X-wings and TIEs (my thoughts)

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2006-10-05 11:01am

I was wondering about how they wank the X-wing, and how some bunch of rebels with shitty equipment can have fighters that could go toe to toe with a properly funded and professional military with the top of the line stuff - and butcher said professional pilots with top of the line stuff too, according to some sources. Now, a part of it would be the Rebel propaganda bullshit machine, Admiral Ackbar's buddy, the Minister of Alliance Information ("There are no AT-ATs on Endor, Alderaan continues to support the Rebellion! Rebel fighters kill a hundred TIEs for every one shot down!").

But I was thinking, maybe the X-wing is so praised because it's a pretty meh machine that, when tinkered with and when used by a properly trained pilot, can stand relatively toe to toe against proper Imperial fighters and professional Imperial pilots.

A TIE would be built for speed, maneuverability, without shields or hyperdrive but is very speedy, maneuverable and with the additional option of giving its pilots a bit of survivability after being shot down (unless Rebel X-wing pilots can somehow eject and not suck vacuum despite the absence of survival gear)- as a specialized fighter, it does its job better than anything out there.

Whereas an X-wing would be a general fighter, not as maneuverable as a TIE, but it's got shields, a hyperdrive, and the option of blowing stationary objects good with proton torpedoes. Sure, X-wings still get killed as easy as any fighter despite their shields, but their hyperdrives allow them to do all sorts of Rebellious things - like jump to an Imperial freighter, prototorp it, jump away and have a couple of laughs. And aside from this, an X-wing would be maintainable despite the underfundedness of the Rebels. And with a competent pilot (which is what truly makes a fighter kick ass), it can hold its ground against TIEs. Of course, if and when a X-wing gets blown up, its pilot is dead.

X-wings are decent rugged fighters that can stand up to specialized TIEs under the hands the few Rebel pilots who've survived all these years - Rebel pilots who are deployed on missions that count - and because of that, that's where the in-universe love comes from. It's like a pack mule that can keep up to a couple dozen feet of a racehorse stallion mare horse, wouldn't you just love that mule? It eats shit while the race horse eats expensive race horse food, yet it can keep up AND you can pack shit on your mule and go mountaineering on it! Now, I don't think the X-wing is exceptional - if the Rebels opted for the Naboo N-1 instead as their primary fighter, we might even see the same results (i.e. fighterwank).

Anyway, that's all for now. Thoughts? I'm not that wise with the SWverse, so I might be full of shit.

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2006-10-05 11:13am

I prefer the way the fighters are presented in the Rogue Squadron games: the TIE as a cheap, expendable, mass-produced Volksjäger vs the more expensive and better-equipped but rarer X-wing.

And I don't see a problem with the TIE being inferior. It's designed to fight in packs with capship support and mos of it's targets after the war would be pirates and the occasional rebel band with a handful of fighters that can be overwhelmed with numbers.

As for ejecting, doesn't ANH pretty much confirm that X-wing pilots can abandon a damaged fighter? Maybe the whol cockpit detaches, like in S:AAB

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2006-10-05 11:54am

Where in ANH did it show the X-wing pilots abandoning their fighters?

And, come on. Wouldn't you find it weird if the Taliban used a dozen F-22s against the USAF's swarms of a thousand biplanes? Besides, according to the threads that analyzed the Battle of Yavin and Endor, it seemed like X-wings and TIEs had equal kill/death ratios.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-10-05 12:20pm

X-Wing pilots can indeed survive ejection into hard vaccum, utlizing a variety of methods: manual suit seals (Heir to the Empire), auto-sealing suits (X-Wing: The Bacta War), and miniaturized magcon fields (X-Wing: Wraith Squadron), to name a few.

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2006-10-05 12:28pm

Where in ANH did it show the X-wing pilots abandoning their fighters?

I *think* it was Porkins who got roasted while Luke was yelling at him to eject. Not sure though.

Wouldn't you find it weird if the Taliban used a dozen F-22s against the USAF's swarms of a thousand biplanes?

The Star Wars universe has been technologically stagnant for millennia, so no, I would not be surprised to see quality craft in the hands of rebels. R&D costs - especially if you believe the story that the plans for the T-65 base model were handed to the Rebellion - would be vastly lower and parts would be cheap and easily-obtained.

Besides, according to the threads that analyzed the Battle of Yavin and Endor, it seemed like X-wings and TIEs had equal kill/death ratios.

Haven't read those. I'll do a search.

Crazedwraith · Post by **Crazedwraith** » 2006-10-05 12:30pm

000 wrote:X-Wing pilots can indeed survive ejection into hard vaccum, utlizing a variety of methods: manual suit seals (Heir to the Empire), auto-sealing suits (X-Wing: The Bacta War), and miniaturized magcon fields (X-Wing: Wraith Squadron), to name a few.

IIRC All the ejections in the X-Wing series where magcon fields. But Nawara Ven makes reference to his suit self-sealing when one of his legs was amupated by a passing micrometeor.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2006-10-05 12:35pm

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Where in ANH did it show the X-wing pilots abandoning their fighters?

When Biggs told one of the pilots to eject. That would be such an odd thing to say if they didn't have that capability.

And, come on. Wouldn't you find it weird if the Taliban used a dozen F-22s against the USAF's swarms of a thousand biplanes?

Except that's a massive exaggeration, and you know it. If anyone has the claim of having an overwanked fighter it actually is the Empire, with the TIE Defender.

The X-wing is much better than the TIE Fighter, but the Interceptor and Vader's Advanced/TIE Avenger are better or equal in some/most areas of performance.

Besides, according to the threads that analyzed the Battle of Yavin and Endor, it seemed like X-wings and TIEs had equal kill/death ratios.

So? The four TIEs to a single x-wing notion probably refers to the quality of pilots and equipment found in most run of the mill Imperial garrisons found in the Outer Rim, while the Death Star squadrons could conceivably have the best equipment available with the best pilots. Vader was flying a TIE Advanced prototype, after all. TIE Fighters don't have shields, yet we know that the Death Star has TIEs that are equipped with shields, which makes them a rarity and supports the 'elite squadrons' idea.

000 · Post by **000** » 2006-10-05 12:40pm

Crazedwraith wrote:IIRC All the ejections in the X-Wing series where magcon fields. But Nawara Ven makes reference to his suit self-sealing when one of his legs was amupated by a passing micrometeor.

I'd have to check to say anything with any certainty, but from what I remember Stackpole's books left the method of ejection survival vague, with only the incident you refer to and a couple others as hints of self-sealing suits, and Allston first explicity introduced magcon fields.

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2006-10-05 01:18pm

Considering that the TIE Interceptor is equal or better than the TIE Fighter in every aspect (more powerful engines and has more guns), it's pretty obvious that the TIE Fighter is not a top-of-the-line fighter. If the games are to be believed, the TIE Advanced and TIE Defender models completely outclass the TIE Fighter in every performance measurement and have no disadvantages.

So it's conceivable that a heavier fighter such as the X-wing can have comparable performance to a TIE Fighter as long as its reactor (which can be much bigger than a TIE Interceptor's reactor) has enough power. Sure, it's much less efficient, but keeping pilots alive long enough to return the equipment in usable condition is more important to the Rebellion than fuel efficiency.

The TIE Advanced, on the other hand, outperforms the X-wing while still having the same general features (four lasers, missile launchers, shields, hyperdrive). Top-of-the-line Imperial fighters can easily outclass the best the Rebellion can produce.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2006-10-05 01:34pm

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Where in ANH did it show the X-wing pilots abandoning their fighters?

Porkins: I've got a problem here.

Biggs: Eject.

Porkins: No, I can hold it.

Biggs: Pull up!

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-10-05 04:25pm

Strangely most wank of the X-Wing comes from the EU and the games, wherein they make the X-Wing into some truly superior fighter.

With both Yavin and Endor, the TIE Fighter is on par with the X-Wing.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2006-10-05 05:32pm

The X-Wing is a (compared to the TIE/ln, anyways) heavy strike fighter - its "dogfight" performance probably suffers from the requirements of hyperdrive, range, those big lasers and also the sensor suite. The TIE, as a short-range point-defense fighter, doesn't have to deal with all that baggage and is a "pure" dogfighter.

Analogously, you might compare the TIE Fighter to a MiG-21 and the X-Wing to an F-4. The F-4 is a heavy, long-range multirole fighter while the MiG-21 ... isn't.

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2006-10-05 06:13pm

While the era alters it a bit I would think it better to compare the X-Wing to the F-14 in terms of being a big, somewhat difficult, but still fightable interceptor. Meanwhile the Y-Wing is your A-6 and the A-Wing is your F-18 (only faster than the Tomcat rather than slower).

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2006-10-05 06:28pm

CmdrWilkens wrote:While the era alters it a bit I would think it better to compare the X-Wing to the F-14 in terms of being a big, somewhat difficult, but still fightable interceptor. Meanwhile the Y-Wing is your A-6 and the A-Wing is your F-18 (only faster than the Tomcat rather than slower).

I don't really consider the X-Wing to be an interceptor, though. It seems more optimized for the strike role but with enough ability to mix it up when needed - again, something like the F-4 (which did not to do so well in a furball, even in F-4E configuration).

If not for the hyperdrive, I'd call the A-Wing an F-104 equivalent (various EU works paint it as a originally designed as a point-defense interceptor for convoy escort). The F/A-18 is a bit too multirole and not that fast.

The Y-Wing ... maybe something like the F-105? The A-6 has rather less self-defense capability than the Y-Wing.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2006-10-05 06:34pm

Where would the B-wing enter into it? It seems to be a hotted up version of the X-wing. Greater strike capability, less dogfighting ability (making the X-wing more of an all-rounder, I guess).

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-10-05 07:07pm

Keep in mind that the X-wing was supposedly an updated version of the Z95 Headhunter - already known as a cheap, dependable but sturdy and relatively dangerous fighter - and was developed, if I'm not mistaken, thanks to the defection of several key designers to the Rebellion.

JointStrikeFighter · Post by **JointStrikeFighter** » 2006-10-05 07:44pm

Personaly I'd rate the TIE Fighter as the F-16A and the X-Wing as a single seat F-15E.

The TIE/F-16 is better in a dogfight but the X-wing/F-15 can do alot more stuff; longer range, higher speed [hyperdrive], strike capability and more poerful sensor suite.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-10-05 08:07pm

I love the Fishbed/Phantom ananlogy. It fits perfectly.
As for the A/Y/B-Wing I must admit I'm at something of a loss.
The B-Wing seems to me to be something of an F-15E/F-111 hybrid, it's tolerably capable of antifighter work but mainly geared towards strike missions.
The Y-Wing is sort of a lower-tech version of that. The closest I can think of right now is the Tornado, though the Thud probably works as well.
The A-Wing would be the Wests answer to the MiG-21. A pure air-to-air F-16/F-20 might fit the bill.
And incidentally personal magcon fields were introduced by Kathy Tyers in 'Truce at Bakura'.

Cykeisme · Post by **Cykeisme** » 2006-10-05 08:23pm

Not much time to post atm, but I'll say this much: you'll never guess the sort of disparity between Rebel/Imperial starfighters in the movies. In fact in the movies, fighters of the same class on either side aren't very different in performance.
The massive disparity is all EU.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-10-05 08:42pm

Yeah, it's just bullshit. In the movies, they're shown as pretty much equivalent. It's the EU that makes up all this feelgood 'hillbillies with greatest FIGHAH EV4H' bullshit. You know, the same EU that makes out the B-wing is a capship killer, designed by Admiral fucking Akbar? Excuse me while I ignore all the bullshit. I also like the EU fiction of Xwings being totally different to Ywings even though they're shown being pretty similar. But no, Ywings are WAY SLOWER and have MORE HITPOINTS.

Aren't they up to like Xwing-7s now or something? That's hilarious: even the conservative Jedi didn't hold a single design that long.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-10-05 09:02pm

Stark wrote: Aren't they up to like Xwing-7s now or something? That's hilarious: even the conservative Jedi didn't hold a single design that long.

Yeah, because no real-world military would stick with the same design for decades. Oh wait...

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2006-10-05 09:15pm

In-universe examples are obviously more relevant than out-of-universe examples.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-10-05 09:17pm

Shit, your out-of-universe example sure beats my in-universe one! PS, given the tech stagnation the changes should be due to changes in warfare... but the XJ is just a Xwing with knobs on. Surely they'd be better off with a redesigned craft... but that's lose the EU one of the few SW icons they haven't fucked up yet.

The remilitarisation of the Clone wars sees both sides go through many fighter designs, but the NR still uses what are essentially Xwings - shit backyard fighters? What ever.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-10-05 09:37pm

Let's see-
WW2. There's an actual war on. Involved parties go through a number of fighter designs in a few years.
Clone wars. There's an actual war on. Involved parties go through a number of fighter designs in a few years.
Real world. There are no threats worth mentioning to your country, so you stick with the designs you have and gradually improve them.
Post-ROTJ EU. After Thrawn and the abomination that was DE, there are no threats worth mentioning, so the NR sticks with the designs they have and gradually improve them.
If anything the technological stagnancy of the Star Wars universe SUPPORTS sticking with X-Wings.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2006-10-05 09:42pm

I think the first half of the Cold War is a rather better comparison. During which, of course, both the US and Russia went through aircraft designs like they were toilet paper.