Secutor-class Star Carrier VersionPrevious: >>96396481A thread for discussing the Star Wars franchise and its various media and tabletop games.Fantasy Flight Games’ X-Wing, Armada, and Legion>https://pastebin.com/9puqx1zeStar Wars Roleplaying Games (d6/d20/FFG)>https://pastebin.com/iUriRfaAOther FFG Star Wars tabletop (Imperial Assault, Destiny and the LCG)>http://pastebin.com/ZE4gn0yNOld links>https://pastebin.com/yUVx32wBX-Wing/Armada/Legion/Shatterpoint:>https://www.atomicmassgames.com/transmission/update-on-star-wars-x-wing-and-star-wars-armada/>https://www.atomicmassgames.com/star-wars-legion-documents>https://www.atomicmassgames.com/star-wars-legion-transmissions>https://www.atomicmassgames.com/swp-transmissions/>https://www.atomicmassgames.com/swp-rules/Latest Edge news:>https://edge-studio.net/a-new-hope/>https://edge-studio.net/star-wars-edge/Unlimited links:>https://starwarsunlimited.com/articles/>https://swudb.com/>https://karabast.netThread Question: Is the Secutor late Republic, or firmly in the Imperial era as a carrier replacement of the Venator?
Why does the Imperial Navy have carriers in general? I love battleships but I also love carriers.Is it cause Thrawn's defender got BTFO?
>>96486846Firmly Imperial, at most you could talk about its bridge being a reference.
>>96486917>haveI meant to type "hate"
>>96486917They really don't. Secutor, Quasar Fire, they've got plenty of carriers. They don't have the Venator because it was an emergency wartime design which got made, and destroyed, in the thousands. Why do you think even the Rebellion isn't down for using it?
>>96486917>>96486935They don't? They have some dedicated vessels, almost every capital ship of theirs is a carrier at least in a minor capacity and for a good while most of their fighters and bombers required carriers to be deployed anywhere.
>>96486917So in real life naval warfare, Carriers made Battleships obsolete due to the factor of range. In theory, battleships were necessary for the long range of their massive canons, and the need for armor to soak up any hits they might take from enemy ships. In practice however, planes on a carrier had so much range that carriers could sit parked in the back far from any danger, and no ammount of armor or AA could stop planes from taking you down with sufficient numbers. Hence carriers have become king ever since WW2 (though there have been few naval battles since then). Of course, the issue is now in theory cruise missiles have way higher ranger than even jet planes do, and are much logistically simpler, which could in theory completely invalidate Carriers, but this hasn't been tested yet. Star Wars exists in a sort of 'WW2 in Space' at least on the space-battles front. So Starfighters exist to extend the range of a starship. In theory. However this is invalidated by the fact that logically they wouldn't have the same range considerations with laser weapons. Starfighters seem to exist to do dogfights, but it seems they are capable of taking down ships. So this begs the question that's never answered, which is what's the point of main-guns if star-fighters can take down ships, or why bother fielding starfighters if your starships main guns are sufficient to take down enemy ships.
>>96486846What an ugly ass triangle. Terrible OP.>>96486917There is no such thing as "navy" in Star Wars. It's "starfleet".
>>96487375>There is no such thing as "navy" in Star Wars. It's "starfleet".uh, anon....it's also called the navy.https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Imperial_Navy
>>96487406>links wookieepediaCringe.The word "navy" was literally never once said in any of the movies, ever. It was only ever referred to as STARFLEET.>LUKE: Well, I'll be at the Academy next season... after that who knows. I won't be drafted into the Imperial Starfleet that's for sure... Take care of yourself, you'll always be the best friend I've got.>BIGGS: So long, Luke.https://imsdb.com/scripts/Star-Wars-A-New-Hope.html
>>96487573The "movies" (more like flicks, really) are peak redditcore. The main thing you should take away from Star Wars is the universe. Everything else about it is ass.
>>96487375>>96487573Maybe I'm missing something but this whole Navy vs Starfleet debate seems kind of like a distinction without a difference, especially with SW spaceships being described using naval terms like cruisers or destroyers.Also have some generic Jedi.
>>96487662You are an uncultured swine, a redditor manchild.
>>96487573Are you the same fag who has a meltdown when the Imperial Army is mentioned
>>96487765>truth nuke is spoken>n-no u!
>>96487844No, it's quite obviously the exact same shitposter. When a meaningful discussion happens, which it did just the last thread, and an interesting thread question, he will come in and shit it the fuck up. Whatever the topic is, he WILL shit it up. If its Legends, he will either Pelleonclassfag spam or spam that one picture, if its Army Chads, he will spam ceaselessly about how it shouldn't exist because muh Lucas, if there's discussion on the Force, he will start Greyfagging. This is the exact same guy shitting up the thread since at least 2020, and the worst part is jannies aren't doing shit, but they're not alone. You know we could just ignore him.
>>96488231but its NOT filonifag right?
Imperial army is pretty dumb, let's be honest.
>>96487731>generic MOTF 1 We need justice for Ventress/Maul/Ahsoka
>>96487375>What an ugly ass triangleStill better than a Pellaeon class.
>>96487731>some generic JediI ike this. In fact, I Iike all the Jedi/Offiicer/Agent/Operative/etc kits.
I wonder if someone out there has the original VHS versions of star wars online somewhere, that would be cool
>>96489560I always see this cosplay posted but never the full set of images
>>96489859That's a cosplay? I thought it was CGI.
>>96489977It's a cosplay. There is at least one more where she holds a lightsaber.
>>96486846>secutorFractal and Saxton shit. Imperial class is as big as it needs to be, save for Executor command ships.
>>96486994Presumably turbolasers just have enough range to obviate the whole "carrier supremacy" thing in Star Wars. Starfighter range superiority appears mainly in hyperspace equipped fighters, but that requires your carrier to be in another star system.
>>96490552One of the better Fractal ships though. I do like a bigger carrier and it is has a more interesting figure than the rest of his ugly ass shipsAlso there are only 4-12 Executors. Thinking there are more is maximalism which is a Saxtonite bullshit fantasy
>>96490561Except that SW media consistently shows that starfighter and bomber squads with enough time can take down whole capital ships. Also every single big ship in Star Wars is a carrier. The ISD realistically can carry as much as the Venator, the 72 fighter estimate is pretty clearly outdated lore from an era that had fighters be far less relevant.>>96486994A lot of this is very Saxton, Star Wars shouldn't be taken this seriously nglAnyways most of this "unanswered question" is answered if you just play Empire At War which pretty much shows how SW naval fights work.
>>96490650>ISD realistically>also shouldn't be taken this seriouslyWhich is it.
>>96490675"Realistically" is an expression. The point is that 72 TIE number is an outdated relic from '80s D6. If the Venator had been made back then it also would have had the same or even less TIEs. Hence we need to adapt the ISD to modern Star Wars conventions, first by eliminating retardation like the ISDII lacking PD (which is a misreading of D6, not even the intended lore) and fixing the fighter count.
