[jr2]

Isn't the Y-Wing the equivalent of a Herc II in FS?  Or is it more of a Myrm?

[BS403]

I would think that is the equivalent to an Artemis in firepower(or perhaps  more firepower) and less maneuverable then a herc 2.

[jr2]

  Less than a Herc II???  That would make it an assault bomber, not a heavy fighter... as you just pointed out by mentioning the Artemis.  So, SW heavy fighter = FS assault ("light") bomber, at least in this case?

[Turambar]

let's not do equivalents.

this is a TC, whole different game

[Mobius]

Where the Y-Wings supposed to be the main torpedo launchers at the end of the very first Star Wars?

Anyway, the Y-Wing has always been one of my favourite fighters. Keep it up SWC team!

[chief1983]

They aren't quite bombers, but they are mostly relegated to capship assault later in their lifetimes.  The movies never show a Y killing a TIE, so I'm not sure if they're really supposed to be able to hold their own except in terms of durability.  But maneuvering, I kind of doubt it.

[Mobius]

In fact I don't think they're bombers or heavy fighters. Just a compromise between the capacity of attacking ships and the capacity of dogfighting.

They shouldn't be meneuverable, but I think they have an high top speed. What do you think?

[Scourge of Ages]

It's probably more akin to the Athena bomber from FS1. It's not as fast or as maneuverable as even a heavy fighter, but it doesn't have the firepower of a regular bomber. Also, it's the slowest of the standard Alliance/Empire fighters.

It's easy to see why it was replaced by the B-Wing. Even so, it's one of my favorites also.

One more thing: will the ion turret be permanently fixed foreward, permanently auto tracking targets (like bomber turrets in FS), or can you switch it back and forth (like the CORTs in XWA)?

[chief1983]

If we can get switching implemented, that would be the most ideal situation I think.

[Mobius]

It's probably more akin to the Athena bomber from FS1. It's not as fast or as maneuverable as even a heavy fighter, but it doesn't have the firepower of a regular bomber. Also, it's the slowest of the standard Alliance/Empire fighters.

The Athena is much faster than some fighters...

The Y-Wing may not be meneuverable, but it must have an high top speed, that tries to balance the combat capability. Something like the Tornado or the Starfighter...in Real Life^TM.

[Turambar]

actually y-wings are very slow.

theyre very durable and hold more torps than an x-wing.  those ion cannons are damn useful as well, especially against capital ships.

[Mobius]

They're slow? I was almost sure of the contrary a few minutes ago.

[brandx0]

The Y-wing was a resilient, well-shielded craft, but was slow and ungainly compared to other Alliance fighters. Its deficiencies were partly compensated for by the heavy proton torpedo load it could carry, and its ability to paralyze craft with ion cannon fire without destroying them, unique until the B-wing starfighter was introduced after the Battle of Yavin.

[Herra Tohtori]

Well it's pretty hard to name exact corresponding ships in FS and SW universe. In general, SW ships are a lot more fragile than FS ships, with some exceptions. But as far as roles go, I guess you could try and look at it in this way...

Role: SW ships - FS ships

Swarm pests: Z-95, TIE/ln, TIE Interceptor - Anubis (plus non-canon Angel, and Loki if they are incorrectly used)

Space Superiority:  X-Wing, TIE/Advanced, TIE/Defender - Myrmidon, Erinyes, Thoth, Mara

Interceptor: A-Wing/TIE Advanced - Perseus, Valkyrie, Serapis, Dragon

Assault: Y-Wing, Assault Gunboat - Hercules, Herc II, Tauret,

Heavy Assault / light to medium bomber: B-Wing, Missile Boat - Ares, Artemis, Medusa, Boanerges, Bakha, Taurvi

Heavy Bomber: No clear counterpart in SW games so far - Ursa, Sekhmet, Seraphim, Nahema


...it's kinda strange to assign some ships to certain categories, since the roles and properties of some ships and categories overlap slightly. For example, B-Wings are faster and slightly more maneuverable than Y-Wings and have more shields and more fire power, but less hull durability. In similar fashion, Missile Boat is way faster than Assault Gunboat and more maneuverable as well (IIRC), and has mainly warheads as it's weaponry, complemented with a single superlaser cannon.

Star Wars universe also doesn't really have heavy bombers as dedicated ships; pretty much all ships with warhead launchers can carry Heavy Rockets and Space Bombs - the firepower is more limited with the number of warheads you can fit in, say, Z-95 Headhunter.

On the other hand, FS universe has very little Swarm Pests... Perhaps the closest match to TIE/ln's would be the Vasudan Anubis coffin. And perhaps Basilisks... but aside from them, each side seems to go with quality instead of numbers.

Y-Wing is in some ways like the Ares with a Herc payload. B-Wing is like a Herc II with Ares payload. Assault Gunboat is pretty similar to a Tauret.

[brandx0]

One thing to note is that the interpretation given in the above post is based mainly on the video games as a source.  We're trying to stay as far away from the games as possible for reference.  SWC is a new star wars space sim based on the movies, not a port of any of the X-Wing games

[Herra Tohtori]

Good.

They are good games (well the X-Wing/TIE Fighter games at least - XWA never hooked me like the previous ones) but if you can make it better, I definitely won't resist just because the old games felt different...

Nevertheless, I was actually trying to compare the roles of the fighters by their description as well as what impression I have of them based on the games. TIE/ln is a swarm pest no matter what kind of stats you make it have... and Y-Wing is a heavy fighter with heavy shielding, moderate firepower and heavy payload, and it pays for that in speed and maneuverability in pretty much all sources, including the games.

But I have to say I would welcome actually fast Star Wars fighters with open arms. Fun as the previous games may be, but most of the the ships feel like Volkswagens circling each other on the parking lot instead of lean mean killing machines used in outer space powerstruggles... What's up with that, eh.

[chief1983]

These ships will probably be faster than the stuff in BtRL, but probably without the maneuverability.  Should be interesting.

[Mobius]

One thing to note is that the interpretation given in the above post is based mainly on the video games as a source.  We're trying to stay as far away from the games as possible for reference.  SWC is a new star wars space sim based on the movies, not a port of any of the X-Wing games

Good. I think the movies are enough to get an idea of the parameters

These ships will probably be faster than the stuff in BtRL, but probably without the maneuverability.  Should be interesting.

are you going to use inertia, momentum, etc. etc. ? The movies, if I remember well, show no sign of these features.

[Herra Tohtori]

The movies have a very limited spectrum of ships being displayed in same scenes and those that have multiple ship classes in same scene give completely contradicting visual clues about relative performance values between ships.

Also, the visual effects improvements between old and new trilogy mean that Clone War era fighters are much faster and maneuverable than Galactic Civil War era fighters. Which is kinda ridiculous when you think about it...


I'm more for "what feels and looks good" approach, with relative strengths of different ships pronounced and/or balanced to form a coherent package of ships that are different to fly in some kind of believable manner.

[brandx0]

Mobius: No, we'll be keeping the WWII dogfights in space  feel that the movies were designed with

Herra Tohtori:  Even though the original trilogy was made with worse special effects, the feel of dogfights we're going for is from ROTJ for the most part.