Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: Tie's have no hyperdrive
ZalTaur wrote:
I really don't like this break from continuity. There are other ways to get around the no hyperdrive, no shield issue. They might require more work. But there are ways.
Eh, what am I talking about. Guess we shouldn't be complaining about continuity and realism in a game where you have to shoot someone fifty times before they die.
if you have a better idea please tell us. It is all well and good to say that other ways exist - but unless you tell us what they are how can they be implemented and discussed? If you want to nerf us - give us a good spiff to replace it - If they take the Hyperdrives from Ties... read below
i have no probs with no hyperdrive as long as I get my mother ship - my Star Destroyer. Or they could issue all imperials Tie Defenders (with hyper, shields and cloak) ^_^ take your pick.!
Scobfro wrote:
Being a huge fan of XWA and any star wars game, think that the TIE's should definitly not have a hyperdrive. I also think that the ability to track rebel ships through hyperspace is not very good either. If an imperial ship gets into a duel with a rebel ship, they should not be allowed to enter hyperspace no matter what. I do like the idea of using the Star Destroyers in the sky as a transport. The gravity well should also be taken into account, as any spacer knows, if you jump in a gravity well, chances are you will end up as the newest wall decoration in that ship... SPPPLAAATTTTT... Also if i were an imperial, i would never pick a TIE, i would go with a generic or neutral craft, or any ship with shields.
Again:
No hyperdrives on TIE's.
No hyperspace jumping by any faction when in combat.
And SD's for TIE transport.
Ackehece wrote:
ZalTaur wrote:
I really don't like this break from continuity. There are other ways to get around the no hyperdrive, no shield issue. They might require more work. But there are ways.
Eh, what am I talking about. Guess we shouldn't be complaining about continuity and realism in a game where you have to shoot someone fifty times before they die.
if you have a better idea please tell us. It is all well and good to say that other ways exist - but unless you tell us what they are how can they be implemented and discussed? If you want to nerf us - give us a good spiff to replace it - If they take the Hyperdrives from Ties... read below
i have no probs with no hyperdrive as long as I get my mother ship - my Star Destroyer. Or they could issue all imperials Tie Defenders (with hyper, shields and cloak) ^_^ take your pick.!
HelRayzer wrote:
Metroid:
Well I have had enough of you being a jack ass to everyone so I will fill in the blanks?
For example: The TIE fighter is not aerodynamic. By any flight standards, this thing couldnt' even stay in the air.
No, you are wrong, the TIE is more manueverable than any starfigther (maybe not jedi starfighter) in the vaccum of space. It performs about the same as an X-wing in atmosphere. If you don't belive me pick up the X-Wing series books.
The ketch is, Starwars engines work on repulsor technology
Um no, they use repulsors to take off, land, and for evasive manuevering, as in hovering over a trench or somthing like that. Again see X-wing Series
Using this type of a technology, you could make ANYTHING fly. As I said earlier, you could strap an engine to a brick and it would fly. Your arguing the hull of the ship couldn't withstand the Hyperspace- why? Do you have ANYTHING from the Starwars series, or even the EU, that shows what kind of impact hyperspace even has on a ships hull?
Do you understand G-forces. Imagine the G-forces created on a spacecraft (due to acceleration) going from slow to lightspeed velocity. X-wings and other ships have internal compensators for the pilots, but the hull takes the load. See any physics book on kinematic forces
A) Yourassuming the helmets TIE pilots wear aren't self contained life support systems.
B) Your also assuming the TIE's themselves lack life support. Where do you get this information from? Please, feel free to share
I'm not assuming anything. Read the X-wing series books. It is plainly stated that the TIE pilots have no life support.
AND you had the odacity to say a LIFE SUPPORT system would be needed... COME ON
I'll assume that means audacity and say, what if you have a hyperdrive failure in a distant galaxy with out being able to communicate. Oh well you are dead. No time to repair it because you don't have life support.
Realisticly, a starship can be anything.
Well not the TIE's, because they are used in space and in atmosphere. So they have to have good enough flight characteristics in atmospehre which means a brick won't fly really. The best example of a bad aerodynamic airplane design in the F-117 Nighthawk. It's engines are overpowered to make up for this, but hey it is stealth and that is why it is not aerodynamic.
NO! Imperial players MUST do xxxx because the MOVIES say standard TIE doesn't have hyperdrive!" is just plain lack of common sense
Um, no one is forcing this down the devs throat or yours. This was simply an intelligent conversation before you started with the insults. And as I have shown you obviously have no knowledge of what you are saying. So your little insults are nothing.
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:15 AM
So I am editing other stupid stuff you have said so bear with me.
I'm tired of this thread, the "No hyperdrive for TIEs!" crowd just ignores any post that debunks them completely and keeps posting reasons why they shouldn't have hyperdrive.
You haven't provided a post to "debunk" us. Where is it at? I would be interested in reading a thoughtful and factual response to this
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:26 AM
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:26 AM
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:28 AM
THREE CHEARS FOR HELRAYZER
HIP HIP!
HIP HIP!
HIP HIP!
), then that might work because htey could join those ships for hyperspace, but that feature isn't in right now.
Obi-Wan-Keneli wrote:
HelRayzer wrote:
For example: The TIE fighter is not aerodynamic. By any flight standards, this thing couldnt' even stay in the air.
No, you are wrong, the TIE is more manueverable than any starfigther (maybe not jedi starfighter) in the vaccum of space. It performs about the same as an X-wing in atmosphere. If you don't belive me pick up the X-Wing series books.
Realisticly, a starship can be anything.
Well not the TIE's, because they are used in space and in atmosphere. So they have to have good enough flight characteristics in atmospehre which means a brick won't fly really. The best example of a bad aerodynamic airplane design in the F-117 Nighthawk. It's engines are overpowered to make up for this, but hey it is stealth and that is why it is not aerodynamic.
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:15 AM
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:26 AM
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:26 AM
Message Edited by HelRayzer on 05-19-2004 09:28 AM
THREE CHEARS FOR HELRAYZER
HIP HIP!
HIP HIP!
HIP HIP!
Message Edited by Metroid on 05-19-2004 09:19 PM
Metroid wrote:
OHMSS225 wrote:
Heh. I'll let HelRayzer take this one. I'm hogging all the fun.
Metroid wrote:
You haven't proven jack squat, this post you just made is an example of it. Your failing completely and everyone can SEE it. I keep posting because it's beyond me how you can continue to support your "theories" without using ANY logic whatsoever.
Please, feel free to provide ANY evidence that a TIE fighter couldn't support the power usage of a hyperdrive, after being modified. FEEL FREE. We're waiting!
Translation: "I can't support my pointless ranting".
No. Translation: "I had a date tonight so I had better things to do than argue back and forth all night with some kid that doesn't even have a clue of the basic working of a TIE fighter or Star Wars lore."
I'm not continuing this arguement. We've disproved youmany times with loads of proof from many different mediums. We've made our arguement and did it well, when you have only offerred hypotheticals and absolutely no proof or sources whatsoever. Now you're only doing this to aggrivate people, which is against forum rules. If you keep it up, I'll report you.
Message Edited by OHMSS225 on 05-20-2004 01:41 AM
OHMSS225 wrote:
I'm not continuing this arguement. We've disproved youmany times with loads of proof from many different mediums. We've made our arguement and did it well, when you have only offerred hypotheticals and absolutely no proof or sources whatsoever. Now you're only doing this to aggrivate people, which is against forum rules. If you keep it up, I'll report you.
Message Edited by OHMSS225 on 05-20-2004 01:41 AM
Blah blah blah, so you came back to say that someone else proved me wrong.. yet you left it for someone else to prove. Wow, that's.. nice man, your like a republican, only your less bearable.
Congratulations, you've officially topped my stupid people list.
I'm still waiting for you to prove a TIE couldn't support a hyperdrive, you haven't proven squat.