ROTJ show the Home One as much bigger than the other two cruiser-types, and I believe there's some official info to back that up. Even so, the fact that they were converted star liners does not automatically mean the Home One type had to be equal in size to the other types.

Inthe films and the Game the ship really doesn't seem to be that much bigger than anyother ship. But I do admit that the Liberty and Shadow (MC80 and MC40) are smaller than the Independence and the Defiance in XWA.

Since we're talking about designs and stuff, I noticed while looking for the Home One in the many movies that are out, that the ISDs array between the globes are wrongly modelled. Unless we are able to produce the ISD mkII, the ISD mkI has the array mounted uppwards, not horizontally like the ISD mkII.

 

ISD mkI Tower

 

ISD mkII Tower

Thats right. There is a difference in the design of the raised pier on top of the bridge. Thanks for the Pics Jan.

I had noticed that before also, thought there were MkII's. Now we know otherwise.

Someone inform Petroglyph about this.

 

I'm tired of seeing games do the same mistake over and over and over again.

Yeah, some people make fun of those who nitpick about the inconsistencies like this, but really, it's Lucasarts (and by relation Lucasfilms') own fault by having there be two sub-classes of the same design in the first place! Asking them to follow their own rules isn't too much is it?

To be fair, I believe Rebellion got it right though.

With the 3d technology of that game, how could you tell? Unless you are referring to the cards...

Yeah, some people make fun of those who nitpick about the inconsistencies like this, but really, it's Lucasarts (and by relation Lucasfilms') own fault by having there be two sub-classes of the same design in the first place! Asking them to follow their own rules isn't too much is it?

 

Yea, I would hate to make a star wars game, no matter what you do, some one will find an inconsistency Would be horrible, at any Q&A some one WILL mention something you did wrong.

 

And am I the only one that thinks that one of the only reasons they have it at the ANH timeline is so they don't have to worry about balancing the SSD, but include everything else it?

 

I know I am sure there is more to it, but that is what it is seeming like.

With the 3d technology of that game, how could you tell? Unless you are referring to the cards...

Yeah, I'm refering to the cards.

 

Obviously.

I remember a card that had the ISD I labled a Victory-class destroyer. Nice. >__

I hate balance, it ruins so many games

i can only say one thing to that

 

 

you are on crack

 

how does balance ruin a game? it makes it more challenging, tatical, and it feels better whenyou beat it.

What would be the oppisite of balance? Un-balance? One way or another, a game is going to be balanced. It may be a perfect mixing of sides or it could balanced towards one team that can crush all challengers.

 

On another topic:

I hate n00bs, they ruin so many games

Guys, we are not arguing about what we like in games (I think we agree there) we are arguing about different definitions of "balance". We all like balance in that both sides have an equal chance of winning the game upon start and that neither side has a unit combination that is completely unstoppable. None of us want a quid pro quo scheme in which every unit on one side has a counterpart on the other side.

We can also agree this has been said many times on at least two other threads... WE NEED MORE NEWS, DARN IT!!!

swiftie

 

noobs are people too

 

i have already said my share of what i thought balance was, but we shouldnt be fretting over what kind of ships there are, just make sure none of them can be exploited (like a ISD that costs 0000 credits glitch or somethin like that) although i would like free ISDs

I can't find the picture of the Accusor. Does anybody remeber noticing and differences to the model itself? Or was it exactly the same as the other ISDs, just slightly enlarged?

I can't find the picture of the Accusor. Does anybody remeber noticing and differences to the model itself? Or was it exactly the same as the other ISDs, just slightly enlarged?

 

http://www.sw-eaw.de/galerie/org/201.jpg

 

It doesn't seem diferrent from other ISDs.

Wait a second, isn't that model just like an ISD mkII?

 

And if my eyes arn't deciving me, I think I clearly can see that the heavy battery on the side are of the ISD mkII make (2 turrets on a joint huge turret base, each having 4 barrels). If so, then why are they marked Ion Cannon Batteries?

 

The mkII got rid of the one turret ( 1 on each side, at the rear) and replced it with a heavy turbolaser battery instead.

 

 

Petro, please, re-read the history books and technical specifications if this is the case.

 

I have a feeling this game isn't going to be modelled as well as I had thought.

Whats more satisfying, having your forces beat attack your opponent in equal numbers and just barely win by one or massivly crushing your enemy with highly trained and accurate stomtroopers unlike those clumsy rebels that barely ever hit.

This kind of post usedt o be Fosh's specialty. We don't hear from him anymore

it does look a bit like a MK2, but that was a beta version of the game, so maybe they hadn't added all the weapon names yet.

I've been readin thru some Previews, and in one of them I read that you apperantly are able to modify your ships to carry different armaments and even add extra shields.

 

Personally I don't care too much about that kind of things. I want a Star Wars experience, not some Alternate Universe. Sure, the Alternate comic stories are fun to read, but they're not part of Star Wars.

They are just a bunch of "What ifs...".