JanGaarni

No, I think that actually was aired on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Larger numbers increase, and lower decrease the size. Note: the star destroyers for instance have a value of 1.0, but fighters have a value of 0.7, etc... So they don't all have the same value. The Venator (marked as Jedi_Cruiser) is roughly the same size as the Victory, but has a scale factor value of 1.2, while the Victory has a scalefactor of just 1. Note 2: If you are going to change it, remember to change the ships' death clone value aswell so the blown up ship won't appear smaller (or larger depending which way you scaled them) as it explodes.

Quote from Darth_Torpids answers over at LucasForums:

You left out the 12 heavy turbolaser guns and 4 heavy Ion Cannons, half on the right side of the superstructer, the other half on the left (located where it says Ion Cannon Batteries in EaW, but they look different cause EaW is using the mkII model), 2 Quad Lasercannon Trench Batteries, and 3 triple barreled medium turbolaser turrets in front of the superstructure on the mkI. On the MKII the trench guns and triple barreled turrets are removed, and the 12 HTL guns and 4 Ion Cannons are replaced with 64 HTL guns, 32 on either side. Smaller caliber, but more independant of eachother.

The TIE Avenger is the final product of the TIE Advanced x1. Looks alot like the x1, except they used almost the same wing configuration as they used on the TIE Interceptor (with cut outs so the pilot has a better view to the sides). Due to the extra cooling the system requires (it has shields and hyperdrives and thus needs a bigger reactor than the TIE/in) the wings are bigger and is identical at the rear to the front.

The TIE Interceptor is also born out of the TIE Advanced x1 research. Just an FYI. The same powerunit, lasers, heat/solar panels, etc... comes from the TIE Advanced x1.

The voice of Boba Fett in the latest OT edition ( : ai ai ai, where will this end?) has been replaced with Temuera Morrisons voice. And it is actually Temuera Morrisons voice you hear in the game. As for Veers' voice, the son of the actor playing him in ESB was the one who provided the voice for this game.

Crap, I was logged off. Cain, you might want to turn off Guest posting.

We have a Demo Button over at EmpireAtWar.net. Once Chris manages to upload it to us, it will be available. But you have to be a member to LucasForums.

And? It would still be the right height.

Is this the same Troops that was based on the TV show Cops? If so, it's an old, well made classic.

Yes that is correct. Speaking of sizes The AT-AT is definatly not 50 meters tall, but it's not 20 meters either. It's 22. Yeah I know, small difference.

Heh, Star Wars Tecnical Commentaries has stated the right lenght of the Executor since 1995. StarWars.com is just sloooow. Well, with the little I know, those sizes (except the Executor of course) looks about right. By the way, Cain, if you ever gonna up the size to the propper lenght, keep in mind the bridge tower dimensions is standarazid by Kuat. So it's the same size on an ISD, any of the other larger SD's, and SSD's.

I concure! And that's about all I have to say about that.

yeah I know.... why do people still call it the Imperator? Off-Topic: Because the Imperator name was the first used name to describe the class as far back as 1978 with the Mandel blueprints. Later second generation games and resource books mistakenly named it the Imperial Class, a mistake that has unfortunatly been stuck firmly in Star Wars literatur until recently. Curtis Saxton, who is running the Star Wars Technical Commentaries site since 1995, has been trying to get the truth out about the true name of the class, aswell as many other details about the Star Wars universe. Unfortunatly, the best he has been allowed to do is to come up with a way to explain why both names are correct when he wrote the Revenge of the Sith: Incredible Cross Sections book. And so the history of why the Imperator was renamed Imperial was born. But atleast, I, along with many others, now have propper official backing to justify using it, even though I'd rather see the Imperial-class "fallacy" being removed completely instead. Other things that has been repeated over and over and over for decades is the lenght of the Executor, which was stated to be only 8 km long, but in reality is 17.6 km long. It too has recently been corrected after years of missleading. But that's a whole nother story. On-Topic: I would rather having to build my Tie's, rather than have it the way it is now. But I'll survive.

They took out the Venator because it was phased out and replaced by the ISD by the time this game starts. Or they had balancing issues. Either way, the last reason is irrelavent because it fits the Star Wars history up to this point. But to be perfectly honest, if I needed to choose, I'd get rid of the 2 completely made up ships over the Venator, even if it doesn't fit 100%.

It doesn't fit because it got decommissioned and replaced by the ISD by the time this game starts. That's why it doesn't fit. So you got Star Wars, and not something else. You would have gotten something else if it were to be in, much like SWG is something else, and not fully Star Wars.

Well, depends what sector you're comparing to. The Sector Naboo is in (the Sector Palpatine, and later Amidala, was representative for in the Senate) had only 36 full member systems. The Sector Valorium comes from has over a 1000. That does not include various uninhabited planets and moons, and colonies, aswell as gasgiants etc, under the various member systems' control ofcourse.

Including Obi-Wan? Hadoken, rewatch ANH. And pay attention to details this time. Reason why games get this wrong is because games don't think that detailed enough.

I hope you're right. As for proving it's an mkII: Take a look at the tower section of an mkI and an mkII ISD. mkI mkII Notice anything different? It's one of the most recognisable features, and easiest to spot. What else you say? Well, although we don't have too good closeups of the main heavy guns, you can see that they are of the 4x2 gunbarrel design per batteri, 4 batteries on either side of the superstructure, totalling to 64 guns (32 per side). Striking resemblance to the real thing, ain't it? On the mkI there are just 6 dual barreled Heavy Turbolaser turrets (12 guns in total), 3 on either side of the superstructure, plus 1 Heavy Ion Cannon (also dual barreled, so 4 guns in total). You'll notice that the Ion Cannon is easily destinguished from the turbolasers. There is also the baffles on the main drive engines, but we can't see them in any pictures yet so The one thing that baffles me is, that they seem to have labelled the Heavy Turbolaser turrets as Ion Cannons, when the mkII replaced it's 2 rear Heavy Ion Cannons with Heavy Turbolaser Turrets instead. In other words, the mkII doesn't have heavy ion cannons there anymore.

If he keeps getting my fleets destroyed, I will fire his ass.

But Delphi, Imperial Star Destroyers of that kind (Imperator-Class) arn't equipped with those kinds of weaponary. That's the problem. Obviously, judging by the Accuser seen on the picture there, it is an ISD mark II, which is better than the ISD mark I. Shouldn't that be more than enough of a hero ability in itself? Better armor, better shielding, more firepower ..... I mean, it will outdo all the other ISD's in the game. Plus, the mark II didn't come out till after ANH, which makes the ship pretty special aswell. Star Wars is best when it's not tampered with too much, and this is a big tampering of the universe. Gonna be a pain fighting off the newbie Star Wars fans that are gonna come and claim ISD's are equipped with these things.

But unlike Thrawn, Garm Bel Iblis is vital part in order to tell the story on how the Rebellion was formed shortly before ANH.

Just a small insert: A Capital Ship in Star Wars is any warship longer than 100 meters. So the Corellian Gunship (and possibly the Corvette aswell) would be considered Capital Ships.

Ships have ray shielding and partical shielding.