Was just relooking at the CR90's fire arcs, and wanted to throw it out here. Considering that only the top and bottom turrets of the craft can fire to the forward arc, and there are more lasers on the sides instead, isn't it weird that the front arc is more powerful than the sides? Might look better with a red shifted from the front to the side instead.

Seems to me like ffg did this solely in anticipation of ackbar?

IMO

The weapons you can see, being on the side, audio don't make sense with the actual design purpose of the ship. Wish is blockade running. FFGs design makes more sense there

The weapons you can see, being on the side, audio don't make sense with the actual design purpose of the ship. Wish is blockade running. FFGs design makes more sense there

But aside from design philosophy, none of the star wars ship designs would make perfect sense, ffg seem to follow star wars lore in giving ship arcs?

The weapons you can see, being on the side, audio don't make sense with the actual design purpose of the ship. Wish is blockade running. FFGs design makes more sense there

Umm, i don't really geddit. How does front arc placement of guns fall in line with blockade running design philosophy? I thought blockade runners work on speed and stealth to breakthrough?

But aside from design philosophy, none of the star wars ship designs would make perfect sense, ffg seem to follow star wars lore in giving ship arcs?

Speed and Stealth, yes.

But Guns able to fire to the front to "punch" through as required.

Broadsides are worthless when your target is a narrow cone in front of y ou.

Was just relooking at the CR90's fire arcs, and wanted to throw it out here. Considering that only the top and bottom turrets of the craft can fire to the forward arc, and there are more lasers on the sides instead, isn't it weird that the front arc is more powerful than the sides? Might look better with a red shifted from the front to the side instead.

Seems to me like ffg did this solely in anticipation of ackbar?

IMO

Take the ISD/VSD. Why do they have those arc layouts? Makes no more sense than this.

I think you need more midichlorians. That's how you get more realisms.

This has puzzled me a little. If only because the arcs for the X-Wing CR-90 do favor the broadsides.

Was just relooking at the CR90's fire arcs, and wanted to throw it out here. Considering that only the top and bottom turrets of the craft can fire to the forward arc, and there are more lasers on the sides instead, isn't it weird that the front arc is more powerful than the sides? Might look better with a red shifted from the front to the side instead.

Seems to me like ffg did this solely in anticipation of ackbar?

IMO

Take the ISD/VSD. Why do they have those arc layouts? Makes no more sense than this.

Actually, the angular and slightly conical design of the ISD/VSD means that most of it's firepower is indeed directed to the front. If anything, it should actually be a narrower cone.

Was just relooking at the CR90's fire arcs, and wanted to throw it out here. Considering that only the top and bottom turrets of the craft can fire to the forward arc, and there are more lasers on the sides instead, isn't it weird that the front arc is more powerful than the sides? Might look better with a red shifted from the front to the side instead.

Seems to me like ffg did this solely in anticipation of ackbar?

IMO

Take the ISD/VSD. Why do they have those arc layouts? Makes no more sense than this.

Actually, the angular and slightly conical design of the ISD/VSD means that most of it's firepower is indeed directed to the front. If anything, it should actually be a narrower cone.

Most of the heavy batteries are located to either side of the command structure, so main batteries are indeed strongest in an very narrow front arc, but with overall good side coverage.

But what did we get? Large front arcs, and very weak side arcs.

So I'm thinking they do give some consideration to how ships look, but there are also gameplay considerations.

While bone picking, put in my two sense, isd and vsd(if not all imps) should be a cross firing arc vs an X. Would make more sense the way the turbos are set up, but would it be balanced? No.

The CR90 wasn't originally designed to be a blockade runner, only the Rebels started using it that way.

It was used as a blockade runner in the clone wars.....

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the two turrets above and below the bridge are heavier turbolasers than the four side broadside turrets. Which would be consistent with a blockade runner, heavy guns forward to punch a hole and the sides to keep it open, attack fighters.

The CR90 was originally going to be the Millennium Falcon and the side turrets where going to be the escape pods that were referred to when it was brought on board the Death Star.

GL didn't like the design and told ILM to change it and make the "Millennium Falcon" the blockade runner, that is why the CR90 model was so big because it was going to have a lot more screen time.

The ILM crew converted the escape pods into turrets by sticking tubes onto them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the two turrets above and below the bridge are heavier turbolasers than the four side broadside turrets. Which would be consistent with a blockade runner, heavy guns forward to punch a hole and the sides to keep it open, attack fighters.

The top and bottom turrets are supposed to be turbo lasers, the side turrets are supposed to be laser cannons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the two turrets above and below the bridge are heavier turbolasers than the four side broadside turrets. Which would be consistent with a blockade runner, heavy guns forward to punch a hole and the sides to keep it open, attack fighters.

The top and bottom turrets are supposed to be turbo lasers, the side turrets are supposed to be laser cannons.

If ffg is treating the top and bot as immovable forward facing turbolasers, then the current fire arcs would perhaps make more sense.

A second thought that comes to mind is that the front and back fire arcs should also be the same then

Not really. The engine block could mess with LOS.

Also, they went with theme on the ISD. The triangular shape is supposedly to allow firepower to be concentrated forward, but the placement of those 8 big cannons made it so you can't really fire them all at a single target in front of the ISD.

all the weapons are mounted on turrets and can fire on 1/2 or more of a sphere the the whole idea of the 4 firing arcs is only something contrived for the game. if anything all the weapons on all the ships can fire forward that's the whole point of the SD wedge.

if any thing there should only be 3 firing arcs rear and a left and right side/front that goes to the bow of the ship straight out the front.

Not really. The engine block could mess with LOS.

Also, they went with theme on the ISD. The triangular shape is supposedly to allow firepower to be concentrated forward, but the placement of those 8 big cannons made it so you can't really fire them all at a single target in front of the ISD.

Actually, if you look at the angles of the FFG model, all the turrets can superfire forward. Tilting down makes this even easier.

For this reason only I prefer the "non-canon" proportions of the FFG model to the "real" ISD.