- Revora Forums
- → Kaleb Graff's Content
Kaleb Graff's Content
There have been 83 items by Kaleb Graff (Search limited from 21-November 18)
One thing I would recommend changing is the fighter complement, though. Sacrificing a lot of heavy weapons is a bit unreasonable to gain a squadron of fighters. Even if we say that K-wings take more space, it's still too much. I would reduce the Nebula's complement to 36, the standard New Republic wing.
The Nebula is truly a great design for dealing with impstars. In RPG simulations, it usually managed to take out it's target without it's own shields going down.
Also, I read the Jedi Prince wookie article, and found it even more laughable. How did the wedding in the last book end, and Han still had to win Leia over in Courtship? I like the 'bedtime story' idea best, as it makes no sense otherwise.
My number one complaint: TOO MANY SITH!!!! They were somehow able to come up with non-sith villains for years, but Legacy, Fate of the Jedi, and the Legacy comics all involved sith, the last two of which had been in hiding.
Well, at least bring in more Bantam authors, because everything after the Swarm War I can't even bring myself to read due to the ridiculous direction they took it. I know I like anything Zahn writes too, definitely my favorite author; though Stackpole, Luceno, Stover, Anderson, and Traviss (when she doesn't go Mando crazy and screw up the image of the Mandos in the process) usually know what they are doing too. I really need to read this stuff so I can give a decent opinion other than being appalled. I forbid the world from reading the Legacy comics, it is little more than the movies repackaged all over again, with a little spice for supposedly good measure.
On your author list:
Sackpole is quite good, Luceno is OK, I'm not a Stover fan, and he should have had his license revoked over Shadows of Mindor (It read like the first Han Solo trilogy, and I think it was intentional). Anderson is OK. Traviss, on the other hand, should be banned, and all her stuff decanonized. She killed Mara and Pelleaon!!! This is unforgivable, and also quite stupid. Also, her obsession with mandolorians has gone way to far.
I'm going to start plotting to overthrow LucasArts again.
1. There was a feint a Doornik 319 after the main battle (310)
2. To quote p 318:
"...[speaking of the Yevetha ships] had reinforced the fleets at N'Zoth, Wakiza, and Z'Fell, and the other large-population worlds.
The reports that came in from the task forces sent to those worlds mirrored the experience at N'Zoth..."
I still think "Star Defender" is Republic for Star Dreadnought. I think, though I have no support, that it is comparable to the Praetor/Independence.
Have you read the books? There were several large fleet engagements, such as N'Zoth. It would have been even bigger if the SDs hadn't left.Sure, the Koornacht Cluster was large if you include deep space, but even with that in consideration, the Cluster is still a small area in the great scheme of things. And I'm assuming that's what PR is meaning. Especially since, if I remember correctly, there were only one or two skirmishes between the New Republic and the Yevetha.You sure about that? If you set it up right, with plenty of deep-space battlegrounds, it could be really interesting. And nothing with a Super-class SD involved is minor.
We'll work on it. The sad part about the Black Fleet Crisis is that it's too small on a galactic scale to turn into a viable campaign.
I guess, but all you would really need is the thrustships and D-types. Maybe it could be a what-if. What if the Imps hadn't jumped out, or something. And there was a mention in Hand of Thrawn, but I agree. BFC is my favorite from a military point of view, even if the forces are too small by a factor of five.
There are enough worlds to work with in the Cluster, but not enough space to fit them in. Plus we'd have to add a Duskhan League faction and most of the action happened against Independents, with the NR just being there to police. I guess the bigger problem is that nobody did anything with New Class outside of BFC.
I'm not so sure about the Strident. Are we even sure how big it is? Star Defender sounds like Repubic-speak for Star Dreadnaut, which is a large category. It might even be an improved Bulwark. But I definitely agree on the New Class.
That is a big disappointment to me, BFC was the only place that the New Class was depicted and fielded. They were some of the NR's best ships, but they have been relegated to the sidelines for the most part. The NJO was a golden opportunity to show them again! It is the same way with the Strident-class, while the Viscount-class has been well depicted, the Strident-class is a vague shell of a ship. I find it sad that every other KDY Star Destroyer for the most part has been well depicted except the Tector-class. Space is the biggest problem with the engine, it was clearly never meant to be used like you have, but you have made it work about as well as it could, particularly with the plan to spreading out the galaxy a bit in v1.2.
You sure about that? If you set it up right, with plenty of deep-space battlegrounds, it could be really interesting. And nothing with a Super-class SD involved is minor.We'll work on it. The sad part about the Black Fleet Crisis is that it's too small on a galactic scale to turn into a viable campaign.
It really is a shame that many ships like the Tector-class Star Destroyer, the Strident-class Star Defender, the New Class Modernization Program classes, and other ships have been so poorly depicted in the EU.
The Vindicator would be cool, but IIRC almost all were converted to interdictors, and we only know of one. Plus, a lot of the trouble is with getting models.
Back on topic, the consensus is that the Tector is a battleship version of the Impstar, which is more of a hybrid assault ship/carrier/battleship. The closest I can come to it is the Tarawa-class, before the guns were removed, or possibly the Kiev-class.
Thrawn probably made more extensive use of Lancers because the bugs had been worked out by that time. From what I've read, early Lancers had horrendous readiness rates, and thus weren't a huge success. By 9 ABY the bugs were probably worked out.
EU has done a horrible injustice to the structure of everything. I've attached the current draft of my essay on the New Republic Fleet. I apologize for the writing quality, but I started it four years ago, then picked it up again recently.
The stuff on the Lancer is just wrong. You control P-canon. Remove it. It's a kids book, and most Star Wars authors don't know a Lancer from a guy on a horse. Canon would be a lot better if LucasArts hired one of us to proofread this stuff.
I'm not sure how to explain the Strike, or even where it's found early.
- NewRepublicFleet.doc 30.5KB 29 downloads
But most of those could be assumed to be prototypes. The YF-22 first flew in 1990, but the F-22 wasn't operational until 2007. We can just explain away the author's mistakes. I've tried to concoct a reasonable view of the military, but authors have an awful habit of mixing army and navy ranks, among other things.
I try not to override canon unless it absolutely needs it. Creeping the dates plays havoc on the tech tree and our campaigns though. They've now done it in varying degrees of credibility with the AT-AT, Nebulon-B, Lancer, Strike, and Imperial, to name a few. Oh yeah, and they put the Corellian Treaty in 2 BBY.
On the Corellian Treaty, that doesn't make sense when looked at against the Rebel Alliance Sourcebook, which give the impression of a much longer-running rebellion,as does Dark Force Rising. Then again, Interlude at Darkknell suggests it only happened a few months before Yavin. I tend to go with the first interpretation. Then again, we could say that the Cantham House meetings were the real birth of the rebellion. On the other hand (I know that I do this quite a bit, but I'm kind of in stream-of-consciousness mode here), the Rebellion Era Sourcebook says that it was less than two years before Yavin, and it dates back to 2001.
Also, I don't see large ships as really needing escorts. Anything a Tector can hit can be hit even more effectively by an Executor. It's possible that it's an antifighter ship, but I think that it's more likely they use TIEs for that.
1. The reactor placement. Placing the reactor outside the hull is a bad idea from an armor point of view, but it isn't large enough to require outside placement, as demonstrated in Feld's PowerPoint. However, if the Tector came first, particularly as a battleship design, and was then modified, the reactor was likely moved for several reasons. First, the hangar and troop quarters took up more space in the hull, forcing the bulged reactor, probably protruding partway through the access/replacement hatch. Second, the reactor could have been moved out to balance the ship, as the hangar will likely be less dense than whatever replaced it, throwing off the center of gravity.
2. Reqiuirements. As Feld mentioned above, the Venator was horrendously designed for close-ranged battles. A new ship would be built for what was expected, then modified when pacification became the main objective.
3. There is a possibility that the Tector and Imperator are two ships of a group which we haven't seen all of, possibly based on the Tector hull. There's likely a starfighter carrier, and possibly also an "assault carrier" variant. This sort of reminds me of how the first USN LPHs came about.
4. Weapons placement on the ISD. The fact that almost all of an ISD's firepower is on the dorsal hull is very poor design for a dedicated ship-to-ship warship. When enemies can come in from all sides, having all firepower on one surface makes no sense. The giant open hangar and exposed reactor bulb also would be serious liabilities. However, these are explained by a modification of a Tector-class battleship. In this scenario, the ISD is actually not built for serious combat. The Tector had the heavy turrets on both sides, and when the ISD was being built, the designers decided to remove the ventral turrets, as well as adding a large hangar bay and bulging the reactor for reasons listed above. The remaining turrets allow massive firepower for BDZs and such, but are not built for serious fleet actions. I would assume that Imperial doctrine in fleet battles is to either have multiple ISDs to cover each others bottoms or preferably use Tectors.
This entire discussion reminds me of the time a couple years ago I wrote a paper on the organization of the New Republic Fleet. Yes, I am that big of a geek.
This was during the mess with the coneship, which, though a piece of junk, was actually interplanetary-capable. Also, I'm a big hoverscout fan, and want to see it in the mod soon.There is such a thing as a hovercraft that uses an air cushion for flotation. I'd like to think that any reference to "hover" in a vehicle's name operates on this technology, but undoubtedly there's a lot of technical ignorance with the term. Hmm, that probably doesn't help much if SaC was dealing with ships...
Also, in Showdown at Centerpoint, repulsors pushed off the atmosphere as they descended.
Instead of using an ability, they would function much like ion cannons, launching projectiles that disable the target's engines for a period of time, and fire fast enough that the engines are constantly disabled, or nearly so. Multiple projectors would reduce the time gap, stopping the target, and targeting or effect could be restricted to units smaller than the launching ship. I'm not sure it'll work, but when a Venator was able to keep moving under an Mc120s tractor, it annoyed me enough to think of this.