Teradyn_pff

Have you noticed that if you retreat or keep your spotters alive to the end of the battle you keep the artillery even if they were all destroyed? Given that the spotters are non-combatants and can be operated separately from the artillery, you can put them in a far-remote area and keep them safe while utilizing their special ability. This doesn't seem very right. From what I have seen, you can have 3 or 4 groups of artillery completely regenerate if you keep all of their spotters alive. The partial squads rule doesn't seem to apply the same as groups of speeders, AT-STs, T4-Bs, etc do. Anyone confirm this phenomenon?

Take a single group of bombers against a Mon Cal without other targets and see how long things last. Then do the same with a group of y-wings and an ISD. Pay attention to the hit percentage. Remember that the tie bomber is leagues ahead of the Y-Wing as far as maneuverability. Ignoring the accuracy, a turbo laser should be as fatal to a fighter as an artillery round would be in a direct hit on a human. In other words, the turbolasers are, and should be, extreme overkill on fighters. The ideal situation would be to lower the turbolaser accuracy to realistic levels vs fighters, then correct the damage dealt to be correct. The accuracy of a turbolaser should scale depending on the speed and maneuverability of the fighter in question. An example of the scaling I am talking about is the following: Turbolaser accuracy percentage vs fighter targeted 5% -> A-Wing 7% -> Tie Fighter 10% -> Tie Bomber 12% -> X-Wing with S-Foils locked. 15% -> X-Wing in normal mode 20% -> Y-Wing The next thing to fix would be the damage. For example, a tie fighter and bomber should be vaporized instantly on impact and a y-wing, a-wing and x-wing should have a very high probability of instant vaporization but have a small chance of surviving only 1 hit due to shielding and better hull strength. The analogy here is the same as the artillery vs human, a human may have no armor and fall to a small caliber bullet and then survive a direct hit if wearing quality armor, but neither of these two would survive a direct artillery shell impact (the weight of the shell alone falling at that rate should be enough to kill them, not to mention any explosion).

Pay attention to the accuracy of the Mon Cal weapons and then look at the ISD (in)accuracy.

The thing is that the ISD I is the one in the game and it is the most suseptible out of all of the ships almost to small craft.

This is an interesting statement. Is this in a mod?

What about this completely crazy and novel concept..... how about we have the weapons on the vehicles like what they primarily had according to established canon? Why would you have an ISD and not have a single anti-starfighter turret? And of course, anyone notice how hard the Mon Cal Cruisers hit Imperial fighters and bombers?

The serious problem with this is the fact that you are forced to use Auto-Resolve on pirate systesm when playing multiplayer campaign games. This is the problem I have with that system.

Anyone know that you can take x-wings and have them attack the Death Star? They actually try to attack the model... which takes them outside of the map and unassailable.

The problem is that this game was made well after very common things like the issue stated above have been handled smoothly. The fact is that this game's multiplayer interface is very primitive for some reason. It isn't even as robust as C&C Generals' interface and a few of the guys in Petroglyph worked on that title...

The Imperial accuracy across the board for every unit is way off. The Rebels have about 80% accuracy to the Imperial's 20-30%. How exactly would this be the case with a military that has been around and been trained professionally, not to mention having direct access to the most advanced targetting and military hardware in the entire galaxy? I would love to hear how the Devs explain this one. And the AT-AT is not on par with the T4B tank, as the power of the shields/hull/weapon as well as the maneuverability is sub standard compaired to the T4B tanks versatility, power, shielding, maneuverability and weapons. Take a force of 3 groups (12) T4B tanks against 3 groups (3) AT-ATs and see who wins, consider the cost of the T4B Tanks and their speed over the battle ground and their ability to take on troops with thier missle option. As a matter of fact, run your T4B tanks behind the AT-ATs really quick and pummel them while they try to turn around (and sometimes get stuck in a dance move right foot steps in, right foot steps out, right foot steps in, etc). Given the maneuverability of the AT-AT, it should kill 2 T4B tanks in the time it takes the T4B tanks to get from the AT-ATs max range up to the AT-AT themselves. This makes sense when you think of the cheap plex soldiers that can destroy an AT-AT 1 group per AT-AT. Hah, balanced? I don't think so.

Theoretically the AT-AT should make the AT-TE obsolete, but in the EAW universe, that would probably not be the case. I would be all for a technology progression that started out with all classes represented with the updated units (AT-AT) being at the end of the chain starting with the (AT-TE or whatever), but not they way it currently is where the older units are not replaced. The way they do the Z-95 in the campaign is how it should be, not how they do it in galactic conquest where you can build that and the X-Wing.

The best use of this would be to make starship spawning units (ISD, VSD, Acclimator, Starbases) able to activate the spawn manually. This way the isd can't have its entire complement of ships wacked by a CC rush. Why would an Imperial commander launch the ships if they are certain to be destroyed?

Heh, welcome to the Star Wars canon butchery that has ensued following the release of Return of the Jedi. If anyone wants a clear picture of what a loss of vision is, look at the Star Wars franchise.

By the way, the current answer to the original question of this thread after playing the release version of the game is to have a lot of Correllian Corvettes in your fleet. That is how you beat the ISD blockade. All you need is about 1 Correllian Corvette to each 2 Y-Wing groups you have and you should be fine. As for the Empire... you better have a lot of Tartans and I do mean a lot. Your only hope is to kill off the rebel Y-wings before they completely cripple the (supposedly, although not in EAW) "powerful" ISDs. The CCs take way to much time to kill for an ISD or VSD in this game. It is really ridiculous.

The hangar is your only hope, but expect to take massive losses anyway. If you take out the hangar you will be able to rest from the CC atrocity, but you have to take it out and the current CCs before your bomber force is depleted. The tie bombers will fall to a station eventually anyway, unlike the Rebel's Y-Wings who could take out 2 level 3 space stations in the time it takes a station to destroy the group. If some how you manage to get the hangar destroyed before your bombers are wiped out and if your tartans survive to the end of that particular part, you can clean up the remaining fighers/bombers that were spawned and clean up the area. Otherwise, you are toast. This will require the last configuration with the 4 tartans that you listed.