2 hours ago, Piratical Moustache said:The problem I see with most Venator designs is that they're balanced against ISDs, not the VSD. The Victory Star Destroyer was the better brawler, and the Venator was the better carrier.
In my mind the Venator would be very similar to an Assault Frigate.
That's not a bad idea. I still would classify the Venator as a large, so maybe a bit beefyer.
16 minutes ago, cynanbloodbane said:That's not a bad idea. I still would classify the Venator as a large, so maybe a bit beefyer.
Thing is though... I feel you should also look at what you considered "quality" then, when in comparison to the "quality" of your Opponents...
The Venator, barring the Maleficent, is essentially the biggest, baddest ship out there... A Veritable Powerhouse of Death...
... but when your opponents are Sopwith Camels, an ME109 is also a Veritable Powerhouse 
Without an actual, direct comparison point, its REALLY hard to judge the combat power levels of the Clone Wars versus the Civil War and Beyond... What we can tell on the Empire side is things certainly got Bigger and Badder...
I figure that if you had an Assault Frigate Mk II in the Clone Wars Era, although it doesn't hold itself against a "Modern" Star Destroyer, its probably going to be LITERALLY the most powerful thing in the Galaxy...
This is because... No-one was actually really building Warships until the Clone Wars... I mean, a thousand generations of peace with just minor skirmishing at worst? I dare say they'd forgotten how to really build ships back then, and it was only the ramp up of the War that helped refine it... It probably took a Star Destroyer sized frame to fit everything you needed for an Assault Frigate, just becfause you didn't have that ship building efficiency, nor was it really required right away...
... but I also know that evolution is a touchy subject in Star Wars...
1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:Thing is though... I feel you should also look at what you considered "quality" then, when in comparison to the "quality" of your Opponents...
The Venator, barring the Maleficent, is essentially the biggest, baddest ship out there... A Veritable Powerhouse of Death...
... but when your opponents are Sopwith Camels, an ME109 is also a Veritable Powerhouse
Without an actual, direct comparison point, its REALLY hard to judge the combat power levels of the Clone Wars versus the Civil War and Beyond... What we can tell on the Empire side is things certainly got Bigger and Badder...
I figure that if you had an Assault Frigate Mk II in the Clone Wars Era, although it doesn't hold itself against a "Modern" Star Destroyer, its probably going to be LITERALLY the most powerful thing in the Galaxy...
This is because... No-one was actually really building Warships until the Clone Wars... I mean, a thousand generations of peace with just minor skirmishing at worst? I dare say they'd forgotten how to really build ships back then, and it was only the ramp up of the War that helped refine it... It probably took a Star Destroyer sized frame to fit everything you needed for an Assault Frigate, just becfause you didn't have that ship building efficiency, nor was it really required right away...
... but I also know that evolution is a touchy subject in Star Wars...
The Venator is admittedly an underarmed ship for its size:
•DBY-827 heavy dual turbolaser turrets (8)
•Medium dual turbolasercannons (2)
•Point-defense laser cannons (52)
•Tractor beam projectors (6)
•Heavy proton torpedo tubes (4) with 64 torpedoes total
Some sources say that the point-defense are turbolasers which would make its armament more impressive.
Compared to the Victory I which has:
•Quad turbolaser batteries (10)
•Double turbolaserbatteries (40)
•Concussion missile tube launchers (80)
•Tractor beam projectors (10)
I know that Armada is not making stats that directly match lore, but a Victory should be more powerful than the Venator as far as dice count is concerned.
Edited by Piratical Moustache1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:The Venator, barring the Maleficent, is essentially the biggest, baddest ship out there... A Veritable Powerhouse of Death...
How quickly we forget about the Providence (and the larger Separatist Dreadnought)... and the Lucrehulk... and possibly the Recusant...
12 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:I know that Armada is not making stats that directly match lore, but a Victory should be more powerful than the Venator as far as dice count is concerned.
However Wookiepedia, which would consider as fairly reliable, states that
„Despite possessing powerful weaponry and being on par with the Victory-class, the Venator-class was designed with an additional starfighter carrier role in mind...“
and, considering the Venators DBY-827 Turbolasers,
„In terms of firepower, these weapons rivaled the main battery on the later Imperial I-class Star Destroyers...“
Making me think that relative to the victorys 6 die/3 die layout a 3 die/5 die layout with a range layout akin to the armoured MC75 is totally reasonable (short range front arc and long range side arcs)
greetings
Made a title to go with the Venator and encourage a more aggressive style of play, as always still open to suggestions on balancing and wording.
13 hours ago, Atromix said:Made a title to go with the Venator and encourage a more aggressive style of play, as always still open to suggestions on balancing and wording.
Die, singular? Or do you mean, "any number of dice"?
I think it is too expensive.
5 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:I think it is too expensive.
Depending on intended effect, I may agree.
7 minutes ago, Do I need a Username said:Depending on intended effect, I may agree.
5 points if it is multiple dice.
It should say any number of dice, might have to adjust the points cost and text.
On 10/20/2018 at 8:59 PM, Drasnighta said:
... but I also know that evolution is a touchy subject in Star Wars...
...and some schools.
ahem.
I distinctly remember around the time of the first prequel film some of the promo material mentioning that the ships in the OT were (depending on faction) run-down relics or cheaply made fodder compared to the PT ships, but whether that was/is still true who knows.
As for 1000 years (generations?) of peace, I never took that to mean they forgot how to build (and command) effective warships, just that the wars had been local affairs, requiring only a local response, not the creation or maintaining of a centralised federal fleet on the scale we see in the Ep 2-3.
But it’s Star Wars, so it has all the internal consistency of 70’s Turkish remake, so in the end who knows.
The First Order’s military design philosophy seems to be 1) Can we make this bigger? 2) Can we make this blacker? 3) Well...get a move on then. 4) Yes, even if it has no close-range fighter defences. 5) No I haven’t heard the term “exploitable weak point”. 6) What’s a Death Star? 7) Do we have one? 8. Can we build one? 9) Only Bigger OR blacker you say? 10) Ok bigger. And give it a pleasing alpine/tundra exterior. I don’t know...hollow out a planet or something.
Edited by Bakura83I don't mind the idea of incremental/stagnating technological advances in Star Wars, that certain technologies like turbolasers haven't changed much means that turbolasers are about as good as they can get it, barring tweaks like faster recharging.