Mods for ACTA?

Star Wars Technical Commentaries lists seventeen including those from the EU, mainly the comics where there's some sort of visual available.
The Executor and her sister ships, and everything roughly in the same size class, Dr. Saxton lists as battleships.

We have the Victory- class, light destroyers at 0.9 km with some atmospheric capability and a Falcon-cockpit-writ-large on their bridge tower, Vic-I has twin main engines, Vic-II has triple, both have wing wedges. Vic-I is primarily a missile armed fleet support ship, Vic-II a turbolaser armed light hunter. Both have small fighter complements.
Anonymous type 1 (never referred to by name, but possibly Vic-III) is the same length, same bridge tower, but has no wing wedges and no hangar. Fast light destroyer, fleet outrider perhaps.
Harrow is the same length as a Victory, with the wing wedges, but has a KDY style bridge tower and a much larger, probably full wing, fighter bay. Possibly a KDY rebuild of a Victory.
Anya Karu was seen only once, 1km long, no undersurface details, but a small KDY tower. Light destroyer.
Anonymous type 2 is a 1.2 kilometre late KDY design, with a neckless bridge tower embedded directly in the superstructure, no secondary engines, no fighter bay- a fast, light destroyer, pure combat type, possibly based on the Venator hull.
Speaking of which, the Venator is 1.137km, and as much carrier as warship- some heavy weapons, but mainly a space control and land attack multirole.
Republic class have their design ancestry in the Victory, but seem to be 1.25km long and looking as Mon Cal as they do Star Destroyer.
Anonymous type 4 is a probable dedicated carrier conversion of the Imperator class, same length and upper works, smaller reactor bulb and thrusters, larger fighter bay.
Imperator- class star destroyers (as Dr. Saxton points out, they're all Imperial. Calling something Imperial class is like referring to the Jefferson as an American-class carrier.)- there are at least two types. It is the standard class because of it's speed and adaptability; with large troop and fighter complements, it can be sent anywhere in a hurry to do anything. The Imperator-I has triple paddle thrust deflectors round the main engines, the Imperator-II has ring shaped deflectors, the Imperator-I has twin main gun turrets, the Imperator-II octuple.
Anonymous type V was seen on film in ROtJ; probably a development of the Imperator class refined for a pure ship to ship role, it has no bays, a shielded reactor bulb, and apparently thicker armour- it may also be slightly longer.
Dominator is the known name of the Interdictor variant of the Imperator-II; there is also an Unnamed Interdictor Type which appears to be based on Imperator-I hulls.
Anonymous type III was seen in the distance over Byss, from scaling clues from the tower it is slightly over 2km long making it a heavy destroyer. Possibly a 'mini-super'; complicated underside, double thruster bank or large bays, unusual mid mounted bridge.
Allegiance class- 2.2km long, heavy destroyer or possibly light cruiser, tower embedded in the dorsal superstructure again, Imperator like thruster layout but much larger reactor bulb and minimal to no bays; appears to have been designed as battlewagon close support.
Shockwave; poorly described in one of the novels, possibly a light cruiser, at least a very heavy destroyer, 2.2 to 2.4km
Anonymous VI; seen in company with VII under Ysanne Isard, 1.2 to 1.3km long, with a narrow hull, and an upper surface hump- either a protruding reactor bulb, making it an ultrafast type, or an interdictor unit.
Anonymous VII: 1.9km long, heavy destroyer- carrier; large docking bays and a double reactor bulb, strike flagship.

All of these are to greater or lesser degree canon, and counters for this lot are going to be really easy to tell apart. Joy.
 
He's a working astrophysicist (University of Melbourne); he simply happened to take a look at his hobby one day with the same thoroughness as he employs about his day job.
Yes, he is a hero to Wars fans, incidentally, and no, he couldn't actually care less about Vs debates.

Interestingly and scarily, he assumes and finds supporting evidence that Lucas was using naval terminology properly when he named them Star Destroyers. That is to say, they are actually Destroyers, with frigates, corvettes and such smaller and lighter than them, cruisers, battlecruisers and battleships larger.

In the original trilogy, ISD's are the smallest non- auxilliary craft we see the empire deploy. Ouch...
 
Well I've worked out some stats now, only problem is I forgot my USB stick so won't be posting them now until Thursday. As with the original B5W conversion, there is some scaling.
 
Slightly Norse John said:
In the original trilogy, ISD's are the smallest non- auxilliary craft we see the empire deploy. Ouch...

They are also the ONLY non auxilliary craft we see the empire deploy with the exception of the Executor which is vaders personal flagship...
 
Yes, it'd have to be from there on downwards really, especially as there isn't enough information about most of the larger ship images that do turn up to make any real estimate of what they could do. It'd just be numbers- and for most of them, names- out of the air.

Counting turrets on the Executor model does reveal that it has too many of them. Over six hundred, of the kind that the Imperator class have eight of. Numerous smaller, and some unidentified but the right shape to be larger weapon mounts. I don't think the ACtA system (deliberately passes up opportunity for SW quote) has room in it to cope with two orders of magnitude firepower difference when the baseline is high anyway, that's like the gap from Patrol to Ancient- but starting at Battle. Another good reason to leave the big ships out of it.

Call Anonymous- V, Anonymous- VII, Shockwave and Allegiance effectively Armageddon level, most of the Imperator-derivatives and size- alikes War, the smaller destroyers- Anonymous- II and VI, Victory types, possibly Venator, Battle, and work down through the rest of the EU from there?
 
If your going to redo the game mod personally I just stick to a few basic ships initially:

ie. ISD War
VSD Battle
Venator Raid
Lancer Skirmish
Carrack Patrol

vs

MonCal War
Nebulon Raid (MAYBE battle but I think that might be pushing it)
Correlian Corvette Patrol or maybe skirmish
 
I've statted up so far:

ISD -War
VSD and Mon Cal MC80 - Battle
Dreadnought - Raid
Nebulon-B and Carrack - Skirmish
Corellian Corvette - Patrol

The MC80 is not a straight match for the ISD in combat (and they frequently in the various fluff and games take on VSDs evenly). The MC90 would more likely be the Rebel War choice.

I'm tempted to start converting the whole B5W conversion of Star Wars to ACTA. There would be a good deal of scaling involved but it would certainly provide a faster way to play. At the moment the biggest battles I've fought have had an ISD battlegroup (ISD plus Strike/Dreadnought/Carracks etc) vs an MC90 battlegroup (with Nebulon Bs Correllian Corvettes and Gunships MC40 frigate etc). It would open up the possibility of fleet combat.

Disappointingly though the first release is mostly prequel stuff and while there is adequate coverage of classic trilogy fighters the Imperials get a total of two capital ships (ISD and Interdictor) and the Nebulon B frigate is mistakenly called the Rebel cruiser. The Dreadnought is missing but the Rebel Assault Frigate which is a rebuild of the Dreadnought hull is there. And while most eras get one personality fighter (ie Vaders Tie Advanced Lukes X-wing Anakins Jedi star fighter) the Seperatists get two and the Ventress one looks really rubbish and would be better as a Tie Defender or Droid bomber.
 
Id suggest that an MC80 COULD take on an ISD one especially when you factor in the repsective fighter compliments of the two ships (TIE fighters, Interceptors and Bombers vs A-Wings, B-Bwings, X-Wings and a few Y-Wings).

The ISD may have more powerful weaponry but the rebels superior fighters go a long way to even the score...
 
Actually, there's good reason to suspect that contrary to the WEG and WOtC stats, Mon Cal Cruisers are significantly more heavily armed than an Imperator, one for one.

Endor, ROtJ; how many Rebels, how many Imperials? in the special edition, could be as many as eight rebel cruisers, against twenty- two Star Destroyers, the 'communications ship' (Cruiser class) and the Executor.

Considering how long the rebels lasted, and that they do take down some of the destroyers in open combat despite being so heavily outnumbered, they are not weak ships. At one point- throne room, battle in the background- we see a mile-long red, rebel, TL bolt hit and explode a Star Destroyer. That speaks of heavy firepower.

One theory is that, given what does seem to be their much lower endurance, the rebels run their ships far closer to redline than the imperials do. They trade operational lifetime, and probably factors of safety, for peak performance.
 
I think you'll find that the Mon Cal cruisers endurance is due to lots more shields and layered redundancies for those systems.
 
Yep the background material suggests that Mon Cals, whilst not as heavily armed or armoured as Star Destroyers are more heavily shielded and their systems are very non centralised meaning its very hard to knock out specific bits like shield generators.

But really I think in any tabletop game the two forces should if fighters are handled properly balance out fairly nicely, Imps get better capital ships but rebels get better fighters (and we all know how much damage fighters can do in Star Wars...)

I still think the best Star Wars tactical/strategy game (hell the best Star Wars game of ANY type) ever made for any computer/video game system was Star Wars: Supremacy (or Star Wars: Rebellion I believe it was called if you live outside Europe). Any table top game that comes close to the feel that game had for fleet combat would be great :D
 
Locutus9956 said:
Yep the background material suggests that Mon Cals, whilst not as heavily armed or armoured as Star Destroyers are more heavily shielded and their systems are very non centralised meaning its very hard to knock out specific bits like shield generators.

But really I think in any tabletop game the two forces should if fighters are handled properly balance out fairly nicely, Imps get better capital ships but rebels get better fighters (and we all know how much damage fighters can do in Star Wars...)

I still think the best Star Wars tactical/strategy game (hell the best Star Wars game of ANY type) ever made for any computer/video game system was Star Wars: Supremacy (or Star Wars: Rebellion I believe it was called if you live outside Europe). Any table top game that comes close to the feel that game had for fleet combat would be great :D

I still have that, I was so excited when i bought it, and so dissapointed when i played it :-(

Give me any of the X-Wing series of games. flying through the flight deck of a star destroyer always made me chuckle, usually only made it in the B-Wing though, everything else got blown to pieces on the way in!
 
Well it's an aquired taste and the learning curve is certainly a bit steep but it has so much depth to it that its really quite excellent when you get right into all hte little things you can actually do with it. Still not my absolute favourite galactic strategy game though, that title has to go to Birth of the Federation.. if only theyd make a sequel to that now...
 
yeah i loved star wars supremacy, still play it now. shame that star wars empire at war wasnt along the same lines etc.
 
Well to be fair I love Empire at War too (especially now get all sorts of goodies like the Executor, TIE defenders, Interceptors and Dark Troopers with the addon pack).

I admit I was originally hoping for basically Supremacy 2 but Empire at War is a very different game, its still great just not quite as deep as Supremacy.

It does look fantastic though, I mean who DOESNT like seeing their mightly fleet of Star Destroyers pummeling the rebel scum to dust in glorious high detailed 3d cinematic views? :)

And also, and this is a very big factor in EAW's favour mind you, you can Death Star Naboo of the galactic map, hell you can even save the game just before hand and do it over and over again! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

"I sensed a gread disturbance in the force, as though millions of Gungan's cried out it terror and were suddenly silenced...."

Makes you feel kind of warm and fuzzy thinking about it doesnt it? :twisted:
 
http://www.play.com/Games/PC/4-/1015356/Star_Wars_Empire_At_War_Forces_Of_Corruption/Product.html

I must admit it did creep out with little fanfare! I only found out about it about a month before its release and only cos I was trying to find the release date for the Dawn of War addon on play!

But it really is great (though I dont really like the new faction).

You get the Executor (and its truly a sight to behold). TIE Defenders, Interceptors, Ghosts, B-Wings, other rebel stuff I havent really looked at too closely as the Executor was blowing it to bits...

Basically if you have Empire at War you really NEED the addon ;)

Oh also the Deathstar 2 (with ship targeting abilities :D) and the Eclipse class SSD.... oooooh soo much fun to be had with gungans and superlasers :D
 
Back
Top