[brandx0]

Now we've got some content on there, come see it Here

[haloboy100]

Keeps getting better and better

[Flipside]

Looks very nice, good start!

[DarthWang]

Not bad. Are you guys going to make the actual Battle of Endor?

[Stormkeeper]

Something I've noticed.

Rebel fighters are LESS manueverable, but MORE durable than Imp fighters, but Rebel capital ships are MORE manueverable, and LESS durable than Imp capital ships, usually, anyway.

[haloboy100]

and?

[brandx0]

Yeah, that's pretty much what the article says, though as mentioned in the article, Rebel Capships will vary considerably in their characteristics, due to their multi-national origins and often homebrewed designs

[Stormkeeper]

Just making a point. Usually military organizations will have one main modus operandi, like hitting the enemy hard and fast, or bulldozing them, and their ships and vehicles will all generally have similar specs. But the Imps and Rebs have varying ship specifications. Although, if you think about it resource wise, it makes a lot of sense.

[haloboy100]

The mon calamari cruiser is thought to be more powerful than a star destroyer, isn't it?

At least in EAW.

[Stormkeeper]

No idea, but I had no problems taking down Mon Calamari's as long as I approached them from the rear. And Homeworld tactics work fine in EAW too.

[haloboy100]

What are some of those tactics?

I never really moved my ships in battle in EAW. For some reason whenever I moved them in battle it made them stop shooting.

[Droid803]

Mon Cals are better than ISDs in EaW, given face-to-face confrontation without the TIE bombers. (Mainly due to power to shields)
However, whichever is behind the other will win in another other case.

Yr, you can use flanking maneuvers in EaW, just not very well since the ships are real slow. Corellian Gunboats are real fun to have circling ISDs though

[haloboy100]

Do ships in EAW fire at the same power when they are moving as they do when they are stationary? and at the same target?

[Droid803]

I'm pretty sure they do. I've been through all the XML files (tables, if you will), and there's nothing to suggest that they would fire weaker shots while moving. They might "opportunity fire" at random targets in range though...

[brandx0]

As for the research I've done, the MonCal Cruisers have less weaponry and weaker shields than ISDs, but their shields recharge at a faster rate.

[Titan]

please don't reference EaW... a great game, but should not be considered when talking about SW canon.

[Revan]

I have always so estimated it that the star destroyer is minimal better then the MC-80.

My inuniverse Resasons:
The Star Destroyer has more weapons. Ingames it has more shild power. It can focus all his weapns at one point. And it is the fastest ship of its size.

My outuniverse Reason:

The Heros (Rebells) are only as good as their opponents. I hate games or movies, in that the hostiles are stuip and weak, meanwhile the Heros are smart and strong. You ask yourself never, if the Heros will survive. This is simply boring.

But the advantage of the star destroyer should be really only at a minimum.

So I suggest that the Mon-Cal should get more Hitpoints (It has a bigger volume) and a higher shild recharge.
With good skilled Pilots and an capable commander, it would be possible for an MC-80 to destroy an Star Destroyer.

[Turambar]

yeah, it always seemed to me that the mon-calamari designs had weaker firepower, but much more durable hull and shields than the ISD.  The Mon-Calamari have multiple redundant shield systems and overlaps that give the MonCal Cruisers an incredible durability.

[Snail]

Well the skeleton of a Mon Calamari can still apparently skewer a Star Destroyer easily.

[brandx0]

Actually the moncal hulls are weaker than the Star Destroyers, remember they weren't designed as combat warships, but as mentioned, their shields do recharge much faster