StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Jim Raynor wrote:
It's even worse than that. Nomad City is literally a dildo Dreadnaught being carried on the backs of 40 full AT-ATs.

Ah, yes. I had forgotten that it was a Dreadnaught as well. Silly.

Knife wrote:

Jim Raynor wrote:
It's even worse than that. Nomad City is literally a dildo Dreadnaught being carried on the backs of 40 full AT-ATs.

Ah, yes. I had forgotten that it was a Dreadnaught as well. Silly.

Again, I ask why this is silly.
If such a device can be cobbled togther, and it works, than its an ideal solution to the problem the planet poses. Unless this is all, "It dosNt l0oK KewL, so SUXxORS!!1!!!" Trek crap.

Noble Ire wrote:
Again, I ask why this is silly.
If such a device can be cobbled togther, and it works, than its an ideal solution to the problem the planet poses. Unless this is all, "It dosNt l0oK KewL, so SUXxORS!!1!!!" Trek crap.

Well, for one, there isn't any reason to have ATAT legs rather than repulsors, nor is there any reason not to have a purpose built hull for the city. EGVV has cloud city as a custom build Incom design in excess of 16km in diameter and 17kms tall. Don't see any SSD hulls in the design but it can be aloft with repulsors and no visable thruster engines keeping it up.

Basically, I guess, it comes down to the uber stupidity of kitbash as opposed to purpose built designs. If you have the $ for a Dreadnaught cruiser and the $ to convert it to a walking city, then you probably have the $ to purpose build a design that would be economic and effiecint than forcing a spaceship hull into service as a mining city.

Basically, I guess, it comes down to the uber stupidity of kitbash as opposed to purpose built designs. If you have the $ for a Dreadnaught cruiser and the $ to convert it to a walking city, then you probably have the $ to purpose build a design that would be economic and effiecint than forcing a spaceship hull into service as a mining city.

How do you figure?
Dreadnaughts, by the time of the construction, were long relegated to dirthole system patrols, and the fact that it was a pre-Katan Dreadnaught (almost as many crew needed as an ISD) meant that those Dirtholes might not be able to support very many of them, and might want to get rid of a few. Lando was an spendthrift haggler, and he might have searched back water ship junkyards rather than shell out for a new design (he was down on his luck at that point.) Once he found one, all he had to do was find a way to propel it, and AT-ATs did the trick (as I recall, the walkers came from an abandoned Imperial factory captured by the NR, and Lando was able to bum them using his past military clout and reputation.)

Vymp, what the hell are you talking about, the Strike Cruiser is a hot dog? It's a dagger ship. Dark Horse released a guide to the rogue squadron comics years ago retconning it. Someone provide hosting, I'll provide pics.

Firefox wrote:

Trolic_1 wrote:this link has some good info on SSd size and abilities

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/ssd.html

... You do know that everyone here is well aware of Dr. Saxton's site, yes?

The really fucking ironic thing is that that is one of the few pages Connor is NOT mentioned in the acknowledgements.

Ender wrote:Vymp, what the hell are you talking about, the Strike Cruiser is a hot dog? It's a dagger ship. Dark Horse released a guide to the rogue squadron comics years ago retconning it. Someone provide hosting, I'll provide pics.

How recent was this? And was it made clear that this was a Loronar Strike-class cruiser, or did it seem like they were just using the term "strike cruiser" liberally? I really hope this is a real retcon. We could always use another dagger ship.

Jim Raynor wrote:

Ender wrote:Vymp, what the hell are you talking about, the Strike Cruiser is a hot dog? It's a dagger ship. Dark Horse released a guide to the rogue squadron comics years ago retconning it. Someone provide hosting, I'll provide pics.

How recent was this? And was it made clear that this was a Loronar Strike-class cruiser, or did it seem like they were just using the term "strike cruiser" liberally? I really hope this is a real retcon. We could always use another dagger ship.

99, maybe 00. I'm pretty sure it was 99, the CE one in 00, and the DE one in 01.

It's the loronar strike class cruiser modified to hold additional fighters called the Eidolon. Inerestingly, it was built at a KDY yard.

And Yes, I sent these images to Dr S a while back.

I've always assumed this to be the Loronar Strike Cruiser. I've never seen the Eidolon mod.

That's the one I mean. Another fucking dildo.

Firefox wrote:I've always assumed this to be the Loronar Strike Cruiser. I've never seen the Eidolon mod.

That does seem to fit with the description given in Shadows of the Past.

It's how it looks in all Lucasarts games in which its appeared (TIE Fighter, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, X-Wing Alliance, SW Rebellion).

Retconned to dagger shape

Meh- that's pretty weak. "Extensive" redesign? We don't really have a way of knowing whether the original Strike Cruiser is suppused to look anything like that. For that matter, how do we even know it's a Loronar Strike Cruiser and not some other kind? The Strike Cruiser I refer to above isn't KDY, it's Loronar. Stronger evidence is required IMO.

Also, what stupid EU does it come from? A base on Tatooine. How ORIGINAL!



Hacks ...

It's a good looking ship though.

Vympel wrote:Meh- that's pretty weak. "Extensive" redesign?

The word used is ambitious, not extensive. Vastly different meaning as a result.

We don't really have a way of knowing whether the original Strike Cruiser is suppused to look anything like that. For that matter, how do we even know it's a Loronar Strike Cruiser and not some other kind? The Strike Cruiser I refer to above isn't KDY, it's Loronar. Stronger evidence is required IMO.

Then at the very fucking worst, we got a new dagger ship. Aw crap, I sure didn't want that to happen.

It's a good looking ship though.

Aestically, it's ugly as sin. It's beauty lies in the fact that is is clearly 100% function, and very good at it as a result.

Hey, we can settle this right now - scale the globes to the total length. If it's diferent from the Loronar type, then its a new class.

Of course, being a picket it might be mroe sensor orientated and thus have larger globes, making this moot, but...

I made a rough attempt at scaling. According to Curtis Saxton, the diameter of an ISD's scanner globes is approximately 43 m. Assuming that the strike cruiser's globe is the same as an ISD's, I calculated the ship's length to about 573.33 m. I think it would be a good idea if one of you guys checked to see if I did this right, since this was a rough measurement, and I don't do this kind of stuff very often.

If I am right, then no, the length of the Eidolon isn't the same as the traditional length given for Loronar's Strike-class cruisers. However, I think this is meaningless since all sorts of details about ships, including length, have either contradicted from source to source, or have been retconned in the past. I don't think a definate answer to the question hinges upon the Eidolon's length.

I also don't think that the fact that it was built by KDY instead of Loronar means anything either. It's possible that KDY was just given the task of making the "ambitious redesign" of Loronar's Strike cruiser. There's at least one other example of a company redesigning or reusing another company's ship in the EU. If the Completely Unofficial SW Encyclopedia is correct, the Vindicator-class heavy cruiser was a KDY design. However, Sienar Fleet Systems was the one that built Interdictor cruisers, using the Vindicator's hull.

I would really like it if this is a retcon. However, I'm not sure if the evidence is rock solid here. I think it's possible to go either way on this, or to rationalize the contradicting appearances by saying that the Eidolon isn't a Strike-class cruiser, but just a "strike cruiser" (whatever that's supposed to mean).

That's one sweet ship. It's got the same 'I'm butt-ugly and I don't care' appeal as the new Batmobile.

At the risk of going off topic, what are those screw-like projections along the side of the ship? Are they they launch corridors mentioned in the text?

Pcm979 wrote:That's one sweet ship. It's got the same 'I'm butt-ugly and I don't care' appeal as the new Batmobile.

Funny you should mention that. I looked at it again this morning and realized, with its shape and those cylindrical docking ports along the brim, it bears a strong resemblance to the Batman Begins tumbler. Scary.

Well, such a sight clearly needs time to get used to.

This thing is never going to win a beauty-contest. Compared to ISDs, Executors and even Vindicators it is f...ing ugly.

Don't you mean Venator class, not Vindicator?

No, i meant KDYs 600 meter long pocket-cruiser.

I'm still trying to decide, if the Venator is a good or a bad design (as far as aestethics are concerned, since its utility is already questionable).

Fun tidbit : The name Eidolon was also the name for one of the very first computergames made by Lucasarts.

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:At the risk of going off topic, what are those screw-like projections along the side of the ship? Are they they launch corridors mentioned in the text?

They remind me of the pods on the neck of the Corellian Blockade Runner. Possibly they're escape pods?