1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

Of course, but what's the other option...

..... Have George Lucas make ANOTHER edition with MORE edits... This time, Turning classic ISDs into Ventators at times?

Haha, this .

I mean, yeah, it's only trying to justify things after the fact. But eh, that's what we get right now, and I'd rather half-decent justifications than trying to slam them into things for some reason.

Who knows, maybe the Resistance will need to pull old-to-ancient ships out of storage in order to rebuild their fleet in the new trilogy. Who knows! It's Star Wars!

2 minutes ago, Greatfrito said:

Haha, this .

I mean, yeah, it's only trying to justify things after the fact. But eh, that's what we get right now, and I'd rather half-decent justifications than trying to slam them into things for some reason.

Who knows, maybe the Resistance will need to pull old-to-ancient ships out of storage in order to rebuild their fleet in the new trilogy. Who knows! It's Star Wars!

ah, I would have preferred a more thought-out explanation like say, all the Venators are deployed in a specific part of the galaxy to quell some other conflict. But like you said, it's what we have.

11 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

what, you didn't appreciate having Hayden Christiansen as a force ghost?

Does that answer your question?

24 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

ah, I see. In all honesty, I think they decided to go with that statement only to justify why they were no Venators during the original movies...

It's like, an easy way out, ya know.

It may be an easy out but often the simplest explanations are the best and its a BIG galaxy.

Funnily enough the prequels made the galaxy seem huge at least in comparison to the OT.

3 minutes ago, Forresto said:

It may be an easy out but often the simplest explanations are the best and its a BIG galaxy.

hence why I felt that saying they were deployed elsewhere made more sense

It's like Tiger battalions during WW2, you could not have those everywhere!

First off 20-30 years of pan-species war can really drive tech forward (i.e.: 1914-1944).

Second, the Venators were an older design that got turned into a stop gap, do everything well enough, use existing tech because we need it yesterday, make more now!

It was a logistical nightmare that leaned on its fighters (more supply issues). After the Clone War some of the older, better built ones, entered into Imperial service... many went to the scrap yards, and some were mothballed.

Those remaining were used as school ships, parked in orbits as hangers, and used in backwater convoy duty

VSDs and ISDs are more thoughtfully built and use much more efficient support systems, higher technology, and cheaper expendable assets.

therefore a Venerator should be statted to fit it's lore

I'd say 4 or 5 dice red and blue broadsides, 2 dice front, 1 rear, no more than 2 dice AA, 7 hull, 3 shields except 1 in rear, speed 2, 3 command, 4 squadron, 2 engineering, speed 2... And just 2 redirects

4 upgrades... And then it'd be low enough points to be useful.

19 hours ago, Chuntsinger said:

one more click at speed 2 on the 1st joint and this would be PERFECT

only the points more than an af2?

29 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

First off 20-30 years of pan-species war can really drive tech forward (i.e.: 1914-1944).

Second, the Venators were an older design that got turned into a stop gap, do everything well enough, use existing tech because we need it yesterday, make more now!

It was a logistical nightmare that leaned on its fighters (more supply issues). After the Clone War some of the older, better built ones, entered into Imperial service... many went to the scrap yards, and some were mothballed.

Those remaining were used as school ships, parked in orbits as hangers, and used in backwater convoy duty

VSDs and ISDs are more thoughtfully built and use much more efficient support systems, higher technology, and cheaper expendable assets.

therefore a Venerator should be statted to fit it's lore

I'd say 4 or 5 dice red and blue broadsides, 2 dice front, 1 rear, no more than 2 dice AA, 7 hull, 3 shields except 1 in rear, speed 2, 3 command, 4 squadron, 2 engineering, speed 2... And just 2 redirects

4 upgrades... And then it'd be low enough points to be useful.

we could see a 4 command ship....

The Dual bridge for starters...

Venators weren't stop gap ships, Kuat built them with multirole in mind.

2 hours ago, Eye of Thokem said:

I'd rather have an Acclamator, but I see the Venator as more likely. So while I'm not likely to get a Venator myself, I hope to see it as it could mean the Acclamator.

I could be wrong here as I'm not really up to date on Clone Wars ships but wasn't the Acclamator primarily a troop transport? Something akin to a real world LHD?

I think if you ever saw it in Armada it would have to come with some weird ability that would make it work.

MC75 is it a medium ship?

Just now, Swusn said:

I could be wrong here as I'm not really up to date on Clone Wars ships but wasn't the Acclamator primarily a troop transport? Something akin to a real world LHD?

I think if you ever saw it in Armada it would have to come with some weird ability that would make it work.

I'm not too knowledgeable about it myself, I just like how it looks. But yes it is a Troop Transport but it's got a decent armament if I remember right.

2 hours ago, Eye of Thokem said:

Does that answer your question?

More No No No

2 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

MC75 is it a medium ship?

1204 Meters compared to an ISD's 1600 meters or a VSD at 900 meters or AFmkII is 700 meters. I would guess it is in the lower range of a large base but I sure would like to see another rebel medium base.

2 minutes ago, Swusn said:

1204 Meters compared to an ISD's 1600 meters or a VSD at 900 meters or AFmkII is 700 meters. I would guess it is in the lower range of a large base but I sure would like to see another rebel medium base.

So it's no smaller than an MC80.

16 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

So it's no smaller than an MC80.

Well if you didn't want the convoluted answer I guess I could have just said that

42 minutes ago, Gottmituns205 said:

The Dual bridge for starters...

Venators weren't stop gap ships, Kuat built them with multirole in mind.

As I said, older design, built as a stop gap (I didn't mean designed as such). They were not meant for long term deployments and they were crash built because they were needed for a duty they weren't suited for... Like if the US had crash built Tennessee class battleships in WW2... The production would have been a stop gap measure, but the design had been a solid smart one... 30 years before WW2.

Well, as far as not seeing any venators in the original trilogy, don't forget that we only ever saw one major fleet engagement in the entire trilogy. Heck, we only ever saw seven planets (and their associated moons) in the entire trilogy. Eight if you count the Coruscant celebration in RotJ special edition.

The only times we see massed Imperial capital ships at all are in Empire and Jedi. In Empire it's Death Squadron, which is exclusively the Executor and Imperial class star destroyers. In Jedi it appears to be the primary line elements of the Imperial Navy. Again, the Executor and Imperial class ships. They were there to be a demoralizing blockade to keep the rebel fleet there while the Death Star roasted them one by one. Do you think old palpy would have wanted 25 year old ships ruining his carefully constructed image?

Anyway, I think there are plenty of places that Venators could have been "off camera" during the original trilogy. I imagine by then they are relegated to backwater duty like the Victories, but their massive fighter continent would help patrol or pacify trade routes or systems like Kasshyk or other important systems that don't need an ImpStar babysitting it.

5 hours ago, Eye of Thokem said:

I'm not too knowledgeable about it myself, I just like how it looks. But yes it is a Troop Transport but it's got a decent armament if I remember right.

In the clone wars it was a troop transport. The empire retrofitted them to be assault frigate type Ship. Proton torpedo barrage, and turbolasers. That is based on star wars empire at war. But not technically recanonised yet.

2 hours ago, Swusn said:

1204 Meters compared to an ISD's 1600 meters or a VSD at 900 meters or AFmkII is 700 meters. I would guess it is in the lower range of a large base but I sure would like to see another rebel medium base.

You are correct. Mc80s are similar I. Size to mc75s so I would expect large base but less armaments. It was one of the first Mon calamari ships to be militarized according to the ultimate visual guide I have. I would expect it to not be as well armed and protected as the mc80s that came later in the star wars universe. Check page 12 or 13ish for a pic.

17 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:

Well, as far as not seeing any venators in the original trilogy, don't forget that we only ever saw one major fleet engagement in the entire trilogy. Heck, we only ever saw seven planets (and their associated moons) in the entire trilogy. Eight if you count the Coruscant celebration in RotJ special edition.

The only times we see massed Imperial capital ships at all are in Empire and Jedi. In Empire it's Death Squadron, which is exclusively the Executor and Imperial class star destroyers. In Jedi it appears to be the primary line elements of the Imperial Navy. Again, the Executor and Imperial class ships. They were there to be a demoralizing blockade to keep the rebel fleet there while the Death Star roasted them one by one. Do you think old palpy would have wanted 25 year old ships ruining his carefully constructed image?

Anyway, I think there are plenty of places that Venators could have been "off camera" during the original trilogy. I imagine by then they are relegated to backwater duty like the Victories, but their massive fighter continent would help patrol or pacify trade routes or systems like Kasshyk or other important systems that don't need an ImpStar babysitting it.

Amen. I agree.

Acclamator-Class Assault Ships carried 12 Quad Turbolaser turrets, 24 Laser Cannons and 4 Missile or Torpedo Launch Tubes. Early firepower was geared more towards support during ground assault missions, but the Acclamator-II class featured better fire control systems for use in fleet operations.

11 hours ago, Sybreed said:

Is the Venator THAT outdated though? Only 19 years separate the prequels from the original movies. Most military equipment nowadays last for 30 years or more and considering the technology in Star Wars seems to have stagnated a bit (lightsabers and blasters have been used for hundred if not thousand of years), I don't see how the Venator is "outdated". It just fills a different role for what was needed at the time.

You're truly applying far more thought to this issue then was at its creation. The prequels' unbelievably radical designs destroyed any chance of creating a logical transition between the two decades. It looks foolish trying to justify anything related to their chronological relationships. Full stop.

It makes far more sense to treat them as ships from two distinctly different eras and make no more of it.

and now some ridiculous fun

8 hours ago, Arttemis said:

You're truly applying far more thought to this issue then was at its creation. The prequels' unbelievably radical designs destroyed any chance of creating a logical transition between the two decades. It looks foolish trying to justify anything related to their chronological relationships. Full stop.

It makes far more sense to treat them as ships from two distinctly different eras and make no more of it.

False. Since darth Mikey's take over, star wars is being treated like a seamless universe. I.E. Rebels and rogue one serving as transitionary pieces. That is why we can get the Arquitens, because of disney's take over. It might not seem logical, there might be some logistical issues, and there are probably gaps in the story, but that's life. and what is star wars but life in a galaxy far, far away?