Jump to content


Replying to Nebula-class Star Destroyer


Post Options

    • Can't make it out? Click here to generate a new image

  or Cancel


Topic Summary

Tropical Bob

Posted 11 September 2010 - 05:46 PM

The Imperial Starfleet found the Lancer-class too expensive for full fleet deployment. A few frigates made it into various fleets, but most admirals preferred to use, and subsequently lose, their TIE starfighters as anti-starfighter options. As a result, most Lancer-class frigates, like smaller ships before them, were assigned to planetary defense and rear guard operations.

It costs a mere 4.76m - less than a DP20. Only a week of consumables though, so I'm guessing that's where the expenses come in.

That's probably what I would say, as well, considering it mentions "full fleet deployment". If the Lancer was actually too expensive overall, it would say something to the effect of mass-production.

You'd think full fleet deployment would handle some sort of supply ship, or be able to transfer consumables from the larger ships, in order to sustain the Lancer. Guess it was just too much work for old-school Imperial admirals when they already had TIE Fighter screens available as part of their complement.

And whether or not the Lancer may be expensive overall, the reason behind it being cost-effective is it's ability to render starfighter attacks almost useless. I'd say preventing a K-wing bombing run on an Imperial-class's bridge, and saving the ship, would be worth having a Lancer on hand.

Phoenix Rising

Posted 10 September 2010 - 09:34 PM

It costs a mere 4.76m - less than a DP20. Only a week of consumables though, so I'm guessing that's where the expenses come in.

Update: Republic now works out to 12090 in-game with complement.

Casen

Posted 10 September 2010 - 09:15 PM

Much like the Lancer-class Frigate for the Empire, the Nebula-class Star Destroyer is a modern pinnacle of cost-effectiveness.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Lancer-class Frigate NON-cost effective?

http://starwars.wiki...r-class_frigate

The Imperial Starfleet found the Lancer-class too expensive for full fleet deployment. A few frigates made it into various fleets, but most admirals preferred to use, and subsequently lose, their TIE starfighters as anti-starfighter options. As a result, most Lancer-class frigates, like smaller ships before them, were assigned to planetary defense and rear guard operations.


Phoenix Rising

Posted 10 September 2010 - 07:20 PM

I've crunched some numbers on the Republic-class shields and have settled on 4000 SBD being the "most" accurate between disparate stats systems. At max upgrade, that gives it 130% durability and 140% firepower compared to a Victory IV, but it's also physically larger by similar margins, so it's basically an upscaled VSD using most of the same aging technology. That fits with the Corona and Belarus.

On the other hand, the Nebula-class is pure state of the art. It's described as having more shielding than any known ship in the galaxy (for a destroyer, presumably). I've spotted it at 8000 SBD - literally 5/3 of an ISD and greater even than the MC90, which is 7680. On top of that, it would take 10 or 11 population compared to 13 for the Republic and 16 for the Imperial. It's a battlefield terror... no wonder the Remnant surrendered.

Zeta1127

Posted 04 September 2010 - 03:59 PM

Yeah, the Tector and the Nebula (well, basically the entire New Class) are two of the coolest ships in the EU, and they have been largely ignored. And besides, if you want a Fleet Carrier, the Endurance is the ship for the job.

Tropical Bob

Posted 04 September 2010 - 03:34 PM

I really support the Nebula, but don't understand everyone's obsession with pricing. The New Class was specifically designed to increase economy in the production and upkeep of warships.

The issue with the cost is that a new design with the increase of technology can increase the cost immensely. An example being the Supercarriers that the US is rolling into production. The new Gerald R. Ford-class is supposed to cost $9 billion each, whereas the previous Nimitz-class cost approximately $4.5 billion each. Often enough, when you focus on better quality per product, you yield greater costs.

That being said, I have no large issue with the Nebula necessarily being cheaper, but it was the fact that it was 1/10th the cost of the previous generation ship.

It is definitely good news to hear that the Republic will come out to be less than half the price of the Nebula. It helps with the incentive part when you can get two Republics for the price of one Nebula.

The unfortunate problem that has developed with the Nebula (and the New Class in general) is it has been so under depicted, making such discussions as this difficult at best.

Then it is really all the more vital that we do discuss what might or might not be acceptable for introduction into the mod. With so little to work off of, any mistakes become all the more glaring without competing sources to borrow bits and pieces from to cover up.

Such as with the discussion on the Tector.

I don't like the idea of nerfing the Nebula's fighter complement, its lack of consumables in comparison to other Star Destroyers is the side effect of carrying so many fighters.

Whelp. I do have to make a quick retraction of an early statement about consumables in my original post.

On consumables: The Nebula, crewing an additional 700 hands, and having roughly 2/3rds the cargo capacity, has a much shorter deployment duration. The number quoted is 6 months, versus the 2 years for the Republic. This could be factored in to the cost somehow.

I didn't check my source well enough. The Nebula has the larger cargo capacity, and the 700 extra hands were for a minimum crew. The Nebula actually staffs, on average, about 1,500 less than the Republic, and is accompanied by another 1,600 less soldiers.

But I don't think carrying a few extra starfighter/shuttle craft is going to put a large dent in consumables. Even if fuel becomes the limiting factor, rather than food or water, I don't see two or three extra squadrons putting such a severe cramp on that resource much more than food or water.

Phoenix Rising

Posted 03 September 2010 - 08:00 PM

Both of them are destroyers - classes are determined by keel length. It's role would be whatever you wanted it to be.

SpardaSon21

Posted 03 September 2010 - 07:12 PM

So, hypothetically speaking, if the Nebula did get added in, would it be a destroyer like the Republic or a capital like the Impstars? Also, its role would be that of a heavy linebreaker, designed to smash through enemy formations by brute force and heavy firepower?

Phoenix Rising

Posted 03 September 2010 - 06:40 PM

I'm not dealing with complement volume unless someone is willing to compute it for everything. Until then, 1 fighter = 1 bomber = 1 transport.

Zeta1127

Posted 03 September 2010 - 02:14 PM

The unfortunate problem that has developed with the Nebula (and the New Class in general) is it has been so under depicted, making such discussions as this difficult at best. I don't like the idea of nerfing the Nebula's fighter complement, its lack of consumables in comparison to other Star Destroyers is the side effect of carrying so many fighters. The Nebula is not a stripped-down warship, but a modern-armament pocket Star Destroyer capable of taking down ships larger than itself. Starfighters are the bread and butter of the NRDF, which adds to the Nebula's ability to deal with ImpStar Deuces and comparable ships, and besides, size matters not!

Review the complete topic (launches new window)