Le sigh. It makes the setting feel so much smaller if we keep (literally) retreading the same ground. At least they can't do random jackassery like "Oh, Yoda and Chewie were BFF 20 years ago" this time.
The setting is already small. I mean, travel time is always shown as the initial jump to hyperspace. After that, you're where you want to be. But is it really surprising that in a movie still containing Luke that Tatooine would be a location? I mean, it was kind of his home.
He spent his whole life wishing to leave and it's the site of his foster parents' brutal murder? He has nothing to return to there.
In the EU he hung out at the Jedi Temple on Yavin 4 teaching students (in between galaxy-saving heroic adventures of course), I kinda assumed they'd do the same. Although probably on Coruscant, because fancier visuals.
There really isn't a good reason for anyone to go back to Hoth or Tatooine other than "zomg nostalgia".
Um.. lots of people grow up in small towns that they can't wait to get out of. And then they come back, because its home.
But I'm impressed that you can determine the story couldn't possibly have a good reason to return to Tatooine based on absolutely zero information. You should totally use that sort of power play the stock market or something.
Oh please. You can come up with a reason for anything, but this seems more like Tatooine appearing in the prequels so far.
Based on what? We seriously know nothing about the story. How do you get to say it seems like anything?
1) History
2) The director
3) The very fact that it exists at all
If your little pre-emptive nerd-hate somehow makes the wait for Ep7 easier, then good for you, but you're being a silly goose by making assumptions based on the fact that a location is simply in the movie, without any other context.
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
I have always felt that Tattooine was like the Star Wars equivalent of Twin Peaks, WA. It's a backwater place that for some reason The Force/Powers Unknown has decided to be a nexus of shit happening.
Le sigh. It makes the setting feel so much smaller if we keep (literally) retreading the same ground. At least they can't do random jackassery like "Oh, Yoda and Chewie were BFF 20 years ago" this time.
The setting is already small. I mean, travel time is always shown as the initial jump to hyperspace. After that, you're where you want to be. But is it really surprising that in a movie still containing Luke that Tatooine would be a location? I mean, it was kind of his home.
He spent his whole life wishing to leave and it's the site of his foster parents' brutal murder? He has nothing to return to there.
In the EU he hung out at the Jedi Temple on Yavin 4 teaching students (in between galaxy-saving heroic adventures of course), I kinda assumed they'd do the same. Although probably on Coruscant, because fancier visuals.
There really isn't a good reason for anyone to go back to Hoth or Tatooine other than "zomg nostalgia".
Um.. lots of people grow up in small towns that they can't wait to get out of. And then they come back, because its home.
But I'm impressed that you can determine the story couldn't possibly have a good reason to return to Tatooine based on absolutely zero information. You should totally use that sort of power play the stock market or something.
Oh please. You can come up with a reason for anything, but this seems more like Tatooine appearing in the prequels so far.
Based on what? We seriously know nothing about the story. How do you get to say it seems like anything?
1) History
2) The director
3) The very fact that it exists at all
If your little pre-emptive nerd-hate somehow makes the wait for Ep7 easier, then good for you, but you're being a silly goose by making assumptions based on the fact that a location is simply in the movie, without any other context.
What assumptions? You have some weird idea about what the reaction going on here is. It's just eyerolling EU-style silliness where they keep going back to the same damn well over and over again.
We know it's in the movie. We know Abrahms loves him some callbacks. And we know that it was included in the prequels for no damn reason. So I'd place good odds on it being thrown in because nostalgia. Because "that's what Star Wars does". Despite the fact that the PT is terrible and going to Tatooine in them was fucking stupid, leaving you with 2 movies that use the setting and ROTJ only briefly and only because Jabba was established as being there in ANH.
I have always felt that Tattooine was like the Star Wars equivalent of Twin Peaks, WA. It's a backwater place that for some reason The Force/Powers Unknown has decided to be a nexus of shit happening.
It's the backwater that they keep reusing because retreading the same ground over and over again is a (rather pathetic) Star Wars tradition.
Le sigh. It makes the setting feel so much smaller if we keep (literally) retreading the same ground. At least they can't do random jackassery like "Oh, Yoda and Chewie were BFF 20 years ago" this time.
The setting is already small. I mean, travel time is always shown as the initial jump to hyperspace. After that, you're where you want to be. But is it really surprising that in a movie still containing Luke that Tatooine would be a location? I mean, it was kind of his home.
He spent his whole life wishing to leave and it's the site of his foster parents' brutal murder? He has nothing to return to there.
In the EU he hung out at the Jedi Temple on Yavin 4 teaching students (in between galaxy-saving heroic adventures of course), I kinda assumed they'd do the same. Although probably on Coruscant, because fancier visuals.
There really isn't a good reason for anyone to go back to Hoth or Tatooine other than "zomg nostalgia".
Um.. lots of people grow up in small towns that they can't wait to get out of. And then they come back, because its home.
But I'm impressed that you can determine the story couldn't possibly have a good reason to return to Tatooine based on absolutely zero information. You should totally use that sort of power play the stock market or something.
Oh please. You can come up with a reason for anything, but this seems more like Tatooine appearing in the prequels so far.
Based on what? We seriously know nothing about the story. How do you get to say it seems like anything?
1) History
2) The director
3) The very fact that it exists at all
If your little pre-emptive nerd-hate somehow makes the wait for Ep7 easier, then good for you, but you're being a silly goose by making assumptions based on the fact that a location is simply in the movie, without any other context.
What assumptions? You have some weird idea about what the reaction going on here is. It's just eyerolling EU-style silliness where they keep going back to the same damn well over and over again.
We know it's in the movie. We know Abrahms loves him some callbacks. And we know that it was included in the prequels for no damn reason. So I'd place good odds on it being thrown in because nostalgia. Because "that's what Star Wars does". Despite the fact that the PT is terrible and going to Tatooine in them was fucking stupid, leaving you with 2 movies that use the setting and ROTJ only briefly and only because Jabba was established as being there in ANH.
I have always felt that Tattooine was like the Star Wars equivalent of Twin Peaks, WA. It's a backwater place that for some reason The Force/Powers Unknown has decided to be a nexus of shit happening.
It's the backwater that they keep reusing because retreading the same ground over and over again is a (rather pathetic) Star Wars tradition.
Man, give me physical and real Tatooine over digital water planet place (Kamino?), or Geonosis any day.
Le sigh. It makes the setting feel so much smaller if we keep (literally) retreading the same ground. At least they can't do random jackassery like "Oh, Yoda and Chewie were BFF 20 years ago" this time.
The setting is already small. I mean, travel time is always shown as the initial jump to hyperspace. After that, you're where you want to be. But is it really surprising that in a movie still containing Luke that Tatooine would be a location? I mean, it was kind of his home.
He spent his whole life wishing to leave and it's the site of his foster parents' brutal murder? He has nothing to return to there.
In the EU he hung out at the Jedi Temple on Yavin 4 teaching students (in between galaxy-saving heroic adventures of course), I kinda assumed they'd do the same. Although probably on Coruscant, because fancier visuals.
There really isn't a good reason for anyone to go back to Hoth or Tatooine other than "zomg nostalgia".
Um.. lots of people grow up in small towns that they can't wait to get out of. And then they come back, because its home.
But I'm impressed that you can determine the story couldn't possibly have a good reason to return to Tatooine based on absolutely zero information. You should totally use that sort of power play the stock market or something.
Oh please. You can come up with a reason for anything, but this seems more like Tatooine appearing in the prequels so far.
Based on what? We seriously know nothing about the story. How do you get to say it seems like anything?
1) History
2) The director
3) The very fact that it exists at all
If your little pre-emptive nerd-hate somehow makes the wait for Ep7 easier, then good for you, but you're being a silly goose by making assumptions based on the fact that a location is simply in the movie, without any other context.
What assumptions? You have some weird idea about what the reaction going on here is. It's just eyerolling EU-style silliness where they keep going back to the same damn well over and over again.
We know it's in the movie. We know Abrahms loves him some callbacks. And we know that it was included in the prequels for no damn reason. So I'd place good odds on it being thrown in because nostalgia. Because "that's what Star Wars does". Despite the fact that the PT is terrible and going to Tatooine in them was fucking stupid, leaving you with 2 movies that use the setting and ROTJ only briefly and only because Jabba was established as being there in ANH.
I have always felt that Tattooine was like the Star Wars equivalent of Twin Peaks, WA. It's a backwater place that for some reason The Force/Powers Unknown has decided to be a nexus of shit happening.
It's the backwater that they keep reusing because retreading the same ground over and over again is a (rather pathetic) Star Wars tradition.
Le sigh. It makes the setting feel so much smaller if we keep (literally) retreading the same ground. At least they can't do random jackassery like "Oh, Yoda and Chewie were BFF 20 years ago" this time.
The setting is already small. I mean, travel time is always shown as the initial jump to hyperspace. After that, you're where you want to be. But is it really surprising that in a movie still containing Luke that Tatooine would be a location? I mean, it was kind of his home.
He spent his whole life wishing to leave and it's the site of his foster parents' brutal murder? He has nothing to return to there.
In the EU he hung out at the Jedi Temple on Yavin 4 teaching students (in between galaxy-saving heroic adventures of course), I kinda assumed they'd do the same. Although probably on Coruscant, because fancier visuals.
There really isn't a good reason for anyone to go back to Hoth or Tatooine other than "zomg nostalgia".
Um.. lots of people grow up in small towns that they can't wait to get out of. And then they come back, because its home.
But I'm impressed that you can determine the story couldn't possibly have a good reason to return to Tatooine based on absolutely zero information. You should totally use that sort of power play the stock market or something.
Oh please. You can come up with a reason for anything, but this seems more like Tatooine appearing in the prequels so far.
Based on what? We seriously know nothing about the story. How do you get to say it seems like anything?
1) History
2) The director
3) The very fact that it exists at all
If your little pre-emptive nerd-hate somehow makes the wait for Ep7 easier, then good for you, but you're being a silly goose by making assumptions based on the fact that a location is simply in the movie, without any other context.
What assumptions? You have some weird idea about what the reaction going on here is. It's just eyerolling EU-style silliness where they keep going back to the same damn well over and over again.
We know it's in the movie. We know Abrahms loves him some callbacks. And we know that it was included in the prequels for no damn reason. So I'd place good odds on it being thrown in because nostalgia. Because "that's what Star Wars does". Despite the fact that the PT is terrible and going to Tatooine in them was fucking stupid, leaving you with 2 movies that use the setting and ROTJ only briefly and only because Jabba was established as being there in ANH.
I have always felt that Tattooine was like the Star Wars equivalent of Twin Peaks, WA. It's a backwater place that for some reason The Force/Powers Unknown has decided to be a nexus of shit happening.
It's the backwater that they keep reusing because retreading the same ground over and over again is a (rather pathetic) Star Wars tradition.
I have always felt that Tattooine was like the Star Wars equivalent of Twin Peaks, WA. It's a backwater place that for some reason The Force/Powers Unknown has decided to be a nexus of shit happening.
Or those benches in DC constantly populated with ducks for old men in suits to feed while they discreetly talk about matters of national importance.
I think it's more than justifiable to look at what the prequels did, to look at what the EU did, and have a really strong suspicion of anything that smells of world shrinking and nostalgia baiting. It could be fine, but Giant Universe Where Everybody Knows Each Other And Hangs Out In Mos Eisley is something I'd rather get away from.
I think it's more than justifiable to look at what the prequels did, to look at what the EU did, and have a really strong suspicion of anything that smells of world shrinking and nostalgia baiting. It could be fine, but Giant Universe Where Everybody Knows Each Other And Hangs Out In Mos Eisley is something I'd rather get away from.
The Rogue Squadron games were pale immitations of X-Wing and TIE Fighter.
Wish I could agree twice.
Tie Fighter packed more magic onto those floppies than almost any other game of that era.
Such a great game... why it hasn't been redone in the past 20 years is criminal.
(the CD version doesn't really count; I want something built in a modern engine)
It's like I'm looking in the mirror.
My pessimism has led me to believe another TIE Fighter game as a actual retail production by the central Star Wars gaming development studio, whatever it might be, isn't really feasible in the eyes of everyone who matters. The nature of Star Wars games has changed, and is a bit more rigid. You can, and probably will, have another Jedi Knight game, good or bad. You absolutely will have another game where you play a Jedi of some sort, you'll probably have two or three by the time Episode VII comes out. Another Republic Commando, on the other hand, is substantially less likely (and make no mistake, if it exists it will involve you playing as a support to the theatrical Jedi). I'm not convinced you can have a Star Wars game that you don't play as a Jedi, or at the very least, some sort of commando with Jedi-like qualities. I think it's even less likely to have a game where you, straight through, play an agent or actor in regular, non-wizard service to the Empire (or really, any of the bad guys), whether it be a pilot, a soldier, a fleet commander, whatever (which was a major component of what made TIE Fighter so excellent at the time--the interesting story it told). And you definitely can't have another game where you fly around in what's become the whipping boy of Star Wars dogfighting, or anything related to that (like another model of TIE). The powers that be demand you be Luke Skywalker's backup, demand you be in a Jedi fighter, or demand you be one seat behind Han Solo, or they don't think the game will work or is worth publishing.
The last 20 years have largely proven me correct, with a handful of very specific exceptions (games like Battlefront which are more or less obligated to include a very watered down version of TIE Fighter, and barely do so). I actually enjoyed Rogue Squadron for its sharp visuals (at the time) and the novelty of it, but it's not TIE Fighter, not even close. And we will get mods, of course, which are labors of love from people inherently more willing to break with orthodoxy.
But hey, Battlefront 3 will probably come out eventually. And a small portion of that game will, in fact, let you live out your TIE Fighter fantasies in a more modern, capable engine--but only in the sense that it'll try and cover every other imaginable role in the war part of Star Wars--you only get to be a TIE pilot because you also get to be a rigid-walking battle droid or one of those guys in the stupid-looking clamshell helmets from the Rebel Senior Citizen Naval Auxiliary in ANH.
(Come on, whoever Disney's hiring to make games. Prove me wrong.)
Yanno, I don't mind if we play a more traditional "mandated by the suits" role. I just want to play another god damn X-Wing franchise game, especially if we're getting updated ship designs.
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
+3
Options
ExtreaminatusGo forth and amplify,the Noise Marines are here!Registered Userregular
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
"A disposable starfighter for disposable pilots."
Though more than a match for the fabled X-Wing, as far as the films are concerned.
In the end of the day, as in World War II, about a quarter of a second is the most time needed to rip apart a very heavily protected fighter.
I can remember having a garage sale just to buy a joystick for the original X-Wing game. That was a pretty awesome summer. X-Wing, Tie Fighter, Descent, Dark Forces and Civilization. Loved pc gaming back in the mid-90s.
Imperial fighter doctrine would apparently agree with the quote (attributed to Stalin, I believe) that "quantity has a quality all its own." Or, if you prefer, "we have reserves." Rebel starfighters are good, and some Rebel pilots are very good, but many don't survive long enough to get that good when they're routinely up against (and shredded by) odds of 3:1 or worse.
Another comparison to make (and one I'm fairly sure that George did) would be fighters in the Pacific theater. Japanese Zeroes were practically kites compared to the heavier, more durable US fighters - cloth skins vs. metal, fuel tanks without the extra weight of a self-sealing liner - but until the latter got engines capable of keeping up, they could dance around the sky and their opponents with such ease that it was hard for the Americans to even get a good angle to shoot, to say nothing of winning a turning contest; a Zeke would be in and out of their sights like a wraith.
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
"A disposable starfighter for disposable pilots."
Though more than a match for the fabled X-Wing, as far as the films are concerned.
In the end of the day, as in World War II, about a quarter of a second is the most time needed to rip apart a very heavily protected fighter.
1-on-1 the X-wing outclasses a standard TIE anyday. Its when its 3 or 4 vs. 1 that the X-wing gets trounced. TIE Interceptors are a different story.
Eh it's been awhile but iirc TIE Interceptors are just X-Wings with shields dumped towards engines and a slightly better turn radius.
Now when you start talking TIE Advances that's when the rebels start to get seriously outclassed. And then of course there's the hilariously broken TIE Defender and Missile Boat (not that any of these count anymore, although I guess you could make the argument that the TIE-A kinda/sorta does due to Vader's ship in Episode IV)
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
"A disposable starfighter for disposable pilots."
Though more than a match for the fabled X-Wing, as far as the films are concerned.
In the end of the day, as in World War II, about a quarter of a second is the most time needed to rip apart a very heavily protected fighter.
1-on-1 the X-wing outclasses a standard TIE anyday. Its when its 3 or 4 vs. 1 that the X-wing gets trounced. TIE Interceptors are a different story.
If the movies are any indication, they don't need 3 or 4 vs 1. They can do just fine with 1 vs 1. Regular TIE Fighters have no problem killing X-Wings in the films in ANH certainly. A glance at Wookipedia suggests one squadron of regular TIE Fighters (~12), and Darth Vader, fought a bit over 30 rebel fighters (which would put that at 2 vs 1 in the favor of the Rebel pilots).
That, or every rebel pilot we see who isn't Wedge or Luke seriously sucks. Different story in the games, as I already mentioned. In games, those shields are a lifesaver (and the reason why X-Wing starts out a lot easier than TIE Fighter). Just in the film, those shields can't endure a one-second burst from a TIE Fighter.
One of the differences between films and EU.
Synthesis on
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
In terms of the old canon, TIE pilots were basically expendable, save for the rare few who managed to survive the lack of shields and ability to go EVA when the ship was destroyed. Those guys were then supposed to be crazy good, up on par with the best X-wing pilots despite having fragile ships.
The X-wing pilots were supposed to be much superior than the average TIE pilot, simply because they actually had equipment that let them survive long enough to learn from their mistakes. But the movies definitely wouldn't have been able to keep up the pace if every Xwing versus TIE duel ended up as the circle-and-shoot routine from XvT. Just for simple cinematic purposes, the Xwings had to go down fast to emphasize the losses, rather than show how tough they were.
Besides, pretty sure they were always in big fights and stuff when they were showing all that. Pretty easy to handwave away that the Xwings going down pretty quick simply because they'd been taking plenty of hits beforehand. Considering how long ago those movies came out, though, I'm not at all going to hold it against the films if they violated some sort of internal consistency with the fiction.
In the Death Star run, it seems likely the Rebels were dumping shield power into their engines... so that they could make the Trench Run before the Station blew up Yavin IV. They didn't have time to play it safe.
Plus, I always figured that the TIEs that were on the Death Star were, basically, brand new, while the X-Wings and Y-Wings making the Trench Run were "what the Rebels had on-hand, because oh-shit-Death-Star" and therefore were likely to have already suffered battle damage of some sort or another and not be operating at 100% efficiency.
After playing TIE Fighter I always kinda assumed that the pilots who were stationed on the Death Star let alone flying as Vader's wingmen were the ones who were in the same god tier of pilots as the character in TIE Fighter.
...damnit Star Wars thread you're making me want to play through X-Wing/TIE Fighter/X-Wing Alliance again.
God those games need remakes.
No lie I am hoping that current crop of upcoming space sims do really well and somehow convince Disney of that.
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
"A disposable starfighter for disposable pilots."
Though more than a match for the fabled X-Wing, as far as the films are concerned.
In the end of the day, as in World War II, about a quarter of a second is the most time needed to rip apart a very heavily protected fighter.
1-on-1 the X-wing outclasses a standard TIE anyday. Its when its 3 or 4 vs. 1 that the X-wing gets trounced. TIE Interceptors are a different story.
If the movies are any indication, they don't need 3 or 4 vs 1. They can do just fine with 1 vs 1. Regular TIE Fighters have no problem killing X-Wings in the films in ANH certainly. A glance at Wookipedia suggests one squadron of regular TIE Fighters (~12), and Darth Vader, fought a bit over 30 rebel fighters (which would put that at 2 vs 1 in the favor of the Rebel pilots).
That, or every rebel pilot we see who isn't Wedge or Luke seriously sucks. Different story in the games, as I already mentioned. In games, those shields are a lifesaver (and the reason why X-Wing starts out a lot easier than TIE Fighter). Just in the film, those shields can't endure a one-second burst from a TIE Fighter.
One of the differences between films and EU.
If we're including the games as performance indicators then it's worth noting that Tie Fighters do have a maneuverability edge on the X-Wing, but that's about it. They're basically Space Zeroes, right down to the awful training the pilots tended to have as the war dragged on.
+4
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
This might be a dumb question, but where do the X-Wing fighters actually come from? I don't want a whole movie about it(I think), but that's a manufacturer who outfitted the Rebellion and arguably ultimately won the war. Clones, The Force, smugglers and space gangsters, all well and good, but I'm suddenly intrigued by the premise of this aspect in Star Wars-provided it's not ridiculous or some kind of watered down version of a House from Dune.
Again, the old EU, but Incom Corporation. From what I recall, and it's not canon anymore so I don't care enough to look it up and confirm, they designed the X-wing, but the Empire didn't like it--it ran counter to their philosophies. (According to the EU, the Empire's attitude towards starfighters was, aside from a small elite corps, that fighters are useful, but only for fighter-intercept duty. With a handful of exceptions, during the time of the movies no TIE had shields, hyperdrive, or even onboard life support--but they could be produced in seemingly limitless numbers, and that's all they cared about.) Several Incom execs were a) sympathetic to the Rebellion and b) really wanted to get their money back from the project, and started selling the X-wing to the Rebellion. In response, the Empire nationalized Incom, but the execs had fled with their first run and gave them to the Rebellion in exchange for protection and a safe place to produce more.
In short: corporate greed led to the rise of the Empire in the prequels...and its fall in the EU.
EDIT: Wow I was ghosted hard. Need to read the thread more carefully next time.
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
"A disposable starfighter for disposable pilots."
Though more than a match for the fabled X-Wing, as far as the films are concerned.
In the end of the day, as in World War II, about a quarter of a second is the most time needed to rip apart a very heavily protected fighter.
1-on-1 the X-wing outclasses a standard TIE anyday. Its when its 3 or 4 vs. 1 that the X-wing gets trounced. TIE Interceptors are a different story.
If the movies are any indication, they don't need 3 or 4 vs 1. They can do just fine with 1 vs 1. Regular TIE Fighters have no problem killing X-Wings in the films in ANH certainly. A glance at Wookipedia suggests one squadron of regular TIE Fighters (~12), and Darth Vader, fought a bit over 30 rebel fighters (which would put that at 2 vs 1 in the favor of the Rebel pilots).
Yeah, I think you'll find this is the deciding factor here.
Even though I think it wasn't emphasized very well in the prequels (haven't seen Clone Wars yet), in episode 3 Anakin Skywalker managed to land half of a cruiser never intended for atmospheric maneuvers using controls that weren't familiar to him and displays that weren't in any language he could read. Dude almost literally hacked the universe when he flew, and then at Yavin he was flying probably the best fighter money could buy in the galaxy at the time.
Two squads of fighters is 24 (Red One to Twelve, Gold One to Twelve). Off the top of my head, there were three survivors, and I think only three fighters went down to enemy fire--one of those was to surface gunners--before Vader joined the battle, at which point he got the rest.
Some of the recent Elite: Dangerous videos have made me dream of X-Wing and TIE Fighter remakes with that sort of visual fidelity. I'm still drooling from the thought.
On a tangential note: I don't think it's right to beat on the Rogue Squadron games for lack of an X-Wing/TIE Fighter successor. The Rogue Squadron games did their own thing; yes, they were pretty shallow, but they were still charming and fun. Sometimes I want a TIE Fighter and sometimes I just want to fly around an AT-AT walker repeatedly until it stumbles and falls.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It certainly looks like in ANH, outside of a few pilots blessed with actual names, the rebel pilots seem to suck in that particular mission performance anyway--especially when you look at how many kills weren't from Wedge or Luke against crappy, unshielded, under-armed (?) defending fighters with giant "shoot me here" wings.
(EDIT: Of course, if you've played X-Wing, you know that everything was shot down by Rookie One anyway.)
It certainly looks like in ANH, outside of a few pilots blessed with actual names, the rebel pilots seem to suck in that particular mission performance anyway--especially when you look at how many kills weren't from Wedge or Luke against crappy, unshielded, under-armed (?) defending fighters with giant "shoot me here" wings.
(EDIT: Of course, if you've played X-Wing, you know that everything was shot down by Rookie One anyway.)
Obviously I'm probably reading a bit too much into it, but simming also matters a ton too. It's not unreasonable to say those TIE pilots had extensive experience training for fighting in and around the Death Star. The rebels had never fought there before, and had about a day or so of analysis to even see what they were up against. Home field advantage is still a thing in aerial (or space) combat.
It certainly looks like in ANH, outside of a few pilots blessed with actual names, the rebel pilots seem to suck in that particular mission performance anyway--especially when you look at how many kills weren't from Wedge or Luke against crappy, unshielded, under-armed (?) defending fighters with giant "shoot me here" wings.
(EDIT: Of course, if you've played X-Wing, you know that everything was shot down by Rookie One anyway.)
Rookie One was the pilot from Rebel Assault. X-wing's pilot was Keyan Farlander.
As to mission performance, you should remember that they were going up against the Death Star, even with it's slow tracking turbolasers, it could put out enough firepower to blanket an area making it really tough for a fighter to make it through, especially when said fighter is running down a relatively narrow trench in a straight line. Even an experienced pilot would have trouble making it through that kind of kill box.
Edit: Also, the two TIE pilots were handpicked by Vader. Chances are they're the best of the best of the Empire. Vader's not about to pick some chump rookie as a wingman.
It certainly looks like in ANH, outside of a few pilots blessed with actual names, the rebel pilots seem to suck in that particular mission performance anyway--especially when you look at how many kills weren't from Wedge or Luke against crappy, unshielded, under-armed (?) defending fighters with giant "shoot me here" wings.
(EDIT: Of course, if you've played X-Wing, you know that everything was shot down by Rookie One anyway.)
Rookie One was the pilot from Rebel Assault. X-wing's pilot was Keyan Farlander.
I stand corrected. I haven't played X-Wing in more than ten years, probably a good bit longer, and I really thought they just called him "Rookie One" in the supplementary texts.
I think that Keyan Farlander thing wasn't actually established in the games, so it may be a retcon of some sort. It's the first I've heard of this, and while it's been 10+ years since I played the games I can't say I've heard of Farlander before now.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I think that Keyan Farlander thing wasn't actually established in the games, so it may be a retcon of some sort. It's the first I've heard of this, and while it's been 10+ years since I played the games I can't say I've heard of Farlander before now.
It was in the hint guide, IIRC, which incoporated most of The Farlander Papers, a ... short novel, IIRC ... about how the protagonist joined the Rebellion. That was originally in the limited edition of the original game.
*checks Wookieepedia*
And of course, in the good old EU tradition, the guy's a Jedi. Yeah, I think I'll stick to my X-Wing character being a blank slate, regardless of what the hint guide says.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
*checks Wookieepedia*
And of course, in the good old EU tradition, the guy's a Jedi. Yeah, I think I'll stick to my X-Wing character being a blank slate, regardless of what the hint guide says.
I'm not sure fluff in a strategy guide really counts, broheim.
*checks Wookieepedia*
And of course, in the good old EU tradition, the guy's a Jedi. Yeah, I think I'll stick to my X-Wing character being a blank slate, regardless of what the hint guide says.
Of course he's a Jedi. Where do you think Corran Horn got the idea from?
*checks Wookieepedia*
And of course, in the good old EU tradition, the guy's a Jedi. Yeah, I think I'll stick to my X-Wing character being a blank slate, regardless of what the hint guide says.
Turns out, Force sensitivity is a prerequisite for flying an X-wing.
Posts
If your little pre-emptive nerd-hate somehow makes the wait for Ep7 easier, then good for you, but you're being a silly goose by making assumptions based on the fact that a location is simply in the movie, without any other context.
That would be interesting! Target practice in the outer rim.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
What assumptions? You have some weird idea about what the reaction going on here is. It's just eyerolling EU-style silliness where they keep going back to the same damn well over and over again.
We know it's in the movie. We know Abrahms loves him some callbacks. And we know that it was included in the prequels for no damn reason. So I'd place good odds on it being thrown in because nostalgia. Because "that's what Star Wars does". Despite the fact that the PT is terrible and going to Tatooine in them was fucking stupid, leaving you with 2 movies that use the setting and ROTJ only briefly and only because Jabba was established as being there in ANH.
It's the backwater that they keep reusing because retreading the same ground over and over again is a (rather pathetic) Star Wars tradition.
Man, give me physical and real Tatooine over digital water planet place (Kamino?), or Geonosis any day.
Show me on the doll where Tatooine touched you
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Or those benches in DC constantly populated with ducks for old men in suits to feed while they discreetly talk about matters of national importance.
We'll have to wait when Abrams leaves for that.
It's like I'm looking in the mirror.
My pessimism has led me to believe another TIE Fighter game as a actual retail production by the central Star Wars gaming development studio, whatever it might be, isn't really feasible in the eyes of everyone who matters. The nature of Star Wars games has changed, and is a bit more rigid. You can, and probably will, have another Jedi Knight game, good or bad. You absolutely will have another game where you play a Jedi of some sort, you'll probably have two or three by the time Episode VII comes out. Another Republic Commando, on the other hand, is substantially less likely (and make no mistake, if it exists it will involve you playing as a support to the theatrical Jedi). I'm not convinced you can have a Star Wars game that you don't play as a Jedi, or at the very least, some sort of commando with Jedi-like qualities. I think it's even less likely to have a game where you, straight through, play an agent or actor in regular, non-wizard service to the Empire (or really, any of the bad guys), whether it be a pilot, a soldier, a fleet commander, whatever (which was a major component of what made TIE Fighter so excellent at the time--the interesting story it told). And you definitely can't have another game where you fly around in what's become the whipping boy of Star Wars dogfighting, or anything related to that (like another model of TIE). The powers that be demand you be Luke Skywalker's backup, demand you be in a Jedi fighter, or demand you be one seat behind Han Solo, or they don't think the game will work or is worth publishing.
The last 20 years have largely proven me correct, with a handful of very specific exceptions (games like Battlefront which are more or less obligated to include a very watered down version of TIE Fighter, and barely do so). I actually enjoyed Rogue Squadron for its sharp visuals (at the time) and the novelty of it, but it's not TIE Fighter, not even close. And we will get mods, of course, which are labors of love from people inherently more willing to break with orthodoxy.
But hey, Battlefront 3 will probably come out eventually. And a small portion of that game will, in fact, let you live out your TIE Fighter fantasies in a more modern, capable engine--but only in the sense that it'll try and cover every other imaginable role in the war part of Star Wars--you only get to be a TIE pilot because you also get to be a rigid-walking battle droid or one of those guys in the stupid-looking clamshell helmets from the Rebel Senior Citizen Naval Auxiliary in ANH.
(Come on, whoever Disney's hiring to make games. Prove me wrong.)
"…Seinar System's basic TIE fighter—a commodity which, after hydrogen and stupidity, was the most plentiful in the galaxy…"
I found this disk the other day at the bottom of a box of old games I have. I've been trying to get it to work ever since.
"A disposable starfighter for disposable pilots."
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Though more than a match for the fabled X-Wing, as far as the films are concerned.
In the end of the day, as in World War II, about a quarter of a second is the most time needed to rip apart a very heavily protected fighter.
Another comparison to make (and one I'm fairly sure that George did) would be fighters in the Pacific theater. Japanese Zeroes were practically kites compared to the heavier, more durable US fighters - cloth skins vs. metal, fuel tanks without the extra weight of a self-sealing liner - but until the latter got engines capable of keeping up, they could dance around the sky and their opponents with such ease that it was hard for the Americans to even get a good angle to shoot, to say nothing of winning a turning contest; a Zeke would be in and out of their sights like a wraith.
1-on-1 the X-wing outclasses a standard TIE anyday. Its when its 3 or 4 vs. 1 that the X-wing gets trounced. TIE Interceptors are a different story.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Now when you start talking TIE Advances that's when the rebels start to get seriously outclassed. And then of course there's the hilariously broken TIE Defender and Missile Boat (not that any of these count anymore, although I guess you could make the argument that the TIE-A kinda/sorta does due to Vader's ship in Episode IV)
If the movies are any indication, they don't need 3 or 4 vs 1. They can do just fine with 1 vs 1. Regular TIE Fighters have no problem killing X-Wings in the films in ANH certainly. A glance at Wookipedia suggests one squadron of regular TIE Fighters (~12), and Darth Vader, fought a bit over 30 rebel fighters (which would put that at 2 vs 1 in the favor of the Rebel pilots).
That, or every rebel pilot we see who isn't Wedge or Luke seriously sucks. Different story in the games, as I already mentioned. In games, those shields are a lifesaver (and the reason why X-Wing starts out a lot easier than TIE Fighter). Just in the film, those shields can't endure a one-second burst from a TIE Fighter.
One of the differences between films and EU.
The X-wing pilots were supposed to be much superior than the average TIE pilot, simply because they actually had equipment that let them survive long enough to learn from their mistakes. But the movies definitely wouldn't have been able to keep up the pace if every Xwing versus TIE duel ended up as the circle-and-shoot routine from XvT. Just for simple cinematic purposes, the Xwings had to go down fast to emphasize the losses, rather than show how tough they were.
Besides, pretty sure they were always in big fights and stuff when they were showing all that. Pretty easy to handwave away that the Xwings going down pretty quick simply because they'd been taking plenty of hits beforehand. Considering how long ago those movies came out, though, I'm not at all going to hold it against the films if they violated some sort of internal consistency with the fiction.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
...damnit Star Wars thread you're making me want to play through X-Wing/TIE Fighter/X-Wing Alliance again.
God those games need remakes.
No lie I am hoping that current crop of upcoming space sims do really well and somehow convince Disney of that.
If we're including the games as performance indicators then it's worth noting that Tie Fighters do have a maneuverability edge on the X-Wing, but that's about it. They're basically Space Zeroes, right down to the awful training the pilots tended to have as the war dragged on.
Yeah, I think you'll find this is the deciding factor here.
Even though I think it wasn't emphasized very well in the prequels (haven't seen Clone Wars yet), in episode 3 Anakin Skywalker managed to land half of a cruiser never intended for atmospheric maneuvers using controls that weren't familiar to him and displays that weren't in any language he could read. Dude almost literally hacked the universe when he flew, and then at Yavin he was flying probably the best fighter money could buy in the galaxy at the time.
Two squads of fighters is 24 (Red One to Twelve, Gold One to Twelve). Off the top of my head, there were three survivors, and I think only three fighters went down to enemy fire--one of those was to surface gunners--before Vader joined the battle, at which point he got the rest.
On a tangential note: I don't think it's right to beat on the Rogue Squadron games for lack of an X-Wing/TIE Fighter successor. The Rogue Squadron games did their own thing; yes, they were pretty shallow, but they were still charming and fun. Sometimes I want a TIE Fighter and sometimes I just want to fly around an AT-AT walker repeatedly until it stumbles and falls.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
(EDIT: Of course, if you've played X-Wing, you know that everything was shot down by Rookie One anyway.)
Obviously I'm probably reading a bit too much into it, but simming also matters a ton too. It's not unreasonable to say those TIE pilots had extensive experience training for fighting in and around the Death Star. The rebels had never fought there before, and had about a day or so of analysis to even see what they were up against. Home field advantage is still a thing in aerial (or space) combat.
Rookie One was the pilot from Rebel Assault. X-wing's pilot was Keyan Farlander.
As to mission performance, you should remember that they were going up against the Death Star, even with it's slow tracking turbolasers, it could put out enough firepower to blanket an area making it really tough for a fighter to make it through, especially when said fighter is running down a relatively narrow trench in a straight line. Even an experienced pilot would have trouble making it through that kind of kill box.
Edit: Also, the two TIE pilots were handpicked by Vader. Chances are they're the best of the best of the Empire. Vader's not about to pick some chump rookie as a wingman.
I stand corrected. I haven't played X-Wing in more than ten years, probably a good bit longer, and I really thought they just called him "Rookie One" in the supplementary texts.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It was in the hint guide, IIRC, which incoporated most of The Farlander Papers, a ... short novel, IIRC ... about how the protagonist joined the Rebellion. That was originally in the limited edition of the original game.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
And of course, in the good old EU tradition, the guy's a Jedi. Yeah, I think I'll stick to my X-Wing character being a blank slate, regardless of what the hint guide says.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
Of course he's a Jedi. Where do you think Corran Horn got the idea from?