| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Ok, now that you explained it, your rationale makes sense (or at least more sense than it did before). But there is at least one thing throwing me off:
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | The Star Cruiser variant (the version seen in ROTS and the Clone Wars) carries a Fully Reinforced Stormtrooper Battalion, with a total of 8 Companies. Bear in mind that the four additional companies also include the crews of all the Ground Assault Vehicles, like the Walkers, Juggernauts, etc. |
Wait, doesn't this reinforced Stromtrooper battalion with the four additional companies of drivers and ground crews essentially become a mixed unit? Is this a stormtrooper unit or an Imperial Army unit? Or does it effectively become a mixed unit since it has stormtroopers as infantry and Imperial Army soldiers as the drivers and support personnel?
IIRC, stormtroopers don't drive AT-ATs or other Imperial vehicles, at least according to what I understood from reading the ImpSB (though, scout troopers with their speeder bikes are an obvious exception). Also according to the ImpSB, stormtroopers and Imperial Army troopers do not belong to the same OrBat. That said, I can understand the need for mixed units when the Empire wants to send out armor units crewed by the Army accompanied by stormtrooper infantry if the Army infantry is unavailable for some reason, or, as you mentioned, the mixed unit is a vanguard where stormtroopers would be the first ones to establish a beachhead to clear the way for the Army units. I'm just wondering how typical mixed units are, though I'd expect mixed units to be at least somewhat common. Mixed units are more versatile, after all.
And yes, I agree that the idea of stormtroopers not having any support personnel at all in their OrBat is tremendously silly. It violates 2 well-known and simple adages about warfare that any competent soldier does (and would have to) know (and that I think we're both familiar with, CRM), and both have been mentioned on this forum before:
1) As you said, "An army moves on its stomach."
2) And as I mentioned before (but maybe not in this specific thread): "Amateurs study tactics. Experts study logistics."
The ImpSB notion of stormtroopers being a purely combat unit with no logistical support personnel violates both of those truisms about warfare. And, to be fair, the ImpSB does lampshade the silliness of the idea when it mentions how no one knows how stormtroopers get resupplied or if they have a "shadow network" of some kind or whatever. It's like the Star Wars equivalent of saying "A Wizard Did It."
Yeah, the WEG books are fun to read, but they do have their flaws. Stats inconsistencies is one. Silliness like this is another.
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Eight wings would be the capacity if you stripped out all the ground vehicles and had the Venator function strictly as a carrier. My presumption is that the AT-TEs and SPHA-T's carried by the Venator during the Clone Wars would've been parked on or near the hangar deck, and taken up quite a bit of room that otherwise could've gone to starfighters. |
Thanks. That clears it up for me.
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | But ultimately, there wasn't really a way around at least having deckspace for a ridiculous number of starfighters. Instead, I went with the idea that neither side (Alliance or Empire) actually put that deckspace to that kind of use. The Empire had shifted doctrine away from massed starfighter attacks, and thus didn't need 420 starfighters, converting their Venators to troop transports at the expense of starfighter capacity. The Alliance, on the other hand, would've loved to make full use of that many starfighters, but lacked the sheer numbers to be able to do so. Instead, their starfighters are scattered around the galaxy in squadron-sized units, not concentrated in one place aboard a relatively fragile carrier. So the deckspace is instead used to land and service assault shuttles, fast attack and patrol ships, gunboats, etc. |
Thanks for this detail, but I got that Imperial doctrine went away from that number of fighters, and I quite agree that the Alliance wouldn't have the number of fighters to use all that deckspace.
I'm not asking for another write-up, but what do you think about the possibility of these ships being sold off to planetary governments? If so, how would they use them and all that deskspace? Could the ship maybe be repurposed as space station and use all that deckspace for refueling, maintenance and repair of smaller vessels like starfighters and light freighters? And what if any Venators fell into pirate hands? Could they use that deckspace to store pirated vessels until they were fenced?
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sutehp wrote: | | Doesn't this reinforced Stromtrooper battalion with the four additional companies of drivers and ground crews essentially become a mixed unit? Is this a stormtrooper unit or an Imperial Army unit? Or does it effectively become a mixed unit since it has stormtroopers as infantry and Imperial Army soldiers as the drivers and support personnel? |
Once you accept the idea of specialist Stormtroopers (scouts, medics, technicians and the like), it's an easy step to accept the possibility of Stormtroopers who are trained vehicle crew.
I picture these units being much like the Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable). Deployed aboard amphibious assault ships, they generally consist of a Marine battalion with several companies' worth of armored vehicles tacked on organizationally. The thing is, they don't tap the Army for those vehicles and crew; they're Marines who also happen to be vehicle crew.
I see the stormtroopers the same way; they're separate from the Army, even though they often fight alongside the Army, but they also understand quite well that they need support and transport within their own organization.
And it's not like there isn't some overlap. Per his background, General Veers was Imperial Army, but Vader wanted him for his personal ground troop commander, so the result was an Army General commanding a Stormtrooper Corps (more likely a Reinforced Legion, if we're just counting the Executor, but whatever)
| Quote: | | Yeah, the WEG books are fun to read, but they do have their flaws. Stats inconsistencies is one. Silliness like this is another. |
Yeah, I like using the ImpSB as a baseline for designing Imperial units, but I'm also not averse to ignoring it if needs be, and this is just one example of why.
The closest I ever came to a solution to Stormtroopers not having a Logistics tail was an idea I pulled from another sci-fi novel. That novel centered around a group of light infantry who were each equipped with a device called a Convertor. What it did was, if you fed any kind of carbon into it (tree limbs and such), it would convert it on a molecular level to an unappetizing-but-edible glop that would keep the troops fed (with added advantage of producing water as a byproduct of the molecular reaction). In my head, I figured each Stormtrooper was equipped with one of these, especially for long-term deployments.
Of course, this still doesn't explain medical and technical support, or where they get all of their spare parts, replacement power packs, undamaged armor components, etc...
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Whill wrote: | | I'm not asking for another write-up, but what do you think about the possibility of these ships being sold off to planetary governments? If so, how would they use them and all that deskspace? Could the ship maybe be repurposed as space station and use all that deckspace for refueling, maintenance and repair of smaller vessels like starfighters and light freighters? And what if any Venators fell into pirate hands? Could they use that deckspace to store pirated vessels until they were fenced? |
I would say that these are all possible, but not necessarily probable. IMO, the bigger combat starships get, the more likely it becomes that the Empire will be extremely picky about who else can get ahold of them.
IMO, a civilian space station with a large hangar deck would likely be more economical for the purpose you describe. As far as pirates, that's more likely, since there is at least one instance in the WEG material of a capital ship (Victory I) falling into pirate hands. I just don't think I'd let it happen more than once.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sutehp
Commodore
Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1797
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Sutehp wrote: | | Doesn't this reinforced Stromtrooper battalion with the four additional companies of drivers and ground crews essentially become a mixed unit? Is this a stormtrooper unit or an Imperial Army unit? Or does it effectively become a mixed unit since it has stormtroopers as infantry and Imperial Army soldiers as the drivers and support personnel? |
Once you accept the idea of specialist Stormtroopers (scouts, medics, technicians and the like), it's an easy step to accept the possibility of Stormtroopers who are trained vehicle crew.
I picture these units being much like the Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable). Deployed aboard amphibious assault ships, they generally consist of a Marine battalion with several companies' worth of armored vehicles tacked on organizationally. The thing is, they don't tap the Army for those vehicles and crew; they're Marines who also happen to be vehicle crew.
I see the stormtroopers the same way; they're separate from the Army, even though they often fight alongside the Army, but they also understand quite well that they need support and transport within their own organization.
And it's not like there isn't some overlap. Per his background, General Veers was Imperial Army, but Vader wanted him for his personal ground troop commander, so the result was an Army General commanding a Stormtrooper Corps (more likely a Reinforced Legion, if we're just counting the Executor, but whatever) |
That is actually a very good point. Any stormtrooper unit that has an officer wearing the grey uniform (either with or without the field armor chestplate) where you can see the guy's face is by default going to be a mixed unit because it has an Army officer and stormtrooper infantry. Two different branches of the Imperial military in the same unit.
And yeah, you're right that the above Imperial example is not entirely analogous to our Army and Marines. After all, the Marine Corps has it's own officers and is decidedly not led by Army officers. And you're also right that the Marines have their own vehicle corps and support organization. Hell, they even have their own air force!
Which leads into the notion of stormtrooper officers. As far as I can recall, I think I've only seen one stormtrooper officer in all of the Star Wars franchise. In fact, it involved General Veers. Remember when he turns to that snowtrooper in the AT-AT cockpit and says "All troops will debark for ground assault"? Look closely at the armor of that trooper and you'll see the lieutenant's officer badge on that guy's armor. That is the only stormtrooper officer I've seen in all my days of watching Star Wars!
Why haven't we seen more guys like him?
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Sutehp wrote: | | Yeah, the WEG books are fun to read, but they do have their flaws. Stats inconsistencies is one. Silliness like this is another. |
Yeah, I like using the ImpSB as a baseline for designing Imperial units, but I'm also not averse to ignoring it if needs be, and this is just one example of why.
The closest I ever came to a solution to Stormtroopers not having a Logistics tail was an idea I pulled from another sci-fi novel. That novel centered around a group of light infantry who were each equipped with a device called a Convertor. What it did was, if you fed any kind of carbon into it (tree limbs and such), it would convert it on a molecular level to an unappetizing-but-edible glop that would keep the troops fed (with added advantage of producing water as a byproduct of the molecular reaction). In my head, I figured each Stormtrooper was equipped with one of these, especially for long-term deployments.
Of course, this still doesn't explain medical and technical support, or where they get all of their spare parts, replacement power packs, undamaged armor components, etc... |
Yeah, that must have been lampshaded to hell and back multiple times since the first edition ImpSB first came out in 1989 and asserted that the stormtroopers didn't seem to have logistical support of any kind....
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
If anyone is interested in other stats here we go 
Venator-Class Star Destroyer
Affiliation: Old Republic / Empire
Era: Rise of the Empire
Type: Venator Class Star Destroyer
Scale: Capital
Length: 1,137 meters
Skill: Capital ship piloting: Star Destroyer
Crew: 7,400, gunners: 124, skeleton 3,025/+15
Crew Skill: Astrogation 3D+2, capital ship gunnery 4D+2,
capital ship piloting 5D, capital ship shields 4D, sensors
3D+2
Passengers: 2,000 (troops)
Cargo Capacity: 20,000 metric tons, 40 LAAT/I gunships,
and 24 heavy walkers of various makes
Consumables: 2 years
Cost: Not available for sale (valued at 59 millions)
Hyperdrive Multiplier: x1
Hyperdrive Backup: x15
Nav Computer: Yes
Maneuverability: 1D+1
Space: 6
Atmosphere: 340; 975 kmh
Hull: 5D+1
Shields: 3D+1
Sensors:
Passive 40/1D
Scan 70/2D
Search 150/3D
Focus 4/3D+2
Starfighter Complement: 192 Starfighter
Weapons:
8 Heavy Turbolaser
Fire Arc: 2 front, 3 left, 3 right
Crew: 5
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 3-20/45/75
Damage: 6D
12 Double Light Turbolasers (Fire-linked)
Fire Arc: 4 front, 4 left, 4 right
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 3D+1
Space Range: 3-15/35/65
Damage: 5D
26 Double Point-Defense Light Laser Cannons (fire linked)
Fire Arc: 6 front, 7 left, 7 right, 6 rear
Crew: 3
Scale: Starfighter
Skill: Starship gunnery
Fire Control: 4D
Space Range: 1-5/15/40
Damage: 3D
6 Medium Tractor Beam Projectors
Fire Arc: 4 front, 1 left, 1 right
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 3D+2
Space Range: 1-10/25/35
Damage: 5D
4 Heavy Concussion Missile Launcher
Fire Arc: Front
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 1D+1
Space Range: 1-150
Damage: 9D (12D Fire-linked) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamatried
Commodore
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1853
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| denderan marajain wrote: | If anyone is interested in other stats here we go
Venator-Class Star Destroyer
Affiliation: Old Republic / Empire
Era: Rise of the Empire
Type: Venator Class Star Destroyer
Scale: Capital
Length: 1,137 meters
Skill: Capital ship piloting: Star Destroyer
Crew: 7,400, gunners: 124, skeleton 3,025/+15
Crew Skill: Astrogation 3D+2, capital ship gunnery 4D+2,
capital ship piloting 5D, capital ship shields 4D, sensors
3D+2
Passengers: 2,000 (troops)
Cargo Capacity: 20,000 metric tons, 40 LAAT/I gunships,
and 24 heavy walkers of various makes
Consumables: 2 years
Cost: Not available for sale (valued at 59 millions)
Hyperdrive Multiplier: x1
Hyperdrive Backup: x15
Nav Computer: Yes
Maneuverability: 1D+1
Space: 6
Atmosphere: 340; 975 kmh
Hull: 5D+1
Shields: 3D+1
Sensors:
Passive 40/1D
Scan 70/2D
Search 150/3D
Focus 4/3D+2
Starfighter Complement: 192 Starfighter
Weapons:
8 Heavy Turbolaser
Fire Arc: 2 front, 3 left, 3 right
Crew: 5
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 3-20/45/75
Damage: 6D
12 Double Light Turbolasers (Fire-linked)
Fire Arc: 4 front, 4 left, 4 right
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 3D+1
Space Range: 3-15/35/65
Damage: 5D
26 Double Point-Defense Light Laser Cannons (fire linked)
Fire Arc: 6 front, 7 left, 7 right, 6 rear
Crew: 3
Scale: Starfighter
Skill: Starship gunnery
Fire Control: 4D
Space Range: 1-5/15/40
Damage: 3D
6 Medium Tractor Beam Projectors
Fire Arc: 4 front, 1 left, 1 right
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 3D+2
Space Range: 1-10/25/35
Damage: 5D
4 Heavy Concussion Missile Launcher
Fire Arc: Front
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital ship gunnery
Fire Control: 1D+1
Space Range: 1-150
Damage: 9D (12D Fire-linked) |
why "only" 192 fighters? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Mamatried
Me and my group have decided that it is more realistic for us, for example, to have a Venator "only" 2.6 times as many Starfighters as an Imperial Star Destroyer. Due to the mass, where the official information is usually chosen very arbitrarily, in our view more Starfighter are simply not justified.
We had once made a calculation what such an average starfighter occupies space but I can not find this calculation currently. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamatried
Commodore
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1853
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| denderan marajain wrote: | @Mamatried
Me and my group have decided that it is more realistic for us, for example, to have a Venator "only" 2.6 times as many Starfighters as an Imperial Star Destroyer. Due to the mass, where the official information is usually chosen very arbitrarily, in our view more Starfighter are simply not justified.
We had once made a calculation what such an average starfighter occupies space but I can not find this calculation currently. |
I actually sort of agree with you.
I am all for active starfighter combat, and to me a ship with none is a weak one.
Looking at the numbers on various ships, and sizes of both possible hangars as well as fighters.
If we look to the x-wing, it is about 2x the size of a tie fighter.
In the TIE lin most fighters are within +/- 25% of eachother for the most part, with the exception being the scout.
I'd say a ship capable of 300 x wing, would be able to hold 350-400 TIE.
I am also thinking especially on the venator though, maybe the 400+ numer is the right one as it without them is armed sub par to even lighter frigates.
(almost)
I do however think that the venator has a max of 2X198 or something with fighters, and another 40 so "other ships and shuttles" this seems to be in addtion to the "small" compliment of ground vehicles and such, the latter taming more storage and hangar space than a little fighter.
So I am personally allowing the venator to act as a carrier, with 2x198 ++++ ships carried or a more conventional destroyer role, with both ground and "air" units.
And finally a third role much like the smaller acclamator......planetary landing/assault. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I hope I can answer you in detail tomorrow as far as some aspects of balancing are concerned |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
For future reference, when quoting and replying to a post, it is appreciated if you trim as much of the previous post as possible. Unless you are engaging in a line-by-line analysis of a posted stat, there is no need to post the entire stat text merely to question a single entry.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | For future reference, when quoting and replying to a post, it is appreciated if you trim as much of the previous post as possible. Unless you are engaging in a line-by-line analysis of a posted stat, there is no need to post the entire stat text merely to question a single entry. |
That is a good best practice in general. I should add that to the posting guidelines.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2018 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Mamatried
So now there is a longer explanation
We chose ISD as the starting point for the efficiency and strength of Capital Ships.
In our view, an ISD should basically win every 1 against 1 duel.
But the problem here are all carriers. Due to their high number of Starfighters, it is no problem to keep the ISD's Starfighters at bay and at the same time destroy the ISD with the help of the remaining Starfighters and we wanted to avoid that (with 192 vs. 72 already on the rather unfair side).
If I now give a Venator-Class Star Destroyer 400 Starfighter this ship is unstoppable in our view.
Since then would ask the question why produce ISD at all if a Venator is so much better 8)
In addition, the Venator here has still anti-Starfighter Weapons and not so bad Capital Ship Weapons. He can even defend himself in this way effectively and that is in our view too much, especially since an ISD can do absolutely nothing against Starfighter without its Starfighter.
But of course it's just our point of view
I hope I could explain our point of view a little better and more accurately |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamatried
Commodore
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 1853
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2018 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
@denderan
I can see where you are going and I agree somewhat.
I see the Venator as something completely different than any of the other SWU Star destroyers.
I consider it the "only" true carrier in the swu, and it represents a doctrine of war that was radically different than that of the empire.
If we consider what seems likely that the venator was not only out of service, but most of them being chopped up, and recycled.
The need for swarms of fighters was changed.
However if we look to the rebel alliance, we see that where they share starship classes with the empire, we see the rebels rely more on large starfighter units than the empire.
The nebulon class is a good example, the rebel ones usually having higher starfighter compliment, but lesser main armaments, and the imperial versions are the other way around.
So do I think the venator had 400+ fighters, yes and no.
I do believe that the 192 compliment+ assault craft, shuttles and such adding another 30ish, is a very standard configuration.
Leaving room for either x2 fighters, or other forces. We do see both the acclamator and the venator in ground assault and troop deployment roles.
to me this speaks of a multirole starship.
So I would say if used as an assault ship it would carry 1/2 fighters compared to the carrier, but a much higher compliment of ground, assault units , etc.
So I actually have a hard time comparing the two, but seeing the ships using only their main armaments, the venator is hardly more than a frigate blown up in size, compared to the much more heavily armed ISD.
So the two ships, venator and the ISA ar from two different doctrines and to be fair I think they can not really be compared outside their intended roles within their distictively separate doctirines. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
denderan marajain
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 213
Location: Vienna, Austria
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2018 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
You are absolutely right when you say that the Venator Class is primarily a carrier, but by no means the only one. There are escort carriers and, of course, the Mon Calamari heavy carrier, who with the official values also casually removes every ISD I or ISD II. And ironically, this carrier has anti-starfighter weapons;)
| Quote: |
Blue Diver-class Heavy Carrier
Type: Mon Calamari heavy carrier
Era: New Republic (~28-29 ABY)
Affiliation: New Republic
Source: FreddyB (rpggamer.org)
Scale: Capital
Length: 2,400 Meters
Skill: Capital Ship Piloting: Heavy Carrier
Crew: 25,621, Skeleton Crew: 8000/+10
Crew Skill: Astrogation 4D+1, Capital Ship Piloting 5D+2, Capital Ship Shields 4D+1, Capital Ship Gunnery 5D+2, Sensors 5D
Passengers: 12,000 (Troops)
Cargo Capacity: 27,000 Tons
Consumables: 8 Years
Cost: Not available for sale
Hyperdrive Multiplier: x1
Hyperdrive Backup: x12
Nav Computer: Yes
Maneuverability: 1D
Space: 5
Atmosphere: None
Hull: 7D+2
Shields: 5D *
Sensors:
Passive: 120/1D
Scan: 180/2D
Search: 320/3D
Focus: 12/4D
Weapons:
72 Turbolaser Batteries (Fire Separately)
Fire Arc: 18 Front, 18 Left, 18 Right, 18 Back
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Scale: Capital
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 3-15/36/75
Atmosphere Range: 6-30/72/150 Km
Damage: 4D
48 Heavy Laser Batteries (Fire Separately)
Fire Arc: 12 Front, 12 Left, 12 Right, 12 Back
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Scale: Starfighter
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 1-3/12/25
Atmosphere Range: 10-30/1.2/2.5 km
Damage: 5D
40 Ion Cannons Batteries (Fire Separately)
Fire Arc: 10 Front, 10 Left, 10 Right, 10 Rear
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Scale: Capital
Fire Control: 3D
Space Range: 1-10/25/50
Atmosphere Range: 2-20/50/100 km
Damage: 3D
24 Tractor Beam Projectors (Fire Separately)
Fire Arc: 6 Front, 6 Left, 6 Right, 6 Back
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Scale: Capital
Fire Control: 2D+2
Space Range: 1-5/15/30
Atmosphere Range: 2-10/30/60 km
Damage: 4D
Hangar Bays:
Starship Complement:
180 Starfighters
|
For me, it's simply unrealistic why you should not build ships that can do any job and are totally superior to the rest.
RAW also wins my slimmed-down Venator against an ISD. I've given the ISD about House Rules Anti Starfighter Weapons to make up for it, but RAW are busy with the ISD's STarfighter, while 4 Squadrons of Bombers are simply disassembling the ISD with torpedoes.
RAW carriers are from my personal point of view the best you can have. You win against any Capital Ship, you can win massive Starfighter attacks, and you can make accurate shots against space stations and planets.
In my opinion, 192 Starfighters and bombers are sufficient for this. If you increase this number to 400, the balancing is finally lost.
The question is, what can you do about it?
1. Introduce Anti Starfighter Weapons on Capital Ships
2. Less hull and shields for carriers
3. Less strong main weapons for carriers
And this list can certainly continue
I am aware that this is of course a personal opinion and preference and yes I like Carrier too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
