we only see a limited chunk of the battle, not one of them is seen to be shot down by a fighter and they utterly butcher a Star Destroyer's X-wing complement. The only one we see destroyed, IIRC, is blown up by the forward guns of a Nebulon-B Frigate.

Cykeisme wrote: And quit it with EU "fragile ball shaped crate" crap already. G-Canon comes first. TIE Fighters are powerful and durable starfighters capable of easily outperforming their contemporary opposition.

The original TIE fighter was underrated and it was designed to be used in large squadrons with ship support anyway, so it would've been decent enough as a combat ship. The Rebels had infinitely far less resources, so their fighters were far more self-sufficient and beefed up to make up for their lack of numbers (but the Empire was mass producing other TIE variants to compete with the very successful X-Wing).

Was Vader's personal TIE fighter a relatively common Imperial fighter? I can see the Empire knocking out one TIE Advance in the factory for every batch of thirty regular TIEs.

Big Orange wrote:

Cykeisme wrote: And quit it with EU "fragile ball shaped crate" crap already. G-Canon comes first. TIE Fighters are powerful and durable starfighters capable of easily outperforming their contemporary opposition.

The original TIE fighter was underrated and it was designed to be used in large squadrons with ship support anyway, so it would've been decent enough as a combat ship. The Rebels had infinitely far less resources, so their fighters were far more self-sufficient and beefed up to make up for their lack of numbers (but the Empire was mass producing other TIE variants to compete with the very successful X-Wing).

Was Vader's personal TIE fighter a relatively common Imperial fighter? I can see the Empire knocking out one TIE Advance in the factory for every batch of thirty regular TIEs.

My god you're full of shit.

What do we see in the movies?

TIEs destroying X-Wings, Y-Wings, A-Wings, and B-Wings with impunity.

Your retort to this? A byline of shit that has never been shown compared to the objective evidence we see on screen.

Ghost Rider wrote: My god you're full of shit.

What do we see in the movies?

TIEs destroying X-Wings, Y-Wings, A-Wings, and B-Wings with impunity.

Your retort to this? A byline of shit that has never been shown compared to the objective evidence we see on screen.

I fully agree the EU has vastly underrated and diluted the capabilities of the bog standard TIE fighter as a effective combat craft, but it is true that the X-Wing is more self-sufficient (with the hyperdrive, shields and prolonged pilot provisions) while the TIE is a craft that works with fleet support (no hyperdrive or provisions for long haul flights).

Big Orange wrote:

Ghost Rider wrote: My god you're full of shit.

What do we see in the movies?

TIEs destroying X-Wings, Y-Wings, A-Wings, and B-Wings with impunity.

Your retort to this? A byline of shit that has never been shown compared to the objective evidence we see on screen.

I fully agree the EU has vastly underrated and diluted the capabilities of the bog standard TIE fighter as a effective combat craft, but it is true that the X-Wing is more self-sufficient (with the hyperdrive, shields and prolonged pilot provisions) while the TIE is a craft that works with fleet support (no hyperdrive or provisions for long haul flights).

That doesn't change the fact that Alliance and Imperial fightercraft are at the very least at parity in actual combat. An X-Wing may be more versatile overall, but considering that its primary function is combat, implying that the TIE fighter is an inferior vehicle is misleading.

Noble Ire wrote: That doesn't change the fact that Alliance and Imperial fightercraft are at the very least at parity in actual combat. An X-Wing may be more versatile overall, but considering that its primary function is combat,
implying that the TIE fighter is an inferior vehicle is misleading.

I never stated that TIE fighters had less killing power than X-Wings, but do bog standard TIEs carry proton torpedoes? Although we've got to take into account the excellent TIE Interceptor, which was intended to totally replace the original TIE Fighter in the long term. And the X-Wing's shielding is overrated, if they were still being picked off by Vader and his escorts with relative ease.

Big Orange wrote:

Noble Ire wrote: That doesn't change the fact that Alliance and Imperial fightercraft are at the very least at parity in actual combat. An X-Wing may be more versatile overall, but considering that its primary function is combat,
implying that the TIE fighter is an inferior vehicle is misleading.

I never stated that TIE fighters had less killing power than X-Wings, but do bog standard TIEs carry proton torpedoes? Although we've got to take into account the excellent TIE Interceptor, which was intended to totally replace the original TIE Fighter in the long term. And the X-Wing's shielding is overrated, if they were still being picked off by Vader and his escorts with relative ease.

You do know asking if TIE carry torpedoes is asking a negative. And plus, what use are they really? They have dedicated ships that do carry them...your point being? It's a red herring.

The TIE interceptor was meant to replace the TIE regular because it was faster, and better...that in no way deingrates the what the TIE fighter did. Another red herring.

The whole thing that made this little bit was your idiotic bit of

and beefed up to make up for their lack of numbers

We grasp the first part that they had more self sufficency. That is shown clearly. Now prove the second part, to which you've evaded constantly.

Stark wrote:Oh you'd think, but you're not as stupid as EU writers. That's their explanation for the back drivers seat: they can't turn worth shit.

D. Turtle mentioned the modern-day Luchs, but a front-and-back twin driver setup was a very common feature of WWII era recon vehicles; examples include the French AMC Schneider P16 and the German Panzerfunkwagen Sd. Kfz. 231, Sd. Kfz. 232, and Sd. Kfz. 263. It's not that they don't turn well; it's that wheeled vehicles can't pivot-turn the way a treaded tank can, so in very tight quarters sometimes the only option is to back up.

It can carry bigger, better deflector screens then a starfighter, which are the primary defense in the SW universe, not armor. As a matter of fact if I was really in the mood for a fight I could go further with that, but I'm not.

The A-10 Warthog is 16.26 metres long with a 17.53 metre wingspan. This makes it bigger than the X-Wing which is 12.25 metres long or the ARC-170 which is 14.5 meters long, but not *way* bigger as you seem to think.

Ghost Rider wrote:You do know asking if TIE carry torpedoes is asking a negative. And plus, what use are they really? They have dedicated ships that do carry them...your point being? It's a red herring.

While it's not standard and they aren't torpedos, it appears field-modifications can be done to give TIE/In's the ability to carry and launch four advanced concussion missiles or eight standard concussion missiles.

Ghost Rider wrote: You do know asking if TIE carry torpedoes is asking a negative. And plus, what use are they really? They have dedicated ships that do carry them...your point being? It's a red herring.

Yes it is a red herring - the original TIE was intended to work in conjunction with other ships and in numbers. It essentially did what it was designed to do and did it fairly well.

The TIE interceptor was meant to replace the TIE regular because it was faster, and better...that in no way deingrates the what the TIE fighter did. Another red herring.

Well the TIE Interceptor was essentially built on the strengths of the original TIE Fighter, so I'm not intentionally denigrating it. But the way the Interceptor's solar panals are shaped hints at superior ergonomics as well as superior speed and maneuverability (there are gaps in the side solar panals to increase the pilot's front 180 view, although there could be sensor feeds into the holoscreens in the the cockpit or TIE pilot's helmet that fill in the TIE's blind spots).

We grasp the first part that they had more self sufficency. That is shown clearly. Now prove the second part, to which you've evaded constantly.

It seems that the original TIE and X-Wing seem to have comparable firepower when it comes to their turbo laser mounts. I'd say the X-Wing was more "beefed up" because they could be fitted with proton torpedos (although X-Wing's likely never always had proton torpedos and Y-Wings were more dedicated to carry them).

And the thread has been reopened over at Wizards.

Mange wrote:And the thread has been reopened over at Wizards.

You're talking about Sarli's idiocy, you're in the wrong thread...