| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| vanir wrote: | | I think it's a desperation craft, like using X-Wings in place of Star Destroyers. You can get lucky, but don't plan wars on it if you don't have to. |
I think you're judging the craft by what it looks like after it got raped by the NEGVV. As originally written, the K-Wing is a two-seat fighter craft designed to carry a plethora of ordnance, including some stuff that would make capital ships a little worried. It was never supposed to be a gunboat, just a bomber. Strip off the cannon and leave the crew at 2, allow them to coordinate, and the ship makes more sense. The original in the novels lacked any defensive weaponry or a hyperdrive, so that means a K-Wing would require fighter escort to survive an enemy fighter attack.
Very few military aircraft are the result of desperation. Generally, they are the result of years of research and development in accordance with a set of design requirements issued by the military. I'm willing to bet that the K-Wing was probably one of the few Republic starfighters that was actually the result of a peace-time procurement process, along with the first wave of the new capital ship models featured in the Black Fleet Crisis trilogy.
Like any other military craft, the K-Wing can be quite formidable if used properly, but if pushed into a situation it wasn't designed for, the results can be catastrophic. The K-Wing (as originally written) was intended as a fleet bomber, ala the US Navy's A-6 Intruder. It can deliver a serious ordnance punch from a variety of weapons. The one that caught my eye was the Shieldbuster torp, which is designed specifically to take out a target's shields. It would doubtless require other craft or capital ships working in concert with the K-Wing to take advantage of an enemy ship's shields being taken out, but massive air strikes are all about teamwork anyway. No one ship can do everything well (at least, not without being prohibitively expensive).
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well the context I used "desperation craft" was tactical rather than technological. If the Rebel Alliance had fleets of star destroyers they would've used them rather than X-wings.
A better term would've been "desperation measure"
And I get what you're saying. Sort of like a variation on the Y-Wing theme, from which it shouldn't depart too far into an "everything starfighter" without being penalised as a larger class of warship due to power and systems requirements.
But as you describe is far more reasonable. And then I would only add that the capital damaging "shield breaker" warheads should then only do shields damage, especially if they're doing something like 10D capital scale damage.
I generally use the cap scaling system over die add/subtract for scaling myself though, except for special situations. Gunports on a Neb B I use die add/subtract for starfighter point defence (both to hit and damage), but its turbolasers will use the cap scaling and have bucklies of hitting any decent fighter pilot. One hit from those however will desintegrate it every time, due to cap scaling for hull/defence.
That works for me, but leaves me being very conservative about things like capital scale weapons on starfighter class craft. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanir wrote: | | Well the context I used "desperation craft" was tactical rather than technological. If the Rebel Alliance had fleets of star destroyers they would've used them rather than X-wings. |
Well, as the EU saying goes, "If we had some bruallki, we could have bruallki and menkooro...if we had some menkooro."
| Quote: | And I get what you're saying. Sort of like a variation on the Y-Wing theme, from which it shouldn't depart too far into an "everything starfighter" without being penalised as a larger class of warship due to power and systems requirements.
But as you describe is far more reasonable. And then I would only add that the capital damaging "shield breaker" warheads should then only do shields damage, especially if they're doing something like 10D capital scale damage. |
That's exactly what I was thinking. IIRC, the description on the shieldbusters was that, unlike regular torpedoes that try to punch through and do damage (thereby having to roll against the cap ships hull & shields plus the scale modifier times 2), shieldbuster torps detonate at the shield perimeter and overload it with a blast of plasma energy (thus only rolling against the shield dice plus the scale modifier).
| Quote: | I generally use the cap scaling system over die add/subtract for scaling myself though, except for special situations. Gunports on a Neb B I use die add/subtract for starfighter point defence (both to hit and damage), but its turbolasers will use the cap scaling and have bucklies of hitting any decent fighter pilot. One hit from those however will desintegrate it every time, due to cap scaling for hull/defence.
That works for me, but leaves me being very conservative about things like capital scale weapons on starfighter class craft. |
I use a modified scaling system as well, using 4D steps between all levels, putting starfighters and walkers in the same class, and then dividing capital ship into three different levels (Starship for corvettes, frigates and cruisers, Capital Ship for the big ships like Star Destroyers, and Dreadnought for the behemoths like the Super Class). It makes the smaller capital ships more vulnerable to starfighters, so something like a K-Wing becomes an even bigger threat to the more common starships.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Hellcat
Grand Moff
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 11921
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In your initial post you brought up the fact that they lack a hyperdrive and in my last post I talked about the Saga Edition's description of the K-Wing. There was something I noticed after logging off, the claim that a four man crew made the K-Wing less popular. You already know where I stand on the K-Wing stats, but the description. Uh uh. When I was posting on TheForce.Net's boards I complained about the K-Wing not having a hyperdrive because that had been the hallmark of Alliance and New Republic fighters up to that point. Wouldn't the lack of a hyperdrive be more of a reason for the decline in use? Turrets could be automated so you wouldn't have to worry about extra crew. But without a hyperdrive you've got to haul a fighter into the battle zone. Or if you have to retreat you have to risk loosing the capital ship carrying the fighters because you have to wait to retrieve all your fighters or abandon them to their fate.
_________________
FLUFFY for President!!!!
Wanted Poster |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hellcat wrote: | | In your initial post you brought up the fact that they lack a hyperdrive and in my last post I talked about the Saga Edition's description of the K-Wing. There was something I noticed after logging off, the claim that a four man crew made the K-Wing less popular. You already know where I stand on the K-Wing stats, but the description. Uh uh. When I was posting on TheForce.Net's boards I complained about the K-Wing not having a hyperdrive because that had been the hallmark of Alliance and New Republic fighters up to that point. Wouldn't the lack of a hyperdrive be more of a reason for the decline in use? Turrets could be automated so you wouldn't have to worry about extra crew. But without a hyperdrive you've got to haul a fighter into the battle zone. Or if you have to retreat you have to risk loosing the capital ship carrying the fighters because you have to wait to retrieve all your fighters or abandon them to their fate. |
I agree. I think Kube-McDowell screwed up by making the ship non-HS capable. I could see something like a dedicated fleet defense fighter like the Defender or the A-9 Vigilance not having a hyperdrive, but a bomber's usefulness would increase exponentially with the installation of a hyperdrive, for all the reasons you described and more. IMO, a gunner for defensive weaponry would not be out of place, but I see your point. I know Cold War-era strategic bombers had remote controlled tail guns; but I could go either way. With one pilot and one bombardier, a third crewman to run shields and the defense turret would not be out of place.
I made some suggestions in my initial post that might allow a later model of the K-Wing to be fitted with a hyperdrive. It has a third engine that allows the ship to accelerate rapidly in short bursts, and the cockpit section can detach and be used as an escape pod. The way I'm seeing it, an upgraded design would put augmented thrusters in the cockpit section and use them to replace the booster engine in the rear. The empty space in the rear could then be filled with a hyperdrive, maybe with a remote-controlled laser turret on the ship's dorsal surface, above and between the main engines...
_________________
"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 |
|
|
vanir
Jedi
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
 I love this site. You guys are just terrific to bounce ideas with. Listen you're really helping with my game, which I'll be taking over GMing soon for a period before passing the hat to the next gamer's module, and so I really appreciate it.
I don't think there's a single thread I'm not getting great ideas out of, or learning new and better ways to refine my own with. Cheers pal  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hellcat wrote: | | But without a hyperdrive you've got to haul a fighter into the battle zone. Or if you have to retreat you have to risk loosing the capital ship carrying the fighters because you have to wait to retrieve all your fighters or abandon them to their fate. |
On a related note, I've been using V-Wing fighters from ROTS for Alliance Fleet defense and escort, freeing up the various other starfighter types for the offensive missions. Rather than having them rely on hyperdrive rings, I use modified versions that replace the astromech with a basic x2 hyperdrive and a navcomputer with a 2 jump capacity. That way, if the mothership has to make a sudden retreat, it doesn't have to wait around to recover its escort fighters; it makes a short jump of a few dozen lightyears, and the fighters jump with it and land aboard the mothership outside the combat zone. It also allows the V-Wings to self-deploy.
On a related note, I thought the V-Wing Airspeeders from Dark Empire were relatively useless, but their deployment shuttle has promise. Fit it with a hyperdrive, and you have a starfighter-scale transport that can carry and deploy 4-6 non-HS capable starfighters into a combat zone without having to commit a capital 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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kemper Boyd
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 68
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: |
On a related note, I thought the V-Wing Airspeeders from Dark Empire were relatively useless, but their deployment shuttle has promise. Fit it with a hyperdrive, and you have a starfighter-scale transport that can carry and deploy 4-6 non-HS capable starfighters into a combat zone without having to commit a capital ship. |
I remember some WEG book also presenting an Imperial patrol craft that has mountings to carry a couple TIE fighters through hyperspace, and of course there's Zsinj's bulk freighters that carry TIE's in the Rogue Squadron books. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanir wrote: | :D I love this site. You guys are just terrific to bounce ideas with. Listen you're really helping with my game, which I'll be taking over GMing soon for a period before passing the hat to the next gamer's module, and so I really appreciate it.
I don't think there's a single thread I'm not getting great ideas out of, or learning new and better ways to refine my own with. Cheers pal ;) |
Glad we could help.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: |
I think you're pretty dead-on about the A-6, but there are some significant differences between the Mk. II version and the A-10. The A-10 has a single crewmember instead of the 4 listed for the K-Wing. If it had a single turbolaser in a fixed-forward mount like the GAU-8 Avenger on the A-10, I could see a stronger resemblance. |
Obviously, the K-wing is larger, and carries more crew, but the turning ability of the A-10 is so great, that avenger cannon may as well be turret mounted!
I tend to divide and classify craft and their real world counterparts by capabilities and effect, and in those fields the A-10 and the Mk. II are a pretty close match.
And by the way, as far as the quad turbolasers... I've seen some indications (although where I don't remember) that the Incom W-34t turbolaser is roughly as powerful as a B-wing's main laser cannon. Perhaps there is overlap in the power of small turbolasers and large laser cannons. Now, there are four of them and that's an awful powerful turret, and I may not have made that call, but maybe we should look at these guns as large starfighter scale, rather than small capital scale?
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | vanir wrote: | I love this site. You guys are just terrific to bounce ideas with. Listen you're really helping with my game, which I'll be taking over GMing soon for a period before passing the hat to the next gamer's module, and so I really appreciate it.
I don't think there's a single thread I'm not getting great ideas out of, or learning new and better ways to refine my own with. Cheers pal |
Glad we could help. |
Plus that modified freighter (think it was in Bakura) which had foward launching tubes for the fighters.. ala Battlestar galactica.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: | | Now, there are four of them and that's an awful powerful turret, and I may not have made that call, but maybe we should look at these guns as large starfighter scale, rather than small capital scale? |
If the original version (as described in the novels) had cannon mounted up front, it wouldn't even be an issue. Unfortunately, the staff that generated the NEGVV version of the K-Wing were apparently smoking crack. The ship was supposed to be a carrier-based bomber, and it got mutated into a blastboat. It isn't even supposed to have guns. Its primary mission is supposed to be ordnance delivery. It'd take a major revamp of the power system to install cannon of that size.
_________________
"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: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Plus that modified freighter (think it was in Bakura) which had foward launching tubes for the fighters.. ala Battlestar galactica. |
Don't remember that one. The only starfighter carrier in Truce at Bakura was the Flurry, and it had a wide-open docking bay...
_________________
"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
Last edited by CRMcNeill on Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:50 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kemper Boyd wrote: | | I remember some WEG book also presenting an Imperial patrol craft that has mountings to carry a couple TIE fighters through hyperspace, and of course there's Zsinj's bulk freighters that carry TIE's in the Rogue Squadron books. |
I remember Zsinj's bulk freighters, but I'm pretty sure their TIEs were carried internally for stealth reasons. I don't remember the patrol craft at all.
I was thinking an Imperial version based on the Sentinel landing craft, with the hull shaped to provide external docking ports for TIE fighters. Since the shuttle has a month's worth of consumables, it would make an excellent multi-role platform, depending on what fighters it carried
-TIE/ln = Light convoy escort
-TIE/rc = Recon / Scout
-TIE Interceptor = Raids and superiority missions
The possibilities are endless...
_________________
"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: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pursuant to this thread, I went back and read a relevant portion of the novel, and the K-Wing can actually be equipped with modular cannon pods. Before The Storm only mentions a slugthrower cannon, but its reasonable to assume that the ship could be equipped with energy cannon pods as well.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
