The Hangar

[Nelowulf]

My points exactly! What is it you're arguing?

But yes, the Xwing is only slightly less maneuverable than a TIE. They aren't that far off for speed and manueverability. I can't remember the source, but they aren't necessarily drastically different. That's why the TIE interceptor was so favored as the next step, because it was relatively cheap, but yet, was 10 times the fighter the TIE was, and flew around Xwings like they were slow Y's.


And nospai, that BAR, as much as I like it, I'd take an MG-42 for personal reasons. Much like how I like the AK, but would never use one in battle due to its inability to drop a magazine quick. The M1 was simply a rifle that the military had in store. Though I'm not sure which one you're defending in your statement...

As for the airplanes, everyone had props. I don't see how germany's were any more advanced than ours. In fact, the british had the most advanced airplanes at that time (even selling us some!). True, the Germans were trying to develop jet engines, but they didn't, and none of the planes with jets were effective fighters. They were to be bombers. couldn't work out a good gunning system.

as for the tanks, of course 10 to 1 odds will beat it. If I get ten guys with knifes, and pit you with a revolver, there's a good chance they'll knock you down. Duh! What do you expect with odds like that? the Tiger to be unharmed?

The US forces comment was exactly what I said. Fresh troops and total war. What are you arguing there?

As for shields on TIEs, who said they were necessary? I simply stated the shields on them really don't matter, as they lack any sort of battle protection. It is a fighter after all. They're just there for ornamental purposes. Whereas the Xwing uses them efficiently.

So what is it you're arguing? You've basically gotten flustered and restated everything, minus several variations.  

[Nospai Deathous]

first i was arguing that ties had shields.

then i was arguing that there's a point to having shields when they aren't combat shields, even when combating fighters with combat shields.

then i was arguing that such a practice was effective, as shown by history, when great numbers are applied. (that's what the tank analogy was for... ties usually outnumber x-wings by incredible odds in a standard rebel vs imperial engagement)

i thought you were arguing that the tie and imperial tactics were inferior because the tie had no shields, or that there was no point to it having non-combat shields. @_@  

[Nelowulf]

No, I was saying that the imperials used numbers because they're craft couldn't stand heavy barrage or single fights as well as other craft.

But I was also saying that the shields on a TIE were negatable because they only provide defense for rudamentary dangers, and nothing more. They are useless when it comes to actual fufilment of the fighter's role, so they are negatable in the overal performance of the TIE.

Though those solar array panels must make quite a hassle for the shield, making it much larger than need be.

Non-combat shields are useful, yes, but they are useless in combat. Basically saying, saying the TIE has shields is true, but the defense they provide is so minimal one can overlook it and change very little when it comes ot combat. Its like they aren't even there.  

[Nospai Deathous]

well in terms of general battle strategy yes, but considering all the radiation and all the debris released during battles, i'd say that practically they are pretty vital.

fighting in space is basically like fighting on a battlefield where you're bombarded by heat and radiation and little tiny daggers that hit you at supersonic speeds from all directions. without that rudimentary shielding, any warrior would be instanty destroyed. so they need minimal armor to combat those basic dangers, which are pretty lethal and almost guarentee destruction.

i argue that they are not negatable. to negate them would be like negating clothing when fighting during a blizzard.  

[Nelowulf]

Nospai Deathous

well in terms of general battle strategy yes, but considering all the radiation and all the debris released during battles, i'd say that practically they are pretty vital.

fighting in space is basically like fighting on a battlefield where you're bombarded by heat and radiation and little tiny daggers that hit you at supersonic speeds from all directions. without that rudimentary shielding, any warrior would be instanty destroyed. so they need minimal armor to combat those basic dangers, which are pretty lethal and almost guarentee destruction.

i argue that they are not negatable. to negate them would be like negating clothing when fighting during a blizzard.

Yes, they are vital, but during battle, are you more worried about microdebris, or getting lit up by that xwing in the rear-view mirror?  

[Nospai Deathous]

of course you'll worry about the more immediate threat, but it's thanks to the minimal shields that you have that luxury.  

[Nelowulf]

Nospai Deathous

of course you'll worry about the more immediate threat, but it's thanks to the minimal shields that you have that luxury.

Even without the shields, you still think of the immediate threat. Which is why running Naked in russia is usually only seen when people are being chased by the Red Army....

Either way, this is the hangar... perhaps we should get back to vehicle discussion. Like what fuel do you think the Juggernaughts and ATs use?

I like my tibanna gas, but its more than probably wrong.  

[Nospai Deathous]

i can see the juggernauts plausibly as having compact fusion engines, possibly... but the AT-ST has no room for such a thing. the balancing mechanisms and such take up almost all the space so.. where's the engine go??  

[Nelowulf]

Nospai Deathous

i can see the juggernauts plausibly as having compact fusion engines, possibly... but the AT-ST has no room for such a thing. the balancing mechanisms and such take up almost all the space so.. where's the engine go??

perhaps the gyro also provides electromagnetic propulsionary movements?  

[Nospai Deathous]

..that's a really interesting idea. however, i dout it'd be sufficient enough to power the legs and the 'head' and the weapon, although it may convert energy and aid the power supply..  

[Nelowulf]

Nospai Deathous

..that's a really interesting idea. however, i dout it'd be sufficient enough to power the legs and the 'head' and the weapon, although it may convert energy and aid the power supply..

not alone, but it does reduce the need for as much power. Plus, isn't the powerpack for the ST on the back of the head?  

[Durza the Shade]

If I recall rightly, AT-STs use compact solid fuel cells, much like those of the Vulture droid fighters. They take up little space, so there's more room for all the gyroscopes and everything else a two-legged vehicle needs for balance, but they burn very quickly, severely limiting the walker's range.

I think they plug into the sides of the engine, which is in that "pod" between the legs that the head sits on top of. I don't remember exactly how that engine works.  

[Nospai Deathous]

solid fuel cells?

...batteries..?

ok. that must be what those little circular hatches on either side of the pod are for.  

[Durza the Shade]

Nospai Deathous

solid fuel cells?

...batteries..?

ok. that must be what those little circular hatches on either side of the pod are for.

Kinda. But not electricity-producing batteries, cylinders of actual fuel that actually burns, like liquid fuel. Only, compressed into a solid.  

[Nospai Deathous]

pretty cool. and /are/ those what the little hatches are for? easy replacement?