2 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:Hey, NuCanon allows any old Legends ships to be called anything! Don't like the Scimitar Bomber? Simply call it the TIE Scimitar! Or TIE *******.
Tie the third questionable bomber?
XG-1 "Star Wing" Assault Gunboat Thread
25 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:Hey, NuCanon allows any old Legends ships to be called anything! Don't like the Scimitar Bomber? Simply call it the TIE Scimitar!
Give it two engines (or a multiple of two) and that's fine. TIE Advanced, for example, having 4.
On 27/03/2017 at 7:54 PM, DariusAPB said:I suspect I'm the only member of this forum who actually liked the Scimitar.
Gunboat.
I do like the scimitar too.
19 minutes ago, Ironlord said:Give it two engines (or a multiple of two) and that's fine. TIE Advanced, for example, having 4.
How many engines do Phantoms and Defenders have again?
47 minutes ago, GeneralBergfrühling said:The Empire don't need anything. Its so rich of fresh and juicy pilots who could hardly wait for their first combat missions in the unshielded basic Tie Fighters. And the Tie Fighters are available in vast numbers!
The Empire does not need hyperdrives in their fighters - they have the huge carriers which they call 'Star Destroyers' - and no pilot is as motivated to defend his or her mothership as one without a hyperdrive and live support.
In the end its just nice to have to fill the gaps.
The Empire just stole the whole carrier based fighters thing from the GAR. V-19s, Delta-7s, Eta-2s, V-wings, Z-95s, none of them had built in hyperdrives, they relied on VSDs or rarely hyperspace rings for small force deployment. ARCs and Y-wings had hyperdrives to supplement their ability of long range bombing and assault, similar to GUNBOAT and the Missile Boat.
38 minutes ago, Ironlord said:Give it two engines (or a multiple of two) and that's fine. TIE Advanced, for example, having 4.
I'm still dubious that TIE is an acronym best represented by Twin Ion Engine. This doesn't say anything about the role of the vehicle or its capabilities like AT-AT/ST/TE/DP/AP/RT/ect. Or the Juggernaut/Turbotank HAVw or SPHA-T and such. There's also the IRD or Intercept/Recon/Defense fighters of the Corperate Sector Authority. Maybe TIE can be Tactical Intercept Escort since they covers the wide roles these craft operate in. Or Totally Integrated Engineering since the TIE series is extremely modular in design. Why name it for the engines?
Edited by GrimmyV8 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:I'm still dubious that TIE is an acronym best represented by Twin Ion Engine...
...it's only called that because the ship looks like a bow tie. They came up with the acronym after making the connection.
Just now, FTS Gecko said:...it's only called that because the ship looks like a bow tie. They came up with the acronym after making the connection.
Yes, I am aware of the RW explanation. The in universe meaning just never sounded right to me.
30 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:How many engines do Phantoms and Defenders have again?
Rebels Defenders look like they have 2:
Phantoms look like they have 3. So "Twin Ion Engines, plus one".
4 minutes ago, Ironlord said:Rebels Defenders look like they have 2:
Phantoms look like they have 3. So "Twin Ion Engines, plus one".
Look at the FFG models. Rebels CG super deformed ships don't count. Those would also be prototypes.
16 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:Look at the FFG models.
The FFG model doesn't look like it has any - though the Twin Ion Engine Mark II image shows a TIE Defender with one ion exhaust:
suggesting that it has two engines and the hexagonal panel on the rear of the cockpit, is where those engines expel propellant - two engines but one "exhaust nozzle" so to speak.
On TIE fighters, that flattened hexagonal panel on the rear of the ball cockpit, is generally not labelled an engine exhaust though - instead, the two red rear lights, are.
Edited by Ironlord23 minutes ago, Ironlord said:Phantoms look like they have 3. So "Twin Ion Engines, plus one".
Triple Ion Engine. Still a TIE.
1 hour ago, Ironlord said:The FFG model doesn't look like it has any - though the Twin Ion Engine Mark II image shows a TIE Defender with one ion exhaust:
suggesting that it has two engines and the hexagonal panel on the rear of the cockpit, is where those engines expel propellant - two engines but one "exhaust nozzle" so to speak.
On TIE fighters, that flattened hexagonal panel on the rear of the ball cockpit, is generally not labelled an engine exhaust though - instead, the two red rear lights, are.
Oops I thought the FFG model had the same engine layout as the Action Fleet toy, three engines radially arrayed on the round 'service module'. Looks like the FFG Defenders don't have engines at all!
the black hexagon was originally meant to be a window, but it also is the same dimensions as the hex opening in the ordnance pod of the Bomber/Pubisher, implying a modular connection function of some kind.
On 29.3.2017 at 0:47 AM, GrimmyV said:Oops I thought the FFG model had the same engine layout as the Action Fleet toy, three engines radially arrayed on the round 'service module'. Looks like the FFG Defenders don't have engines at all!
the black hexagon was originally meant to be a window, but it also is the same dimensions as the hex opening in the ordnance pod of the Bomber/Pubisher, implying a modular connection function of some kind.
Actually these are the engines at the version FFG used (of course there is also the variant with the three red dots). This layout is also seen in a cutscene of (I think it was) X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
So if a variant had 5 engines, would it be a PIE?
Dood, GUNBOAT totally has two identical ion engines, why isn't it a TIE? It's a conspiracy!
14 hours ago, RogueLeader42 said:Actually these are the engines at the version FFG used (of course there is also the variant with the three red dots). This layout is also seen in a cutscene of (I think it was) X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
Crap are they?
*tries to resist urge to repaint*
17 hours ago, RogueLeader42 said:Actually these are the engines at the version FFG used (of course there is also the variant with the three red dots). This layout is also seen in a cutscene of (I think it was) X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
WHOA. I never noticed that! THAT'S COOOOOOOOOOOOL
Speaking of engines: did the Assault Gunboat ever get the SLAM or was that only the Missile Boat... man its been to long
Hey FFG? Know what would dull the pain of missing my favorite ambush craft from the old PC game I never play anymore... come on... you can do it... Q3 2017?
16 hours ago, Lobokai said:Speaking of engines: did the Assault Gunboat ever get the SLAM or was that only the Missile Boat... man its been to long
Hey FFG? Know what would dull the pain of missing my favorite ambush craft from the old PC game I never play anymore... come on... you can do it... Q3 2017?
The Assault Gunboat NEVER had SLAM.
The Missile Boat, however, was the first ship (and most notorious) to equip SLAM.
My heart hurts every time I think how FFG chose the obscure, uninspired and fugly TIE Interdictor Punisher over the Missile Boat in Wave 7.
And how the rebels and scum have SLAM and somehow the Empire doesn't
For illustration, this would be the Missile Boat:
(with a good dial and maybe the system slot)
This would be the Assault Gunboat:
4 minutes ago, Lobokai said:And how the rebels and scum have SLAM and somehow the Empire doesn't
Because sometimes devs think their game is greater than an IP.
On 28.3.2017 at 9:55 PM, GeneralBergfrühling said:
Tie the third questionable bomber?
Don't be so harsh.
Btw: The fact we'll get the Tie Aggressor makes me confident that we'll get the Gunboat sooner or later. Maybe even next wave thereafter.
On 3/30/2017 at 10:28 AM, RogueLeader42 said:Actually these are the engines at the version FFG used (of course there is also the variant with the three red dots). This layout is also seen in a cutscene of (I think it was) X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
The TIE Defender wasn't in X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter. It was in XWA, but not in any cutscenes.
Edited by Knightcrawler