Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Manchu wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Like its ugly...

Agreed but no moreso than the fugly HWK-290, which showcases all of the foibles of 90s video cards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Skipray looks fine to me. It's not the Suncrusher.

Or the K-Wing, blarg.

OOhhhhh god don't get me started on the HWK-290... but the K-Wing? That IS sexy in a fugly sort of way...

But the suncrusher... wtf, I don't even... besides the fact that its like... the Mary Sue of fething spaceships, its shape/design makes absolutely no logical sense... how the hell does the thing even land??

As to the idea for production, I fully disagree. It would have been MUCH easier for Incom to have supplied the Rebels with established ARC machines and tooling than to have given them a brand new design and make it into production with material support. I do fleet logistics for a living, trust me when I say that with the Rebel's need for cost-effective and easy to access craft...if the ARC wasn't inferior in quality/ability in general...it would be there in lieu of at least one of the major craft used by the Rebellion(whichever one you want to assume the ARC could take on the role of).

I would disagree. First, ARC-170s seemingly ceased production about 20 BBY (once the Empire made the doctrinal change which rendered them doctrinally obsolete within the Imperial Navy), the Rebellion didn't kick up until about 2 BBY, so we're talking about 18 years of cold production, I doubt Incom or any real world manufacturer of aircraft, etc. would leave a production facility sitting around ready to go and unused for that long a period of time. Likely the facilities were converted for other purposes and a new design was produced, and I'm sure production tooling etc. for the ARC-170 weren't retained (at least not for that long), because that would come with its own costs as well. No matter what, an ARC-170 production line is very unlikely to have been in a 'ready-to-go' state as of 2 BBY whereas other more current designs might have been ready (or far enough along in development to make it a moot point), and it would have cost additional money to convert production over to the ARC, which (as per your statement) wouldn't necessarily have been cost-effective (or for that matter time-efficient). In any case, we do know that it was used during the GCW on both sides.

Also, the Rebellion didn't use Incom/Subpro exclusively (and given it was a joint venture and their partnership evidently ended at some point during the Clone Wars, its possible that they weren't able to manufacture them at all anymore), beyond that the X-wing wasn't technically produced by Incom, only designed by them until the Rebellion 'liberated' it.

Its also entirely possible that the ARC-170 fulfilled such a niche design space ("Aggressive Reconnaissance") that the Rebellion never had use for that specific type of craft in great numbers (meaning that whatever examples of the type they already had access to were sufficient for the Rebellions needs).

chaos0xomega wrote:
No matter what, an ARC-170 production line is very unlikely to have been in a 'ready-to-go' state as of 2 BBY whereas other more current designs might have been ready (or far enough along in development to make it a moot point), and it would have cost additional money to convert production over to the ARC, which (as per your statement) wouldn't necessarily have been cost-effective (or for that matter time-efficient). In any case, we do know that it was used during the GCW on both sides.

Also, the Rebellion didn't use Incom/Subpro exclusively (and given it was a joint venture and their partnership evidently ended at some point during the Clone Wars, its possible that they weren't able to manufacture them at all anymore), beyond that the X-wing wasn't technically produced by Incom, only designed by them until the Rebellion 'liberated' it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the Rebels started using the X-wing, didn't they have just the plans and a handful of prototypes (most of which got trashed in short order)? So both ships needed their production built from the ground up to be used in any numbers. If the ARC wasn't outdated, wouldn't it have been smarter for the Rebels to go for the tried and tested fighter? The ARC would also have to have been widely available, as both sides used it- implying that it was at least somewhat easy to get, unless it's use was some kind of one-off (in which case every fighter would qualify to have been "used by both sides"). Parts likewise would have had to either be scrounged (implying availability) or improvised (suggesting a rugged, easy-to-repair design), both of which would have been very logistically useful.

So from a Logistics standpoint, I do not see how the mechanical elements of the ARC could have been worse than the X-wing. I could see the Rebels deciding that it was to manpower intensive to have 3 "Pilots" in a ship, but, assuming that each "pilot" was qualified to fly their own fighter, you just tripled the number of Astromechs you need to scrounge.Likewise, you now need three times the maintenance hours to keep those fighters running, so unless the ARC was stupidly high maintenance you are not getting ahead by splitting the crew.

This leaves us with three options.

1) The rebels decided their line fighter on a coin toss between two equally good fighters.
2) The Rebels were so determined to not be the Empire they rejected a superior fighter for purely aesthetic reasons.
3) The ARC was in some way inferior to the X-wing.


I like option 3.

Funny, option four was better I thought:

I could see the Rebels deciding that it was to manpower intensive to have 3 "Pilots" in a ship, but, assuming that each "pilot" was qualified to fly their own fighter, you just tripled the number of Astromechs you need to scrounge.Likewise, you now need three times the maintenance hours to keep those fighters running, so unless the ARC was stupidly high maintenance you are not getting ahead by splitting the crew.

How about the plethora of other scraped together smugglers, volunteers, and whatever crummy ship they brought to the party? I would wager we don't see them because they were put on other assignments. As you are all hell bent on them being 'obsolete', let's pause a moment and think about that. The Rebels didn't have CRAP! They are a resistance movement who's best defensive tactic for a better part of the war is to run the flip away. You think just because some engineer or logistics guy says "Well, the ARC-wings aren't that good anymore blah blah blah" they are going to be like "Oh well, scrap 'em I guess. har-d-har!" They need ships enough to cover the freaking galaxy for gaks sake. Any ship deemed 'obsolete' that still flies and can fire rocks at the bad guys is solid gold to some sci-fi-fantasy resistance movement that doesn't have anything else to really work with and is under attack by a vastly larger force of oppression which is out to kill them.

Likely conversation between Leia Organa and her Quartermaster.
Leia: So the ARC-wing is no good huh?
Quartermaster: Not really. Not enough men to man them all. Kinda slow-ish.
But it flies? And shoots in two directions? And has Hyperdrive?
Yeah, its got those. Guns do have some bite I suppose. I guess the crews can handle their own routine maintenance, being all old familiar systems and what not. And that were in the Star Wars universe where every joe blow some how knows how to fly a starship and maintain it.
Okay well, lets put some with the transports for escorts but only pilots and tail gunners and one R2 unit each, got to be frugal. They get the same things the Y-wings get.
What if they get shot to hell?
Then while they are busy exploding, those vital supplies have a chance, and our offense capable ships are elsewhere! We can collect the salvage later with some of our civilian assets. Now what else we got?
Clever, let the Imps blast them into spare parts and save on labor. Okay but we still have some extra ARCs, lots left over from the clone wars and all.
Really? Well deploy the rest as picket ships to protect our Main fleets and bases. You did say we can get their sensors to work right?
Sure, will do. Alright, so, what do you want to do with these V-wings we found in the back of the cave we're hiding in? One of the boys already fired up their engines for some extra heat in here. And Jimbo Comethopper there used the lasers to carve the Alliance insignia on the wall for us.
MOAR SHIPS! IT'S LIKE CHRISTMAS!

Just the way the situation felt to me y'know?

chaos0xomega wrote:
I would disagree. First, ARC-170s seemingly ceased production about 20 BBY (once the Empire made the doctrinal change which rendered them doctrinally obsolete within the Imperial Navy), the Rebellion didn't kick up until about 2 BBY, so we're talking about 18 years of cold production, I doubt Incom or any real world manufacturer of aircraft, etc. would leave a production facility sitting around ready to go and unused for that long a period of time.

But according to you technology was completely static over that time period. You close production lines in the real world because technology keeps moving on and a fighter from 20 years ago wouldn't be worth restarting. But if an older design is just as good as it was when it was first introduced then the opposite is true: you keep the production lines in storage while looking for a new buyer, and keep the ability to meet a new order as soon as you get one. And remember, most production is automated, unlike real-world factories where you have lots of hand tools and skilled worker knowledge to worry about. Turn the droids off, have the maintenance people sweep the dust off every few years, and a hundred years later you can start producing top-tier fighters again as soon as you hit the "on" switch.

Its also entirely possible that the ARC-170 fulfilled such a niche design space ("Aggressive Reconnaissance") that the Rebellion never had use for that specific type of craft in great numbers (meaning that whatever examples of the type they already had access to were sufficient for the Rebellions needs).

This doesn't make any sense because the rebellion was desperate for fighters in the early days. If it was possible to dust off a pile of surplus ARC-170s and have them be more than a suicide mission for their unfortunate pilots then they would have done so. The ARC-170s absence in a time period where the Y-wing and Z-95 were kept in service despite being too old to be top-tier fighters is a pretty strong argument that the ARC-170 was obsolete.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KnuckleWolf wrote:
Any ship deemed 'obsolete' that still flies and can fire rocks at the bad guys is solid gold to some sci-fi-fantasy resistance movement that doesn't have anything else to really work with and is under attack by a vastly larger force of oppression which is out to kill them.

Unless the ships in question are so hopelessly obsolete that it would be like matching the first WWII-era jets against F-22s, and the only thing using them would accomplish would be getting valuable pilots killed. The rebels were desperate, not suicidal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
None of those features speak to superior technology, just a better design, especially considering that you can find ships with bigger engines,more guns, astromechs, larger size, etc. etc. etc. throughout the timeline, though admittedly none of them are necessarily the package deal that the x-wing is (which is why the design was so successful, because it was a perfect blend of various performance measures to give it longetivity against much more modern designs that emphasized differing performance characteristics).

The problem with this argument is that technological stasis also implies design stasis. If fighter technology has been pretty much constant for hundreds (or even thousands) of years in a setting with as many different competing starship engineers as the Star Wars galaxy then someone is inevitably going to find the perfect fighter design. There's no room for someone to come along later and magically discover the perfect multi-role fighter that replaces everything that came before it. The only way that can happen is if you have major technological changes and everyone is scrambling to find the best way to take advantage of them.

@Crazy Carnifex - When the Rebels first started using the X-Wing they had 4 prototypes, specs, and the entire engineering/design team from Incom to assist them in setting up their own production of them. Additionally, after the initial acquisition of prototypes, the Rebellion also raided an Incom production facility and got their hands on a large number of production models.

As for availability, they might not have been easily available. Realize that the Z-95 was in production at least 10 years prior to the Clone Wars, the ARC-170 went into production just prior to the Clone Wars, but evidently didn't see widespread use until later on. Theres also the fact that its a joint Incom/Subpro design, and the two ended their partnership at the start of the Clone Wars, so its entirely possible that there simply werent enough ARC-170s and/or parts left by the time of the GCW to utilize them as a front-line combatant, whereas there were enough Z-95s produced over a 20-40 year timeframe that they were still available in sufficient quantities to be used by the Rebellion. You could argue that this should be reason enough for them to not be included in the game, but then I will point you to the TIE Advanced, which was only ever produced in large enough quantities to outfit just a handful of squadrons, so much so that a replacement for Vaders fighter wasn't actually available and it had to be recovered and repaired after crash landing in the wilderness.

The Empire continued to use them at least until they could be replaced by other craft (which generally speaking were lightly armed, armored, and lacked hyperdrives, so good luck arguing that the Empire faced them out because they were technologically inferior), and even then it seems that they went through the trouble of putting at least some of them into storage (and IIRC actually continuously maintaining them) after refurbishing and upgrading them, hence their use after the death of the Empire by some Imperial factions, why an organization like the Empire, with access to pretty much whatever damned starships they damned please would go through the trouble of preserving something that would be regarded as 'obsolete' is otherwise beyond me, unless of course the explanation is that they weren't obsolete, just different, and they saw potential uses for the craft at a later date. I suppose the same can be said about production, why they would bother storing/maintaining these things if they had the option to build more is also beyond me (although I think its implied that the whole operation is somewhat hush-hush, so maybe that simply wasn't an option to the Empire?)

In any case, considering that the Empire would have had the majority of the fighters, seeing as how it (politically and militarily) succeeded their primary user, the Rebellion possibly only had enough for limited use, but we don't know for sure because that fluff evidently hasn't been written yet, all we know is that they did, in some capacity, utilize them at some point.

As for maintenance and logistics, well although I'm championing the ARC-170, I highly doubt a single ARC-170 would be a match against 3 separate starfighters, or even comparable to 3 separate starfighters in terms of anti-capital capabilities (even though the ARC-170 wasn't designed to be an actual fighter, and seemingly was intended for use against bigger/larger/heavier opponents, it seems that thats how they were overwhelmingly used), so you have to consider economy of force in that application. Also, it seems the rebellion didnt have much of a shortage of astromech droids (or 'astromech' droids considering that they mostly used repurposed agricultural R4 models), and in general I would assume that the cost of a single droid is far less than the cost of a human life, given how ubiquitous droids seem to be within the Star Wars universe.

As for your 3 options, it kinda seems to ignore a lot of other plausible alternatives, no? I have no doubt that the ARC-170 was in some way inferior to the X-wing, especially given that they are NOT intended to fill the same role (at least from the perspective of designers intent), that doesn't necessarily mean that this inferiority (likely in the form of acceleration and maneuverability) was the reason why it wasn't used.

I also feel the need to go back to the Z-95/X-wing design lineage.

We have the Z-95 which entered production sometime prior to the Battle of Naboo
The ARC-170 which entered production just prior to the Clone Wars (about 10 years after Naboo)
The Clone Z-95 which entered production at some point during the Clone Wars (probably 2-3 years after the ARC-170), which despite its name is a very different, although similar, design to the Z-95
The X-Wing which entered production about 20 years after the Clone Wars.

Now, the argument, it seems, is that the X-wing replaced the Clone Z-95 which in turn replaced the ARC-170 which in turn replaced the Z-95 (despite the fact that the ARC-170 and Z-95/Clone Z-95 fill roles in the design space, but whatever, maybe the Republic, after 1000 years of peace, misunderstood what was required for a successful space-superiority fighter and
thought the ARC-170 was good for the job even though it was better suited for hunting big ships). The ship we're getting in a few months (hopefully) is the original design, or a derivative thereof, as in the design that preceded the ARC-170. So, even though the original Z-95 never actually saw service with the Republic, it was technically 'replaced' by the ARC-170... does it make sense that we have the X-wings grand-daddy in game, but not the X-wings err... mother/uncle (assuming the Clone Z-95 is the X-wings actual daddy)? If the ARC-170 replaced the Z-95 and would thus be technologically superior (as the argument seems to go), then why is it we get the really obsolete ship and not the slightly less obsolete ship? It makes no sense to me.

@Knucklewolf, I wouldn't really say the Rebels didn't have crap, if anything the movies and canon seems to imply that the Rebels, at least by the Battle of Yavin, and definitely by the Battle of Endor, were actually very resourceful, enough so that they had designed and produced their own native fighter designs in the form of the A-Wing and the B-Wing, as well as the use of Mon Calamari cruisers which were also native designs (unlike the X-wing which was actually an abandoned Imperial design).

 Peregrine wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I would disagree. First, ARC-170s seemingly ceased production about 20 BBY (once the Empire made the doctrinal change which rendered them doctrinally obsolete within the Imperial Navy), the Rebellion didn't kick up until about 2 BBY, so we're talking about 18 years of cold production, I doubt Incom or any real world manufacturer of aircraft, etc. would leave a production facility sitting around ready to go and unused for that long a period of time.

But according to you technology was completely static over that time period. You close production lines in the real world because technology keeps moving on and a fighter from 20 years ago wouldn't be worth restarting. But if an older design is just as good as it was when it was first introduced then the opposite is true: you keep the production lines in storage while looking for a new buyer, and keep the ability to meet a new order as soon as you get one. And remember, most production is automated, unlike real-world factories where you have lots of hand tools and skilled worker knowledge to worry about. Turn the droids off, have the maintenance people sweep the dust off every few years, and a hundred years later you can start producing top-tier fighters again as soon as you hit the "on" switch.

Again, I direct you to the SR-71 and the F-22, neither of those production lines were shut down because technology kept moving ahead (at least as far as we know), they were shut down for political reasons in the former, and a combination of political and business reasons in the latter (and interestingly enough, the apparent reason that the Empire moved away from Republic-era hyperdrive/shield equipped designs in the first place was evidently largely political). Beyond that, say they did keep the ARC-170 production open and it continued to sell, now every Joe and his cousin in the galaxy is flying them... great... so are you going to keep producing these things that everyone already has, or are you going to introduce a new model with new features thats all shiny and new and makes people hand over more money for something (because its new)? Its what the car industry does year after year, it doesn't make a car built 20 years ago technologically obsolete, it just makes it old (though that might change given the implementation of new EPA standards, and attempted alt-fuel development, etc.).

Beyond that, your assertion that you just turn the droids off and have maintenance sweep the dust off is pretty ridiculous from a business standpoint, the money you would lose by not utilizing that facility and those droids, let alone the costs to maintain the facilities, etc. wouldn't make that a profitable venture in the slightest.

This doesn't make any sense because the rebellion was desperate for fighters in the early days. If it was possible to dust off a pile of surplus ARC-170s and have them be more than a suicide mission for their unfortunate pilots then they would have done so. The ARC-170s absence in a time period where the Y-wing and Z-95 were kept in service despite being too old to be top-tier fighters is a pretty strong argument that the ARC-170 was obsolete.

Makes perfect sense, we haven't seen much of the Rebellions early days, that is still forthcoming from Disney, etc. so you can't really say that they didn't utilize surplus 170s in such a manner. And again, the Y-wing was never a top tier fighter, it was never intended to be a top tier fighter, its a bomber which the rebellion repurposed as a strike-fighter. Similarly the Z-95 isn't a top tier fighter because its old, it isn't a top tier fighter because it wasn't a great design to begin with.

Unless the ships in question are so hopelessly obsolete that it would be like matching the first WWII-era jets against F-22s, and the only thing using them would accomplish would be getting valuable pilots killed. The rebels were desperate, not suicidal.

You'd be surprised actually. While those F-22s can fly faster and higher and carry more punch, they would have a lot of difficulty actually bringing weapons to bear against those old WW2 fighters, simply because they fly TOO fast for their opponent, and would have lots of difficulty acquiring a lock on them (especially the various fighters that were made out of wood). Its the same reason why, at times, the National Guard has to role out A-10s for civil air defense roles in lieu of F-16s (older civilian planes flying slower than the F-16 can fly and too low for the F-16s radar to resolve them against the background clutter). Granted, I wouldn't doubt the eventual success of an F-22, it just wouldn't be as one sided as you would think.

The problem with this argument is that technological stasis also implies design stasis. If fighter technology has been pretty much constant for hundreds (or even thousands) of years in a setting with as many different competing starship engineers as the Star Wars galaxy then someone is inevitably going to find the perfect fighter design. There's no room for someone to come along later and magically discover the perfect multi-role fighter that replaces everything that came before it. The only way that can happen is if you have major technological changes and everyone is scrambling to find the best way to take advantage of them.

I disagree, as stated much earlier in the thread, technology in Star Wars seems to revolve around design trade-offs, the reason design stasis hasn't been reached is, to borrow gaming terminology, 'changes to the meta', although, I would argue that you do reach a sort of design stasis once the X-wing comes around (and we saw a similar sort of design stasis with the aforementioned Aurek-class fighter which served for 3,000 years). The X-wing continued to be used as of about 40 ABY (and its implied that it was still used well beyond that) despite introduction of all manner of starfighters intended to replace it (E-wing, etc.), granted the late model X-wings featured upgraded hardware (and in the case of the XJ series an additional proton torpedo launcher), but none of that necessarily speaks to an improvement in technology, just the implementation of better hardware that the Rebellion might not have had access to earlier on.

KnuckleWolf wrote:Funny, option four was better I thought:

I could see the Rebels deciding that it was to manpower intensive to have 3 "Pilots" in a ship, but, assuming that each "pilot" was qualified to fly their own fighter, you just tripled the number of Astromechs you need to scrounge.Likewise, you now need three times the maintenance hours to keep those fighters running, so unless the ARC was stupidly high maintenance you are not getting ahead by splitting the crew.

How about the plethora of other scraped together smugglers, volunteers, and whatever crummy ship they brought to the party? I would wager we don't see them because they were put on other assignments. As you are all hell bent on them being 'obsolete', let's pause a moment and think about that. The Rebels didn't have CRAP! They are a resistance movement who's best defensive tactic for a better part of the war is to run the flip away. You think just because some engineer or logistics guy says "Well, the ARC-wings aren't that good anymore blah blah blah" they are going to be like "Oh well, scrap 'em I guess. har-d-har!" They need ships enough to cover the freaking galaxy for gaks sake. Any ship deemed 'obsolete' that still flies and can fire rocks at the bad guys is solid gold to some sci-fi-fantasy resistance movement that doesn't have anything else to really work with and is under attack by a vastly larger force of oppression which is out to kill them.

I am not entirely sure why you are quoting me here. I say: "There might be reason to not use the ARC (manpower), but it would be a logistics nightmare for these reasons...". You start talking about how the rebels are desperate, and I'm not really sure how you think this is supposed to be coherent.

Also, re: basic line maintenance. Other than the Falcon, I cannot think of anybody doing all their own maintenance. Do you have examples?

Well, Luke and his X-wing on Dagobah comes to mind immediately, although given the circumstances and who it is (considering he was a farm boy and all and thus had to be good with machines) it makes sense. Also Anakin plus the crew/passengers of the Naboo Royal whatever it was on Tattooine in the Phantom Menace.

The general sense I got (and I think I recall an interview with GL that basically affirmed this) is that starfighters/smaller starships in Star Wars are the settings equivalent to cars in our own world, not everyone necessarily has one, but they are common and affordable (which is reinforced by pricetags of various starships in various canon sources being 100-200k credits new and often less than 100k used, based on other canon pricing, including the films themselves, it seems that the value of a credit is roughly equal to the value of a real world US dollar (see also: prices in Dex's Diner)), so its not really that farfetched to think that most pilots are capable of some rudimentary maintenance.

@CrazyCarnifex: It's like chaos says. The ability to fly a starship and maintain it is really just a handy tool for storytelling. Obi-wan didn't necessarily know how to fly one 'expertly' but in Ep. 2 opening he climbs into a cockpit and goes into combat. It's space opera remember, jumping into a starfighter is roughly equivalent to donning armor and grabbing a sword. Many of the role playing game books dedicate some time to this phenomenon to explain why a character won't need a specific skill like 'Pilot' to at least move a ship around in space.

@Chaos: Indeed, by the battle of Yavin they did have some ability to wage standard warfare. They even had their own new generation fighters, the X-wing. By Endor they have enough support and resources to field an A-wing squadron which is built by hand, and B-wings too. Plus they had a full fledged naval fleet, the Mon Calamari, backing them. But the funny thing to note is that in both battles they didn't turn it away when the Millennium Falcon wanted to join the battle despite being held together with duct tape and the good graces of the Force. And it was designed to be a Civilian ship! Of course it had been modified a ton too.

@Peregrine: You are STILL trying to compare fighters from too large a time gap to appropriately analogize the difference. Even using your WWII example, I'd like to point out Russian prop-driven fighters did manage to confirm kills on German jets in that war alone. Stop trying to compare it to WWII which was 60 years before the Raptor was fully introduced. Even Vietnam is a tad too far back at 30 years. Luke and Leia are only 19 when A New hope begins.

American prop-driven fighters likewise managed to score kills against ME-262s. Regardless though, the comparison isn't really apt. The core technologies used to design a world war 2 fighter are significantly different from that used to design a raptor. Its completely different propulsion systems, a completely different airframe design and airfoils, completely different avionics systems, the primary weapon system of the world war 2 fighter is a secondary (or even tertiary) system in the Raptor, different electronics, countermeasures, etc. etc. In Star Wars the propulsion technologies are largely unchanged, as are the air(space?)frame designs (I dont really think any craft in star wars, even atmospheric, bother with airfoils anymore), weapon systems, avionics, electronics, countermeasures, etc. etc. etc.

The ARC was terribly slow and lumbering. I imagine once air superiority fighters got better than the ones we see in the Clone Wars movies(none are terribly powerful offensively) and get to craft like the X-wing and TIE Fighters(because of quantity fielded), those ARCs become a lot harder to use properly even against their intended targets.

That could be where it become no longer feesible for use. Just ideas here...as we have no actual hard data to go on.

I could believe the political assassination of the project, but that is unlikely considering the Empire's use of craft like the Assault Gunboat which has a similar role and capability. Granted, that is pretty 'loose' canon material...but still something to think about.

The manpower thing does ring a bit true with the Rebellion, but I'm thinking it was more along the lines of the prevalence of effective capital ship targetting systems and prevalence of space superiority spacecraft.

Obviously, we are all speculating...so there are a few reasons the ARC would have not be used. :-P

Lumbering? Yes. Slow? No, we have 'hard data' from canon that says it had the same speed in vacuum as an X-wing, so unless you also regard the X-wing as 'slow', the ARC-170 wasn't.

Hard data from canon?

If you consider the video games produced by Lucasarts as canon (which it would seem like you must given the introduction of the TIE Phantom and TIE Defender), then yes.

The technicalities of SW canon, which are hardly reliable in the first place, are probably a pretty low priority when it comes to design. (Cf. the great A-Wing debate.)

I'd say the higher priority considerations are:

- making every ship a viable option
- making every ship feel unique
- maintaining gamewide thematics

We can (and might) argue about the ARC-170 forever BUT, given previous releases, I'd say it's best chance to make it into X-Wing is showing up on SW: Rebels.

So, does anyone know if the Empire had any fighters with turrets? Maybe one of the bounty hunter ships? I love ion turrets and wish there was some way to use them in Imperial lists, but I'm not familiar enough with EU canon to know if it would ever be a possibility.

I suppose it's possible the Empire had a few Y-wings they used occasionally... But obviously FFG isn't moving in the direction of multi-faction ships yet.

Don't know. But I remembered today that there was something called a Cloak Shape Fighter. That might be the wave five 'odd' ship. Like the HWK-290 was. Unless the YT-2400/Outrider takes that spot.

chaos0xomega wrote:
The X-wing continued to be used as of about 40 ABY (and its implied that it was still used well beyond that) despite introduction of all manner of starfighters intended to replace it (E-wing, etc.), granted the late model X-wings featured upgraded hardware (and in the case of the XJ series an additional proton torpedo launcher), but none of that necessarily speaks to an improvement in technology, just the implementation of better hardware that the Rebellion might not have had access to earlier on.

This is the ultimate concession. None of your other ridiculous claims about how technology "shouldn't" advance in Star Wars matter, because canon sources explicitly say that it did. The X-wing was a top-tier fighter when it was first introduced, by far the best ship the rebellion had access to and able to handle anything the empire could throw at it. But within 40 years it was already becoming obsolete, and only a major redesign (almost to the point of being a new ship in all but name) and brand new hardware kept it in its top-tier position. "Standard" X-wings were completely outclassed by the newest fighters.

And no, your "the rebellion didn't have good hardware" argument doesn't work. The X-wing wasn't just the best the rebellion could manage with its limited resources, it was one of the best ships of its time, period.

Actually, no the canon never explicitly states that technology advanced in Star Wars, it only vaguely implies it via terminology such as 'outclassed' and 'old'. What it does explicitly state is that things age and that newer designs frequently 'outclass' the older ones. What it also explicitly states is that some designs were still in regular service after more than 3000 years. If a starfighter design can remain a viable element through 3000 years of warfare, then I highly doubt there was much advancement in technology, and if there was it was at such a glacial pace that for the purposes of this discussion its irrelevant, as clone wars tech would be about as old as last years performance car by the time of the Yuzzhan Vong War.

And the XJ series X -wing was hardly a major redesign, no moreso than an F-16 Block 50 is to a Block 40. It was simply an upgrade of certain systems. The only element of it that comes close to being a 'major redesign' is the addition of a third proton torpedo launcher. Standard X-wings also were NOT completely outclassed by the newest fighters, given that the T series X-wing was still in use with the Republic even going into the Yuzzhan Vong War alongside the E-wing. The only ones who had access to the XJ were the NJO and some elite fighter squadrons (Rogue and Twin Suns primarily).

And the 'rebellion didn't have good hardware' argument does work, just because the X-wing is one of the best starfighters of its time does not mean that it had all the best hardware stuffed into it. That would actually be pretty impossible given the fact that there are ships flying around that are better armored, or better shielded, or better armed, or faster, etc.

chaos0xomega wrote:

And the 'rebellion didn't have good hardware' argument does work, just because the X-wing is one of the best starfighters of its time does not mean that it had all the best hardware stuffed into it. That would actually be pretty impossible given the fact that there are ships flying around that are better armored, or better shielded, or better armed, or faster, etc.

Thing is, fighter design probably isn't just "stuff the best stuff in there, it'll work". There will be trade-offs. For example, the TIE fighter eschews armour, life support, and guns in exchange for speed and agility. The X-wing is a generalist. This isn't to say that Incom said "Eh, we could give this thing perfect systems, but that would be a little unfair, y'know?", but instead there may be some kind of mechanical limitation (Such as power generation) that restricts the X-wings ability to get those super-heavy shields like we see on a B-wing while running a TIE fighters speed. The newer version X-wings may simply represent the Rebels overcoming these technological limitations, or developing ways to work around them.

Also, look at the TIE-Interceptor vs. TIE-Fighter; the Interceptor is faster and better gunned than the Fighter, while still holding to the Imperial Doctrine of "Fast, cheap, and expendable". If technology is not advancing, why didn't we see the interceptor earlier?

Because there wasn't any need for it? The Interceptor was developed as a response to the X-Wing. According to one source X-wings had something like a 70:1 kill:death ratio against TIE fighters, and the Empire needed something better, so they adopted the TIE interceptor.

If you actually look back, the entire 'advancement' of technology within Star Wars basically amounts to a cyclical set of technological tradeoffs between difference performance criteria, seemingly limited only by practical application and money

Also as I stated previously, the Interceptor (and the A-wing) are hardly the only or the first starfighters of that speed. The Aurek starfighter that I keep referring to (the one that was in service for 3,000 years) was considerably faster (in fact I can't find anything else nearly as fast in any of the eras) than both the TIE Interceptor (about 40%) and the A-Wing (33%), and arguably more heavily armed than either (twin HEAVY laser cannons and twin proton torpedo launchers). If technology progressed, i think it safe to say that the Aurek shouldn't have been able to carry such a heavy armament to such a great speed if neither the Interceptor nor the A-wing can match or exceed it. And again, the Aurek was designed 4,000 BBY and served until 1,000 BBY...

Okay, so if the Aurek was so good, why was it retired?

That doesn't have a clear explicit answer, but if I had to guess:

Seeing as how its retirement seemingly coincides with the Ruusan Reformation which all but disbanded the Republic military and ushered in about 1000 years of peace... well, yeah, it basically was retired because the Republic military ceased to exist and for the most part there was no more need for it. The manufacturer of that ship in particular was Republic Fleet Systems (and thus purpose built for the Republic Navy by the Republic government itself), so there was no opportunity to produce the ship for anyone else, and existing models would eventually cease to be used through lack of available parts, losses/attrition, and just outright aging of the hulls.

Theoretically they should have been able to put them in production, but it seems RFS was disbanded by the Senate not too long before the Clone Wars, so that design might have been lost... besides that 1000 years is a long time, nobody around who would have even remembered that such a ship existed, and its actual production would just be a footnote in a history book... We also have a pretty good indication from the canon that history/records aren't something that the Republic (or anyone else for that matter) seems to do a very good job of maintaining, so its not out of the question that even the design specs are lost and/or unavailable by this time.

You could, I suppose, argue that there was little to no technological progression over that 3000 year period and thats why the Aurek remained viable over such an extended period of time... but we have no real reason to believe that there was any progress over the following 1000 years or so either if thats the case. If anything, it would imply that technology (or at least design concepts) stagnated over that time, given the fact that numerous Old Republic starfighters possessed hyperdrives, yet by the time of the Clone Wars its rare for starfighters to have their own hyperdrives and they only gradually start making an appearance in starfighters again over the course of the war.

Going back to my previous theory about cyclical tradeoffs, etc. If I had to hazard a guess, the lack of centralized military planning and serious resources poured into it, etc. (the only real military forces remaining in known space were system/planetary defense fleets organized locally as a sort of space militia) meant that military designs (DESIGN not technology) stagnated and thus favored smaller/lighter/cheaper/less capable ships that weren't necessarily *GOOD* but were good enough for the competition. Enter the Clone Wars and the return to a centralized military and you see that there is a general progression within the Republic in terms of design in building progressively more capable starfighters (and even capital ships) that aren't necessarily more technologically advanced, but simply more capable from a design standpoint. Similarly, you see that same progression from the Separatists in a sort of arms race as each side implements new designs to keep up with the opposition. Also remember, despite the fact that the technology is theoretically there, there is still a learning curve that needs to be applied from the design standpoint as to what works, what doesnt, whats needed, what isn't etc. A lack of serious military production (most of the designs used by the system fleets, etc. were seemingly commercially available and not purpose built for military use) over the previous millenia, and the lack of proper doctrine, etc. means that they are effectively relearning how to fight wars. By the end of the Clone Wars you see far more capable designs stemming from this learning curve and galaxy wide remilitarization. Then enter the Empire which is a HEAVILY militarized faction which sees the designs shift in a new, more aggressive direction than what was previously seen before (owing to greater resources and a more militant organizational culture), and you change the entire status quo for the galaxy, meaning everyone who is designing combat capable space vessels has to account for a new design paradigm unlike what was seen before.

So, in that sense, there really isn't any technological progression there, just a progression of how its utilized.

chaos0xomega wrote:
That doesn't have a clear explicit answer, but if I had to guess:

Seeing as how its retirement seemingly coincides with the Ruusan Reformation which all but disbanded the Republic military and ushered in about 1000 years of peace... well, yeah, it basically was retired because the Republic military ceased to exist and for the most part there was no more need for it. The manufacturer of that ship in particular was Republic Fleet Systems (and thus purpose built for the Republic Navy by the Republic government itself), so there was no opportunity to produce the ship for anyone else, and existing models would eventually cease to be used through lack of available parts, losses/attrition, and just outright aging of the hulls.

Theoretically they should have been able to put them in production, but it seems RFS was disbanded by the Senate not too long before the Clone Wars, so that design might have been lost... besides that 1000 years is a long time, nobody around who would have even remembered that such a ship existed, and its actual production would just be a footnote in a history book... We also have a pretty good indication from the canon that history/records aren't something that the Republic (or anyone else for that matter) seems to do a very good job of maintaining, so its not out of the question that even the design specs are lost and/or unavailable by this time.

Okay, so you are saying that the technology could have been lost... and are also arguing that there is not space for technological improvement.


I strongly disagree.


The Aurek may have been the ultimate fighter, remaining in service for 3000 years. I would argue that this is simply a product of bad writing, but that is beside the point. The point is, there is then 1000 years of peace. Due to the Republics poor bookkeeping, records are lost, including a large portion of the knowledge of military technology. When we reach the Clone wars, there is plenty of room for improvement on starfighter designs. We see these improvements made throughout the Clone Wars, and into the Galactic Civil War. As such, despite the fact that one fighter design lasted 3000 years in the past, now we actually get to see an arms race. We see Clone-Wars era designs fall into the category of "obsolete, outdated fighter" (Z-95, Y-Wing), shipd get replaced by successors (TIE FIghter to TIE Interceptor) with similar roles.

Because of the One-thousand years of military technology regressing, the fact that the Aurek lasted 3000 years is irrelevant to the question of "Is the ARC-170 outdated". Because from the Clone-wars on we see signs of hardware improving, and we do not see the ARC in any major combat role post Clone Wars, I would argue that the answer is "Yes".

I wasn't at all arguing that technology was lost, I'm arguing that a design for a starfighter was lost. Design does not equate with technology, the two are different things. I'm talking like the blueprints need to construct the thing. Considering that the Empire lost the means to continue producing clones at an industrial scale(the technology was still there in the galaxy somewhere, just not available to them) during the GCW, the Republic lost information pertaining to countless star systems (even their very location and existence) over the years (especially after a certain Sith Lord wiped portions of their databanks), the Jedi Order lost countless pieces of information relating to their history over the years, etc. Its not that farfetched to believe at all. All that information was still available within the galaxy to someone somewhere, just not necessarily to the people that wanted and/or needed it.

It's not that different in todays world, even with all our technology we don't necessarily know a lot about what happened 1000 years ago let alone what happened 100 years. Yes, we know the major important bits, it doesn't necessarily mean we have the blueprints needed to rebuild the USS Maine. I mean, technically speaking I'm sure those blueprints exist somewhere in a dusty filing cabinet at the back of a rarely used storage space in a sub-basement of some office building or something like that, but we don't necessarily know to look there.

Beyond that, I'm arguing that warfighting methodology (doctrine) was lost, not technology. Just because we know that at one point our ancestors fought in phalanxes and stormed castle walls doesn't mean that we, today, would know how to properly fight in a phalanx formation or storm a castle walls. There is nobody alive today that has ever put those skills into practical use to train us, we would have to relearn and retrain in those methodologies if we wanted to do it.

In regards to the rest of your point, yes the designs are dated, but here is the problem: Some posters are arguing that the technology is outdated, meaning that the laser cannons are weaker, the engines are weaker, etc. etc. etc. and that an arc-170 should be a straight set of 2s for anything and everything because there is no way that it could keep up with anything else. What I am arguing is that the technology isn't outdated, merely the design. Its not that an ARC-170 or a Z-95 would be incapable of handling GCW era designs, its simply ineffecient and unoptomized for that purpose, and thus isn't necessarily used.

The minis game doesn't necessarily take a lot of the elements that would be required to represent that on tabletop into consideration, or necessarily do so at a 'resoution' where those subtle differences would become apparrent.

In other words, its entirely possible that the ARC-170 could and should be statted as 3 or 4 attack, 1 defense, 3 hull, 3 shield or something like that vs the proposed 2-2-2-2 or whatever it was that Peregrine or Manchu suggested, and that would be an accurate in universe representation of those performance criteria relative to the other ships in the game, but due to the abstraction inherent to any non-simulation based game design, that doesn't take into consideration such things as shield recharge rates, rate of fire, targeting speed, subtle differences in maneuverability and handling, etc. that would make one design preferable over another. Nor does the game take into account the doctrine under which they were employed, TIE fighters and TIE Interceptors for example always being supported by capital ships from which they operated or the rebels using hit and run tactics to take advantage of their hyperdrives, etc.

Also, re-read my previous post, I think you missed my edit...

I can see what you are saying. To use a current example; The technology to build another space shuttle has not been lost, but the knowledge of how it was put together has - Most of the peeps involved in building them have moved on, or passed away, and as a result, NASA admits it couldn't build a new one even if it wanted to. Despite the fact it is 1960's tech.

Really?? That I did not know, I would assume that we at least still have the blueprints floating around though, no? I know there were rumors that we lost the blueprints to the Saturn V, but it seemed that turned out to be bunk as they have them on microfilm somewhere.

The shuttle was such a complex craft, no blueprints existed as such. There were hundreds of different systems and parts to it, so they each had plans and drawings etc at one point, but they were scattered over different facilities, offices and such, many of which are now lost. So no, there isn't a set of blueprints as such.

Here's a story that may be used as an allusion...

The Savage Firearms company released their Model 99 Savage Lever-action rifle in 1899. We'll compare it to the Winchester Model 94... the most common Lever-action Rifle. The Winchester 94 (released in 1894) is what you think of when someone mentions a Lever-Action rifle... it is actually a refinement on the Model 1873... "The Gun That Won The West".

Both rifles work in the same way... they operate in the same way (the lever)... the bullets components and powder are not different, the metals that they are made of are not different.
However, there is a fundamental difference in engineering, that makes these two rifles (introduced only 5 years apart) worlds apart.

The action of the 99 is such that it can use Spitzer (pointed) bullets rather than the rounded ball ammunition of the 94. Spitzer bullets are ballistically superior to ball ammunition, providing a much better flight and kinetic energy at the target. A hammerless design increased shooting accuracy. In many ways, the mechanism of the 99 is much closer to the modern military semi-auto rifle than the other lever actions of its time.

So is the image of the 94 an iconic part of American culture, but the 99 not? The 99 didn't have a conflict to win. By the time WWI came, it was either bolt action rifles (Springfield 103) or fully automatic machine guns (Browning BARs and Thompsons). The 94 is just an updated version of the 1873... unless you are a serious gun nut, you'll have a hard time telling the difference. The lesson remains the same... it isn't advances in technology that make certain things iconic... it is their uses in specific combats.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Some posters are arguing that the technology is outdated, meaning that the laser cannons are weaker, the engines are weaker, etc. etc. etc. and that an arc-170 should be a straight set of 2s for anything and everything because there is no way that it could keep up with anything else.

Please don't post straw man arguments like this. I never said the ARC-170 must have a 2-2-2-2 stat line, I said it has to be comparable to that stat line. For example, the basic TIE fighter has a 2-3-3-0 stat line, but is roughly equivalent to the Z-95 since they're both worth 12 points. The ARC-170 would have some room for variation in stats (it might get 3-1-2-1, for example) in that general 12-15 point range, but it has to fall short of a "modern" fighter's stat line because it's locked into being a cheap Z-95 equivalent.

And, as I've said before, the problem isn't finding balanced stats, it's the limited design space available for a 12-15 point ship. The most important attribute of a cheap ship is its point cost, so subtle variations on the stat line of a 12-point ship are pretty boring and lead to a bunch of ships that nobody has any strong feelings about. You might have room to add the ARC-170 if you absolutely must have it, but you almost certainly don't have room to add the other prequel-era fighters without running straight into the design space problem. And if you can't include a complete prequel-era expansion then why include just one of the ships?

chaos0xomega wrote:
Really?? That I did not know, I would assume that we at least still have the blueprints floating around though, no?

This is somewhat of a misunderstanding. What it means when we say we've lost the ability to build X is that we can't build more of X without investing so much effort that we might as well just build an updated version of X with modern technology. For example, why go to considerable effort to duplicate the shuttle's exact computer systems (which have been out of production for decades) when you can use modern computers that are more powerful, take up less space, and use less power? And then you have to redesign the racks that hold the computers, the bolts that hold the racks to the wall, re-do all of the weight and balance stuff to account for the changes, etc. In the end you're investing a solid majority of the work required to make an entirely new design. So the old one is effectively "lost" in that nobody considers it worth the effort to keep it.

And you'll note the common theme in your examples of "lost" technology: it's all obsolete. We can't build a copy of the USS Maine because nobody bothered to keep all the necessary blueprints and production methods for a ship that would be hopelessly obsolete if we built another one. If someone wanted to build a warship of equivalent size they'd design a new one from scratch that would be far more powerful.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Because there wasn't any need for it? The Interceptor was developed as a response to the X-Wing. According to one source X-wings had something like a 70:1 kill:death ratio against TIE fighters, and the Empire needed something better, so they adopted the TIE interceptor.

Again, this is a concession that technology advanced and ships became obsolete. You don't get a 70:1 kill ratio with a new fighter unless it's a major advance in design and technology. So the X-wing was explicitly better than any similar ship that came before it, and it was explicitly becoming obsolete within 30-40 years and required major upgrades to stay competitive.

and arguably more heavily armed than either (twin HEAVY laser cannons and twin proton torpedo launchers)

You're again making the assumption that two things with the same broad category name are identical in performance. Just like "missiles" from 1970 and 2014 are very different weapons the "heavy laser cannon" from an ancient fighter may be no better than an average blaster pistol in the "modern" era. The fact that it was "heavy" relative to other weapons of its era does not mean that it is "heavy" relative to "modern" weapons.

 Peregrine wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Some posters are arguing that the technology is outdated, meaning that the laser cannons are weaker, the engines are weaker, etc. etc. etc. and that an arc-170 should be a straight set of 2s for anything and everything because there is no way that it could keep up with anything else.

Please don't post straw man arguments like this. I never said the ARC-170 must have a 2-2-2-2 stat line, I said it has to be comparable to that stat line. For example, the basic TIE fighter has a 2-3-3-0 stat line, but is roughly equivalent to the Z-95 since they're both worth 12 points. The ARC-170 would have some room for variation in stats (it might get 3-1-2-1, for example) in that general 12-15 point range, but it has to fall short of a "modern" fighter's stat line because it's locked into being a cheap Z-95 equivalent.

Right, but there is no reason for it to be locked into being a cheap Z-95 equivalent except for your own belief that it is an inferior craft, whereas it is my belief that it isn't inferior, just different. I suppose, for the purposes of abstraction you could argue that this difference needs to be represented by an inferior statline, but without truly knowing how the design team goes about translating 'real' performance to a statline, it would be difficult to make that argument I think.

And, as I've said before, the problem isn't finding balanced stats, it's the limited design space available for a 12-15 point ship. The most important attribute of a cheap ship is its point cost, so subtle variations on the stat line of a 12-point ship are pretty boring and lead to a bunch of ships that nobody has any strong feelings about. You might have room to add the ARC-170 if you absolutely must have it, but you almost certainly don't have room to add the other prequel-era fighters without running straight into the design space problem. And if you can't include a complete prequel-era expansion then why include just one of the ships?

This I can agree with I think, you can probably squeeze a few of the Clone Wars designs into some niche roles (the ARC-170 especially given it has the rear laser cannons which would make it pretty unique for such a small ship), but a lot of them would overlap with other ships without the implementation of some new secondary rules/upgrades to try to diversify and differentiate them.

Again, this is a concession that technology advanced and ships became obsolete. You don't get a 70:1 kill ratio with a new fighter unless it's a major advance in design and technology. So the X-wing was explicitly better than any similar ship that came before it, and it was explicitly becoming obsolete within 30-40 years and required major upgrades to stay competitive.

Stop using 'explicit' unless you can actually find that word used somewhere. And theres a bit of an issue, you're saying you don't get a 70:1 kill ratio unless its a major advance, etc. so its better than any similar ship that can before it... well, the TIE fighter isn't at all similar in any way shape or form except that it was the oppositions front line fighter, so is that really a valid analysis?

You're again making the assumption that two things with the same broad category name are identical in performance. Just like "missiles" from 1970 and 2014 are very different weapons the "heavy laser cannon" from an ancient fighter may be no better than an average blaster pistol in the "modern" era. The fact that it was "heavy" relative to other weapons of its era does not mean that it is "heavy" relative to "modern" weapons.

See, theres an issue inherent to that, in that they were using the same construction materials to build their ships back then (durasteel, which is used to construct pretty much everything in star wars), so if a heavy laser cannon then is the modern equivalent of a blaster, then there are serious issues with constructability in pretty much every aspect of design throughout the timeline. We know that blasters cause largely superficial damage to durasteel (seen in the first film when the stormtroopers open fire on the Falcon) unless they come in 'blaster cannon' form, which even then are primarily an anti-personnel weapon or used against very light unarmored vehicles. We know that modern laser cannons are powerful enough to vaporize small asteroids, which takes an OBSCENE amount of power, so you're talking the difference of several orders of magnitude in power levels... and if the heavy laser cannons of yesteryear are the blasters of today... well, then those weapons wouldn't be very good against ships of the same era that were also made of durasteel. Yes, they could have improved durasteel over time, but NOT by that much. Given that, if any sort of technological advancement occurred, then it would have been very very tiny almost irrelevant levels, so yes, I suppose in that sense things could become 'obsolete' but to borrow some gaming terminology, we're looking at a difference of like 1 DPS (damage per second), not really enough to really be noticeable to anyone except number crunchers and bean counters looking to maximize efficiency and minimize costs.