Jump To Lightspeed Archive

Thread: YT 1300 Front Guns

X-Rebel
Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:57 pm
#14






SpecWar1 wrote:

HOLY CRAP IS EVERYONE BLIND? I DID NOT ASK FOR THE FRONT WEAPON I JUST POINTED IT OUT AS AN OBSERVATION.


ITS A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DAMN GUN NOT A FREAKING FLAME FEST!



Freaking ignorant people I swear! Nothing better to do then flame a subject. Lets make it clear, dont have nothing constructive or dont want to have a grown conversation about an observation then dont freaking post! The damn title of this post is clear enough and if you dont want to discuss this then DONT. But other people would love to point out that yeah there was a gun in the front of that ship yet other people would argue that there wasnt.....







take a chill pill.


to have a good coversation is to get everyone point of view if its a flame or not, or just talking about something completely different but related. Like i had another observation myself i wanted to point out. Oh yes i could swaer i saw a front fireing gun myself.





gravaton loakee
I love my Ships
My krayt YT-1300 Retrofit Kimo My Grevious
My Arc-170
Noobs Rule
learn from yesterday
live for today
hope for tommorow
StressLess
Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:59 pm
#15






shootingiron wrote:
You bet, this is a dead horse. =)

We are not going to get a forward gun because the whole concept of an MP ship is that it be just that, multi player. As soon as you fit it with a forward gun, it can be turned into a big fighter. It would just violate the design concept, so it'll never happen. =)






I posted this response in another message thread but your post REALLY needed an answer:


On the soloing MP ships, remember SWG and JTL aren't training simultations. You are using virtual assets in a virtual universe, and within this universe those assets are real to it's inhabitants(and within this universe our characters are real, if you wound them don't they bleed? To us it's virtual, to them it's death, you got to think INSIDE the box). Most of the issues with taking any item in the universe and really making it your own are technical, there is only so much that can be made virtual.


With that in mind, I most certainly WOULD set up the YT-1300 to becapable of flying solo if I could truely make it my own and it disturbs me that the reason for not doing so is NOT technical but a design decision that is poorly thought out and implimented! I understand there are tradeoffs in a virtual universe, but this isn't one of them. I cannot see ANY self-respecting captain of a YT-1300 (or any MP ship for that matter) not wanting the ability to solo should the need arise (what if your crew isbusy withconduit fires, you can still save the ship, but no -you can't run the droid command to shunt cap to shields and buy that precious few seconds to jump to hyperspaceand your Operations Officer is handling plasma leaks in the cockpit and not at his station so he can't do it either!! Multi-Player DOESN'T mean we have to DIE TOGETHER!!).


If a station is empty, the pilot should have control of it. The home position of the turrets should be facing forward. And if there's an Operations Officewho isalso a Master Pilot, he should get control of piloting if the pilot leaves his seat (the Operations Officer is sitting in the Co-Pilot seat!! The Operations seatis actually the one BEHIND the Co-Pilot seat - if you're sitting in the chair you should do the job!). All of this not only makes sense but adds to the operational ability of the ships, and as I've stated before I really don't believe ANY self-repecting pilot who REALLY wants to make it back to port would have it any other way!!


It's not as if this would make these ships uber, heck it takes almost 500m to slow from full speed to a stop position (and a little longer distanceto get up to speed), and Granny in her 1975 Caddy has a better turn radius than the YT-1300! These things just are NOT as nimble as a single-player ship and their real power is that the turrets can be manned and have a 160 degree (or so) arc of fire and can load the biggest and baddest shields, reactors, weapons and armor!! Making them able to operate solo would not unbalance anything in JTL!! And if you do something like trade Prestige Points for the ability to solo a MP ship, wouldn't that make sense that a more experienced captain would have this ability (and give a reason for Presitge Points to actually exists)?





-- "I don't play this game because I WANT to play with other people, I play this game because every time I log in, the universe is different BECAUSE it is constantly being changed by other people (this is the basic way any Soloist thinks, if you understand it you understand WHY someone would pay the same money as someone who likes to group but instead chooses to solo)! Multi-Player is what brings the SWG world alive (real people, other players, make SWG so wonderfully dynamic). I just don't treat SWG like it was a chat room, I don't play to socialize and I resent forced grouping!"
X-Rebel
Tue Apr 26, 2005 12:04 am
#16

you know what.

i was watching empire strikes back the other night and teh falcon sure it move. It was very nimbble. Heck it did a 180 turn in a very small space, and it was very quick taking off. Not the slow to take off, slow down, and turn like a flying brick that we have all gotten to know in jtl hence the reason i never fly it except to shuttle myself around on the terminals. When the new ships come out and if the prices for them are not to high its going into cobwebs unless we get a xtra slot to put new ships into.



gravaton loakee
I love my Ships
My krayt YT-1300 Retrofit Kimo My Grevious
My Arc-170
Noobs Rule
learn from yesterday
live for today
hope for tommorow
SOL740
Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:41 am
#17

According to everything i've read, the guns that fire at the core in the 2nd death star are in fact 2 concussion missle launchers.


Its been quite a debate for a long time (in more places than the SWG community I might add).


But... somehow its become relatively common EUinformation that the Falcon's entire repertoire of weaponry is limited to the 2 turrets, 2 foward facing concussion missile launchers and 1 anti personel auto turret located under the right mandible. However the auto turret is not large enough to be used in space combat. Its basicly a light repeating blaster on a pivoting mount operated and aimed by the many slave droid brains aboard the Falcon (also another custom modification of Han's).


The question is,do you subscribe to the EU train of thought on the subject as portrayed in novels, pnp role playing books or vehicle guides? Or do you go by what it looks like in the movies? Though bear in mind in the movies... it just looks like 2 red ... things coming out the front. That doesnt necessarily mean that they are blasters. Hell they could be Star Trek photon torpedoes for all we know






---Darra Qol'Morru---

---GACKLEBATS MERCENARY COMPANY---

SheenaBrelya
Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:27 am
#18

How many times do you remember when there are two people at the controls of the Falcon and one of them has to get up and physically go to the turret station to use it?

It does not require a crew of six or eight to properly fly a POB ship. It requires three. Personally, I do not feel like 'three' is too high of a crew complement for a freighter to be able to use its armament to the fullest.

Shona
SpecWar1
Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:11 pm
#19






SOL740 wrote:

According to everything i've read, the guns that fire at the core in the 2nd death star are in fact 2 concussion missle launchers.


Its been quite a debate for a long time (in more places than the SWG community I might add).


But... somehow its become relatively common EUinformation that the Falcon's entire repertoire of weaponry is limited to the 2 turrets, 2 foward facing concussion missile launchers and 1 anti personel auto turret located under the right mandible. However the auto turret is not large enough to be used in space combat. Its basicly a light repeating blaster on a pivoting mount operated and aimed by the many slave droid brains aboard the Falcon (also another custom modification of Han's).


The question is,do you subscribe to the EU train of thought on the subject as portrayed in novels, pnp role playing books or vehicle guides? Or do you go by what it looks like in the movies? Though bear in mind in the movies... it just looks like 2 red ... things coming out the front. That doesnt necessarily mean that they are blasters. Hell they could be Star Trek photon torpedoes for all we know





You are absolutlly correct Sol740. My observation was wrong and yeah I should have looked it up. After your post I decided to go and prove you wrong and sure enough the truth appeared to me right in starwars.com. Here is the gist of what i found on the Millennium Falcon.


Millennium Falcon


A legendary starship despite its humble origins and deceptively dilapidated exterior, the Millennium Falcon has factored into some of the Rebel Alliance's greatest victories over the Empire. On the surface, the Falcon looks like any other Corellian freighter, with a saucer-shaped primary hull, a pair of forward cargo-gripping mandibles, and a cylindrical cockpit mounted to the ship's side.


Beneath its hull, though, the Falcon packs many powerful secrets. Its owners made "special modifications" on the freighter, boosting its speed, shielding and performance to downright illegal levels. Its weaponry has been upgraded to military-class quad laser turrets. To cover rapid escapes, the Falcon sports a ventrally mounted hatch-concealed antipersonnel repeating laser. Between its forward mandibles rest concussion missile launchers. The habitable interior of the vessel also has a few surprises, such as concealed scanner-proof smuggling compartments.

The Falcon pays a heavy price for its augmented performance, though. It is extremely recalcitrant and often unpredictable. Its reconditioned hyperdrive often fails. Its current captain, Han Solo, has even been seen to restart a failed ignition sequence with a hard rap on the bulkhead with his fist.

A vessel employed in the shady fringe business of smuggling, the Falcon was owned by Lando Calrissian before Solo won it in a heated sabacc game. Under Solo's command, the Falcon became a famous starship, completing the Kessel Run at unprecedented speeds. Solo and his first mate Chewbacca maintained the Falcon, constantly modifying and tinkering with it, coaxing the maximum speed from the ship.

This speed became quite useful as Solo and Chewbacca were drawn deeper into the Rebel cause, and the Falcon began flying missions for the Alliance. It was the Falcon that provided covering fire for Luke Skywalker's final attack run on the first Death Star. The Falcon became Princess Leia Organa's escape transport during the Battle of Hoth. During the decisive Battle of Endor, the Falcon flew point for the Alliance Fleet. Under Lando Calrissian's command, it soared into the heart of the incomplete Death Star, and delivered a missile volley that helped seal the Empire's fate.




END OF Discussion

Give the DEVS credit where its due.

They did it right!



Moone Shadow
Master Mercenary
Master Pirate
Shadow I (Firespray Class Patrol Attack Ship
www.bountyhunters.endofinternet.net
That which does not kill us makes us stronger

Venom1300
Tue Apr 26, 2005 10:26 pm
#20

I have played all 3 rogue squadorn games and in every game the falcon has had a forward cannon. Would be interesting if the y-wing in rogue leader had an auto-aim turret like the falcon did (they made you use the c-stick in rebel strike, pretty stupid IMO)
Shierre
Wed Apr 27, 2005 1:35 am
#21

My personal feeling is I would like to see a single either missile or weapons hardpoint added to the YT or have it just a touch more maneuverable then the opther MP ships to make up the lost missile point.. But also I can understand that after all its just one missile point.


Now as some parts of discussion has gone to movies and sometimes books, if you read the Han Solo Trilogy then that anti-personel weapon on bottom of the Falcon was Han's own unique idea ASWELL as both concussion missile launchers... if they wanted to make this a true stock YT then I am sorry to say that it should only have 2 turrets and thats it so I can live with it how it stands now.


I know this will have been touched on before but once again my personal opinion is when it comes to the crunch while a MP ships is indeed fun its still a loss of firepower if you have 4 people on it instead of four fighters. I vote for making turrets on MP ships hold 2 or 3 weapons a piece... after all a MP ship can dedicate alot more tonnage to a weapon, why not make em hit hard. Make a fighter have to think about 1 good hit could be a real problem not just a case of thinking "bah after another hit I will just shield shunt"


Ahh my 2 cents spent and ready to receive it back with big wads of fiery flame =o)... All just my opinion... I am happy as the game stands though.





Livonya
StressLess
Wed Apr 27, 2005 1:36 am
#22






SpecWar1 wrote:


END OF Discussion

Give the DEVS credit where its due.

They did it right!






Of course this doesn't address the issue of whether the turrets face to the front and can be operated from the cockpit!





-- "I don't play this game because I WANT to play with other people, I play this game because every time I log in, the universe is different BECAUSE it is constantly being changed by other people (this is the basic way any Soloist thinks, if you understand it you understand WHY someone would pay the same money as someone who likes to group but instead chooses to solo)! Multi-Player is what brings the SWG world alive (real people, other players, make SWG so wonderfully dynamic). I just don't treat SWG like it was a chat room, I don't play to socialize and I resent forced grouping!"
SpecWar1
Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:45 am
#23






Venom1300 wrote:
I have played all 3 rogue squadorn games and in every game the falcon has had a forward cannon. Would be interesting if the y-wing in rogue leader had an auto-aim turret like the falcon did (they made you use the c-stick in rebel strike, pretty stupid IMO)






Ok dosent matter what game had what..... What matters is what starwars.com says. That is the true cannon with EU as well. Facts that cannot be disputed. For the turret issue facing forward, know that I know the truth yeah it does kind of answer the issue. The cannons were never used unless they were being manned.


So all in all it was actually, concusion missles that sent Darth spinning out of control to allow for Luke to shoot the basket into the Deathstar, and it was indeed concusion missles that sent the second unfinished deathstar into oblivion. It closes all arguments on the subject. Read about the ship at starwars.com. I even looked it up in a book, The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessles. Two concussion tubes in the front mandbles of the Falcon.


So yeah end of discussion.




Moone Shadow
Master Mercenary
Master Pirate
Shadow I (Firespray Class Patrol Attack Ship
www.bountyhunters.endofinternet.net
That which does not kill us makes us stronger

SOL740
Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:23 pm
#24

well..... not to bring this up again... but actually what sent darth spinning was in fact han using the top turret gun from the cockpit


same thing with the rogue squadron games....



why do i get the feeling i just woke this post up again?



oh well... back to getting loaded drunk






---Darra Qol'Morru---

---GACKLEBATS MERCENARY COMPANY---

SOL740
Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:25 pm
#25

and yes for the record i do think it would be cool if you could shoot those guns while they're unmanned



likewise the A-wing supposedly can turn its side guns around to shoot behind it.


^argue you ravenous madmen






---Darra Qol'Morru---

---GACKLEBATS MERCENARY COMPANY---

X-Rebel
Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:28 pm
#26






SOL740 wrote:

well..... not to bring this up again... but actually what sent darth spinning was in fact han using the top turret gun from the cockpit


same thing with the rogue squadron games....



why do i get the feeling i just woke this post up again?



oh well... back to getting loaded drunk






yup in the scene when lando and they others are blowing up the death star i cant remember if the turret and the dish or just the dish got knocked off. I am going to go watch it again to see i am bored so that would waste my time instead of wating for the game to come back up.



gravaton loakee
I love my Ships
My krayt YT-1300 Retrofit Kimo My Grevious
My Arc-170
Noobs Rule
learn from yesterday
live for today
hope for tommorow
Page 2 of 3