Thrawn's Revenge

Imperial Civil War [Empire at War] => Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback => Topic started by: HobbesHurlbut on April 05, 2017, 08:19:11 AM

Title: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 05, 2017, 08:19:11 AM
Looking over the ship roster of the New Republic. I don't know if anyone had realized it but until Era 4/5 the NR have only the MC40a for ion cannon firepower below the capital ships. At Era 4 you have Sanchen gunship and Corana Frigate, Era 5 the Bothan Assault Cruiser for ion cannon firepower available to Light and Heavy Frigate shipyards.

So until Era 4, you have to rely on capital ships to provide ion cannons to knock down other ships shield quickly if not starfighters like B-Wings and Y-Wings (well, the proton torpedo helps a lot) or depend on MC40a a lot more.

IR has Carrack and Vindicator for Light shipyard, Strike Class Cruiser and VSD II for Heavy shipyard.
PA has Enforcer and Vindicator for Light Shipyard, VSDII and Munificent Star Frigate for Heavy Shipyard.
EotH has Decimator (era 4/5) for Light Shipyard, Warlord (again, Proton Torpedoes; big damage multiplier against shields) and Chaf for Heavy Shipyard.

So what does this mean for you as a NR admiral? Well, you could always invest in capital ships but that take time! and lots of credits! What about building up starfighters with ion cannons and proton torpedoes? Certainly doable! But expect casualties and micromanage when the OpFor has heavy antifighter corvettes/frigates. At least from a material standpoint, starfighters are CHEAP and *cough* expendable *cough*. Good news is that MC40a should be getting her population count reduced in 2.2!
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: the_trots on April 05, 2017, 11:41:41 AM
In my opinion the NR doesn't have Ion Support from Frigates until Era 5 BAC.

 Yes the Sacheen and Corona may have Ion Cannons but these ships are close to useless in ship to ship combat. 
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: briG on April 05, 2017, 01:43:25 PM
Proton torpedoes do massively increased damage to shields. Essentially Ion cannons in projectile form that also do increased damage to stations.

Not to mention Y-Wings and B-Wings have ion cannons themselves.

I mean I think the whole IPV devouring swarms of bombers like a fat kid in a pie eating contest is a kinda crummy situation but it's doable.

Dedicated ships for eating shields arent THAT neccesary imo, depends on what faction you're playing really. 4-6 Chafs to augment Phalanx class destroyers and their almost pure turbolaser armament works pretty well but not many ships have that many ion cannons to begin with.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 05, 2017, 01:48:19 PM
Proton torpedoes do massively increased damage to shields. Essentially Ion cannons in projectile form that also do increased damage to stations.

Not to mention Y-Wings and B-Wings have ion cannons themselves.
Yeah that's why I did mention them in the OP. And also why we love Warlord in EotH.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: the_trots on April 05, 2017, 01:53:16 PM
Proton torpedoes do massively increased damage to shields. Essentially Ion cannons in projectile form that also do increased damage to stations.

Not to mention Y-Wings and B-Wings have ion cannons themselves.

I mean I think the whole IPV devouring swarms of bombers like a fat kid in a pie eating contest is a kinda crummy situation but it's doable.

Dedicated ships for eating shields arent THAT neccesary imo, depends on what faction you're playing really. 4-6 Chafs to augment Phalanx class destroyers and their almost pure turbolaser armament works pretty well but not many ships have that many ion cannons to begin with.

The Chaf is a badass ship.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: GreyStar on April 05, 2017, 07:35:42 PM
Brig is correct with the Y-Wing and B-Wings utilizing their ion cannons. Individually it's not much, but it's capable of bringing shields down with enough fleet supporting firepower and other bombers. According to my figures for 2.1 (haven't had the time for 2.2) I had 9X, 6A, 4Y, and 8B in a personally optimal New Republic fleet. Those bombers were enough to help take down shields.

You see the MC40a in 2.1 at least was not a heavy frigate, it had the shields of one but not the damage output. What was important however was that it carries B-Wings and ion cannons, allowing it to act as a shield stripper and take some firepower. Using the MC40a as a shield stripper instead of a damage dealer works like a charm (at least in 2.1) hence I think it would do the same as 2.2 Last looking I had 5 Dreadnaughts working with 2 MC40as.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 05, 2017, 07:38:43 PM
Hold on you guys....you do realize I did mention starfighters and also B-Wing/Y-Wing specifically in the Original Post?
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: GreyStar on April 05, 2017, 07:52:22 PM
Apologies, you are right and I misread it as "BWings and Y-Wings are good because proton torpedoes" not "ion cannons on starfighters are great like the B-Wing and Y-Wing which also contain proton torpedos which are also great".
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Helix345 on April 05, 2017, 09:54:23 PM
devouring swarms of bombers like a fat kid in a pie eating contest is a kinda crummy situation but it's doable.

This description made me laugh so hard and I don't know why.

I personally think that the nr could swap out a ship for something a little more ionic. The battle dragons fill the role pretty well but are only available in hunt for zinji (as far as I know).
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Bucman55 on April 05, 2017, 11:45:34 PM
This description made me laugh so hard and I don't know why.

I personally think that the nr could swap out a ship for something a little more ionic. The battle dragons fill the role pretty well but are only available in hunt for zinji (as far as I know).
Actually you can get some for free by taking Hapes in any GC it's present in. As for an ionic frigate... Maybe the CC-9600 http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/CC-9600_frigate (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/CC-9600_frigate) or the Liberator-Clas Cruiser http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Liberator-class_cruiser (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Liberator-class_cruiser), though the latter may be more of a capital ship. Also if they don't mind making up a new ship design, they could do the Proficient-Class Cruiser : http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Proficient-class_cruiser (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Proficient-class_cruiser) for later eras (4-5).
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Helix345 on April 06, 2017, 07:40:49 AM
I'm pretty sure that they have a proficient class in ascendancy.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 06, 2017, 08:11:43 AM
If the mod team can fix the Assault Frigate's armament to match Saga Edition loadout (a very good depiction), they can justify swapping out the Dreadnaught for another ship. (Heavy Frigate shipyard slot).

Edited: Hrm well, giving NR access to Carrack can be justified. It was widespread like Dreadnaught (as Assault Frigate in NR hands) and it is tough and fast which supplement the starfighters very well enough. The only reasons that I brought up Carrack is so the team doesn't have to develop a new model and both factions did use it.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: GreyStar on April 06, 2017, 12:25:15 PM
Why aren't we using the Dauntless Cruiser? It has ion cannons and in Ascendancy it has enough room for an X-Wing squadron. No need to replace the Dreadnaught if we have that in the demo.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Corey on April 06, 2017, 05:41:13 PM
If the mod team can fix the Assault Frigate's armament to match Saga Edition loadout (a very good depiction), they can justify swapping out the Dreadnaught for another ship. (Heavy Frigate shipyard slot).

Edited: Hrm well, giving NR access to Carrack can be justified. It was widespread like Dreadnaught (as Assault Frigate in NR hands) and it is tough and fast which supplement the starfighters very well enough. The only reasons that I brought up Carrack is so the team doesn't have to develop a new model and both factions did use it.

If we remove the Dreadnaught for them, it wouldn't be replaced. Their roster is pretty loaded as is.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Bucman55 on April 06, 2017, 06:02:51 PM
Why aren't we using the Dauntless Cruiser? It has ion cannons and in Ascendancy it has enough room for an X-Wing squadron. No need to replace the Dreadnaught if we have that in the demo.
The Dauntless in the demo is messed up. It currently has a hangar and is supposed to drop 2 X-Wing squadrons and 1 Y-Wing squadron (according to the text tooltip, but the code only gives it 2 X-Wing squadrons), but the hardpoint is broken somehow and the game doesn't think it exists so it ends up not having any fighter support. The Dauntless acts more like a fast tank and as far as damage goes, it ranges from underwhelming - average.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: GreyStar on April 06, 2017, 06:32:47 PM
Well the NR can't exactly have a BAC available pre Era 5. It'll be better in full 2.2 if Ascendancy is anything to go by.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Bucman55 on April 06, 2017, 06:51:00 PM
Well the NR can't exactly have a BAC available pre Era 5. It'll be better in full 2.2 if Ascendancy is anything to go by.
I hope so. Playing NR in the demo is 45% using Imperial ships, 35% using Hapan ships, and 20% using the only decent NR cruisers in the demo. I don't even waste my time building fighter squadrons as cruisers that carry fighters are actually victory-relevant.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 06, 2017, 06:56:38 PM
If we remove the Dreadnaught for them, it wouldn't be replaced. Their roster is pretty loaded as is.
is 2.2 adding to the roster? Will we have another ship that at least have a few ion cannons in Light or Heavy Frigate shipyard?
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Bucman55 on April 06, 2017, 07:05:48 PM
is 2.2 adding to the roster? Will we have another ship that at least have a few ion cannons in Light or Heavy Frigate shipyard?
Have you not played the demo? The Dauntless was added and it's buildable from the Heavy Frigate shipyard, though it isn't great. The only other ship I know they're adding in 2.2 is the Republic-Class Star Destroyer, though that's a capital ship.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 07, 2017, 08:00:04 AM
Have you not played the demo? The Dauntless was added and it's buildable from the Heavy Frigate shipyard, though it isn't great. The only other ship I know they're adding in 2.2 is the Republic-Class Star Destroyer, though that's a capital ship.
Oh I thought Dauntless was a capital ship considering her fluff describing her as 2nd largest cruiser in the fleet and being over a kilometer long.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Bucman55 on April 07, 2017, 10:44:11 AM
Oh I thought Dauntless was a capital ship considering her fluff describing her as 2nd largest cruiser in the fleet and being over a kilometer long.
It certainly looks like a capital ship. It looks larger than the MC80 Liberty.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: tlmiller on April 07, 2017, 12:10:31 PM
It's basically the same length as the Liberty.  It was put in as a cruiser instead of a capital ship because the NR needed cruisers more than capital ships, and they're not as iconic as the MonCal line of capitals.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: HobbesHurlbut on April 07, 2017, 12:41:30 PM
It's basically the same length as the Liberty.  It was put in as a cruiser instead of a capital ship because the NR needed cruisers more than capital ships, and they're not as iconic as the MonCal line of capitals.
Oh and did it replaced a ship in that slot? If not, I understand what Corey meant when he said if Dreadnaught was removed, it wouldn't be replaced by another ship.
Title: Re: A certain ionic deficient in the NR ship roster
Post by: Bucman55 on April 07, 2017, 12:56:06 PM
Oh and did it replaced a ship in that slot?
I don't think so. There wasn't really much in between a Cap-Ship and Heavy Frigate for the NR in 2.1 until era 4.