Ships

[chrlsthgreat]

What is your favorite ship, and why?

 

For me, I would have to say the Nebula-class Star Destroyer for the Alliance. I always liked that it was less bulky than the original SDs for the Empire. Although it maybe smaller, it still packs a punch. The only thing is, it takes a while to obtain, as you have to research a bunch of technologies in order to get it.

[Mace Uzumaki]

Well from .45 i loved the Imperial star destroyers mark 3 they could teir through and capital ship out thier *not including cruisers or star dreadnuaghts*

[dojoyoda_warlords]

I have always been a fan Imperial I and II Star Destroyers. For me, they're the signature ship of star wars. A star destroyer is what took the collective breath of the world away in the first scene of Star Wars is 1977.

 

Now, the take the literal breath away from all opposition in Warlords. What more could you want.

[Freek]

Well for me it has to be the Corellian frigate

[chrlsthgreat]

Regarding them Imperial SDs, it seems to me that the Imperator II is a little weaker (not in firepower, but hull strength) than its predecessor. Anyone know why?

[dojoyoda_warlords]

I believe the phrase Freek is looking for is 'stirring the pot'..........The corellian frigate?! (i've been stirred. It's 4.48am local time. I'm well pissed, just back from town and still able to type coherently...do not ask how long it took me to type this post )

 

(at christhegreat) The Imp Star Deuce, according to some information, trades shield strength and hull integrity for speed and firepower. It packs nearly 3 times the punch of its predecessor, has faster sublight speeds (?) and a better hyperdrive. Having said that, I don't know where I got that idea from.....lets go find out.

 

EDIT: Nothing conclusive from Wikipedia or the Star Wars Technical Commmentaries.

 

Conclusion: The ISD II has to have at least ONE weakness. Otherwise it wouldn't be a true imperial vessel.....

 

It's now 5.01am.

[OOM-911]

from what i have seen the ISD MK II had stronger everything but was slightly slower and they had not moved the globes presenting a major weakness

 

but its fine this way to.

[Venator]

The Venator-class Star Destroyer all the way. It is faster than a CR-90 (canonly) plus packs enough firepower to take out just about anything smaller than itself and even some ships that are bigger. That, and it carries over 400 fighters.  ;D

[EvilleJedi]

The ISD II was originally supposed to have a better solar Ionization reactor, but this had stability problems so it was dropped, given the increased weapons load the shielding had to be decreased, so they supplemented the hull with extra plating, the ISD II/III upgrades incorporated the better reactor during the remnant (making the ISD (III) kick major ass)

[OOM-911]

for me its the victory class 1 all the way

 

by the way EvilleJedi were did you get this data.  everywhere i have been says it has heavier shielding and wepons.

Edited December 19, 2006 by OOM-911

[Mace Uzumaki]

The victory 1 sucked and was expensive thats why they made they victory 2 but it was soon outdated becuase they brought in the ISD.

[OOM-911]

the VSD MK 1 wasn't useless it was used for a extremely long time well into the vong war.

 

it could enter atmosphere

it could bombard planets

it was used to compair firepower of modern starships would be compared to

it could rip off the shields of another ship with a barage of missiles

 

this is why i like it even though its not as heavy as the ISDs or as fast it was very multirole

 

 

the vsd MK2 embraced the space design of the vsd Mk1 but lost atmospheric flight and fixed its engine probelms

but was rarely built

[EvilleJedi]

roleplaying stats

[chrlsthgreat]

Ok, this was labeled as Imperator III-class Star Destroyer: http://mods.moddb.com/gallery/image/33915/. Anyone know why it looks the way it does in that particular mod and its different in Warlords?

[EvilleJedi]

They decided to make their own model, as far as I know the Imperator III's only visible difference is a darker hull plating (they didn't paint them bright white and had some sensor absorbent material applied) and a larger reactor as well as a possibly slightly less complicated bridge face than the I or II

[Venator]

Wow, for a star destroyer that design isn't bad. I prefer the "non standard" look on star destroyers like the venator and such so this one really isn't that bad.  ;D

[chrlsthgreat]

Just a question about the Ecclipse-class. How would we fire the giant laser in the game? Will it be a special key, or will it be part of the Special Commands menu on the ship movement bar?

[chrlsthgreat]

Ok, last question is now completely irrelavent...but I do have a new one: Why is the Venator included with the Empire and not Victory-class SDs? Weren't the Venators scrapped when the VSDs came into existence?

[dojoyoda_warlords]

The man hasn't finished modelling the new version of the victory yet. There's some development shots of it in the gallery on the website.

 

As far as SW history goes though, the VSD I predates the Venator. The VSD I is a design from Rendili Stardrive (the same guys that designed the Dreadnaught). KDY Industries was responsible for the Acclamators and both classes of Victory.

 

According to Wookiepedia, Venator's were designed more as a starfighter carrier than a frontline battleship. They were phased out by Victory II's, Tectors and Imperator I's through the early years of the Empire.

 

To quote:

 

"At the end of the Clone Wars, it had outclassed the Acclamator-class assault ship and the Victory I-class Star Destroyer to become the primary capital ship of the Republic, although shortly after the formation of the New Order, it was eclipsed by designs inspired by the Victory II-class. A second generation of Venators were finalized by the time the Empire was moving in on the last remnants of the Separatists and the Jedi Order. They lacked the colorful markings of the Republic and were used to great effect in the early Empire.

Eventually, more robust vessels such as the Imperator- and Tector-classes became favored and the Venator and its variants were gradually phased out as the Empire's main destroyers. Still, they continued to serve the Empire, even during the Rebellion era, although the extent of their use appeared limited.

After the end of the Clone Wars, many Venators were abandoned and left to drift in space. Several of these vessels fell into the hands of the Mandalorians, the Zann Consortium, the Hutt Cartel and various pirate groups."

[OOM-911]

and the reason for this? simple the jedi aces really liked the amount of fighters these things carried.

 

id expect the new VSD MK 1 model will be in the republic and empire teams when the next update comes.

[EvilleJedi]

wow I never saw the last bit about the abandonment, I assumed they all got stuck in the strategic reserves in the deep core, like around Byss.

 

can you give a reference for that quote (not wookiepedia, I mean official LFL stuff if possible)

 

venators will be dropped from the imperial ship list, and replaced by the Victory II's

 

Republic list will incude the Venator, Victory I and Victory II (I doubt I will add the Venator II simply because it seems to be a hull refit with slightly better shielding at best)

Edited January 29, 2007 by EvilleJedi

[dojoyoda_warlords]

It looks as if it relates to the Empire at War expansion - I managed to find a list of what the Zann Consortium can build and it says they can purchase Venators from Pirate docks.

 

It's a bit of leap but I guess pirates recover them from deep salvage. Sound like the kind of wasting the Empire excels in.

[Lord Shonus]

According to background text for the Star Wars D20 RPG, (Which is canonical, unlike the game statistics) the Venators were retired because they were too expensive compared to the Imperial Mk. I Class, which could be mass-produced easily. The Venators also had problems from the fact that the construction was rushed.

[EvilleJedi]

I think the value equation is more about survivability, very little power was left over for shielding. The chance to lose the ship in a large battle was very high.

[shadowlegion421]

id have to say surviveability makes a lot more sense than being more expensive than the isd-1's. the isd's are what? somewhere between 2-4 times larger, carry more armament, more shielding, more armor, and require a much larger crew. it would be safe to assume that the production cost was exponentially higher than the venator. but at the time of its commissioning, the ISD's were the force to be reckoned with in the galaxy as far as warships went. there was nothing that could stand against them 1 on 1. a venator could be completely outclassed by 2 competently-crewed large frigates, whereas those same frigates would be a splatter on the bridge viewport of an ISD 1. so in the long run, the cost of maintaining an active military force of consistently engaged ISD's was much cheaper than doing the ame with venators, since repairing and maintaining 1 isd after 10 engagements was much cheaper than building 2 new venators to replace the ones lost in each of those 10 engagements. thats just my specualtion though, i could be wrong

 

 

edit: lawl, i forgot to add my favorite ship. i would have to say it is the ISD, because of its iconic value, and simple destructive power. the history in those ships, in all of them in general, and in a few specific ones, such as the Chimaera (coolest ship ever, imo), is just awesome. even if your enemy has a superior force, they will treat any star destroyer with respect. even when i get bored and play with a Super SD, i always take out the star destroyers first, even though, in this mod, they cant even scratch the executer in groups of 10, but they demand respect. i think the star destroyer and the x-wing are the 2 best known symbols of the space aspect of star wars.

Edited June 15, 2007 by shadowlegion421