Worst ship design in sci-fi?

RK_Striker_JK_5 · Post by **RK_Striker_JK_5** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:28 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:
RK_Striker_JK_5 wrote:Ejector seats, Seafort? i don't recall them ejecting in ESB...
It's in the asteroid field - in a frame by frame analysis of the destruction of the TIEs you can see a small seated figure spinning away from the fighter. They also turned up in the comics. (See herefor an example)

LOL! I thought that was just the pilot getting tossed out of the fighter as it disintegrated. Hmm, learn something new every day.

Reliant121 · Post by **Reliant121** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:48 pm

Lovely! i hadn't even noticed it. I like the idea of this unknown pilot being popped out of the cockpit as his stellar vessel is blown to bits.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:53 pm

Given that he's stuck in the middle of an asteroid field, I'd say he's pretty screwed anyway.

Reliant121 · Post by **Reliant121** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:55 pm

Thats the part thats appealing...

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:56 pm

Ah, right.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:04 pm

Deepcrush wrote:The two rows of eight yes, but the bulk of the weapons were not.

The HTLs are the guns that matter - all the others are either for point-defence against fighters and missiles or for firing on secondary targets. The HTLs are at least three orders of magnitude more powerful than any other weapon on the ship, so they're the ones whose firing arcs matter.

RK_Striker_JK_5 · Post by **RK_Striker_JK_5** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Man, I wanna write a fanfic about this guy, now... his rescue, the time floating around...

On star destroyer bridge domes, I've seen sources that indiacte tham as shield domes, mostly the X-wing series. IIRC, in one of the cross-sections, they compromised by having them be sensor domes with shield generators for the bridge tower itself.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:17 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:
Deepcrush wrote:The two rows of eight yes, but the bulk of the weapons were not.
The HTLs are the guns that matter - all the others are either for point-defence against fighters and missiles or for firing on secondary targets. The HTLs are at least three orders of magnitude more powerful than any other weapon on the ship, so they're the ones whose firing arcs matter.

Is that what you tell your crew when the MC80b with 2 rows or 12 HTLs pulls up next to you? Someone might yell back that it would sure be nice to have 60 other TLs to help out at that moment in time. That MC80b TLs and Ion Cannon are still up and running and they have 48 of them.

ISD, 16 HTLs
MC80b, 24 HTLs plus 48 TLs
Yeah, that just wont end well, plus the MC80's had better speed, turning and firing arcs.

Don't even get me started on the MC90's! OMG they were beautiful ships! Just one of them took out 2 ISDs in a broadside slugger fest and walked away in style.

Reliant121 · Post by **Reliant121** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:32 pm

Heres to the Mon Calamari!

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:36 pm

ISD IIs have 64 HTLs - 8 batteries of 8, and ISD Is 12 (6 turrets, each with 2)while Mon Cals have an unknown number (the WEG figures simply aren't reliable, given how they treated the ISD).

The lesser TLs are irrelevent - comparing even the 200 GT MTLs to the heavies is like comparing machine guns to a 16" gun.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:52 pm

I heard that the ISD 2 model has around 100 turbolasers in all but I find it hard to believe that 64 of them would be heavys. then again it would make sense since they were most likely an answer to the MC star cruisers that were so happily pasting the ISD1's.

Edit!
Seafort was right about the ISD1's having only 12 HTL instead of 16 which I thought I had remembered. Thankyou for the correction. Now I hate them even more!

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:18 pm

Deepcrush wrote:I heard that the ISD 2 model has around 100 turbolasers in all but I find it hard to believe that 64 of them would be heavys. then again it would make sense since they were most likely an answer to the MC star cruisers that were so happily pasting the ISD1's.

The "100 guns" number comes from WEG sources, which are notoriously inaccurate (they're also responsible for claims of a 5-mile long Executor, a 1200m Home One, and a 160km DSII). In this case, their numbers completely ignore the octuple HTL mounts and, in the case of the ISD I both the triple midline and quad trench guns. They are utterly useless as a source of information.

Edit!
Seafort was right about the ISD1's having only 12 HTL instead of 16 which I thought I had remembered. Thankyou for the correction. Now I hate them even more!

Easy mistake to make: eight turrets with two guns per turret makes 16. You have to go into the tech manuals to find out that the aftermost turret on each side was an ion canon, not a TL.

As for the numbers of HTLs, its irrelevent. The important fact is the power output of the main reactor, since a true warship (which the ISD is) can divert the entire power output of is reactor to its guns. (re:"RotS:ICS")

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:36 pm

Having an Ion cannon of that size as part of a broadside would be a beautiful thing. A great way to stun the enemies shields and allow your HTLs to fire straight to the hull. This does lighten my hatred of the ISD but only slightly. I also find my self mad because the MC80b's were so effective against the ISD IIs. I would have thought that the newer model ISD should have faired better then they did, but they didn't and this upset me. It aloud a single world to snot-kick the empire which just confused me. I would also wonder how damn big is the Mon Cal shipyards? They must have turned out ships with ungodly speed. Every time I read a new Star Wars book, there were more MC's popping up everywhere. It was like a never ending river that just lined boats as far as the eye could see, and every one of them was better then an ISD. With as much as I love the ISD (just like rochey's love of the GCS), I still feel they should have faired better then they did.

My rant is finished for the now.

PS, the Wookipedia numbers are what I used to double check the 64 HTL count you gave and it supported it along with much of the tech info that I did remember correctly. I would seem that some of the numbers on there are up to date of sorts. Yes, I just did say that about a Wiki but eh, they got one right. It was bound to happen.

mwhittington · Post by **mwhittington** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:13 pm

Ugliest starship in-universe: the (shudders) Griffin class! Ugh, what the hell is that piece of floating Targ vomit!?

Out of universe: The Sulaco from Aliens. The only redeeming features on it were the dorsal and ventral mounted rail cannons.

Baddest starship ever: Eclipse class SSD. Having a smaller version of the Superlaser powerful enough to crack the crust of a planet.....Oh, yeah, baby!

Jordanis · Post by **Jordanis** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:02 pm

mwhittington wrote:Ugliest starship in-universe: the (shudders) Griffin class! Ugh, what the hell is that piece of floating Targ vomit!?

Out of universe: The Sulaco from Aliens. The only redeeming features on it were the dorsal and ventral mounted rail cannons.

Baddest starship ever: Eclipse class SSD. Having a smaller version of the Superlaser powerful enough to crack the crust of a planet.....Oh, yeah, baby!

The Eclipse SSD is an example of everything that is wrong with the Star Wars EU.