First Strike Forums — Tie fighters and tie bombers.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (MK4210) — Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:51:50 +0000

Sorry for assuming too much, I realize that FS is a completely new mod. I only posted my concern for the falcon being a stationary gun platform basing it on the bad experiences from GC, since I have nothing else to base it off of. I just posted a warning as to what was bad in GC so that the same mistake wouldn't be made twice.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (generalandrew) — Fri, 14 Apr 2006 00:35:48 +0000

That's correct. Echo Base it self was stated in an interview to be multiple interior stories, so there has to be at least more than on entrance besides the main hanger bay.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (someguy) — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:57:59 +0000

Your entire assumtion fall apart when you realise this game wont be anything like GC.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (MK4210) — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:22:53 +0000

I understand that the falcon will be a stationary object that can be destroyed and at the same time have operable turrets. What worries me is that even though the falcon will be destroyable, that it will be impossible to actually destroy it if someone is using a turret.
In Galactic Conquest, when the Imperials had taken Echo Base, Rebels that spawned inside the falcon and manned the turrets would cut down the imperial troops attempting to destroy it. It would be nearly impossible to move anywhere within the hangar or to go near the falcon to destroy it. In my opinion this is a huge advantage for the rebels, because the falcon let the rebels spawn kill the imperials and quickly retake echo base.
When I mentioned the noob player (sorry for using that word), or any other player for that matter, I meant that it was the one player that used the falcon and left the hangar. In GC this was the saving grace for the Imperials because we could finally leave the hangar and worry about other command posts. Since it will be static, there will be nothing left for the Imperials to do other than to stay in the tunnels while the Rebels hold all of the other command posts.
It won’t matter if the falcon doesn’t move because if even just one rebel player is in it operating the turrets it would be impossible to destroy. I’m assuming that the Falcon will not be a spawn point in FS, but even so it only takes one player to cause havoc. I just think that it will be too overpowered for the Rebels to have the Falcon as an operable gun platform. I suggest that it is just put in the game for show in Hoth since it was only Han and Chewy that probably knew how to operate it.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (FSDev| RedMonkey999) — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:16:11 +0000

hmm, you have conflicting viewpoints I think, I'm not completely sure.

First off, if the Falcon were deployed as a "static with guns", it wouldn't be a static in the sense of a BF2 static object, it would be a static in the sense that it wouldn't be able to take off/move. It would be a vehicle with a certain amount of HP (therefore destroyable), but it wouldn't have any engines (hence the "static" part). It would be enterable yet stationary, static yet destroyable.

Secondly, if some n00b, as you say, wouldn't be able to take off in it, wouldn't that be a good thing?

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (MK4210) — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 21:17:32 +0000

How will the player exit the tie fighter if it can't land? Also, will there be parachutes in FS, or some sort of ejection system?

EDIT:
If the falcon was made static with guns, it would be nearly impossible to destroy as was the case in GC. And because its static no stupid noob can come along and take off in it.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (FSDev| RedMonkey999) — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 18:49:16 +0000

The reason TIE Fighters can't operate without a base or a capital ship is because they don't have hyperdrives, all of the alliance starfighters have their own hyperdrives. TIE Fighters don't have landing gear because they have those huge solar panels, it wouldn't be practical. If the empire wanted them to be able to land, they could just reinforce the panels.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (Markus) — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:41:10 +0000

yea but bombers that cant fly in a atmosphere wouldnt make any sence. but a Star Fighter is build for battles between the stars.
is tie fighter where made to lad why dont they have a landing gear like x-wings.
a tie fighter can only operate with a base schiip nearby. that what a wise old man once sad (or was it the crazy man)

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (Dragunov) — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:34:57 +0000

yes, they all had a repulsor lift to fly in atmopshere

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (FSDev| RedMonkey999) — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:27:28 +0000

I believe all of the starfighters had repulsors (antigrav) so I doubt they would have had a problem flying near a planet's surface. Besides, they, like the TIE Bombers, made many bombing runs on surface targets.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (MK4210) — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 14:42:05 +0000

What I'm wondering is a ywing aerodynamic enough to fly with gravity?

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (mechag2) — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 02:27:27 +0000

Actually, the standard TIE/ln's wings are structurally sound enough to support the weight of the craft, although it was designed specifically for specialized racks within Imperial hangers. There's no ladder system to let you down if you were to land on a surface and getting back up into the cockpit would be a major pain if you could get down. I don't know if the wings of other TIE variants could support their own weight, but I would imagine that the TIE Bomber wouldn't have any problems seeing as how it's the sturdiest of TIE fighter models (during the Civil War era).

The internal workings of the T-47's afterburners are greatly different from that of a starfighter. The X-wing and Y-wing squadrons stationed at Echo Base didn't need any modifications to operate successfully in such a harsh environment.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (Dragunov) — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:01:15 +0000

The daytime temperatures of Hoth were bearable for properly dressed humans, but the Hoth nights are too hostile even for the native creatures.

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (zanth91) — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:07:06 +0000

Well think of this...It may have been warm enough durring the day for it to fly. Why? Look at all the guys on the battlefield fighting. If it was -200, they couldn't move...

Re: Tie fighters and tie bombers.

null@example.com (Dragunov) — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:32:08 +0000

x-wings could fly on Hoth, cause R2 directed the plane to Luke for take-off