Tie fighter with a turret???

By Djturbo12345, in X-Wing

Actually I bet they wait for the t-65 x-wing buff and they do it with a rogue one expansion

Going by the newest souurce books there are no TIE Fighters nor T-65 X-Wings in ep VII. Really it shows no X-Wings. It could happen thatt he X-Wing looking fighters in ep 7 are known in universe as X-Bolts or soometthiing else like that. Or they are T->65 X-Wings.

They're T-70 X-wings.

JJWars

Seriously, stop saying that.

Why??

JJTrek is nothing like Star Trek why should I believe that new Wars will be anything like Star Wars

JJWars

Seriously, stop saying that.

Why??

JJTrek is nothing like Star Trek why should I believe that new Wars will be anything like Star Wars

Yeah he's already changed stuff for the sake of changing it, that was horrible in star trek it'll be the same in jjwars.

Star Trek hasn't been Star Trek a lot longer than J.J. Abrams. Anyone remember Nemesis? Insurrection. Even first contact. These were all trying to be action movies in the Star Trek universe. Deep space 9 decided to put in a massive all out war.

Long gone are the ideals that Star Trek future is what we should aspire to be, rather than what we are.

J.J. Didn't break Trek. It was already broken.

If Star Trek is going to try to be a fluffy action movie, like Star Wars is, then I think J.J. Did a fine job. Would I like to see a return to the optimistic vision of the future, where there is a message of hope, compassion and tolerance? Yep. But as popcorn action movies go, the current State of Trek is fine.

JJTrek is nothing like Star Trek why should I believe that new Wars will be anything like Star Wars

Because while JJTrek is nothing like Star Trek, it IS a lot like Star Wars.

Deep space 9 decided to put in a massive all out war.

So? You act like the Star Trek universe never had any wars before DS9.

Edited by DarthEnderX

They did have wars. Though much of it were go the cold variety - Star Trek was during the cold war as it were. There was also the Organian Peace Treaty. The point with bringing up the dominion war is that it seemed to be to inject more grim and gritty to the bright and hopeful Star Trek universe. This was a slowly changing aspect of the Star Trek universe.

The shows were developed in different times and influenced by them.

Star Trek, to me, always seemed to be more about humans growing and improving. Being better than we currently are. Putting a massive war because action is needed is what it seemed to me to be. We don't get much cerebral sci-fi nowadays.

But the Dominion war in DS9 was incredibly good story telling, with loads of human drama and interesting yet beleivable twists and turns, the new Star Trek films have just been crap.

Nevertheless, I am cautiously optimistic about the new Star Wars. Star Wars (the films at least) have quite a few elements to the look and feel that are more concretely defined and expected that Trek did, so I don't think there is as much stuff that Jar Jar Abrams can mess with.

The point with bringing up the dominion war is that it seemed to be to inject more grim and gritty to the bright and hopeful Star Trek universe.

I always just thought it was meant to:

A. Show a part of the Star Trek universe that always existed, but hadn't been shown before. Star Trek had always had real open wars in it, it's just the TOS and TNG series didn't take place during any of them.

B. Try and copy what Babylon 5 was doing. Which was doing amazing things in sci-fi television storytelling at the time.

Edited by DarthEnderX

I'm not saying I didn't enjoy DS9 and that story arc, just that it was, I feel, a deviation of what Star Trek was originally intended to be. Most people tend to be fascinated by war, until they actually experience it.

Enough of this though. This is about TIEs

Will the TIE/cog have. 3 attack forward and two rear?

From the trailer it looked like it had the firepower of a normal TIE (2 attack dice front and rear arcs).

But we haven't seen the turret fire forward. In the trailers, as far as I can tell, we've only seen regular TIEs, with the standard placement for the laser cannons (under the viewport). Will the TIE/cog have those as well as the turret below? That would possibly give it 4 linked laser cannons if fired forward, translated into 3 attack dice as per the x-wing.

Could the TIE/cog have have a cannon slot that fires forward or rear? I'd love to see autoblasters on TIEs. Make for an interesting upgrade. Perhaps, though I'd hat this, we won't get a new model for the TIE/cog, just a TIE fighter exclusive title that adds something - I really want the model.

Heck, new $100 starter gives two x-wings, black/orange and blue/grey and three TIEs, two regular one TIE/cog model and I'll throw my money at it.

Edited by That Blasted Samophlange

But we haven't seen the turret fire forward. In the trailers, as far as I can tell, we've only seen regular TIEs, with the standard placement for the laser cannons (under the viewport). Will the TIE/cog have those as well as the turret below? That would possibly give it 4 linked laser cannons if fired forward, translated into 3 attack dice as per the x-wing.

We'll have to wait and see, but due to their placement on the chin of the craft, I just assumed that the TIE/cog had a single set of twin-linked lasercannons that were on a swivel mount instead of fixed positions.

If that's the case, then either it would have two firing arcs, like the Firespray, or it would have a Turret upgrade slot, and no normal weaponry, which seems much less likely.

The TIE/cog (or whatever it is) definately has some kind of coward facing guns as well as the turret. It is unclear whether he turret can swivel to the front though. If it is included in a new starter set or the inaugural wave with the 2.0 version it might require a rules change to how turrets or firing arcs work. I would bet that it would be much like a standard tie with a rear firing arc like a firespray, with an extremely low chance of a cannon upgrade slot.

And all this trek talk on a Star Wars board is enough to make Curtis Saxton's head explode.