Star Wars equivalent of an A-10

[CRMcNeill]

OK, that is an excellent start. IMO, the next step to building a balanced stat is, if this is what the ship is designed for (i.e. what it is good at), then what is it bad at? What are the design compromises and sacrifices that had to be made to make this ship excel at its primary mission?

In many ways, what you describe would be analogous to a Y-wing, which works well as a bomber both in space and in atmosphere. The key advantage a Y-Wing would have over an SW A-10 would be its hyperdrive, greatly increasing its utility when used for independent strike missions, while the A-10 (if you stick with not giving it a hyperdrive) would be limited to capital ship transport or deployment strictly in-system from a planetary base.

Another key vulnerability would be the externally mounted weaponry. In the SWU, projectile weapons are carried almost exclusively in internal magazines and fired through ports in the hull. There could be many reasons for this, but an obvious advantage for me is that any ordnance is completely covered by the ship's armored exterior, and therefore less vulnerable to damage (and premature detonation), while an A-10, with almost exclusively externally mounted weapons (minus the cannon) could quickly turn into a fireball if a lucky blaster shot clipped a heavy bomb or rocket on an under-wing pylon.

A good way to help flesh out what you want the ship to be and do is to write up a capsule with the background information as to how and why a specific vessel was developed. The details often help clarify things...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[thedemonapostle]

[CRMcNeill]

Ok, so if it doesn't look like an A-10, what does it look like? I have been working under the impression that the main reason you posted the big picture of the A-10 was that you wanted this starfighter to look like the A-10. For me, visualization is also a big part of designing the ship...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[thedemonapostle]

well i figured that it didnt have to look like an A-10. but in my minds eye i see:

cockpit: would stay the same general shape and size. appears to provide the same general visual range as other starfighters already available.

main fuselage: i really dont see a need to change this at all, unless one really wanted to put a droid slot in to allow an R2 droid (or similar model) to aid the pilot in flight.

tail fins: i like the look of the rear end of the A-10, so maybe the tail is pretty useless in a vacuum, but it adds to the overall flavor of the design.

wings: possible shortened by up to 33% and reinforced to better accommodate and protect the 2 launchers that will be mounted under each wing.

engines: here i see something similar to the Y-Wings engines, but shortened to better accommodate the designed maneuverability.

other: everything else will remain the same.

so far everything is still flexible.

ok i did a quick review and tweeked the stats some and came up with this:

Name: A-10 Thunderbolt II
Craft: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II
Type: heavy strike bomber
Scale: starfighter
Length: 16.26 x 17.53 x 4.47m (LxWxH)
Skill: starfighter pilot
Crew: 1
Passengers: 0
Cargo Capacity: 150kg
Consumables: 1 week
Cost: 180,000 new; 90,000 used
Hyperdrive: n/a
Hyperdrive Backup: n/a
Nav Computer: no
Maneuverability: 2D (3D in atmosphere)
Space: 7
Atmosphere: 350; 1,000 km/h
Hull: 5D+2
Shields: 2D+2
Sensors
Passive: 50/0D
Scan: 75/1D
Search: 100/2D
Focus: 5/4D+2

Weapons
1 Assault Cannon
Fire Arc: forward
Crew: 1
Scale: starfighter
Skill: starship gunnery
Fire Control: 1D
Space Range: 1-3/12/25
Atmosphere Range: 100-300/1,200/2,500m
Damage: 7D


4 Multiple Warhead Launchers
Fire Arc: forward
Crew: 1
Scale: starfighter
Skill: starship gunnery
Fire Control: varies
*Proton Bomb: 0D
*Rocket: 1D
*Concussion Missile: 2D
Space Range: varies
*Proton Bomb: 1/2/5 (non-self propelled, i.e. semi-stealth)
*Rocket: 1/2/5
*Concussion Missile: 1-3/8/15
Atmosphere Range: varies
*Proton Bomb: 100/200/500m (non-self propelled, i.e. semi-stealth)
*Rocket: 100/200/500m
*Concussion Missile: 100-300/800/1500m
Ammo: based on payload
*Small Proton Bomb: 8 per launcher
*Medium Proton Bomb: 4 per launcher
*Heavy Proton Bomb: 2 per launcher
*Small Rocket: 10 per launcher
*Medium Rocket: 5 per launcher
*Heavy Rocket: 2 per launcher
*Small Concussion Missile: 4 per launcher
*Concussion Missile: 3 per launcher
*Heavy Concussion Missile: 2 per launcher
Damage: based on payload
*Small Proton Bomb: 3D
*Medium Proton Bomb: 6D
*Heavy Proton Bomb: 11D
*Small Rocket: 2D
*Medium Rocket: 5D
*Heavy Rocket: 10D
*Small Concussion Missile: 7D
*Concussion Missile: 8D
*Heavy Concussion Missile: 9D

Capsule: The A-10 Thunderbold II was designed and built by Fairchild Republic as short range, carrier based heavy strike fighter and heavy bomber. its powerful forward cannon gave it unparalelled firepower. its 4 warhead launchers provided exceptional power while providing various ammunition options to allow for a better range of mission profiles. Fairchild Republic modified and mounted the sublight drive systems from a Y-Wing.
Unfortunetly Fairchild Republic failed due to a number of marketing mistakes and poor finacial management. Due to these issues the success or failure of the A-10 Thunderbolt II is unknown. it is known that during testing it was very successful in elimiating simulated gound targets. During Live fire testing there was a performance issue regarding a then unknown variance between maneuverability inside an atmosphere versus a vacumm. another performance issue that randomly occurd during simulated damage tests were sensor failures when transitioning between an atmosphere and space.
all flaws aside the A-10 proved to out perform most fighters of the day but didnt stand up against the Skipray blastboats.

im thinking the basic capsule needs a good revision, but thats what all this is here for.
_________________
Aim low, shoot high
I'm a pirate, need I say more?

d6holocron.com: Thedemonapostle

Thedemonapostle Star Wars Crossovers

[CRMcNeill]

[garhkal]

A weeks consumables for a fighter? I can see Xwings and such having that much as they are space superiority, but an A-10 is a ground assault craft.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[vanir]

Pure WEG/SWU rendition of something equivalent to the role of the A-10, well I've been rewriting the starship combat system in our gameworld anyway analoguous to real world avionics so have been doing this sort of thing bringing the nuances of signal locks and countermeasures phases in the combat round by detailing sensor systems and gunnery controls and other avionics in starfighters.

I've uploaded some technical manuals in the starships/equipment forum (under the thread Y-Wing flight manuals, did an X-Wing manual and a TIE comparative evaluation done in the style of military comparative testing documents).

It's a pretty simple system, during the combat round the attacker must achieve successful sensors detect on the enemy starfighter to get his weapon fire control bonus and medium/long ranging (otherwise fires over open sights using Perception/Search rolls to identify the target and no fire control bonus, this is only possible at point blank and short range for the given weapon system). Once a "target lock" is achieved the target remains locked unless he passes outside sensor range and back in (a function of comparative speed values and respective positioning over the course of combat). If the enemy passes outside sensor range you must again lock him up with the sensors when you get him back in range.

So if you get a sensors lock and are going fast enough, or do enough moves to keep him in sensor range you get your full fire control and full weapon range capabilities for the duration of the combat. If your weapons only fire on one facing, you need to continually outmanoeuvre him as well, to keep him in your gunsights. Unless you use missiles/torpedos, at medium range or greater these will track to any fire arc using their seeker heads (but relative speed differences increase base firing difficulty as per core rulebook, instead of determining base difficulty as speed versus stationary target, use relative speed difference between you and the target, so a target travelling the same speed, ie. within the same frame of reference has no additional range difficulty modifier).

Effectively all missiles and torpedos are "fire and forget" weapons in our game, so long as you lock him up on the sensors and keep him within sensor range and weapon range. This makes missiles and torpedos extra useful even against other starfighters, being able to track onto any fire arc the way guided missiles will do if you keep a lock. You can lock up a TIE, but he's a better pilot and outmanoeuvres you to get away from your front firing arc, so what, you're a better gunner and fire off a proton torpedo at 5 spaces range and despite the fact that he's veered off to your left facing and you can't swing inside his circle...the torpedo tracks from your sensor array and follows him on a computer generated intercept firing solution doing ridiculous G's so...boom.

There is also an ECM phase whereby enemy pilots can attempt to break your lock (useful if he's getting missiles/torpedos fired at him or can get to medium range and outside your visual "head out of cockpit" capabilities to target him), if their starfighter is so equipped he can use his sensor skill against yours to break your lock as a reaction skill. TIE do not have ECM like this due to production cost cutting measures, but almost every other well equipped starfighter, like X-Wings, Skiprays, etc. do, though the buyer pays for this in retail credit cost. Things like sensor baffling and sensor jamming equipment already listed in sourcebooks simply add their dice to the sensor skill of the user to break sensor locks. Simple.

Adds an extra dimension and gets more immersion for my Starfighter pilot PCs, we've always had a few in our campaigns and they love to get real with the avionics and starfightering side of SWU. It also forces PCs to spend their CP in a variety of starship related skills such as sensors, you don't perform as well when you have average sensors skill and high gunnery skill, you need both, just like a real world jet fighter pilot needs both. You want good BVR you need good sensors. You want good close combat BFM then stick with gunnery and piloting is okay but you need to get everyone into short range or point blank and use your eyes. That's pretty realistic. The fighter pilot term "head out of cockpit" is actually an Israeli Air Force term and is the preferred kind of fighter combat, just some trivia.


Okay so that brings me to the A-10 rendition in the WEG/SWU. Its role clearly is one which could actually be very useful.
I take it you've watched the Empire Strikes Back? Remember the problem with Walkers? (that armour's too strong for ~speeder scale~ blasters)
Okay here's the thing, starfighters are pretty much the thing to use against heavy walkers. Obvious.
Problem there is put starfighters up, the enemy puts starfighters up, it's a battle for air superiority before you can even think about close army support. What are you going to do, send Z'ers or X-Wings against Walkers and just ignore all the TIE they send after them?

This is where the role of something like the A-10 comes into play. Starfighters can hit walkers just fine, but if you use 2e (not 2R&E) scaling die caps like I do for realism in large scale battles, which I run with miniatures a lot like WH40K using combined actions and hero units and whatnot...well the thing is a starfighter has no problem hitting walkers, but has just about bucklies of hitting an airspeeder. Starfighters are no good against airspeeders.

Let me say that again. Starfighters are no good against airspeeders. You want the Walkers down. You don't want to be distracted by an air superiority battle against enemy starfighters. So you send your X-Wings against their TIE, and you send some airspeeders with custom walker scale kill-you cannon against the walkers.

There's your A-10.

[thedemonapostle]

[CRMcNeill]

[CRMcNeill]

[vanir]

[thedemonapostle]

[ZzaphodD]

[CRMcNeill]

[CRMcNeill]