Jump to content

Colindarklighter

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Most likely, the mc-75 had some glaring weaknesses and no doubt due to raddus the alliance lost most of the fleet. The mon cals were probably working triple shifts just to get the mc-80 cruisers refitted for endor. It also explains the sorry state of the rebel fleet at the end of empire strikes back.
  2. He's probably the executors captain at the time while piett is the admiral of death squadron. I always got that feeling when watching that scene, especially since he asks about why the fleet is not attacking.
  3. The old rebel alliance sourcebook from west end games had a good break down on how ships were classified primarily based on how ship combat was designed for the ot. Ship combat in the ot was based around the line with cruisers forming the back bone of the fleet with support ships in the close support line, these were corvettes and frigates. After the close support line was the picket line which was mainly for scouting and intercepting fighters and close support line ships. Ideally picket line ships were highly maneuverable like system patrol crafts. Corvettes were ship that were under a certain length and had a certain number of crew, 150 I believe it was, frigates were ships that were under 300 meters or so and had a max crew of 1000. Cruisers were everything else bar dreadnought class ships like the SSD or death star. The concept of destroyers was eliminated due to the fact that they were an unnecessary class due to the three dimensional nature of space and the fact that multiple frigate and Corvette class ships would be used in the cruiser line to protect against incoming attacks.
  4. I think one of the issues is more that there should be a cap on the number of ace squadrons that can be in a fleet, kinda like the flotilla nerf. Its ironic that when they nerfed rikeen they never considered one of the reasons he needed a nerd in the first place was rikeen ace holes being to good. The only downside to this is that it would kill two ship which imperial players need to stay relevant.
  5. Even on the separatist side, many of there support ships like the munificent or the rescuant had open spaces in the hull that could accommodate fighters, while I will agree that the primary design of most of the separatist support ships was not being a carrier but more in line as ships ment to support and defend the carriers, their secondary use was to ferry extra fighters into battle. And in the case of a battle to prevent a landing, the ships especially the republic ones if my memory serves me and it was the siege of ryloth you are referring to, the reason the republic was unable to land was because of a blunder from ashoka which led to the bridge of a venator being damaged. Still the venators primary design was as a carrier and a troop transport. Not a front line combat ship. That would be more around the design of the victory star destroyer which was better designed for ship to ship combat. And while battles did come down to ship to ship combat, I myself take little stock in what was made for both TV and the movies as it makes for better visuals. Since the game of armada is designed around trying to create a semi realistic space naval simulator, certain embellishments that the movies and TV did have to be removed to balance and keep the game from becoming a single faction is king game. My issue is many people who want the clone wars in armada are blinded by the fact that George Lucas was horrible at writing and then implementing the concept of the clone wars which is no better exemplified in the apparent change in naval philosophy from carrier based combat to big gun based ships which should never have happened. I find the clone wars to be the worst portion of the star wars mythos because it is an anomaly within the history of the series. For instance the 2-1b medical droid, first appearing the empire strikes back. No person should ever be operated on by s droid like that and the you have b1 and b2 battle droids that look to be better constructed than a droid ment for complex surgery.
  6. That's embellishment created for the movies, if it was a real battle, the majority of the fighting would have been done by fighters similar to the battle of midway. Both the republic and separatist ships have horrible structural integrity due to the huge number of fighters carried by the ships. This means the main combat philosophy was not the big gun philosophy of the later civil war but a carrier philosophy much like today's naval philosophy. The downside of the carrier philosophy is that most of a fleets combat capacity is tied up in its fighters and its only way to project its power is by sending out its fighters. The battle of coursant was most likely an anomaly as they had to attempt to rescue chancellor palpatine before the CIS fleet fled from the battlefield necessitating a close combat brawl battle to prevent the CIS ships from being able to jump to hyperspace. This would not have been the norm in the clone wars as both sides ships where designed not only as carriers but also as troop transports and battles between ships would be a huge waste of military resources on both sides.
  7. The big issue I have with the clone wars being added to armada is a major reworking on how squadrons are used in the game will need to be implemented. Contrary to what many believe, the clone wars was not a capital ship on capital ship conflict. Nearly all large capital ships in the conflict held substantial number of fighters. For instance the venator alone held 192 v wings, 192 ETA-2 jedi interceptors and 36 arc-170. Compared to a providence class like the invisible hand which carried 120 vulture droids and 120 droid tri-fighters. Even a lucrehulk is capable of fielding 1500 vulture droids. The staggering amount of fighters carried by these ships means there has to be a tradeoff some where. For the venator due to its ventral hanger bay it should be very weak to attacks as the long open areas in the hanger bay would weaken the structural integrity of the ship as a whole. Plus true to its role as a carrier it is a glass cannon. It's only capable weapons are its eight heavy turbo laser cannons on port and starboard sides which are only capable of projecting it's full fire power in those arcs. At most to target enemies in front of it it can only ever bring two cannons to bear at a time. This is why it's only true ability to project its power is in its squadrons but that also weakens it as it is incapable of defending itself. I could go on and on but most would not have the time or patience for it so I will stop here.
  8. I guess the point I am trying to make is that FFG did a bad job with scaling certain ships. In my opinion, the MC 30 should have been a medium base ship and I feel the pelta should have been one as well. I think the imperial ships were scaled well but I think they dropped the ball a little on rebel scaling.
  9. It's more along the lines that fleets would require not only large cruiser class ships which would be the ISD and the MC80 and MC75 but small corvette and frigate class ships for escort and defense of the cruisers. Unfortunately the game designed Corvette and frigate size ships as small ships with little to differentiate between them. The medium base then becomes an important size class as they are capable of engaging small base ships and can come up on top and at least pose a threat to the large base ships. Medium base ships should theoretically be used to support the large base ships while small base are both to support the medium base as well as probe the enemy formation to draw off the medium base and small base ships so the large base ships can Duke it out. Now this is not really feasible in armada due to point limits for standard play and it gets tedious with larger games to keep track of dozens of ships at a time.
  10. I had times where it made my interdictor unkillable. Any damage to the shields was just regenerated and it just kept hitting back with sw-7.
  11. Engineering team is fun if you use it on an interdictor, you use a engineering command and token you get 9 points of fun coming your way. That's 3 damage cards removed or 4 shields regenerated and you could still move one more to another arc.
  12. Unfortunately if we go the bulk cruiser way, I cant see it being any different from a quasar, maybe even weaker. In the WEG rebel alliance sourcebook, the rebellion hated them cause they were fickle, tended to breakdown and were expensive. Not only that, they barely had any armaments on it due to being converted bulk freighters so the reactors were weaker. To be honest, I don't think the rebel needs a ship with a vanilla squadron value of four due to the inherent strength of the rebel squadrons as well as their ability to be multi role.
  13. For me its redundant shields, 8 points for an effect that regenerates only a single shield and it really only works on turns 3-6 if you are lucky.
  14. I think the rebels are fine with what the have. A carrier with a squadron value of four seems overkill for the rebels whose squadrons tend to be heartier than there imperial counterparts as well as being more expensive point wise. If anything, I feel both factions are in desperate need of a medium size close support ship other than the AF2 for the rebels or the Vic and interdictor for the imperials that can scare of those pesky msu fleets as well as pose a threat to the big heavy fleets that chose to ignore them. I could see a new carrier if we have gotten a new squadron pack for both factions, however most purpose built carriers tend to be to fragile for actually combat and at least where I play, we rarely see the quasar fielded due to the fact it dies real quick. All an all, if a rebel player is fielding a carrier it should either be a command pelta with AFFM or a HMC80 flying the independence title because they let you speed up those pesky B-wings which is where rebel carrier pla shines.
×
×
  • Create New...