Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Corellian Corvette

Vindicator-class Heavy Cruiser

Recommended Posts

vindicator.png250px-Vindicator_heavy_cruiser-Taldryan.250px-Cotelinclass.jpg701px-Predator-Class_Star_Destroyer.jpg

(the last two came up a lot in the search results, maybe it is a variant, or an upgraded version, like a Mrk2?)

 

Stats:

Dimensions:

-600 meter length

-300 meter width

-100 meter height

 

Standard Weapon Loadout:

-5 Light Turbolaser Batteries

-5 Light Quad Turbolaser Batteries

-4 Point Defense Laser Batteries

-4 Point Defense Ion Batteries

Variants Weapon Loadouts:

-4 Point Defense Quad Laser Batteries

 

These are images of how I would imagine the Vindicators weapons being layed out, with batteries on the dorsal, ventral, port, and starboard axis.

eA8S142.jpg?1

unhTMT9.jpg?1

 

Background
As a bridge between a full Star Destroyer and of other smaller craft, the Vindicator design platform was of moderate success. Early models were more lightly armed and did not have the capacity to carry large ground forces. This was immediately seen as critical needs and made it into the design.
Indeed, the Vindicator platform became the hull for later craft, many very specialized designs. The most familiar is the Immobilizer 418 Interdictor Cruiser.
 
Characteristics
Those familiar with the Imperial Fleet find the Vindicator class and it's sister designs slightly cramped versions of larger Star Destroyers. In essence, this is largely true, particularly on the Immobilizer 418 class vessels.
Designed to fulfill the same roles as a Star Destroyer, Vindicators are similarly built with the same mission requirements with merely smaller armament and starship complements. Early model Vindicators had very little ground force capabilities but were capable of carrying a full wing of starfighters. None of these designs serve in the Vast Empire fleet.
 
Armament
While not carrying overwhelming firepower, the Vindicator class has a variety of weapons systems capable of handling most threats that may confront it. Long distance attacks are best handled by the starfighter complement, where close-in fighting is covered by a mix of anti-capital light turbolaser and ion cannon arrays. Plentiful quad turbolasers and anti-starfighter laser cannon prevent enemy fighters from getting a good approach for attacks.
The goal of the Vindicator design is to provide a robust Imperial presence wherever it appears and it is successful in this endeavor.
 
History
Initial deployment by the Vast Empire Imperial Navy Fourteenth Fleet began in 10 ABY, with years of Imperial service proven in other sectors prior.
 
Variants
Immobilizer 418: Gravity Well Projectors x4, 4 point defense batteries, 24 starfighters
-Noted to be extremely expensive, rare, and most fleets having maybe 1.
 Unnamed Carrier Variant: Light Single Turbolasers, point defense systems, 72 starfighters.
-Must be a common alternate configuration because it is mentioned a lot about how the normal ones carry 24 TIEs while others are configured to carry a full wing (72).
-Probably sacrifices a lot of interior space from weapons and ground troops to fit all the TIEs and their equipment/maintenance areas/fuel/ammo.
 
Known ships
Cascade
Centennial
Challenger
Horizon
Herald
Northdown
Palisade
Pioneer
Pride of Ringwood
Progress
Sterling
Summit
Tradition
Vanguard
Edited by Corellian Corvette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anywyas, despite that forum hicchup, this is the vindicator-class heavy cruiser. It is a simple design, allowing for many complex modifications. It is recognized for being very thin and wide, and for having a flat and rhombus shaped bridge. It is a step up in size and looks from the glatiator, and is respected by the admiralty for all its variants that spawned from its simple hull.

It is to a victory as a victory is to a imperitor.

I hope we see it next wave, and have some ideas to toss around. So, you know how rebel aces basicly shifted the a&b wings roles a bit? Imagine the standard Vindicator Heavy Cruiser is released with the next wave as an expansion like the glatiator is. Then, mid way to the next wave (or later, knowing ffg) an 'aces' box is released (expect it would be called something different) and it would have the Immobilizer 418 and the Heavy Carrier as models in it. It would come with just one of each, and the models would be different than the standard Vindicator, and not just by paint either. The immobilizer would have the classic 4 domes on it, and the heavy carrier would have a different underside with more hanger space and way less guns.

1 class, many different possibilities. Also, I am really starting to like the last two pictures with the extra armor and stuff on the sides at the rear, maybe that's a variant, or it becomes the new standerd?

What does everyone think of my ideas? Good, Bad, Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this hull, always have.  Always felt it to be a more "sensible" size than the bigger ships.

 

As for stats relative to the Victory, lets look at the stats of these two ships from FFG's own Age of Rebellion RPG (sole reason being that they are FFG published stats for both ships, so hopefully they should be a decent guide):

 

Speed / Manoeuvrability: The Vindicator is comparable to a Neb-B, certainly faster and more manoeuvrable than the Victory.

 

Shields: The Vindicator actually has heavier shields compared to the Victory on the front, equal shielding in other arcs.

 

Squadron capacity: the same, both ships carry (and one would assume can command) 24 fighters.

 

Anti-squadron firepower: the Victory must be tasking some of it's main guns to this role as it is stated with no dedicated point defence weapons, while the Vindicator comes with 30 laser cannons across it's hull (that's 250% of the number of point defence guns on the Neb-B).  Better anti-squadron for the Vindicator than the Neb-B maybe?

 

So far the Vindicator looks like the better ship, until we get to the following:

 

Hull strength: The Vindicator at 2/3 the length of the Victory also has approx. 2/3 the armour and hull integrity of the Victory, so much easier to take down once it's stronger forward shielding is dealt with.

 

Anti-capship firepower:  The Vindicator weighs in with 15 medium turbolasers, 10 quad mount light turbolasers and 3 heavy tractor beams.  The Victory easily beats this with 10 quad mount light turbolasers, 20 twin mounted medium turbolasers, 20 assault conc missile launchers and 10 heavy tractor emplacements.  That's still heavier firepower than the Neb-B, but no where near the destructive capability of the Victory.  So less firepower and focussed much more on the red dice with no black dice.  Also probably far fewer offensive mod slots (no missiles to upgrade!).

 

All of this is from the stats in FFG's RPG, and pure speculation.

 

But yes, I love this hull and hope that it comes out as a miniature!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Known ships
Cascade
Centennial
Challenger
Horizon
Herald
Northdown
Palisade
Pioneer
Pride of Ringwood
Progress
Sterling
Summit
Tradition
Vanguard

 

 

Did anyone else notice that all of the examples of known ships in this class are named after varieties of hops?  Is beer brewing a big deal among Imperial shipwrights?

 

Out of curiosity, where did you find the list of known ships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On some wiki, grabbed the list of names for possible titles cause that seems to be a big thing.  I didnt even bother to read them, but your right :P

 

Also, thanks Hygric, seems like the vindicator still has the same speed (moving from 2 to 3 is a big jump, lets keep it at 2 but add more maneuverability) and has the same shields as the Victory.  So its pretty tanky, until you get down to the hull, which is pretty fragile!  So, somewhere between 4-6 hull you think?  Also, it does lack in the firepower department, hopefully if it is released it doesn't go down the TIE advanced path!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see a place for the ship in the Imperial arsenal, depending upon the Gladiator of course.  It has a significant anti-fighter armament, is fast, hard shields but soft hull and comparable fighter support to the Victory.  I'm seeing a really good anti-fighter cap-ship in that mix still with "reasonable" firepower against the big ships.

 

Like I said, all the stat stuff I did above is based purely on the FFG Age of Rebellion RPG stats.  Who knows where the designers would take this ship!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Known ships
Cascade
Centennial
Challenger
Horizon
Herald
Northdown
Palisade
Pioneer
Pride of Ringwood
Progress
Sterling
Summit
Tradition
Vanguard

 

 

Did anyone else notice that all of the examples of known ships in this class are named after varieties of hops?  Is beer brewing a big deal among Imperial shipwrights?

 

Out of curiosity, where did you find the list of known ships?

 

That list is from Wookieepedia...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is this the base design upon which the Interdictor was built upon?

 

It is the design used by the Interdictor but this was only rectoned to be so many years later in the Expanded Universe.  

 

The Interdictor was developed by West End Games [The Imperial Sourcebook, November 1989] well over a decade before the Vindicator  [starships of the Galaxy, May 2001] entered the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did say the Interdictor was made from a modified cruiser hull back then, but that cruiser didn't have a name until Wizards of the Coast gave it more of a back story. Also I'll probably make myself look stupid here because I don't know how many fighters FFG has the Victory carrying, but it's "suppose" to be two squadrons (24 fighters) and the Vindicator carries a full wing of 6 squadrons (72 fighters) plus some Assault Gunboats, Assault shuttles and some other craft. Same load out as an ISD.

 

I hope FFG has made the number of fighters the Victory carry more realistic. Two squadrons always seemed a bit off to me, no reason it can't carry a full wing. Especially considering it's a clone wars era design and they had other ships at the time that could carry over 400 fighters. In my head I liked to think the Victory carrying only two squadrons was it's "peace time" load out or that since Vic's were being phased out they weren't equipped with a full wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Imperial Sourcebook, 1st and 2nd Edition [1989,1995] the Interdictor had no mention of coming from a modified cruiser hull, in fact the Interdictor's hull itself was said to be the basis of the Penstar Alignment's Enforcer Heavy Class Cruisers.

 

Again this was all later rectoned well over a decade later by Wizards off the Coast.

 

The Vindicator had a standard configuration that allowed for two fighter squadrons, that is the norm.

 

For it to house and maintain a full wing [six squadrons] the Vindicator would have to give up drop ships, ground troops, AT ATs, and other support vessels.  Other vessels such as the Strike Class Crusier and Victory Class could also be modified to some degree.

 

At Gencon I asked how many squadrons the Victory could carry into combat and the Fantasy Flight designer who was running the demo said it was not really how many squadrons were inside the Victory but rather how many the Victory could coordinate.  I believe I was controlling four TIE squadrons and the Victory could coordinate/directly command three at a time.

 

Please excuse me if I don't have the exact game terminology in use here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did say the Interdictor was made from a modified cruiser hull back then, but that cruiser didn't have a name until Wizards of the Coast gave it more of a back story. Also I'll probably make myself look stupid here because I don't know how many fighters FFG has the Victory carrying, but it's "suppose" to be two squadrons (24 fighters) and the Vindicator carries a full wing of 6 squadrons (72 fighters) plus some Assault Gunboats, Assault shuttles and some other craft. Same load out as an ISD.

I hope FFG has made the number of fighters the Victory carry more realistic. Two squadrons always seemed a bit off to me, no reason it can't carry a full wing. Especially considering it's a clone wars era design and they had other ships at the time that could carry over 400 fighters. In my head I liked to think the Victory carrying only two squadrons was it's "peace time" load out or that since Vic's were being phased out they weren't equipped with a full wing.

You're right about those numbers, if we accept what has been published in the RPG books.

My interpretation is that the Victory-class was an all-purpose vessel, which had a naval role, but also a ground assault role. As such it does not only deploy TIE fighters, but also landing barges. Those really take up a lot more inconvenient space than TIE Fighters do (even if TIEs are also not the most convenient size-wise).

The Vindicator, on the other hand, does not have that ground assault role, and can therefore use all its hangar space for fighters.

EDIT: Ninja'd!!

Edited by Mikael Hasselstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They did say the Interdictor was made from a modified cruiser hull back then, but that cruiser didn't have a name until Wizards of the Coast gave it more of a back story. Also I'll probably make myself look stupid here because I don't know how many fighters FFG has the Victory carrying, but it's "suppose" to be two squadrons (24 fighters) and the Vindicator carries a full wing of 6 squadrons (72 fighters) plus some Assault Gunboats, Assault shuttles and some other craft. Same load out as an ISD.

I hope FFG has made the number of fighters the Victory carry more realistic. Two squadrons always seemed a bit off to me, no reason it can't carry a full wing. Especially considering it's a clone wars era design and they had other ships at the time that could carry over 400 fighters. In my head I liked to think the Victory carrying only two squadrons was it's "peace time" load out or that since Vic's were being phased out they weren't equipped with a full wing.

You're right about those numbers, if we accept what has been published in the RPG books.

My interpretation is that the Victory-class was an all-purpose vessel, which had a naval role, but also a ground assault role. As such it does not only deploy TIE fighters, but also landing barges. Those really take up a lot more inconvenient space than TIE Fighters do (even if TIEs are also not the most convenient size-wise).

The Vindicator, on the other hand, does not have that ground assault role, and can therefore use all its hangar space for fighters.

EDIT: Ninja'd!!

 

TIE's seem inconvenient size wise, but they were actually carried in racks in the hangar bay, which means more could be carried than their actual size would lead to believe. Shuttles and drop ships, however, had to land in the hangar bay, resulting in more lost space.

 

In contrast, Confederate droid starfighters could somewhat "fold-up" to take even less room than TIEs in their own racks.

It still doesn't explain how the Republic's Venator Star Destroyer, at 1137 meters, shorter than a full Imperator/Imperial class SD, could field 196 V wing or V-19s, 36 Arc-170 (Larger than X-wings) and another 192 Eta Actis fighters in addition to their full complement of ground assault vehicles.

 

Ah, the joys of researching the retconned explanations for why ships of similar sizes carry vastly different numbers of fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TIE's seem inconvenient size wise, but they were actually carried in racks in the hangar bay, which means more could be carried than their actual size would lead to believe. Shuttles and drop ships, however, had to land in the hangar bay, resulting in more lost space.

 

Yes. The inferred utility of TIEs in racks is not so much in saving space - because putting them in racks doesn't seem to really save space, it probably makes them even more of space consuming. The utility, I think, is in speed of deployment. You don't have any competition for runways with the launch racks in a star destroyer, the way you did seem to have with the set-up in the Venator.

 

For a visual, check out this image on how the launch racks were arrayed according to the cross-sections book, which I still treat as my canon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the Venator always ticked me off.  I love the look of the ship, the feel of the ship, etc.--one of my favorite designs.

 

But that fighter complement is patently ridiculous considering every other Stawr Wars design, unless it was stripped of all weapons and other functionality, and even then...it is just silly. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In contrast, Confederate droid starfighters could somewhat "fold-up" to take even less room than TIEs in their own racks.

It still doesn't explain how the Republic's Venator Star Destroyer, at 1137 meters, shorter than a full Imperator/Imperial class SD, could field 196 V wing or V-19s, 36 Arc-170 (Larger than X-wings) and another 192 Eta Actis fighters in addition to their full complement of ground assault vehicles.

 

Ah, the joys of researching the retconned explanations for why ships of similar sizes carry vastly different numbers of fighters.

 

Yeah, that never sat right with me neither.

 

It seemed like when they did TCW stuff, they unleashed their inner 10-year old.

 

"Our stuff is better than the old stuff, even if it was newer. See, bigger numbers, so there!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In contrast, Confederate droid starfighters could somewhat "fold-up" to take even less room than TIEs in their own racks.

It still doesn't explain how the Republic's Venator Star Destroyer, at 1137 meters, shorter than a full Imperator/Imperial class SD, could field 196 V wing or V-19s, 36 Arc-170 (Larger than X-wings) and another 192 Eta Actis fighters in addition to their full complement of ground assault vehicles.

 

Ah, the joys of researching the retconned explanations for why ships of similar sizes carry vastly different numbers of fighters.

 

Yeah, that never sat right with me neither.

 

It seemed like when they did TCW stuff, they unleashed their inner 10-year old.

 

"Our stuff is better than the old stuff, even if it was newer. See, bigger numbers, so there!"

 

 

Some of the other ships from the Episode III era are also pretty silly with armaments and whatnot far exceeding their class-size.  One more thing about the prequels to make me sigh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, the Venator always ticked me off.  I love the look of the ship, the feel of the ship, etc.--one of my favorite designs.

 

But that fighter complement is patently ridiculous considering every other Stawr Wars design, unless it was stripped of all weapons and other functionality, and even then...it is just silly. 

 

 

 

I'm bending the canon a bit and saying that the standard compliment is a modest 24 fighters.

 

However there is constant mentions of a design that has 72 fighters (a complete wing) and i am deciding that it is a separate variant of the Standard Vindicator and the Immobilizer.  It would be pathetically armed like the Immobilizer, and have slightly reduced shields and hull of the standard Vindi, and a lesser engineering value.

 

BUT it would have a REALLY GOOD SQUADRON RATING even if I don't know what exactly it does.  I also read something about deploying fighters in the new article, what is that about?

 

So, basically you get the fighter support of an ISD without the "Presence" of an ISD (The hull, shields, and overwhelming firepower).  Would be great for smaller fleets that want ample fighter screen against this new threat of every rebel ship that has Torpedo tubes having the bomber special rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the Vindicator, i dont think it's unreasonable to assume the 72 TIE configuration sacrificed weaponry or shielding. All sources specifically state they could be setup that way, but that some still had the 24 (which seems the standard amount for that hull).

 

So your idea to count it as a separate variant seems 100% the correct way to go to me. Have the "combat variant" with the guns and lower squadron rating, and the "carrier refit" with the opposite.

 

And for that matter, the Enforcer is the opposite extreme...same hull again, apparently no fighters, but very fast and heavily armed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...