Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29
  1. #1
    Astonishing Member ChrisIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,053

    Default Should the sequel trilogy have used more interesting ship designs?

    While the prequels did have familiar looking ships, they didn't seem quite as identical to the OT counterparts as many of the sequel trilogy ships did, apart from the Slave One of course. Also each movie evolved the look; the cruisers in AOTC for example, evolve into the more OT-looking Venators in the next film. The Jedi and clone fighters do resemble the OT ships a bit but have many key differences. (The Clone's X-wing style ship, for instance, is much larger with multiple pilots).


    The TIE fighter is perhaps the worst example-it's pretty much identical, except painted black, apart from the twin-seater variant which has an extra attachment to the wings, some red paint and an antennae popping out. We did get some slight variation with Kylo's TIEs (although his ROS one is pretty much just an interceptor) and the Sith ship seen briefly in ROS, but that's it.

    Same with the Starfighters. Apart from a few cosmetic changes (Which largely harkened back to concept art) they were pretty much the same.

    Having the Millennium Falcon around of course makes sense but it was kind of weird having them just bring the old Tantive IV back. (an updated version of the design, the Ninka, was Holdo's original ship in TLJ and the model appears several times in ROS's end battle)


    The Star Destroyers fared a little better in the first two films-the Resurgent looks just different enough, and the Supremacy and Dreadnought were pretty much the same way. However, ROS decided to get extremely lazy and use the Rogue One/Solo model of the Imperial One destroyer, just scaled up, with some red paint and a ventral cannon.







    Even Rogue One seemed to have a bit more variety in it's ship designs with the Death Trooper's TIE fighters, the U-wing, and the variations on the Imperial shuttle (Including "Rogue One" itself).
    chrism227.wordpress.com Info and opinions on a variety of interests.

    https://twitter.com/chrisprtsmouth

  2. #2
    Put a smile on that face Immortal Weapon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Bronx, New York
    Posts
    8,084

    Default

    The sequels could have benefited from having any new ships. They borrowed what already exists and that's a shame. Rebels managed to introduce new ships and that series is before the OT.

  3. #3
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,135

    Default

    I would have liked to see more new ships, or in general an aesthetic that doesn't almost like the one from the OT.

    I also found it very wired that they used the standard Tie for the prequels and not the (imo way cooler looking) Tie interceptor.

  4. #4
    Astonishing Member ChrisIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,053

    Default

    Yeah-the Interceptor is after all actually intended to counter firepower and speed of the Rebel's starfighters (Although it shows up in Fallen Order which is way before the Rebellion is really that organized).


    We did get Kylo's ships which were pretty close in design (Although it's kind of interesting his Silencer kind of looks a lot like the TIE Avenger, a mass-production version of the Advanced from the Legends continuity) and an FO interceptor in Resistance.
    chrism227.wordpress.com Info and opinions on a variety of interests.

    https://twitter.com/chrisprtsmouth

  5. #5
    iMan 42s
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,297

    Default

    The bomber's big change is silly to have even made but the Dagger is just so odd since the Special Forces TIE is already the interceptor and it doesn't even look like it can land properly. In addition to that the Dagger is used by Eternal fleet which has limited pilots and resources but instead of making fixes to its tech made a ship it didn't need with limited pilots. There's also the Xyston destroyer which seems to have made all the design decisions wrong. Like an outside cannon when the tech preceding it had it inside and we know the FO have superlasers which can be fired independently of the main reactor of a ship. The Dagger also has a harder time launching as the hangar is covered by the axial laser so it has to launch from the sides but there is no visible hangar on a Xyston. Meaning that while it should have a hangar or launch bay for the fighters, it's not nearly large enough multiple fighters can launch. So it's compliment of fighters have to be from elsewhere in addition to needing time to get troops moving. You can't even argue the FO itself did worse as the FO destroyers had three versions of this with the main body being open to space allowing fighters to launch through shields or open space, a hangar bay, and ports. The FO had versatility while the Sith had a glaring weakness you'd already be predisposed to targeting.
    -----------------------------------
    For anyone that needs to know why OMD is awful please search the internet for Linkara' s video's specifically his One more day review or his One more day Analysis.

  6. #6

    Default

    To be fair the new ship would need to do more then just appear. Especially if all they do is get blown up. I don't think people will be interested in a ship that does nothing then gets blown up. Case and point the "Star Fortress" bombers which were terrible compared to the previous bombers like the Y-wing.

    I know every time I make this comparison someone says the Y-wing is obsolete. To which my response is this. "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

  7. #7
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MASTER-OF-SUPRISE View Post
    Case and point the "Star Fortress" bombers which were terrible compared to the previous bombers like the Y-wing.
    The way they were shown on screen didn't really made much sense, I mean these Bombers should be imo able to fly with speeds comparable to light fighters like Millennium Falcon or the Ghost, and those are usually shown to to be much faster and much more robust.

    If the "Star Fortress" bombers had actual capabilities that were in line with other ships of their size in Star Wars (I mean in the and of the day the "Star Fortress" bombers are basically just very specialized fighters) they could be really devastating weapons.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aahz View Post
    The way they were shown on screen didn't really made much sense, I mean these Bombers should be imo able to fly with speeds comparable to light fighters like Millennium Falcon or the Ghost, and those are usually shown to to be much faster and much more robust.

    If the "Star Fortress" bombers had actual capabilities that were in line with other ships of their size in Star Wars (I mean in the and of the day the "Star Fortress" bombers are basically just very specialized fighters) they could be really devastating weapons.
    If you ask me they're only function is that of a metal coffin. I would take any ship over those things. Thier speed was terrible and the durability of wet tissue paper.

  9. #9
    Extraordinary Member Jackalope89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    6,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MASTER-OF-SUPRISE View Post
    If you ask me they're only function is that of a metal coffin. I would take any ship over those things. Thier speed was terrible and the durability of wet tissue paper.
    And they drop bombs like they're supposed to be in a planet's atmosphere.

    Maybe they could be effective, if with a fighter escort, against infantry and fortified positions, but in space?

  10. #10
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MASTER-OF-SUPRISE View Post
    If you ask me they're only function is that of a metal coffin. I would take any ship over those things. Thier speed was terrible and the durability of wet tissue paper.
    The thing is with the usual Star Wars Technology it should be possible to build Bombers like this with a speed and durability comparable to the Ghost or the Falcon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackalope89 View Post
    And they drop bombs like they're supposed to be in a planet's atmosphere.

    Maybe they could be effective, if with a fighter escort, against infantry and fortified positions, but in space?
    Star Wars Space Fighters works like WWII Planes that doesn't really make sense but that's how it is.

    And at least in the EU already the Proton Torpedos of one Squad (= 12) of X-Wings were quite dangerous for a capital ship and those had only 6 torpedos each

    One of the "Star Fortress" has 1048 proton bombs that about 15 times the payload of entire X-Wing squad (assuming the bombs are as powerfull as the topedos, and I would actually assume that they are more powerfull). Thats a lot of fire power.

  11. #11
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    7,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackalope89 View Post
    And they drop bombs like they're supposed to be in a planet's atmosphere.

    Maybe they could be effective, if with a fighter escort, against infantry and fortified positions, but in space?
    A.) the idea is that they had a guidance system) and B.) they were positioned to "fall" from the bottom of the bomber; laws of physics in a vacuum would make that work.
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  12. #12
    Non-fanboy Member Cel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Level 42
    Posts
    431

    Default

    I'm a little on the fence about new ship designs. A part of me would have liked to see all-new designs with the exception of the Falcon, but when I think about how ragtag the Resistance was (maybe even less supported than the Rebellion was) and that the First Order was basically the remnants of the Empire, I could see them both holding onto proven and established designs and just updating them.
    "Ignore them. They're nothing but a bunch of basement dwellers who spend all day whining on the 'net. Not a single open-minded one in the bunch."
    --Andre Briggs, Justice League International #1

  13. #13
    Oni of the Ash Moon Ronin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Here, for now.
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    A.) the idea is that they had a guidance system) and B.) they were positioned to "fall" from the bottom of the bomber; laws of physics in a vacuum would make that work.
    I thought it was explained that they were "magnetic" of a sort. Any way there were still slow as molasses.
    Surely not everybody was kung fu fighting

  14. #14
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    7,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moon Ronin View Post
    I thought it was explained that they were "magnetic" of a sort. Any way there were still slow as molasses.
    Yeah, that's right, magnets. As far as being slow, well, Star Wars has always operated on "space battles are just like WWII dog fights" and "rule of cool."
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  15. #15
    iMan 42s
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    3,297

    Default

    Film and TV don't work with real world time-scaling. So things in-universe are actually going much faster most of the time being that speed is meant for style or moments in the narrative. It's the same reasoning as to why if Ahoska was ever adapted to film or games she wouldn't be nearly as fast as she is on TV. Different mediums and different directing styles will change the speed of something happening. In the Clone Wars when Tup assassinates his general we actually see this in-action, as the scene plays out slower than molasses as to build tension but we see in a recording it happened within a couple of seconds.

    Specifically the bombs aboard the bomber are magnetic as to make sure they connect with a ship and can even propel faster as it's deployment is magnetically sped up. Basically magnetic to deploy and connect with a target.
    -----------------------------------
    For anyone that needs to know why OMD is awful please search the internet for Linkara' s video's specifically his One more day review or his One more day Analysis.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •