Yeah. A true killer.

You could go with 3-3-3-4 for the Defender and 3-3-3-2 for the Avenger as well.

This would disqualify the Chiss Clawcraft for ever. Thats maybe no big deal - in the end it depents on how many waves FFG is going to release for this game. sooner or later we have all EU ships in and the game is complete.

But if FFG is going to release the Defender now with , lets say a 3-3-3-3, they would disqualify the Chiss Clawcraft as well as the Avenger. Yet again, maybe a 3-3-3-8 Defender would be a Imperial ship to come for the epic mode

Eight shields?

Come on now.

8 shields would be the correct value if you went with the original version of the TIE Defender as it appeared in the Lucas Arts TIE Fighter PC game, where it had 200 SBD shields. I detailed this in earlier posts in this thread. An X-Wing has 50 SBD, and a B-wing has 125 SBD. It was also faster and more maneuverable than the TIE avenger, which in turn was faster and more maneuverable than the TIE Interceptor.

In later games, the Defender was nerfed quite a bit. It was reduced to 100 SBD, its speed was reduced down to Avenger levels, and its maneuverability was reduced down to Interceptor levels.

Edit: There was only 1 version of the Avenger, and it had 100 SBD shields, so it would be 3/3/3/4. Starkiller and I have this ongoing debate about it, he thinks FFG may release it as 3/3/3/2 for balance reasons, rather than being true to the source material.

Also, they could release a 3/3/3/4 Avenger and a 3/2/3/4 Defender, they would simply fill different roles.

The "OMG TIE DEFENDER" reputation is justified by the original version. The nerfed version however was more of a general purpose ship, though still quite good. The two were really completely different ships in terms of overall capability. So FFG will have to choose what they want to release it as.

Either way, I want to see the Avenger with the proper stats, as it will not exclude the Defender from being useful in either its Uber form, or its Nerfed form.

I hadn't heard of the Clawcraft before you mentioned it, I just looked it up. I disagree that it would be made irrelevant by any of the above ships, it would fit a different role. Slower max speed, but really good maneuverability. You could give it only 1's 2's and 3's, but with a LOT of green on the dial, like all green for 1's and 2's, whites for 3's, and red for 2 and 3 K-turns.

Basically, it looks, stat-wise, like a TIE Avenger but slower, and probably with less shields.

Unrelated, but the speed and acceleration numbers on those pages are physically impossible. Oh well, nobody said it had to make sense. It would reach its maximum speed in atmosphere, from zero to 1000km/hr, in under 1/60th of a second.

The real issue is that there Clawcraft is it doesn't really for the time period of the game. They were created years later. Saying that I do like them.

Also, they could release a 3/3/3/4 Avenger and a 3/2/3/4 Defender, they would simply fill different roles.

The "OMG TIE DEFENDER" reputation is justified by the original version. The nerfed version however was more of a general purpose ship, though still quite good. The two were really completely different ships in terms of overall capability. So FFG will have to choose what they want to release it as.

Either way, I want to see the Avenger with the proper stats, as it will not exclude the Defender from being useful in either its Uber form, or its Nerfed form.

Oh common a 3/3/3/4 Avenger and a 3/2/3/4 Defender? The Defender would be worse than the Avenger stat-wise? You're not serious, are you? at least they should share the same stats. But the Defender should be superior at least in dial and armament!

In 'Empire at war' there are no Avengers (and no Assault Gunboats) and the only Advanced in game is Vader (.... and his laser barrage is pretty awesome btw).

But there are Defenders, and their role is to take on the big ships with ion salvos to cripple the shields, followed by proton torp salvos, to take ships systems down. So in this game the Defenders are the better TIE Bombers - the Bombers tend to die on enemy contact - Defenders don't. They swarm around the big ships and slowly kill them. (As for the epic mode )

I hope there will be an Avenger and a Defender (and the Gunboat) in a way that its really cool to play with.

Now if I'm not mistaken, the Defender is technically the superior fighter in comparison to the Avenger?

Again, that depends on which version of the Defender, since it got nerfed after its introduction. The original version in the TIE Fighter game was better than the Avenger in every regard except for price. The version in the later PC games was nerfed so it was more of a general purpose ship that was still respectably maneuverable (equivalent to a TIE Interceptor), but was inferior to the Avenger as a space superiority fighter. Basically think of the nerfed Defender as an Assault Gunboat (if you are familiar with that craft) that can fly like an Interceptor. The former is more inspiring, but the latter may translate better into the miniatures game.

The Defender wasnt nerfed to such a degree that it would be degraded to a gunboat type craft. I actully wouldnt even consider it being nerfed unless your talking about what it can do in Renegade squadron or the RTS games but you really cant count hose as being true to cannon because in the SWBF series they made all the ships fit in their vehicle class system.

As for why the Defender would be diffrent in SWTF and SWXA it prob has to do with tthe mods done to them. Every Imp squadron, group, wing, just about mods their ships, some more so than others. Though the shields look inferior in SWXA they actully are better, for dealing with fighters, than what they had in SWTF. The shield recharge rate is extremely higher for the Defender in SWXA. This mod could acount for the reduced speed and manuverability.

IThe majority of X-Wing's players would look at the Avenger and most likely say "they cut notches into the Advanced's wings and called it a new ship. What a money-grab."

The Avenger has a heck of a lot more mods than the wing cutouts:

Ovoid cockpit

Missile launcher "claws" on the sides of the cockpit

Teardrop shaped hyperdrive

Angular back section

Sleeker wing bracing

All of these combine to make it look FAR better than the Advanced. If anything, they'll look at it and go, "Now THIS is what the Advance x1 SHOULD have looked like!"

IIRC the ovoid cockpit was for one specific game and had to do with game engine limitations. It in no way is official. (in part because there's no official Avenger... The Decipher version from the old CCG was probably closest to how it should have looked. My favorite version is Ansel's [Fractalsponge] and is how I'm modeling mine. He may be "just a fan", but several of his designs are now canon)

Other than that, yes, a real Avenger model would look significantly different from an X1 and would be awesome to have.

Actully I think the cannon design is all above. Since they belonged to multiple elite squadrons they could mod the ship anyway they want. Skull squadron did mods on their cockpits to the degree I am talking about with the Defender and Avenger.

The TIE Defender! Lord of all fighters! Scourge of the Rebellion!

Despite the cards and the statements and the arguments I made about this craft.

Lets see when this ship will come and what stats it will have using a new POV.

This POV is about development.Development of starfighters within the Imerial Navy. And the development within FFG ... as long as it concerns X-Wing and the releases.

First we had the TIE Fighter and the TIE Advance only, like seen in Episode IV.

TIE Fighters are the cheap swarmers available by the thousends

TIE Advanced is the attempt to build a more resilant craft to cut the heavy losses, but it was a prototype only.

Then the Interceptor came, which used the Advanced Engines.

Before the Avenger was built, the Assault Gunboat was introduced, which came after the Lambda Shuttle.

And this would be next.

Lets make a quick try:

Assault Gunboat: 2-1-4-4

Chiss Clawcraft: 3-3-3-2 (not sure on this one - it may never be released)

TIE Avenger: 3-3-3-4

TIE Defender: 3-3-3-8 (maybe 2 shields less is still ok)

So the defender is the last ship in line (for now!). It may be released as one of the last ships to come.

As for the Bombers:

TIE Bomber: 2-2-6-0 (yeah im pretty sure about this)

(TIE Aggressor: 2-3-4-0 - 'light bomber' - not sure which stats would be best)

(TIE Oppressor: 2-3-3-4 - 'light bomber' - not sure which stats would be best)

TIE Scimitar Bomber ?-?-?-? (this one is ugly)

You looking at more than thousands of TIE Fighters lol. Going by only named planets systes and sectors in the GE from the Atllias, and the GE fleet structure from WOTC R.E.source book their are over 3 mil cap ships in the GE.

As for the Interceptor it uses difrrent engines than the Advanced. Infact it is considred to have the most advanced during the G.C.W. It also for the most part came after the Avenger its just the Avenger was not considred finished until after Hoth. The

Avenger and Defender are faster and more manuverable but the Interceptor has a better roll speed and better control because of its advanced thrust vectoring capabilities. Which is why it is the best dog fighter.

The Chiss star fighter should not be equal in fire power to the TIEs you have listed.

Lastly out of the Bombers you forgot the King bomber the TIE Interdictor. It carries four times the payload of a TIE Bomber. It prob could kill all life on a planet if it were to drop it whole payload. If neutron weapons were used by Rad Trooper before the Bomb run I def know it would because neutron radation boosts proton weapons destructive capabilites 100 fold.

I hadn't heard of the Clawcraft before you mentioned it, I just looked it up. I disagree that it would be made irrelevant by any of the above ships, it would fit a different role. Slower max speed, but really good maneuverability. You could give it only 1's 2's and 3's, but with a LOT of green on the dial, like all green for 1's and 2's, whites for 3's, and red for 2 and 3 K-turns.

Basically, it looks, stat-wise, like a TIE Avenger but slower, and probably with less shields.

Unrelated, but the speed and acceleration numbers on those pages are physically impossible. Oh well, nobody said it had to make sense. It would reach its maximum speed in atmosphere, from zero to 1000km/hr, in under 1/60th of a second.

I dont think it would be as manuverable as a Avenger. It can move in ways Avengers cant including being able to do a death bloosm.

As for the speeds and accelerations being impossible I can only half way agree with you. We cant do it now with what we got but in the future we can. The ultimate goal it to have geometric body the F-14s and SR-71s are steping stones to that destination. Having a ship that has the ability to perfectly change its shape depending on condtions exerted on it while traviling in a desired fasion is the way to go. Ships in SW do this with their shields which is why they can move that fast. The mk VII spartan armor kinda can do the same thing.

After that would come ships that are incorporeal.

As for the pilot sobmerge them in a breathable fluid and they can take the same amount of gs the craft can.

The epic big ships are rebel only?

I want an epic fighter, the Defender, to screw them! so 3-3-3-8

This would leave the Avenger for the standard mode with 3-3-3-4

Also, they could release a 3/3/3/4 Avenger and a 3/2/3/4 Defender, they would simply fill different roles.

The "OMG TIE DEFENDER" reputation is justified by the original version. The nerfed version however was more of a general purpose ship, though still quite good. The two were really completely different ships in terms of overall capability. So FFG will have to choose what they want to release it as.

Either way, I want to see the Avenger with the proper stats, as it will not exclude the Defender from being useful in either its Uber form, or its Nerfed form.

Oh common a 3/3/3/4 Avenger and a 3/2/3/4 Defender? The Defender would be worse than the Avenger stat-wise? You're not serious, are you? at least they should share the same stats. But the Defender should be superior at least in dial and armament!

In 'Empire at war' there are no Avengers (and no Assault Gunboats) and the only Advanced in game is Vader (.... and his laser barrage is pretty awesome btw).

But there are Defenders, and their role is to take on the big ships with ion salvos to cripple the shields, followed by proton torp salvos, to take ships systems down. So in this game the Defenders are the better TIE Bombers - the Bombers tend to die on enemy contact - Defenders don't. They swarm around the big ships and slowly kill them. (As for the epic mode )

I hope there will be an Avenger and a Defender (and the Gunboat) in a way that its really cool to play with.

The nerfed Defender was, by definition, worse than the TIE Avenger at dogfighting. The only way that it was better, was that it had a more flexible payload.

So I am absolutely serious, that if you want to release the nerfed version of the Defender, then by definition it is inferior to the Avenger. We discussed this a few pages back. Personally, I would rather see 3/3/3/8, and make it helluva expensive, rather than see a 3/2/3/4 reasonably priced multi-role Defender.

But either way, the Avenger is 3/3/3/4. There is no reason to nerf the Avenger just to keep it at parity with the Defender, if you are nerfing the Defender to begin with. You might as well nerf every other ship in the game to keep them at parity with the Avenger, while you're at it.

Avenger and Defender are faster and more manuverable but the Interceptor has a better roll speed and better control because of its advanced thrust vectoring capabilities. Which is why it is the best dog fighter.

Citation please. The Avenger and (uber version) Defender were both significantly more maneuverable than the TIE Interceptor.

It's not an issue of half agreeing with me , more like Sir Issac Newton and a few other fellows...

Trying to put this politely, but it seems that you fundamentally don't understand the basic physics involved or related calculus. If a ship had enough power to accelerate 3800G's then it wouldn't have a terminal velocity in atmo of only 1000km/h.

It was just an interesting observation coming from someone who (almost) has his PhD in engineering.

The epic big ships are rebel only?

I want an epic fighter, the Defender, to screw them! so 3-3-3-8

This would leave the Avenger for the standard mode with 3-3-3-4

I'm all for that. Well, except that I want Epic ships on both sides.

Which is why I'll be getting 2 Corvettes, to have a non tourney legal epic battle, with one "flagship" on each side.

You have a crush for the Avenger, don't you?

You sound like 'do what you wanna do with all the other ships, but dont touch my 3-3-3-4 Avenger!!'

It's ok. Personally I would prefere a Defender just like the 'unnerved' Version for the epic mode.

(and maybe a 'nerved' version for the 1/270 mode)

Well, so far everything has been released to be consistent with the "actual" capabilities, why would the Avenger and Defender be any different? The only difference with the Defender is that there are multiple versions of it floating around, so its hard to exactly pin down what it is supposed to be in the first place.

That said, the Avenger is awesome.

There are even multiple versions of the Avenger.

Oval cockpit - round cockpit, with beam weapon and without ...

The Defender came after the Avenger and was built to rule them all! No matter what stats he will have, it must be the superior fighter in the game.

There are even multiple versions of the Avenger.

Oval cockpit - round cockpit, with beam weapon and without ...

I'm not aware of different stats for the Avenger though.

That, right there, is the perfect argument for NOT releasing it in its nerfed form, which I have pointed out before. The ship never would have existed if it was in its nerfed form to begin with.

Also, nerfing the Avenger will not make the nerfed Defender suddenly better against the other 12+ ships that already exist. It would still just be a general purpose craft, and possibly inferior to a 33 point Bounty Hunter.

Lets see how FFG understands this matter someday ^^

... is there a known Avenger pilot anyway? ... except for Maarek?

It's not an issue of half agreeing with me , more like Sir Issac Newton and a few other fellows...

Trying to put this politely, but it seems that you fundamentally don't understand the basic physics involved or related calculus. If a ship had enough power to accelerate 3800G's then it wouldn't have a terminal velocity in atmo of only 1000km/h.

It was just an interesting observation coming from someone who (almost) has his PhD in engineering.

The speed value you are looking at is for the ship if its shields are not on OR if they are not changing shape. Needless to say their is prob something equv to the FAA that requires ships to not go at full exceleration on populated planets just to prevent that one ship from killing all the people on it.

With theoretical physics and Q.M. you will find all things are possible.

What type of Engineering are you studying and what corp do you plan on working for?

Avenger and Defender are faster and more manuverable but the Interceptor has a better roll speed and better control because of its advanced thrust vectoring capabilities. Which is why it is the best dog fighter.

Citation please. The Avenger and (uber version) Defender were both significantly more maneuverable than the TIE Interceptor.

Are you saying you werent around when I posted all those refrences when I was talking about the Interceptor...?

The Defender wasnt nurfed except in the SWBF series and maybe RTS but so was a crap load of ships and barely of the mechanics in that game reflect cannon capabilities..

Anyway S.W.T.N.E.G.T.V.&V. page 159 paragraph 2 line 13 it also has the most advanced targeting computer tied only with the Defender. 3rd paragraph line 3 2nd sentance.

SW.C.V. page 166 3rd sentance. It outpreforms all other craft in dogfights.

Sorry I cant fix my post above my responce is in the quote.

Since the Avenger came before the Interceptor SW.T.E.G.T.W. page 135 paragraph 7 it makes since that they dont have as good of a targeting computer nor as advanced engines.

SW.T.N.E.G.T.V.&V. page 155 paragraph 4. The Defender has the best manuverability esp in atmosphere but it says it is using the same engine design as a TIE Fighter just more advanced so it is not using the highly advanced stream projectors with self guided individual thrust vectoring controls the Interceptor has..

The speed value you are looking at is for the ship if its shields are not on OR if they are not changing shape. Needless to say their is prob something equv to the FAA that requires ships to not go at full exceleration on populated planets just to prevent that one ship from killing all the people on it.

Wait, are you actually going to try and argue this? You're, uh, not exactly qualified to discuss this, as apparent by your comments. It's obviously fine to not be an expert in something, but, trying to argue about it with someone who is probably about 2 orders of magnitude more well informed than you is just silly.

Electrical Engineering, with a crossover into acoustics, which is a subset of physics. I have been employed since 2006 for a large company that you have probably heard of.

Electrical Engineering, with a crossover into acoustics, which is a subset of physics. I have been employed since 2006 for a large company that you have probably heard of.

Sienar Systems?

Shhh don't tell anyone ;-)

The speed value you are looking at is for the ship if its shields are not on OR if they are not changing shape. Needless to say their is prob something equv to the FAA that requires ships to not go at full exceleration on populated planets just to prevent that one ship from killing all the people on it.

Wait, are you actually going to try and argue this? You're, uh, not exactly qualified to discuss this, as apparent by your comments. It's obviously fine to not be an expert in something, but, trying to argue about it with someone who is probably about 2 orders of magnitude more well informed than you is just silly.

With theoretical physics and Q.M. you will find all things are possible.

No it doesn't.

What type of Engineering are you studying and what corp do you plan on working for?

Electrical Engineering, with a crossover into acoustics, which is a subset of physics. I have been employed since 2006 for a large company that you have probably heard of.

The part about the shields is from wookieepedia and their refrence is the SW.C.C-S. As far as speed regulations I am just using common since. I took aviation classes with a Naval Nam vet, besides the fact he told me I should be teaching his class I am pretty sure I am qualified to talk about aircraft both realized and unrealized.

I think the problem here is that your using what is currently known about engineering and physics and are trying to impose those those same resrictions on the SW universe, that and you might not have red alot of the tech books for SW ships and didnt know the whole story from the get go Example of this was the bit about the shields having to be on and gemetrically changing. Lets face it with out that a ship trying to do that would destroy itself in our atmo.. They did a study couple years back they found more people like SW over ST but out of the two groups ST fans where alot more hard core about the ST lore than SW fans are about SW lore.

Any after reading what you said about Theoretical physics and such I realize you are just funing me so...

Guess theirs nothing left to do but talk about Defender values.

Guestion is would anyone want Red Star 1 to be in this game and if so how much points would it cost and how high should the stats be in this game since it is the most advanced/powerful/manuverable/fast TIE Defender.

Guess theirs nothing left to do but talk about Defender values.

Guestion is would anyone want Red Star 1 to be in this game and if so how much points would it cost and how high should the stats be in this game since it is the most advanced/powerful/manuverable/fast TIE Defender.

They could give the defender even an energy management system as an epic mode fighter

There are so many possibilities.

This is just a quick and rough estimation:

PS2 Defender at 3-3-3-8 : 45 points

Guess theirs nothing left to do but talk about Defender values.

Guestion is would anyone want Red Star 1 to be in this game and if so how much points would it cost and how high should the stats be in this game since it is the most advanced/powerful/manuverable/fast TIE Defender.

They could give the defender even an energy management system as an epic mode fighter

There are so many possibilities.

This is just a quick and rough estimation:

PS2 Defender at 3-3-3-8 : 45 points

Yeah I could see that.

Just a thought what do you think about Red Star 1 as being a tittle upgrade that adds 2 or 3 to all stats.

The game set up for using Red Star 1 would have three teams one player uses Red Star 1, one plays as Imps, the other plays as Rebs. The depoyment zone is the same except Red Star 1 starts in the middle.

The objective for the Imp and Reb player is to kill Red Star 1 within 6 rounds if they don't the Red Star 1 player wins. The other special rule for this match is that the Reb and Imp players get to replace their splashed fighters instantly in their deploy zone.

This mission is meant to imulate one of the training missions for Defender Pilots from the Stele chronicles only the person using Red Star 1 is the Countes and not Stele.