Moderator: Beowulf
What is the armament? Twin medium turbolaser on top, with 3 twin light turbolasers. 2 medium ion cannons on the bottom with a twin light turbolaser towards the front ... and then what are those lighter turrets on the bottom? Or am I completely off.
Sniper. Cover dogfighters as they accelerate into the scrum, kill bombers, shuttles, transports, and escort corvettes, independent point and area defense for a capital ship. Instant kills on light fighters, extremely dangerous in close even vs high end fighters because it might have a lot of weight, but it has enormous power to move it, on top of the firepower and shielding. A flight of these with 2 flights of Defender to back them up and that's a fighter squadron that's dangerous at all ranges.Crazedwraith wrote: ↑2017-08-02 01:17pm That's a hefty TIE. What do you envision its Role being? Dual LTL feels like overkill for dogfighting and underkill for attacking shipping.
In EVERY way a PulsarWing, except it's a TIE aesthetic, instead of a StarWing aesthetic.
Good times!I saw a /r/fractalsponge subreddit recently while looking for reference material. I swear I had nothing to do with it!Crossroads Inc. wrote: ↑2017-08-03 02:00pm A "Sniper" fighter, an interesting role, one I never thought about before as far as a 'Starfighter' goes.
Have to say once again you impress me, and I am sure many others, by filling in the "Nooks and crannies" of the Star Wars Order of Battle.
Freighters, Tankers, Recon ships, Cargo, and so many other odds and ends
You are certainly influencing a new generation of Star Wars model makers and fans, I see references to your ships more and more online!
I think it could go either way really. But the existence of a combat variant is definitely around - Acclamator II and Pellaeon's Leveller for examples. The only reason I'm thinking this way, well two reasons, are 1) it's easier to take away weight like reactor, armor, weapons than to add them to something that was never braced and built for them, and 2) it was this order in Hull 721evillejedi wrote: ↑2017-08-11 11:01pm I always felt that the Acclamator went the other way, it started off as something like a liberty ship, a cheap lightly armed transport/escort more suited to landing troops and as the war progressed more weapons and armor were added on, and a larger reactor was cut into the hulls so that the ship could survive fleet engagements prior to disembarking its battalions on the surface.
I assign total flight group volume by hangar, but I figure the space is more or less modular from there. So you can stow a squadron of TIE/I, or a flight of T/D. Some ships I figure should operate many types (or potentially many types) - that's why my frigates have such variable carried craft numbers; you can cram a wing of something like Interceptor into the volume of a pair of StarWing squadrons, for instance. The key visible limits are aperture height (if you want to operate StarWing or T/D, for instance), and depth (if you want to operate, say, Scimitar). This is really only an issue for corvettes and less. Frigates are generally going to be large enough to operate any fighter, but it just might not be a lot of any given fighter, if they are big craft.
Ohhhhh...reading comprehension fail on my part, I see.Patroklos wrote: ↑2017-08-12 01:32pm Hey thanks for that background, that's reall interesting stuff.
However, what I was actually asking was about the fighters themselves. When you say "this one is hyper capable" and "this one is not" do you have a rule regarding how much internal volume you add to a particular fighter design to house the equipment for hyper capability? Sort of like how you make a choice regarding a capital ships reactor size based on what you want it to do (number of g's, turbolaser armament, etc.).
