It's ugly it was in one fight where it died horribly why would anyone give two hoots about it?

It's a good thing we never saw an X-Wing get shot down.

yeah by darth vader and his elite squadron not a bleedin droid, it's an icon of the franchise recognized instantly the arc is not, both fights involving the deathstar featured the x-wing the prequels had it in one lackluster cgi scene they do not equate even a little.

Dude nah, 3 agility.

2. It's not better than the X-wing, and it's certainly not on par with the A-wing.

most things in this game are better than the X-wing

anyway, the N-1 is too small and spindly looking for Z-95 stats and it seems fairly maneuverable. The Scyk profile and dial would be perfect for it (or maybe 2 shields, 1 hull) and still decidedly inferior (at a base level) to the A-wing

I still think it should be 2322. Its size and the size of its engines precludes an agility assessment lower than 3, partly because the Scyk interceptor also is throwing 3 agility dice, so the idea that the A-wing as a prototype, and the TIE Int, as the top of the line Imperial ship, somehow have a monopoly on the 3 dice market is no longer accurate. If MandalMotors' mass-produced cheap as dirt interceptor has 3 agility, I think the hand-crafted, expensive as all get-out N-1 probably does too. Not to mention the N-1 is smaller than the Scyk in most dimensions.

As to the dial, I think something emphasizing its maneuverability would be ideal. Since it probably won't make it into the game anyway, if I were playing it in an RPG, I'd probably give it the A-wing dial. That or the TIE fighter dial, I'd be pretty happy with that actually.

I think the "top of the lineness" represented by the A-wing and T/int (as well as it can be represented given gameplay considerations) shows through in their dials more than anything (so much green)

The cheap as chips mass produced Tie Fighters having 3 agility also kinda throws it out the window as any measure of "eliteness"

My point is more that the TIEs are built for that. The TIE interceptor is mass produced in the exact same fashion as the TIE fighter, the TIE/ln is simply a predecessor. They may be cheap but designing them sure wasn't. The N1s have all the gear that was left out of the TIEs for the sake of getting it to be that nimble, the Naboo only have the resources of a planet researchwise, not the whole Empire, and the N1 is 30 years older than the TIE fighter.

I don't think they're more agile than the X-wing, which is no slouch.

Except, maybe a picture is worth a thousand words, but here is a scale model N-1 next to a scale model TIE Int:

The TIE int is much larger than the N-1, and the biggest components of the N-1 mass-wise are its engines. The thing is a tiny racing machine.

the Naboo only have the resources of a planet researchwise, not the whole Empire, and the N1 is 30 years older than the TIE fighter.

Sweden or France only had the resources of a small country, not a global superpower, but the Viggen, Gripen and various flavours of Mirage were all more than capable of holding their own against contemporary American and Soviet fighters.

Yeah, I see the N-1 as the Mirage when compared to the F-16 or something of that nature. Though if we consider that the N-1 was also clearly designed to be extremely expensive and prestigious, we may say that it's even better than that, as the Mirage was designed to be financially viable for export.

Fairly sure that N-1 is slightly underscaled based on length stats but I get your point.

the Naboo only have the resources of a planet researchwise, not the whole Empire, and the N1 is 30 years older than the TIE fighter.

Sweden or France only had the resources of a small country, not a global superpower, but the Viggen, Gripen and various flavours of Mirage were all more than capable of holding their own against contemporary American and Soviet fighters.

And how did they fare against the American and Soviet fighters of 30 years later?

First off, France is not a small country. Besides, we're talking a planet versus a galaxy here. A galaxy with ten years, a war, then another nineteen years of additional development time on its side. A bunch of backward isolationists aren't really comparable in technological prowess to a Galactic Empire. We're talking a ship from ten years before the Clone Wars here. It's good, but AF-4 Z-95 good. These antiques are simply not going to outdo ABY starfighters. Sure, they're better than Y-wings or A-wings but the X-wing, which I'd put it on par with in terms of agility, is not a sluggish ship. I simply can't justify it being better than an A-wing when ported into the GCW era.

Plus you have to take into account the targeting computers will be much better 30 years on and the modern ships will have a superior ECM suite so that makes the N1 even worse.

Because updating old ships with new parts is impossible

The poor ywing and scyk managed just fine, the antiquated scyk being even more maneuverable than the modern tie fighter

Personally, I think all planetary defence fighters should be comparable to the Y-wing and the Z-95, the Y-wing's the standard for the tough one, and the Z-95 for the mid range. The M3-A does throw something of a spanner in that with its 3 agility, but like the TIE fighter it sacrifices a lot to get that: its shield generator is lackluster, it can't hyperjump by itself, it's in many ways a commerical TIE fighter with a versatile weapon mount, and it's tiny.

The N1, being upgraded over the 34 years since the Battle of Naboo, I can see as better than the Z-95 Headhunter. It'd have a faster dial and native reposition actions. It'd also have the astromech slot, giving it the option for a ton of green with the R2 astromech. However, to bump it up to 3 agility takes its statline to 2/3/2/2. That's an A-wing. You've then got to start taking away from it to stop it being better than the A-wing, which it isn't. Astromech slot has to go or that TIE fighter dial becomes a TIE interceptor dial thanks to R2 astromech. Maneuvers need cutting down, durability sacrificed. Next thing you know you've got an M-3A.

I can see the N1 as a TIE fighter's dial, which is pretty much an A-wing or TIE interceptor's dial for most intents and purposes with the R2 astromech slot. It's more maneuverable than a Z-95. But I couldn't justify making it the superior for the RZ-1 A-wing, at least by the old canon A-wing (we've yet to see what SWR is going to do to that ship.)

antiquated scyk

The Scyk is a contempary of the TIE fighter, if not a little newer. Plus it's designed to beg "strip out my internals and customise me until I'm unrecognisable".

I checked the scale on the N-1 model and it's dead-on. We just sometimes don't realize how out-of-scale big the cockpits on TIEs and A-wings are, I think.

I also think we'll have to agree to disagree on the 3 agility. In my mind, the best-designed ships in the Star Wars universe are the A-wing and the N-1. They are both extremely light, agile, high-speed dogfighters (they call the A-wing an interceptor, but that's not really what it is in the true military aviation sense). The A-wing has some advantages in the way its guns are mounted, giving it off-boresight laser capability. The N-1 has some advantages, being even more lightly-built than the A-wing. I'd suspect the A-wing would have a better roll rate, but the N-1 would have fantastic pitch and yaw capabilities, out-maneuvering the A-wing in those planes.

If we were going by the way airplanes perform in an atmosphere, which I'm more familiar with, and which I think suits Star Wars better, even if it's nothing like space, I'd call the N-1 a rate fighter and the A-wing a radius fighter. What that means is that I think the N-1 can hold a tight turn circle without losing its energy, and turns very tightly in the horizontal, as well as possessing a great rate of climb. The A-wing, by contrast, would want to fight using instantaneous max-G turns, where it trades speed for angles in the fight, and then uses its engine power to get that speed back. So, the A-wing would be superior at the horizontal and rolling scissors, as well as in the one-circle turning fight, whereas the N-1 would win the two-circle fight and probably also the egg fight.

TL, DR: 3 agility for both makes sense for me, despite the 30 year gap. I don't think a 30 year gap in Star Wars means very much technologically, they seem to be on a bit of a plateau.

Except, maybe a picture is worth a thousand words, but here is a scale model N-1 next to a scale model TIE Int:

The TIE int is much larger than the N-1, and the biggest components of the N-1 mass-wise are its engines. The thing is a tiny racing machine.

I take back what I said earlier about the N1 at least being pretty. The best mini painter on the planet can't make that look good.

I'm far from the best on the planet, but I think it turned out cute:

I also like it in the background chilling during the Advanced Royal Guard photoshoot:

You didn't do bad, but it looks worse as a mini than on the screen.

aye, the n-1 is a cool ship minus some incredibly stupid astromech fen-angling that could easily be fixed in post

if you want an example of a lazy ship design, I submit episode 3's arc. It's an x-wing and a snow speeder super-glued together in a movie that rips off the Empire Strikes Back like a drowning man gasps for air. They did add an extra wing, though...

What exactly is the problem - do we see the astromech's legs poking out of the bottom? If not, isn't the whole thing hidden away inside the cockpit, ie invisible in the film?

front page

it is absolutely invisible for anyone just watching the film, but you'd need to widen the ship's dimensions a little to actually fit r2-d2 in it

it's a very easily addressed problem and the OP brought it to our attention as an example of Lucas' completely obstinate ways

I thought people were saying if you rotate the astromech there's no problem, but if you can't see the inside during the film, then how do we know it's not rotated? Seems to me it could be fixed by updating their technical diagrams, no revision to the film required.

The N-1 looks like a hummingbird or mosquito. Just curl that nose underneath when not feeding. It's streamlined for high speeds without turning, more suited for a long distance race than a dog fight. Reminds me of the Learjet, which also didn't perform well.

I don't think a 30 year gap in Star Wars means very much technologically, they seem to be on a bit of a plateau.

Then why make new ships at all?

It's ugly it was in one fight where it died horribly why would anyone give two hoots about it?

It's a good thing we never saw an X-Wing get shot down.

yeah by darth vader and his elite squadron not a bleedin droid, it's an icon of the franchise recognized instantly the arc is not, both fights involving the deathstar featured the x-wing the prequels had it in one lackluster cgi scene they do not equate even a little.

I love how you're plainly implying that X-Wings don't get shot down unless a badass does it. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

aye, the n-1 is a cool ship minus some incredibly stupid astromech fen-angling that could easily be fixed in post

if you want an example of a lazy ship design, I submit episode 3's arc. It's an x-wing and a snow speeder super-glued together in a movie that rips off the Empire Strikes Back like a drowning man gasps for air. They did add an extra wing, though...

What exactly is the problem - do we see the astromech's legs poking out of the bottom? If not, isn't the whole thing hidden away inside the cockpit, ie invisible in the film?

front page

it is absolutely invisible for anyone just watching the film, but you'd need to widen the ship's dimensions a little to actually fit r2-d2 in it

it's a very easily addressed problem and the OP brought it to our attention as an example of Lucas' completely obstinate ways

I thought people were saying if you rotate the astromech there's no problem, but if you can't see the inside during the film, then how do we know it's not rotated? Seems to me it could be fixed by updating their technical diagrams, no revision to the film required.

Yeah, that.

I checked the scale on the N-1 model and it's dead-on. We just sometimes don't realize how out-of-scale big the cockpits on TIEs and A-wings are, I think.

I also think we'll have to agree to disagree on the 3 agility. In my mind, the best-designed ships in the Star Wars universe are the A-wing and the N-1. They are both extremely light, agile, high-speed dogfighters (they call the A-wing an interceptor, but that's not really what it is in the true military aviation sense). The A-wing has some advantages in the way its guns are mounted, giving it off-boresight laser capability. The N-1 has some advantages, being even more lightly-built than the A-wing. I'd suspect the A-wing would have a better roll rate, but the N-1 would have fantastic pitch and yaw capabilities, out-maneuvering the A-wing in those planes.

If we were going by the way airplanes perform in an atmosphere, which I'm more familiar with, and which I think suits Star Wars better, even if it's nothing like space, I'd call the N-1 a rate fighter and the A-wing a radius fighter. What that means is that I think the N-1 can hold a tight turn circle without losing its energy, and turns very tightly in the horizontal, as well as possessing a great rate of climb. The A-wing, by contrast, would want to fight using instantaneous max-G turns, where it trades speed for angles in the fight, and then uses its engine power to get that speed back. So, the A-wing would be superior at the horizontal and rolling scissors, as well as in the one-circle turning fight, whereas the N-1 would win the two-circle fight and probably also the egg fight.

TL, DR: 3 agility for both makes sense for me, despite the 30 year gap. I don't think a 30 year gap in Star Wars means very much technologically, they seem to be on a bit of a plateau.

Thank you for being a reasonable person.

It's ugly it was in one fight where it died horribly why would anyone give two hoots about it?

It's a good thing we never saw an X-Wing get shot down.

yeah by darth vader and his elite squadron not a bleedin droid, it's an icon of the franchise recognized instantly the arc is not, both fights involving the deathstar featured the x-wing the prequels had it in one lackluster cgi scene they do not equate even a little.

Yes, because obviously machines are inferior in all aspects to humans... Especially when it comes to precision stuff where you need fine motor control...

Plus you have to take into account the targeting computers will be much better 30 years on and the modern ships will have a superior ECM suite so that makes the N1 even worse.

That's not really a problem in Star Wars. They have truly static technology. Their blaster, hyperdrive, shield, and ion engine designs haven't changed or improved in thousands of years. Same with computing technology and electronics, like targeting computers.

Yes, because obviously machines are inferior in all aspects to humans... Especially when it comes to precision stuff where you need fine motor control...

They are in star wars, droids are a match for clone troopers at best they are not superior if they were the separatists would of won because you can mass produce them in days and weeks instead of years, in war numbers mean alot.

That's not really a problem in Star Wars. They have truly static technology. Their blaster, hyperdrive, shield, and ion engine designs haven't changed or improved in thousands of years. Same with computing technology and electronics, like targeting computers.

It's not true at all if they had reached the apex then there would be one design they used for four thousand years straight, you'd have no reason at all to make new designs of fighter.

Yet in the movies alone we see a progression from tie fighter to tie advance to tie interceptor in a few short years each more powerful and superior for it's given task.

You go from the prequel carrier to victory class star destroyers and then to imperial class.

You see the y-wing's replacement being brought in in the form of the B-wing, you see the A-wing come in to counter the tie interceptor.

Thats without even touching EU sources.

I love how you're plainly implying that X-Wings don't get shot down unless a badass does it. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Thats a strawman and if it's the best you've got then just concede the point you'll only end up looking foolish.

Can you show a fight where arc's did well?

My take on that is that they wanted different things, so they made new ships to match their new requirements, I didn't assume it was because technology had improved.

Yes, because obviously machines are inferior in all aspects to humans... Especially when it comes to precision stuff where you need fine motor control...

They are in star wars, droids are a match for clone troopers at best they are not superior if they were the separatists would of won because you can mass produce them in days and weeks instead of years, in war numbers mean alot.

That's not really a problem in Star Wars. They have truly static technology. Their blaster, hyperdrive, shield, and ion engine designs haven't changed or improved in thousands of years. Same with computing technology and electronics, like targeting computers.

It's not true at all if they had reached the apex then there would be one design they used for four thousand years straight, you'd have no reason at all to make new designs of fighter.

Yet in the movies alone we see a progression from tie fighter to tie advance to tie interceptor in a few short years each more powerful and superior for it's given task.

You go from the prequel carrier to victory class star destroyers and then to imperial class.

You see the y-wing's replacement being brought in in the form of the B-wing, you see the A-wing come in to counter the tie interceptor.

Thats without even touching EU sources.

I love how you're plainly implying that X-Wings don't get shot down unless a badass does it. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Thats a strawman and if it's the best you've got then just concede the point you'll only end up looking foolish.

Can you show a fight where arc's did well?

So, what, the TIE/D wasn't a threat ever? Look, I'm going to be honest, I think Star Wars handles machine based competence like sheer arse.

Also there were over a thousand Droid Starfighters compared to the dozen of N1s, that's not fair at all. As for the ARC-170, that's as loaded as a question gets, but I know I couldn't possibly cite The Clone Wars because you'd just ignore it as a source.

It's canon so by all means find a clip and link it here.