[TomShak]

Just to add another voice in favour of the AG ..

As I'm sure I've stated in another thread somewhere, I always liked the assault gunboat because it gives the imperials capabilities they otherwise wouldn't have: hyperspace and ion-cannons. It seems fairly obvious that the dominant imperial tactic was small fighters without hyperspace supported by a larger vessel such as an ISD. None the less, it's not hard to imagine that they would have needed a limited number of more specialised fighters.

In my mind the assault gunboat would mainly be used for disabling craft for capture, as a rapid-reaction force that could arrive before an ISD, and for pre-strike reconnaissance. In terms of performance I agree with earlier comments, between a Y-Wing and an X-Wing. Given the nature of the tasks that would be assigned to the assault gunboat, it makes sense that it should be usable in either a bomber role, or in a space superiority role.

In terms of appearance, to me it always fitted in well because it looks like a Lambda class shuttle. I agree on the colours though, it should be more plain than in XWA. Just some different shades of grey would probably be enough to give it depth. I really liked the general shape of Vertigo's truespace model http://img53.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gbwholetempfq9.jpg. The wings are a little long perhaps, but I think the overall shape is good.

The other big thing I loved about the assault gunboat was that it was a really useful craft from the point of view of writing missions. If you want the empire to disable and capture something you were pretty much stuffed without a craft like the assault gunboat. It was also really useful that you could hyperspace them in at a critical moment. It also made some nice variety of missions for the empire as you could do more interesting stuff than you can with TIEs alone. You could be sent to disable and protect a capturing craft, or you could be sent on recon, or as the rapid response force to a rebel attack. You can make some really interesting missions around all of these things, but without a craft like the assault gunboat you simply can't do any of them ...

[brandx0]

I don't get why everyone is so hung up on ion cannons.  Yes in the games they were the only method of disabling a craft.  That was a game mechanic.  The movies make no such assumption.  Despite Vader's insistence that they capture Luke, Han and Leia throughout the trilogy, never once does an ISD use it's Ion cannons, but it has them.  Ion Cannons may be one way to disable a craft, but blowing up the engines or reactor work just as well, if you take the movies as a reference. 

[TomShak]

Well I'd say that the best argument is that the rebel alliance chose to put three ion cannons on the B-Wing. If ion cannons were not useful then it would make no sense to fit them. If the exact same function could be achieved by using lasers and simply targeting the engines then it would make sense to fit the B-Wing with 6 laser cannons.

We know that ion cannons did have the effect of disabling subsystems, and the fact that the Rebel's decided to fit them (3 of them none the less) on their custom designed B-Wing fighters suggests that they were considered a very useful asset. We can therefore conclude that the Rebel Alliance did not consider targeting subsystems with laser cannons to be an effective means of disabling ships.

Although it's conceivable that the Rebel Alliance favoured ion cannons and the Empire favoured other approaches, I find it hard to imagine that the empire had no use for a starfighter equipped with ion cannons. This is particularly true because I can think of a lot of cases where the Empire might want to disable escaping craft.

Also I like them from a gameplay perspective, I personally think trying to shoot out the engines on a Lamba shuttle would be all but impossible if it was maneuvering at all. You'd be more likely to end up blowing it up from missing and hitting a critical system, and that would be very problematic if the passengers had vital intelligence information ... I also rather doubt the AI would be very effective at disabling a shuttle in these circumstances, I'm sure 9 times out of 10 they would end up blowing it up by mistake ...

All in all I like the idea that ion cannons are for disabling, particularly since we canonically know that several rebel craft are fitted with them. Therefore I think the empire should have a similar craft, and for me that craft is the assault gunboat.  Just my point of view, obviously

[brandx0]

I didn't say Ion Cannons were useless, what I suggested is that, being as the empire never uses them when in fact they're the only ones who have any interest throughout the series of taking prisoners, means that there are other ways of capturing a ship.  In addition, the B-Wing is supposed to be a heavy assault starfighter meant to take down small capships. 

If anything, I'd suggest that an Ion Cannon is a great means to temporarily short out electrical systems as well as being good shield breakers, given that they are referenced on the Wookie as very effective against shields (which would also explain their use on the B-Wing) and because the Star Destroyer taken down by the Hoth Ion Cannon was only temporarily put out of commission.

Also, if they're used mainly in combat situations as shield breakers, it'd even further explain why the rebels use them more than the empire, given that the empire has such large ships with large guns, built to be some of the biggest combat vessels in existence, that the rebels' shields are rarely a concern for them (save for MonCals, but they entered the fight late.)  On the other hand, the rebels are often put up against large foes where surgical strikes on key systems and targets are a necessity, due to their lack of heavy hitters.

[swashmebuckle]

It's also worth noting that the Alliance has an interest in hijacking ships to help build their fleet, while that is not the case for the Empire.  Presumably the most fail proof way to make sure a vessel does not get away from you is to shoot up its engines or power system with your best guns, but if the Alliance wants to capture a vessel and have it stay captured, they have to be able to make off with it before Imperial reinforcements arrive.  Severely melted engines and reactors might slow down that turnaround time a little bit. 

The Empire on the other hand doesn't give a crap about the state some criminal's ship is in when they bring it in, they just want to get the job done as quickly as possible to make sure their quarry doesn't flee into hyperspace.  Then they can throw the whole thing into the hangar bay and sell it later at government auction.  Damn it's good to be an Imp. 

[TomShak]

Unfortunately Star Wars is full of things that are tactically illogical, and I would say this is just another example. Even if ion cannons were shield breakers designed to target and disable specific systems they should have had more use in the films. For example the opening scene of ANH with the Star Destroyer and the 'Rebel Blockade Runner'. We know the star destroyer carries ion cannons, and this would have seemed an ideal engagement to use them in. Busting through the corvette's shields and disabling their engines was exactly what the star destroyer was trying to do, and without the risk of collateral damage that lasers had. Yet the star destroyer clearly uses turbo lasers, which is very hard to explain from a tactical standpoint.

Without a doubt there are several different approaches that SWC could take with ion cannons, and I'm sure it would be possible to support each option with good canonical evidence  Personally I quite enjoyed the way ion cannons worked in the TG games, it was nice that you could disable shuttles and transports quite easily and a lot of the missions made use of this to good effect in my view. But I'm sure there would be other ways of doing it.

Moving back onto topic, as I say there are many reasons that I'm a fan of the assault gunboat I certainly like it a lot more than many of the other craft introduced by the TG games, for example the ridiculous TIE Defender and Missile Boat.

[Narvi]

Who says the output of a star destroyer's ion cannons are equal to its turbolasers?

The destroyer's ion cannons might only be able to disable fighters.

[brandx0]

I doubt they'd waste the space on them in that case.  Also look at the ISD I, which has two Ion cannon turrets that are even bigger than its main Turbolaser turrets, at roughly 50-60m in diameter.  Seems a little silly that they'd build a turret half the size of a football field to disable small starfighters

[aRaven]

maybe they didn' t use the ion cannons because they require more energy to fire it. Maybe they are ineffective against shields. maybe they are slower. these reasons are probably why the Devastator used surgical strikes at the reactor of the Tantive IV.

[chief1983]

That and the destroyer didn't have a firing solution with its Ion cannons, I don't think.

[brandx0]

Maybe those two turrets, how about the other 60 scattered around the hull?

Either way, the point I'm trying to make is not that Ion cannons are useless, or that Ion cannons don't disable ships, it's that it's 100% indisputable that you do not require Ion cannons to capture a ship.  Therefore, the argument that the gunboat is necessary due to the idea that the empire would have no other way to capture a ship without it is invalid.

[EtherShock]

I believe the difference here is the meaning between "capture" and "board." Capturing a ship consists of boarding the vessel and taking it over. Boarding a ship however, isn't necessarily concerned with capture of the craft, so in those cases, who cares what kind of state the vessel is left in, as long as you can board it and capture who or what you're looking for on it.

In the case of the movies, the Devastator obviously wasn't interested in capturing the Tantive IV, only boarding it and capturing the Princess and recovering the Death Star plans. The Devastator is also many times larger than a corvette and with strong shields, so it need not be concerned with taking out weapons systems, as it could take whatever the Tantive IV could dish out, even if it was firing on it during boarding maneuvers. A smaller boarding craft would definitely need to be worried about this though. If only the engines were taken out, a well armed vessel could very easily still defend itself from a boarding operation. They would also be useful against more fragile targets, such as shuttles and fighters. The Rebels in Empire on the other hand just wanted to knock a Star Destroyer out of commission for a long time so the transports could get away. These connotate two different uses of ion cannons, but they both share the common goal of taking out defenses, with the former for boarding purposes.

Ions should take out a craft for a long time, from a few hours to days, which is much longer than any can take in a game, unless you...edit in the status in the following mission, let's say. Ships should be able to repair themselves in most cases I think, but a specialized repair crew will obviously expedite the process.

I suggest splitting this thread into a separate discussion of ion cannons before it gets any further off topic.

[TomShak]

This is definitely getting off topic

I still think they would be a valuable asset to the empire for capturing smaller and faster ships such as shuttles and transports, where reliably hitting the engines could be extremely difficult. I do take your point, though, that certainly for larger craft destroying the engines or such like is also a valid option - albeit probably a more risky one.

As I say, for me there are lots of reasons to like the assault gunboat and ion cannons are only a small part of it. For reconnaissance, for a rapid-response force, for patrols. Not everyone agrees though, and that's fine

[aRaven]

A smaller boarding craft would definitely need to be worried about this though. If only the engines were taken out, a well armed vessel could very easily still defend itself from a boarding operation.
Ions should take out a craft for a long time, from a few hours to days, which is much longer than any can take in a game, unless you...edit in the status in the following mission, let's say. Ships should be able to repair themselves in most cases I think, but a specialized repair crew will obviously expedite the process.

The Tantive IV reactor had to be shut down, and with it all its weapons and defense systems. So it doesn't matter if you attack with a big or small ship. As brandx0 said, the ion cannon is not the only way to strip a ship of its defenses and to disable it.

I don't agree with disabled ships to stay disabled for such a long time. In The Space Combat Simulator games, the systems of a ion/emp-based disabled craft are restored instantly after the boarding procedure. That doesn't make sense. Why can't the crew repair systems on its own in that time? The disabled ship's crew should be able to restore systems in a shorter time...making boarding missions harder. But you can disable it then again, of course .

[SPECTRE87]

Only 10 times is far too many, I meant bevel it one time.

Oh, and of the E-Wing again, I just did up a triangulated wire render for ya, note how my large engine pods have less sides than your tiny tiny little tubes for the S-foils.

You do realize there is no effective way that the pilot can enter/exit that craft?.. The top weapon needs to be raised or removed...

[StarSlayer]

Supposedly the laser cannon flips up

[Pred the Penguin]

You do realize there is no effective way that the pilot can enter/exit that craft?.. The top weapon needs to be raised or removed...

That is true to the original design.


As for ion cannons and the Devastator scene...
Why would you use ion cannons, while you can just burn off the engines with turbolasers? If you're trying to stop a ship from escaping, it wouldn't make much sense to temporarily disable it.

[Revan]

Maybe those two turrets, how about the other 60 scattered around the hull?

Either way, the point I'm trying to make is not that Ion cannons are useless, or that Ion cannons don't disable ships, it's that it's 100% indisputable that you do not require Ion cannons to capture a ship.  Therefore, the argument that the gunboat is necessary due to the idea that the empire would have no other way to capture a ship without it is invalid.

I agree.

But i think Ion Cannos aber a better way to disable minor Crafts.
 In Episode V the ion discharge seems to go over the entire hull of the ISD. 
I want to say therewith that the ion canons must land probably no direct hit in order to reach the engines. 

If we assumes now, that a direct laser hit has the same effect on the engines of a Shuttles, you need a verry good pilot to do that.  For with every shot of that not directly the engine encounters, takes the Shuttle further damage and is destroyed if possible before its disabled. Therefore I would propose that Ion Canons correspond more like the principle of the Leach Cannon or yet better to the Disruptor Missle. 

[brandx0]

How the hell did my E-Wing get on here...?

[chief1983]

It was from way the hell up in the other thread, where he was just starting to work on his Gunboat, but I didn't feel like pulling it too, and this post didn't make any more sense over there really.