Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people
* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 
Want to support this site? Click

Quote of the Week: "A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then quietly strangled." - Barnett Cocks, British political writer (1907-)


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Iwiki and EU stuff... PostPosted: 2007-11-10 06:43pm
Offline
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger
Ruthless Genocidal Warmonger

Joined: 2002-07-06 06:34pm
Posts: 28163
I've been wondering.

Should we have rules on what Expanded Universe material can be put in?

I'm leaning towards a quasi restrictive policy; as seen by the TIE FIghter page by me:

Shep wrote:
Unlike many other authors, I don't consider many of the insane TIE designs, such as the Interdictor, Hunter and Oppressor to be part of Star Wars; but rather the result of idiot game designers with too much time on their hands, who instead of logically thinking out the progression of technology, and what a unit would be likely to use, instead create a new one-shot craft which we never ever see again in the Expanded Universe, ever; and essentially being Penis Envy designs.

You may call this elitism; but I call it using a brain.


Image
TIE Interdictor

Image
TIE Hunter (seen only in Rogue Squadron III)

Image
TIE Opressor (made up for SW Galaxies)

Examples of the idiocy I don't like.



"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong

"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-10 07:26pm
Offline
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 2005-01-21 02:39pm
Posts: 1314
Maybe a link to "Other TIE designs" or something where obscure craft could be put. I don't think that EU sources should be dismissed simply because someone thinks they are crap (even though they are :P ).



But if the forces of evil should rise again, to cast a shadow on the heart of the city.
Call me. -Batman

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-10 07:28pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member

Joined: 2006-11-20 07:52am
Posts: 2237
Location: Scotland
I am a relatively quiet member, so feel free not to take this seriously, but what I would want to see from the Imperial Wiki is a comprehensive yet rational take on the material; in other words, Include and Condemn.

For completeness' sake, I don't want to look for these things and not find them; but what would the point of coming to the Imperial Wiki rather than Wookiepedia be, if it didn't include the SDN "traditional values" of rigorous analysis and merciless mockery?

So include them, and go to town pointing out exactly how illogical and unnecessary they are.



On the matter at hand, the Interdictor and Oppressor, I'm not even going to try to defend, but the Hunter, I think there might actually be a rationale for.

The TIE Bomber is a maximum efficiency fleet bomber, am I right? Slow (in all but G-canon, where admittedly we see it in a situation where slow and steady made perfect sense), moderately agile, heavy payload- what I reckon is that it was designed in the light of Clone Wars experience.
Target rich environment, most shooting back. It seems to me to be designed to do as much damage as possible in a fleet melee.

It might not be perfectly adapted for the relatively sparse, open running fights we see in the Rebellion- era EU. What the Empire needs there is more of a fighter-bomber, capable of engaging rebel fighter screens and fighting their way through to a target.

So, basically, it looks like a Sienar variant of the X- Wing because it is. That is precisely what it's for, and also what it's mainly designed to go up against.
It's lack of further appearance probably means that it was turned down, and probably in favour of the superior missile capable later production runs of the TIE Avenger.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 06:31am
Offline
Sith Acolyte
User avatar

Joined: 2006-07-25 09:32am
Posts: 5445
Location: Beverly, WV
I don't think that disclaimer needs to be said. Anyhow, yes, the TIE Hunter and Oppressor should be added as they are described in the canon and by people licensed by LFL to do so.



Wolf Ritter
A Certain Clique, HAB, The Chroniclers
Why would you celebrate the slowly tightening grip of Death?~Hans Beinholt, German Ambassador to the UN, on Children's Birthday Parties.
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -C.S. Lewis

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 07:37am
Offline
Sith Marauder
User avatar

Joined: 2004-03-26 02:31pm
Posts: 3821
Location: Somewhere in the GFFA
One may not like the designs, but the TIE Oppressor, Hunter and Interdictor are canonical (though the TIE Hunter looks pretty nice though they are wanked out).

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 07:42am
Offline
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Posts: 28226
Location: Sydney Australia
Include and criticize as crap.



Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/

Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 01:29pm
Offline
All Seeing Eye
User avatar

Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Posts: 15774
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Someone make fun of the Galaxy Gun. I hate that fucking thing; it can penetrate shields to destroy planets like the Death Star and while being a tiny missile but they can't equip all their other ships with its magic shield-penetration tech or uber-shielding relative to volume? And what about its superduper hyperdrive?



"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 02:17pm
Offline
The Anti-Shep
User avatar

Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm
Posts: 9525
Location: "Style is knowing who you are, what you want to say and not giving a damn. ''
Maybe you could do a three-tier system like they do on the official site. You could have Movies/TV/Radio, followed by EU, followed by Wank. These TIEs would fall under Wank.



"I continue to wonder precisely what Constitution of which nation this president taught back in his days in law school."

--Charles Pierce on Barack Obama

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 06:01pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member

Joined: 2002-07-16 04:12pm
Posts: 1824
Perhaps the articles should be divided in what can be taken from movies and movie-related material (novels, radio-dramas, ICSs and VDs) and then you have in a seperate section what the EU says.

For the DeathStar it could say: "movie-wise the DS was first seen in its planning stage in AotC as the ultimate weapon developed by the Geonosians ... ". And then later on: "EU-wise what would become the DS appeared first in RoguePlanet in the form of a battleplanetoid concieved by Raith Sienar ... ."



The optimist thinks, that we live in the best of all possible worlds and the pessimist is afraid, that this is true.

"Don't ask, what your country can do for you. Ask, what you can do for your country." Mao Tse-Tung.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 08:08pm
Offline
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 2002-09-13 11:46am
Posts: 1237
Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Someone make fun of the Galaxy Gun. I hate that fucking thing; it can penetrate shields to destroy planets like the Death Star and while being a tiny missile but they can't equip all their other ships with its magic shield-penetration tech or uber-shielding relative to volume? And what about its superduper hyperdrive?


I'd argue that the reason the GG missiles were so powerful was that the systems were designed for one-use operations. If you only need to run a shield once for a few hours and it would be scrapped afterward, you can get higher performance out of it.

But that is my opinion, and not reflected in anything.

Still, whenever we make a page, there could be a list at the top that tells what the sources are for that page; movie, books of movies, etc, along with a link to the exact sources at the bottom, and a link to a page saying what is canon, and the order to be taken in.



Space Tycoon RP thread
Space Tycoon Rockets, Spaceplanes, Space Vehicles, and Landers
Space Station components and IASA rockets
Ground bases, Derivative tech, and Orbit Transfer Costs
Research chart
(Max of 5 links allowed)

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Iwiki and EU stuff... PostPosted: 2007-11-11 09:57pm
Offline
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 2007-02-11 11:55pm
Posts: 1480
Location: Idaho
MKSheppard wrote:
Image
TIE Opressor (made up for SW Galaxies)


Whoever designed this piece of shit is a dumb ass. The TIE-Interceptor originally had the cut outs, and that was to increase visibility to the left and right of the pilot, a severe problem of the original TIE. Having the cut outs in the back makes absolutely no fucking sense, and whatever "LAWL new TIE" idiot came up with this should be burned at the stake for heresy.



Coyote: Warm it in the microwave first to avoid that 'necrophelia' effect.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-11 10:04pm
Offline
Sith Marauder
User avatar

Joined: 2003-05-13 01:07am
Posts: 4974
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Eleventh Century Remnant wrote:
It might not be perfectly adapted for the relatively sparse, open running fights we see in the Rebellion- era EU. What the Empire needs there is more of a fighter-bomber, capable of engaging rebel fighter screens and fighting their way through to a target.

That's what the Assault Gunboat was for.



Image
"Stop! No one can survive these deadly rays!"
"These deadly rays will be your death!"
- Thor and Akton, Starcrash

"Before man reaches the moon your mail will be delivered within hours from New York to California, to England, to India or to Australia by guided missiles.... We stand on the threshold of rocket mail."
- Arthur Summerfield, US Postmaster General 1953 - 1961

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-12 02:44am
Offline
All Seeing Eye
User avatar

Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Posts: 15774
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Coalition wrote:
Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Someone make fun of the Galaxy Gun. I hate that fucking thing; it can penetrate shields to destroy planets like the Death Star and while being a tiny missile but they can't equip all their other ships with its magic shield-penetration tech or uber-shielding relative to volume? And what about its superduper hyperdrive?


I'd argue that the reason the GG missiles were so powerful was that the systems were designed for one-use operations. If you only need to run a shield once for a few hours and it would be scrapped afterward, you can get higher performance out of it.


You might get more intense performance, but you shouldn't get ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE better radiation of absorbed heat or heat sinks, and that only covers it shielding. What about penetrating planetary shields? What about its uber-wank magic matter-annhiliating chain reaction warhead? The beauty of the Death Star is that is simply manages its feats of strength through mere scale. No magic or one-of-a-kind, one-off technology never seen again and perfectly insulated from consequences in the larger tactical balance of power. No, just a really large ship with a really large power source and fuel stores with a really big shield with a really big set of drives with a really, really big gun essentially like all the others.



"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2007-11-12 08:39am
Offline
Jedi Council Member

Joined: 2006-11-20 07:52am
Posts: 2237
Location: Scotland
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eleventh Century Remnant wrote:
It might not be perfectly adapted for the relatively sparse, open running fights we see in the Rebellion- era EU. What the Empire needs there is more of a fighter-bomber, capable of engaging rebel fighter screens and fighting their way through to a target.

That's what the Assault Gunboat was for.


My pet theory here, and a general explanation for some of the more freakish TIEs, is that the Defender is pretty much the end of the line as far as performance goes. The Sienar design team have reached the natural limit of the technology, and they are painfully aware of that.

What actually happens after the Advanced/X7 leaves the drawing board is a mixture of searching round for another way forward, deliberately exploring possibilities previously rejected, and outright silly season. After all, they have the answer. Between the omnipresent /ln, the elite Interceptor, the long-range standard Avenger and the silver bullet Defender, there's nothing more the Imperial Starfleet actually needs.

So the overwhelming majority of the late- model freaks, like the Vanguard, Assault, Sentinel, Raptor, Aggressor, et al, are at best solutions looking for problems, usually some designer's private job creation scheme, at worst nothing more than industrial-grade goofing off.

Even the best of them- and the Sentinel/V38 (YT style cockpit with TIE wings) and Hunter probably are the best of the bunch- are competing for roles already filled. I reckon the Hunter is pretty much an F/A-18 equivalent, a light to medium multirole, and it's fatal flaw is payload. It may be slightly faster and more agile than the Starwing, but it can't take nearly as much abuse, nor do as much when it gets to the target.

The fact that the Starwing is a Cygnus design, not Sienar, is another reason for the thing. Sienar would want to get that lost market segment back. Presumably, they didn't.

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group