Quote:

Thing is, the Empire start replacing them with TIEs after 15 BBY. If you're in an area with a lot of resources like a Core world you won't refit the ARCs, you'll scrap them for your new shipment of TIE fighter racks.

/endquote

Actually an ARC has shields and a hyperdrive, the TIE/LN does not. The example I gave deals with why the ARC would still have value for the Empire, as a Recon ship.Maybe even an Aggressive one.

Quote:

SWG was a victim of the "OMG NEW FILM PUT ITS SHIPS IN EVERY GAME" syndrome. When the V-wing is outperforming most the GCW ships you know it's a shoehorned ship in that game rather than an actual GCW represent. GCW V-wings are done fair better in Empire at War, where they're comparable to Z-95s.

/endquote

This is true, but that doesn't actually matter - it still created precedent.

Everything else you said I more or less agree on.

As a fluffmeister, I still want my Clone trooper A-team with ARCs.

Actually an ARC has shields and a hyperdrive, the TIE/LN does not. The example I gave deals with why the ARC would still have value for the Empire, as a Recon ship.Maybe even an Aggressive one.

Here's the thing. Why don't TIEs have hyperdrives? It's the same reason the TIE interceptor was chosen over the TIE advanced for mass production, and it might make the Imperial brass a little eager to get rid of the ARC, hastening its disappearance from standard Imperial military doctrine.

The ARC's backronym is silly. I'm glad the new canon so far has just called it the ARC.

This is true, but that doesn't actually matter - it still created precedent.

I'd put a lot of Galaxies's shenanigans down to Galaxies rather than treating them as canonical, but it's all Legends now anyway.

The new canon does feature Imperial ARCs though. 15 BBY Imperial ARCs, but they do stay in Imperial use for a while.

True, and as i've mentioned perhaps a dozen times the ARC i can see being the mainstay recon ship up until the XG-1 was introduced. Look at the assault gunboat, it's role is very comparable to the ARC.

Also dat Shadow Squadron Imperial ARC ( i nearly bought as a toy for *cough* my kids). is so **** pretty.

Galaxies shenanigans you can't put down really due to the Deci, Syck and other Galaxies introduced stuff worming their way into canon etc. It's no different from TIE Fighter and the Defender, XG-1, DX-9 etc entering canon. When I picked up TIE Fighter, on 3.5 floppy disks all the way back when after playing X-wing I had thought the Advanced and Gunboat were the true pinnacle of Imperial starfighter design, then.... Then the Defender man. The Defender changed everything.

Hell, even the Rebel assault games - which were f**king terrible gave us the Phantom (which appeared also in empire at war).

I'd sooner consider Galaxies canon over Rebel a f**kingsault.

(note, I don't swear normally so I apologize, but Rebel Assault was really bad, and for it's time an exploit on a new technology akin to Star Wars Kinect - a thing of which I will speak of no further).

I guess my point is that appearing in a videogame is an accepted precedent, and that's enough for me.

Also that while yes cheap TIE's without shields or hyp were mass produced, the Empire still needed Hyperspace capable patrol fighters. Once they had the XG-1 then sure, fine, no ARC necessary. Before then, what else they gonna use?

Galaxies shenanigans you can't put down really due to the Deci, Syck and other Galaxies introduced stuff worming their way into canon etc.

I didn't say Galaxies wasn't canon and especially not its original ships, I said a few of its shenanigans shouldn't be considered that canon, the bits that are blatantly "I really wish this was a prequel game right now". The ARCs outperforming X-wings for example. That being said, in Galaxies you take the frame and upgrade it with completely custom parts, so the ARC is more an individual pilot's personal custom rebuilt fighter rather than a ship of the line, so I guess it makes more sense.

I'd sooner consider Galaxies canon over Rebel a f**kingsault.

What was wrong with RA II? It was pretty straightly played Star Wars.

True, and as i've mentioned perhaps a dozen times the ARC i can see being the mainstay recon ship up until the XG-1 was introduced. Look at the assault gunboat, it's role is very comparable to the ARC.

The XG-1's more of a raid ship than a recon ship, but I get your meaning. It's also, like the TIE defender, quite removed from the previously established Imperial military doctrine where pilots are dependent upon the more loyal command ships: the ships have no hyperdrives so they can't steal them and defect. The XG-1 exists because TIE Fighter needed a ship with more depth, the TIE fighter had no shields or hyperdrive and was a very straightforward highly fragile deathtrap. Legends does suffer somewhat from internal consistency issues. It'll be interesting to see how the new canon handles Imperial military doctrine.

Also that while yes cheap TIE's without shields or hyp were mass produced, the Empire still needed Hyperspace capable patrol fighters. Once they had the XG-1 then sure, fine, no ARC necessary. Before then, what else they gonna use?

Capital ships. Gozantis. Things bigger than fighter craft.

I see where you're coming from, and the long range Imperial fighter thing is exactly how I'd imagine FFG implementing it thematically if they did. But I do feel that the areas of the Empire using ARCs as of the GCW are likely to be the areas of the Empire that still have AT-TEs.

Yes, ATTE's rather than ATAT's, ARCS rather than XG1.

The poor parts of the empire or otherwise where people haven't gotten the latest upgrades.

Early TIE Fighters (squat fighters?) rather than the later ones.

RAII was better but both were pretty bad. But then Rail shooters when X-wing was out...

The XG1 however appeared in X-wing and sure yes, because x-wing needed a tough imperial fighter. It doesn't matter why though, what matters is that it exists.

I agree with the hotrodding of prequel ships in the GCW to make them passable, which is kind of why i am thinking well update them so they are competitive.

I want to avoid using real world comparisons, but it's not as if the F18 hasn't had it's share of updates to keep it usable by the US navy...

ARC would be such a perfect Scum ship...

Early TIE Fighters (squat fighters?) rather than the later ones.

Fairly sure the squats are just stylisation.

To be fair they could be probably are. Either way as I understand the TIE/LN was an updated version of the original TIE Fighter.

You'd think the point is to take out capital ships, and that's a logical role for it, but if you look at anything written about it, they scream it's a fighter at you. It's the perfect bomber but it is a God-awful fighter. Heck watch the movies and they use them as fighters.... And 90% of them get destroyed. They should be the Republic's B-wing, but everything in canon (or legends) makes them its X-wing.

... You do get that scene is a parallel to Episode 4's Trench Run right? They aren't there to fight the enemy fighters, they're there to cover Obi Wan and Anakin til they get to Grevious' ship. Which they successfully do.

By that logic the X-wing is a shite fighter because more of them get blown up than TIE fighters (that we see) over the Death Star in ANH.

By that logic, CR-90s are better then ISDs because we see less of them blow up. You're not using logic. I do get the parallel, I'm not blind.

And guys just for reference, I'm not hating on the ARC-170, I really do think it is an ok ship. I'm hating on the idiots that designed it, and thought it would make a good dogfighting ship. I'm hating on how everyone considers it the Republic's X-wing when there's no bloody way anyone design it with the primary intention of dogfighting.

Z-95 = X-wing

Y-wing = Y-wing (duh)

V-wing = A-wing/Squint

ARC = B-wing

EDIT: I'd like to add that the ARC's name is perfect for the role it SHOULD have: AgressiveReCon fighter, an intel ship and bomber. But everything portrays it as a fighter

They had prequel ships they retired them in favour of cheaper mass produced tie fighters, 5 years after the clone wars ended they were replaced wholesale.

Darth vader didn't keep his ship he had something far superior made for himself, they didn't keep those ships in service for very long and certainly wouldn't bother to upgrade old ships they no longer used.

Lucas was determined to force his prequels into games they didn't belong, he did the same with the dvd release of the films because he couldn't accept the fact he's a terrible director and that very very few people liked his movies, even Ewan McGregor was bad mouthing the movies he was staring in before the trilogy was finished.

The games called x-wing the draw is it's set in the OT, it would never have grown so popular had they called it clone wars i for one would never of touched it and i don't think im alone in that.

I dunno. X-wing sequel, simulation style like X-wing / Tie fighter, set in the late republic or better yet early empire.

Yeah i'd buy that.

They had prequel ships they retired them in favour of cheaper mass produced tie fighters, 5 years after the clone wars ended they were replaced wholesale.

Darth vader didn't keep his ship he had something far superior made for himself, they didn't keep those ships in service for very long and certainly wouldn't bother to upgrade old ships they no longer used.

Lucas was determined to force his prequels into games they didn't belong, he did the same with the dvd release of the films because he couldn't accept the fact he's a terrible director and that very very few people liked his movies, even Ewan McGregor was bad mouthing the movies he was staring in before the trilogy was finished.

The games called x-wing the draw is it's set in the OT, it would never have grown so popular had they called it clone wars i for one would never of touched it and i don't think im alone in that.

The draw is that it is Star Wars. Honestly, I would be perfectly happy seeing some of the earlier era ships. If I don't like the ship, I don't buy it. I always hated the B-Wing, it was a terrible design, so I don't own any. At least the ARC has some style to it and looks like a competent fighter/bomber. Dem turbolasers...

And guys just for reference, I'm not hating on the ARC-170, I really do think it is an ok ship. I'm hating on the idiots that designed it, and thought it would make a good dogfighting ship. I'm hating on how everyone considers it the Republic's X-wing when there's no bloody way anyone design it with the primary intention of dogfighting.

All the starfighters in Star Wars are stupid in terms of actual IRL practicality. The TIE pilot's pretty much blind, the X-wing's guns are miles away from the centre of the ship...

It looks like an X-wing, and it acts like a slightly heavier X-wing. You can't really go into physical analysis of Star Wars's starfighters.

The words out of the CEO of FFG are tired and unsubstantiated?

GenCon said they won't make a prequel game. There's a more recent interview with Alex Davy.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/114870-no-prequel-ships-settled/

What did Alex Davey say? Can I read/watch/listen?

main problem is do we want another set of astromechs for a single faction?

main problem is do we want another set of astromechs for a single faction?

Well given the arc would be imperial it would mean all three factions would have astromechs.

Or just don't give it an astromech slot. A small based auxarced ship is crazy enough already.

By that logic, CR-90s are better then ISDs because we see less of them blow up. You're not using logic. I do get the parallel, I'm not blind.

And guys just for reference, I'm not hating on the ARC-170, I really do think it is an ok ship. I'm hating on the idiots that designed it, and thought it would make a good dogfighting ship. I'm hating on how everyone considers it the Republic's X-wing when there's no bloody way anyone design it with the primary intention of dogfighting.

Z-95 = X-wing

Y-wing = Y-wing (duh)

V-wing = A-wing/Squint

ARC = B-wing

EDIT: I'd like to add that the ARC's name is perfect for the role it SHOULD have: AgressiveReCon fighter, an intel ship and bomber. But everything portrays it as a fighter

That is one of the worst comparisons i've seen. The one time we see a CR-90 go toe to toe with an ISD it loses flat out. You can't say "oh more ISDs blew up onscreen and we don't see any CR-90's blow therefore CR-90>ISD"

"Heck watch the movies and they use them as fighters.... And 90% of them get destroyed."

Thats what i poked at. The sole onscreen showing of a starfighter can't possibly be used as an accurate metric of how good it is as a starfighter. Again, in ANH, we see 1 Xwing shot down by TIEs over the Death Star (nameless guy, not counting Porkins here), 2 TIE Fighters shot down, then 3 Y's, 3 X's, Wedge crippled, Biggs dead, and remember Luke takes at least 2 critical hits throughout the battle. Then Han pops 2 TIE fighters. That's a 2-1 ratio in dead starfighters in FAVOR of the Imperials. Thats a really bad ratio considering the Xwing is still considered a better fighter than the TIE Advanced, Darth Vader not withstanding.

I agree that the ARC was more like the B-wing though. But seriously stop using the movie to judge the ARC's combat effectiveness. I don't hear anyone hollering about how terrible the IG-2000 was considering in the comics it never even killed anything before Boba Fett wrecked it(them, however you wanna call it).

Thats what i poked at. The sole onscreen showing of a starfighter can't possibly be used as an accurate metric of how good it is as a starfighter.

He's not, he was pointing out how crazy the "ARCs die in one of their two RotS scenes therefore they suck" suggestion was. A sentence starting "by that logic" is usually trying to present something as flawed.

Thing is, I'm not really sure anyone made that suggestion the first place.

You'd think the point is to take out capital ships, and that's a logical role for it, but if you look at anything written about it, they scream it's a fighter at you. It's the perfect bomber but it is a God-awful fighter. Heck watch the movies and they use them as fighters.... And 90% of them get destroyed. They should be the Republic's B-wing, but everything in canon (or legends) makes them its X-wing.

His argument seemed to me to be ARC's get trashed, therefore are bad superiority fighters. That was his logic to me. I held up that X-wings get trashed in ANH, therefore are bad superiority fighters. I think you're mixing your quotes up.

main problem is do we want another set of astromechs for a single faction?

Well given the arc would be imperial it would mean all three factions would have astromechs.

No, no it really wouldn't. It'd be mostly Rebel. The ARC-170 was phased out of The Empire. Bigtime.

main problem is do we want another set of astromechs for a single faction?

Well given the arc would be imperial it would mean all three factions would have astromechs.

No, no it really wouldn't. It'd be mostly Rebel. The ARC-170 was phased out of The Empire. Bigtime.

I still vote Scum. It wants to be a modified ship for a bounty hunter or pirate. Big enough to carry some extra gear and cargo, small enough to escape notice.

main problem is do we want another set of astromechs for a single faction?

Well given the arc would be imperial it would mean all three factions would have astromechs.

No, no it really wouldn't. It'd be mostly Rebel. The ARC-170 was phased out of The Empire. Bigtime.

The Empire used the ARC in its early years, the Rebels didn't. Rebel ARCs are shoehorning.

main problem is do we want another set of astromechs for a single faction?

Well given the arc would be imperial it would mean all three factions would have astromechs.

No, no it really wouldn't. It'd be mostly Rebel. The ARC-170 was phased out of The Empire. Bigtime.

The Empire used the ARC in its early years, the Rebels didn't. Rebel ARCs are shoehorning.

You sure? Well, if you say so. But I recall ARC-170s being used by the occasional Rebel Pilot.

From what? Personal player ships from an MMO where you can choose from any ship in the whole saga don't count.