| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 6:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Alright, so I went back and changed the weapon stats for the Invader and the Transporter as I suggested in the above post. I also went back and edited the Odds and Ends post to show the weapon stats mounted on those ships.
_________________
"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 |
|
 |
ForbinProject
Commander
Joined: 16 May 2016
Posts: 318
|
| Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | So, I'm coming back around to this.
Since part of the Imperial Navy's back story is that they don't consider starfighters a major threat, does it seem odd to anyone else that the Interdictor's entire defensive armament is composed of anti-starfighter weapons? In fact, from a numerical standpoint, the Interdictor has as many quad-laser cannon as the dedicated anti-starfighter Lancer.
What I'm considering, both for the Interdictor and several of the non-combatant ships on this list, is replacing ten of the quad-laser cannon with turbolaser cannon, giving them a 50/50 mix of anti-starfighter and anti-capital ship defensive weaponry... |
When I read the Imperial backstory I get the impression that the opinion on starfighters doesn't come from the ship designers/builders but from the disdain Imperial officers have for the vastly outnumbered and poorly equipped rebels with ships held together with spit and baling wire.
Makes me think of the British defense of Malta where the Brits repeatedly and successfully fought the vastly superior aircraft of the Axis with 3 biplanes.
Oh and how much of that persistent disregard was a result of Palpatines opinions perverting otherwise intelligent tacticians with his force fueled mind whammy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16345
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2016 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ForbinProject wrote: | | When I read the Imperial backstory I get the impression that the opinion on starfighters doesn't come from the ship designers/builders but from the disdain Imperial officers have for the vastly outnumbered and poorly equipped rebels with ships held together with spit and baling wire. |
Some of us here have spent a lot of time analyzing what the Imperial Sourcebook and a few other sources tell us about Imperial doctrine. While you are right about the disdain of Imperial officers, that disdain has had sufficient time since the Clone Wars to filter into warship and starfighter design and doctrine. The result is that, while the Alliance has developed a doctrine of independent starfighter operations centered around using hyperdrive-equipped fighters, the Empire views starfighters more as an extension or accessory to naval or army operations.
The result is that the Imperial Navy's primary focus is on capital ship doctrine, with their starfighters primarily providing a support function (escort, recon, precision strike, etc.) As such, my reasoning for changing the basic armament of the Interdictor is that the Empire would absolutely take the capital ship threat into consideration and give the ship at least a token anti-capital ship armament. The RAW's Interdictor has the same armament (except for -2D Fire Control) as the experimental, dedicated anti-starfighter-armed Lancer, and this on a support vessel that is used at stand-off range in support of the Imperial ships of the line of battle. I do not believe that Imperial doctrine would provide so much protection against starfighters, yet leave such a valuable ship without any defensive capability against capital ships.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
