StarDestroyer.Net BBS

And correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the Tie Avenger only appear in the CCG?

Jesus fucking Christ! All you had to do was show me my error, you fucking asshole! At least Darth Yoshi and Mr Bean have the decency to correct people using tact. To Darth Yoshi and Mr Bean, thank you for saying something without using insults. I respect you guys.

2000AD wrote:

Grand Admiral Chaos wrote:I hate to inform you, but TIE Interceptors have 10 laser cannons.

From TEGTVAV:
"For weaponary, the interceptor has FOUR laser cannons, one at the end of each solar panel"

The Interceptor in X-Wing Vs Tie-Fighter has FOUR lasers.

In all the novels I have read that state how many lasers an Interceptor has, they have FOUR lasers.

In RoTJ when we see them firing they are firing FOUR lasers.

I hate to inform you but your stupid ass statement has been shown to be false numerous times.

Tone it down 2000, GAC is right, there is no reason to insult someone unless they're trolling.

THank you. If I make a mistake, it's not all that hard to simply show where I'm wrong. It's not like I'll insist I'm right on something like this. Sorry about changing the subject here. I'll try to be on topic next time.

2000AD wrote:And correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the Tie Avenger only appear in the CCG?

Actually, the TIE Avenger also appears in TIE Fighter and X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter. In some of the X-Wing novels, it is mentioned as being a "bright" but it never appears in combat (to my memory). It also, of course, appears in the expansion packs for the above games.

The Tie Advanced is seen in the Game Tie Fighter. In X-wing they feature the Tie Advanced X-1 (Dath Vader's Tie).

A Tie Interceptor with ten guns would be crippling slow. It advantage is its speed and manueverablity. Why would one deploy a fighter that gives up that advantage? In any starfighter, the power comes from the engines somehow. If you add a large amount of energy weapons it will drain power that could be used for speed. laser are NOT like a machine gun, you can't just strap it on, it need energy. and where are you going to put all of those power generators in that cramped hull! The fact the an Interceptor can operate 4 laser cannons and still be fast in a hull that is not much larger than a standard Tie is increadible.

That is reasonable. I find the four cannon configuration totally acceptable. I should find that picture, so I can show where I got that notion of ten cannons. I'm supposed to be an Imperial fan and I misinterpret the number of cannons on the Interceptor. heh! How ironic.

Grand Admiral Chaos wrote:That is reasonable. I find the four cannon configuration totally acceptable. I should find that picture, so I can show where I got that notion of ten cannons. I'm supposed to be an Imperial fan and I misinterpret the number of cannons on the Interceptor. heh! How ironic.

good to see some one who is willing to listen. on the other thread on problem was that some people refused to accept that they might be wrong

I think I've played X-Wing, TIE Fighter, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter and X-Wing Alliance more than anyone else alive. Seriously

The TIE Advanced and TIE Avenger are NOT two different things, rest of the EU be damned. As far as I'm concerned Lucasarts is god in these matters, so sue me.

As its been previously said, X-Wing has Darth Vader's TIE, the X1. But in all subsequent games the TIE Advanced is synonomous with TIE Avenger, which is a nickname. The CCG is full of crap, that picture is downright awful. It looks nothing like that. The main fuselage is totally wrong.

good to see some one who is willing to listen. on the other thread on problem was that some people refused to accept that they might be wrong

Well, pretending I know it all won't get me very far. My intention is to be amongst fellow fans, not to argue and make enemies. Actually, I really hate it when people won't listen to something logical without a good reason.

Grand Admiral Chaos wrote:

good to see some one who is willing to listen. on the other thread on problem was that some people refused to accept that they might be wrong

Well, pretending I know it all won't get me very far. My intention is to be amongst fellow fans, not to argue and make enemies. Actually, I really hate it when people won't listen to something logical without a good reason.

Welcome

David wrote:

2000AD wrote:

Grand Admiral Chaos wrote:I hate to inform you, but TIE Interceptors have 10 laser cannons.

From TEGTVAV:
"For weaponary, the interceptor has FOUR laser cannons, one at the end of each solar panel"

The Interceptor in X-Wing Vs Tie-Fighter has FOUR lasers.

In all the novels I have read that state how many lasers an Interceptor has, they have FOUR lasers.

In RoTJ when we see them firing they are firing FOUR lasers.

I hate to inform you but your stupid ass statement has been shown to be false numerous times.

Tone it down 2000, GAC is right, there is no reason to insult someone unless they're trolling.

Insult? You call that an insult? I gave my counter arguments (and sources where they come from) in a non-insulting manner, highlighting the main points that are relevant to the debate. I then used his own statement (I hate to inform you...) against him.

And here's a quote from Darth Wong's Forum Policy post:

"However, "mockery of stupid people" is OK For example, "that's not how it works, you moronic little dipshit." is probably acceptable, particularly if it occurs in the context of a post which actually makes some meaningful point. "

I'm pretty sure that the "ten Las. Interceptor" idea has already been debated on these forums, and there are numerous sources which state that they do not have ten lasers. If GAC hasn't even watched RoTJ(the only film where we see interceptors firing) , read any of the many EU books that include interceptors or played any of the com. games with them, then I would class him as stupid if he joined a debate about how many lasers an Interceptor carries.

However if he has seen/read/played some of the sources, and just forgot about them, then I apologise.
If he has seen/read/played them and remebers them AND still thinks Interceptors have ten lasers (before taking part in this debate) then i am sorry but I would class him as an idiot.

Well it's 00:50 over here so I'm off to bed. Goodnight.

2000AD wrote:However if he has seen/read/played some of the sources, and just forgot about them, then I apologise.
If he has seen/read/played them and remebers them AND still thinks Interceptors have ten lasers (before taking part in this debate) then i am sorry but I would class him as an idiot.

Well it's 00:50 over here so I'm off to bed. Goodnight.

Pleasant dreams, jerk.

Now, on the topic: I am reasonably sure that the TIE Advanced X1 is different from the TIE "Avenger." Why? Because the TIE Avenger features 4 laser cannons, while Vader's had only two. The TIE Avenger is probably the X2 model, an incremental improvement in speed and firepower.

Recently, I saw a pic of the Avenger. It looks like the x1 body married to TIE/Int wings.

Well, I did see return of the Jedi, but I never did get a very good look at them firing. I don't own all that many EU books, so I don't recall ever learning anything about the Interceptors in them. As for the games, I never got to play them. I guess that picture of the model I saw threw me off.

Actually, I believe I overreacted and I apologise for that. However, I don't believe making one wrong statement is truely grounds to dub me an idiot just yet. I have been known to make mistakes....from time to time.

Btw, thanks for the welcome.

Grand Admiral Chaos wrote:Well, I did see return of the Jedi, but I never did get a very good look at them firing. I don't own all that many EU books, so I don't recall ever learning anything about the Interceptors in them. As for the games, I never got to play them. I guess that picture of the model I saw threw me off.

Actually, I believe I overreacted and I apologise for that. However, I don't believe making one wrong statement is truely grounds to dub me an idiot just yet. I have been known to make mistakes....from time to time.

Btw, thanks for the welcome.

your welcome