I remember awhile back when PR said that the Katana Dreadnaughts didn't match with any of the Heavy Class Dreadnaught upgrades. I was thinking of this idea for awhile and finally decided to suggest it after seeing it being done on another mod (Thrawn Revenge)and see what PR thinks. Anyways why not create a Katana Dreadnaught that can't be built but only given in the Thrawn Campaign(if you get that mission to work) and change Iblis' Peregrine to one.
Katana Fleet
Started by
Guest_StarWars_*
, Sep 01 2009 02:34 AM
17 replies to this topic
#3
Tropical Bob
-
- Members
-
- 1,348 posts
title available
Posted 01 September 2009 - 03:28 AM
From what I can remember, They were just normal Dreadnaughts with slave circuitry.
But that depends if the Dreadnaught I-class in PR is the original design, which according to Wookie, launched somewhere around 100BBY? In that case, the good 60-ish years between the original design launch and the Dark Force Fleet launch could have had a design upgrade in there, leading to the Dreadnaught II-class or higher.
But that depends if the Dreadnaught I-class in PR is the original design, which according to Wookie, launched somewhere around 100BBY? In that case, the good 60-ish years between the original design launch and the Dark Force Fleet launch could have had a design upgrade in there, leading to the Dreadnaught II-class or higher.
#5
Ghostrider
-
- Project Team
-
- 2,035 posts
Sith Lord of Campaigns
- Phoenix Rising QA Lead; Manual Editor
Posted 02 September 2009 - 02:35 PM
From what I can remember, They were just normal Dreadnaughts with slave circuitry.
But that depends if the Dreadnaught I-class in PR is the original design, which according to Wookie, launched somewhere around 100BBY? In that case, the good 60-ish years between the original design launch and the Dark Force Fleet launch could have had a design upgrade in there, leading to the Dreadnaught II-class or higher.
Dreadnaught II's are the Imperial Refits with improved shielding and a token hangar and yes the mark I's are the 100 year old + model. We see no difference between the original mark I and the Katana fleet. I have also included some as well in parts of the galaxy, as Salvaged Dreadnaughts.
As you will note in the Thrawn Offensive, the Imperial fleet has Dreadnaught II's while the NR has Mark-I's preferring to refit ageing dreadnaughts as Assualt Frigates rather than Mark II's. What Mark II's it does have are those refits stolen/captured from the Empire.
The Bel Iblis question is a good one though. I'll mention it to PR - as it looks like his personal sqaudron is comprised of Mark III's!
#6
Phoenix Rising
-
- Petrolution Staff
-
- 6,509 posts
Beyond the Impossible
- Projects:Phoenix Rising
- Mod Leader
- Division:Petrolution
- Job:Mod Specialist
Posted 02 September 2009 - 09:06 PM
The Mark I is the late-Republic/Clone Wars model. It's probably not the original, as I'd assume the standard armament is newer than what you would expect for 100 BBY, but it's definitely on par with the Katana Fleet, which was considered state-of-the-art.
And yeah, the whole reason why I added ions to the upgrades is because of that bit from the Battle of the Katana Fleet - except I forgot to put them on the Peregrine! I'll fix that shortly.
And yeah, the whole reason why I added ions to the upgrades is because of that bit from the Battle of the Katana Fleet - except I forgot to put them on the Peregrine! I'll fix that shortly.
#7
Kaleb Graff
-
- Members
-
- 1,035 posts
title available
- Location:Classified
Posted 17 December 2009 - 01:12 AM
In outbound flight it said that dreadnaughts were Rendilli's "Newest present to the militarily obsessed," which I interpreted to mean that they originated around 27 BBY. Also, why would you build a fleet with 60 year old ships. Blast the prequels. None of this makes any sense.
#9
feld
-
- Project Team
-
- 400 posts
title available
Posted 17 December 2009 - 01:55 PM
heh. I thought the same as you until I realized that I was thinking like a modern person on Earth. To us, technology is advancing ludicrously fast and five years is an eternity (in information technology - it's nothing in propulsion or power). But I don't think that the space technology of the GFFA changes because people discover new ways of doing things. Rather, technology changes like a fad. It's a wierd mix of high technology and Lord of the Rings. Most reasearch appears to be digging into records to finding out how some other race chose to solve a particular problem in the past.Also, why would you build a fleet with 60 year old ships.
Put another way, the people of the Star Wars galaxy have had hyperdrive for 25,000 years. 25,000 years ago, the human race was painting pictures on cave walls. We didn't even have writingyet. 25,000 years from now, we may just have pushed up against some fundamental physical limit or other on what is "knowable" of the universe from within the universe.
Anyway, that's how I learned to stop worrying and love the non-intuitive way Lucas does tech. There's alittle more on the idea at Saxton's site.
v/r
feld
#10
Kaleb Graff
-
- Members
-
- 1,035 posts
title available
- Location:Classified
Posted 17 December 2009 - 02:18 PM
Even then, I disagree that progress has come to a standstill. The dreadnoughts are usually described as old, and only able to match modern ships because of their strong hull. I think they were more recent then was previously believed, as they were apparently new around the time of outbound flight. The original Imperial Sourcebook says that it was introduced before the Clone Wars, but nothing else. Other numbers come later, mostly from Zahn, who apparently revised his opinion for Outbound Flight.
#11
Ghostrider
-
- Project Team
-
- 2,035 posts
Sith Lord of Campaigns
- Phoenix Rising QA Lead; Manual Editor
Posted 17 December 2009 - 06:16 PM
In outbound flight it said that dreadnaughts were Rendilli's "Newest present to the militarily obsessed," which I interpreted to mean that they originated around 27 BBY. Also, why would you build a fleet with 60 year old ships. Blast the prequels. None of this makes any sense.
If it's a good design - you keep it. If i'm right , the US Tomcat is 40 years old and still going strong. That 's why you build with old designs, cos you know they work. New designs have hidden flaws in them.
Fundamentally the Dreadnaught Heavy curuiser is an excellent design. Retro-fitting modern shielding and adding base fighters still kept in in the running in the Thrawn Era. and they may be old by 200 dreadnaughts pack a punch, especially if you have an unlimited source of crewers!
#12
Kaleb Graff
-
- Members
-
- 1,035 posts
title available
- Location:Classified
Posted 17 December 2009 - 08:03 PM
I get your point, but the reasons behind it are wrong. First, the Tomcat went out of service in 2006. Secondly, it was last upgraded majorly in 1991, and spent 15 years in the same configuration. I'm not saying old ships aren't good, but usually you don't build a new fleet out of ships that are of an old design. Actually, shipbuilding is a case where usually the class is all built at once, then left in service. This has become less common lately, but restarting production is very rare (that I know of). If I was going to build a big fleet, I'd just get the latest design, and warship development can't have been that slow.
Basically, stuff stays in service until replaced. However, just because we've used the B-52 for 55 years doesn't mean we've built any in 45.
Basically, stuff stays in service until replaced. However, just because we've used the B-52 for 55 years doesn't mean we've built any in 45.
Edited by Kaleb Graff, 17 December 2009 - 08:05 PM.
#13
Ghostrider
-
- Project Team
-
- 2,035 posts
Sith Lord of Campaigns
- Phoenix Rising QA Lead; Manual Editor
Posted 23 December 2009 - 02:48 PM
Hey, I'm the other side of the pond.
I missed the Tomcat being nerfed! It doesn't make the news over here.
We are dumb enough to keep the Nimrod going, and that design goes back to the deHaviland Comet!
In fact, they are about to go into production of the MRA4 - so we are happily building a 55 year old design.
Perhaps I shoud rephrase my original point.
The best reason for building a 50+ year old design is that you cant be bothered to design something new (or can't afford to)!
Ghost
I missed the Tomcat being nerfed! It doesn't make the news over here.
We are dumb enough to keep the Nimrod going, and that design goes back to the deHaviland Comet!
In fact, they are about to go into production of the MRA4 - so we are happily building a 55 year old design.
Perhaps I shoud rephrase my original point.
The best reason for building a 50+ year old design is that you cant be bothered to design something new (or can't afford to)!
Ghost
#14
Kaleb Graff
-
- Members
-
- 1,035 posts
title available
- Location:Classified
Posted 23 December 2009 - 03:38 PM
Isn't that the version that BAE fixed, and was scheduled to go into service 6 years ago? I know the Raptor looks similar in delays, but at least that's a new aircraft. I get your point, but it's obvious they could afford something better in those hundred years.In fact, they are about to go into production of the MRA4 - so we are happily building a 55 year old design.
What's really sad is the fact that I'm pretty sure that if you used a dreadnaugt in the Clone Wars TV show, everyone would rush out and buy the toy as the latest new thing, not realizing it originated 20 years ago.
#15
Ghostrider
-
- Project Team
-
- 2,035 posts
Sith Lord of Campaigns
- Phoenix Rising QA Lead; Manual Editor
Posted 23 December 2009 - 05:50 PM
Isn't that the version that BAE fixed, and was scheduled to go into service 6 years ago? I know the Raptor looks similar in delays, but at least that's a new aircraft. I get your point, but it's obvious they could afford something better in those hundred years.In fact, they are about to go into production of the MRA4 - so we are happily building a 55 year old design.
What's really sad is the fact that I'm pretty sure that if you used a dreadnaugt in the Clone Wars TV show, everyone would rush out and buy the toy as the latest new thing, not realizing it originated 20 years ago.
Yeah. 2.3 billion- no 3.8 billion later and it still hasnt gotten off the ground. - and yes - you can't avoid the lemming factor.
#16
Kaleb Graff
-
- Members
-
- 1,035 posts
title available
- Location:Classified
Posted 23 December 2009 - 06:00 PM
My thought was that maybe .5% of the audience would realize it isn't new. I know it's a kids show, but so many people pay no attention to it (including me). Most of what I know comes from the Clone Wars Campaign Guide, which was actually very good.
#17
Reedek
-
- Project Team
-
- 118 posts
Posted 09 January 2010 - 09:46 PM
When I read Outbound Flight, I thought of the new Dreadnaughts as being a new model for the Dreadnaught-class Heavy Cruiser. What I have noticed is that there has really never been a Dreadnaught-class Heavy Cruiser Mark __ . PR did that for gameplay reasons so he made the first Dreadnaught used at that time as Mark I(I Think that was his reason) For example...look at the Boeing 747 , it has several upgrades throughout its 41 years of being built, but most people still refer to it as the Boeing 747. Think of the Dreadnaught-class Heavy Cruiser as the popular name with a more official name for production standards. And think of us using the production line names Mark I, Mark II...just like if you wanted to order a Boeing 747-500 you would say the full name of it.
Edited by Reedek, 09 January 2010 - 09:48 PM.
#18
Phoenix Rising
-
- Petrolution Staff
-
- 6,509 posts
Beyond the Impossible
- Projects:Phoenix Rising
- Mod Leader
- Division:Petrolution
- Job:Mod Specialist
Posted 09 January 2010 - 10:08 PM
Right - there's no Mark whatever, but at least the first three variants are representative of canonical examples that just weren't named as such (original Republic, Imperial retrofit, and Garm's fleet). So it's more of a taxonomical thing than gameplay; I'd like the EU to be more tech-savvy and I'm just providing standardized names.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
