[Poll] Official ruling on the White Star Fighters please

Do you think the WSC-L White star fighter should be part of ACTA properly?

  • Yes, abso-fraggin-lutely!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, don't like it!

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Don't know, haven't seen the stats from S&P or the Rangers RPG supplement!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Have seen the stats from one or other source but don't care either way!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

lastbesthope

Mongoose
Dear Mongoose,

These made their one and only appearance in S&P #19, with an addendum on these forums giving them a Dogfight score of +2.

However they do not appear in either of the SFOS drafts I have seen, and as yet no minis have been produced for them.

Stats exist for them in the RPG and are given in the Rangers supplement. Now I know both sources of info were written by August Hahn, and yes I know that a certain Mongoose bod has said he doesn't really like them.

But for us ISA freaks can we please get a ruling on how 'kosher' the WSC-L is. As a concept in the fleet it makes sense, it seems prolific in the Ranger fleets in the RPG book post the TV series, and we have ACTA stats, at least pre SFOS anyway. Please put them in SFOS and give us minis for them.

For the rest of us, please post whether you'd like them kept or not, stating your reasons.

Thanks

LBH
 

Scimitar

Mongoose
OK, the ISA crowd is not satisfied with the Starfury, Thunderbolt and Nial?

As far as metagame logic goes. The ISA can field forces with some of the best fighters in the game already, why give them another toy?

For 'real world' logic: The ISA was a new entity and had already 3 advanced fighter designs. Why spend R&D develpoing an entirely new one which would have new logistical requirements? They had a bigger and more pressing priority in building a large cruiser class. Not to mention the supporting infrastructure for their government and existing military would need to be built from scratch.
 

Rigeld

Mongoose
Scimitar said:
OK, the ISA crowd is not satisfied with the Starfury, Thunderbolt and Nial?

As far as metagame logic goes. The ISA can field forces with some of the best fighters in the game already, why give them another toy?

For 'real world' logic: The ISA was a new entity and had already 3 advanced fighter designs. Why spend R&D develpoing an entirely new one which would have new logistical requirements? They had a bigger and more pressing priority in building a large cruiser class. Not to mention the supporting infrastructure for their government and existing military would need to be built from scratch.

I voted dont care either way, but I was leaning towards no, for basically those exact reasons.

Plus, what reason does the RPG give for the ISA give for designing the WSC-L? Is there one? Or did some Minbari/Human researcher decided to throw a wet Whitestar into the dryer and see what happened?
 

frobisher

Mongoose
Scimitar said:
OK, the ISA crowd is not satisfied with the Starfury, Thunderbolt and Nial?

As far as metagame logic goes. The ISA can field forces with some of the best fighters in the game already, why give them another toy?

For 'real world' logic: The ISA was a new entity and had already 3 advanced fighter designs. Why spend R&D develpoing an entirely new one which would have new logistical requirements?

I don't care for the Mongoose take on the thing, but there is actually a canon precident for it. In the novel, "To Dream in the City of Sorrows" there are three prototype White Star pathfinder fighters that are being used as proof of concept for the White Star fleet; These are, by all accounts super heavy fighters, like the Drazi Sky Serpent.

These they already know how to construct, it's just a matter of if they could now that the Vorlons have gone beyond the Rim and aren't there to help. It should be noted that the Victory is distinctly lacking in the organic technology that characterised the White Stars, even though it includes reverse engineered Vorlon technology...

But the one from S&P didn't portray that prototype :(
 

Morpheus1975

Mongoose
Scimitar said:
OK, the ISA crowd is not satisfied with the Starfury, Thunderbolt and Nial?

As far as metagame logic goes. The ISA can field forces with some of the best fighters in the game already, why give them another toy?

For 'real world' logic: The ISA was a new entity and had already 3 advanced fighter designs. Why spend R&D develpoing an entirely new one which would have new logistical requirements? They had a bigger and more pressing priority in building a large cruiser class. Not to mention the supporting infrastructure for their government and existing military would need to be built from scratch.

I agree or why else have only starfurys on the Excalibur?

If they had the fighters they would have used them on the newest toy that they had in the fleet!
 

Chernobyl

Mongoose
The Victory class was built in cooperation with the minbari, built by earth. Designed for Earth Alliance crews (see the movie, "A Call to Arms"). Given the unique launch configuration of the thunderbolts, I'd assume that the ship wasn't designed for minbari crews or fighters.

Also, I don't know how "canon" the various novels are. Star Trek has said many times that the only canon are the tv shows and movies. everything else is fiction. I don't know what WB, mongoose's, or JMS's take on "canon" is.

Chernobyl
 

frobisher

Mongoose
Chernobyl said:
The Victory class was built in cooperation with the minbari, built by earth. Designed for Earth Alliance crews (see the movie, "A Call to Arms"). Given the unique launch configuration of the thunderbolts, I'd assume that the ship wasn't designed for minbari crews or fighters.

It should be noted that only the Thunderbolts deploy from the spindles - the Aurorea have to use the normal hanger exit, and Nials could certainly be launched that way too; But the ships were being built by human contractors and I suspect they were a little wary of allowing Nials to become available for the inevitable reverse engineering that would occur.

The crews, in ISA service would have been mixed, there's no doubt about it, but the auxillary craft would almost have certainly been of EA origin (and why not).

Chernobyl said:
Also, I don't know how "canon" the various novels are. Star Trek has said many times that the only canon are the tv shows and movies. everything else is fiction. I don't know what WB, mongoose's, or JMS's take on "canon" is.l

That novel is canon. jms even says so in his intro to it...
 

B_Steele

Mongoose
An e-mail I got from JMS a while back when he was ebay-ing everything said that he sees "everything" that Mongoose does, or pretty much anyone else for that matter, because he is "too anal to let just anything past his desk."

Which is a pretty big shot in the arm for any of us who have done work on the B5/ACTA lines.

-Bry

ps-Oh yeah, I voted FOR the White Star fighters because I am always for good, new stuff as long as it is thoroughly playtested and balanced. Not to mention, I try to make sure anything I work on is RPG-friendly and vice versa. It makes for cooler crossovers in either game. :)
 

Chernobyl

Mongoose
Thats awesome! I'm so very glad that JMS takes an active role in the continuity of the B5 universe. He was, is, and will continue to be, a great presence in Scifi.
I am still rooting for a B5 movie though. perhaps some day.

Do we know for a fact that the Auroras use the main exit? I can't remember if I ever saw them leave that way or not. perhaps they have some special launch cradle underneath similiar to B5's cobra bays (though they'd need to boost out as they don't have the station's rotation working for them)

I may need to pick up some of those books. I remember reading one a long while ago that focused on garibaldi if I remember correctly.

I haven't played ISA at all yet. there are so many different races to play I just haven't gotten around to them. Although, I can see the need for a better variety in their ships. I'd like the ISA to be able to choose some earth ships. So as, I voted #3, don't know enough.

Chernobyl
 

armbarred

Mongoose
I voted yes because honestly, ISA does need some variation. Yes I can pick one slot from a small ist of other races, but still there aren't that many choices... not that seem to build a well functioning and truly awe-inspiring force. And I think the ISA shoudl do just that.
 

frobisher

Mongoose
Chernobyl said:
Do we know for a fact that the Auroras use the main exit? I can't remember if I ever saw them leave that way or not.

We did (certainly the small group led by Lochley) in "Each Night I Dream of Home".

Chernobyl said:
perhaps they have some special launch cradle underneath similiar to B5's cobra bays (though they'd need to boost out as they don't have the station's rotation working for them)

Probably not - The Thuds just use their own thrusters to launch from the spindles, and on the Omegas the fighters just pour out the front. The Cobra bays are just making good use of the local circumstances, but it's not necessary.
 

deathlynx

Mongoose
I voted honestly since I haven't seen the stats...but as a gamer and a modeler I would love to see them...partly because I have some old AoG Fleet Action scale White stars that would work perfectly :wink: ...
 

Nomad

Mongoose
I voted 'yes' simply because I believe these are 'canon' to the extent that one appeared in the TV show (the ship Sheridan disappeared in).

Although I seem to remember that vessel being refered to as a Blue Star somewhere....
 

B_Steele

Mongoose
Nope, that was a regular everyday White Star. The White Star fighters weren't actually talked about in any of the shows.

Just that the ISA needed some extra punch for the conflicts to come (Drakh War, namely).

-Bry
 

Jal

Mongoose
B_Steele said:
Nope, that was a regular everyday White Star. The White Star fighters weren't actually talked about in any of the shows.

Just that the ISA needed some extra punch for the conflicts to come (Drakh War, namely).

-Bry

there was indeed a small Whitestar type vessel shown in the final episode of the series when Sheridan goes beyond the rim.

as to wether this was the same as the Whitestar prototype vessels mentioned in the book or was a later development after the formation of th ISA remains to be seen.
 

B_Steele

Mongoose
After a quick re-watch and cue...it isn't a Whitestar, but it isn't a fighter either. It may be the WSC-2 (heavier variant).

Who knows. :oops:

-Bry
 

lastbesthope

Mongoose
RIght,

The ship Sheridan is seen in in SLeeping in Light is not a White Star or a White Star 2. Prrof, well look at it, it is not a White Star hull, it's like just the bridge section of a white Star, maybe a White Star 'FLyer'. I too remember it being called a Blue Star somewhere as well.

Further proof, from the stats for the ES and WSC-2 (S&P 19) the length of the hull is the same, but it is heavier. Basically they are the same hull, just different systems contained within.

The WSC-L fighter stats say an inservice date of 2265 which is a good 5 years or so after the events of "To Dream in the City of Sorrows"

Why should the ISA have it's own fighters, because no military force should rely on rersources that are available at the whim of a foreign government. Now unlikely as it is in the case of the Minbari, it could easily happen with Earth. We want our fighters back Johnny, tough cheddar. You want a real life precedent, JSF is having an 'export' version considerably downgraded from the US version, the UK is particularly unhappy about this given we were assured otherwise, also the US are being picky about technology control, so the RAF won't be able to accerss all the tech info of the JSF for adding our owwn kit without going through the US. OK, this is all in the future, but other examples of the witholding of military resources have occurred. When Gulf War 2 kicked off, one European country did it's best not to let the UK access NATO declared stocks of ammo, another tried to take back some radars it had lent to the UK so they could not be used in the Gulf. Even the US was messing with us as they put an export ban on activated charcoal, an integral component in NBC filters.

In time of war, the ISA would want to be able to guarantee it's own fighter supply. Also it allows it to mask it's losses. Any Furies or T'bolts lost on 'black ops' would bneed replaced. The EA would figure out something was up, likewise for the EA, but if the ISA builds it's own fighters, noone knows how many are built so losses can be covered up more easily.

In game terms, the more ISA options at lower levels the better, even if we make the WSC-L a craft rather than a fighter please k eep it in.

My main gripe about the WSC-L is AFAIK thus far it is the only vessel for ACTA which has had stats printed for it in an official Mongoose publication that will not be appearing in SFOS, at least not in any draft I've seen. So if it is being made unofficial please tell us, or if not make sure it's stats are in line with all the other tweaked fighters and drop it into SFOS before release.

Thanks in advance Mongoose

LBH
 

frobisher

Mongoose
jal said:
as to wether this was the same as the Whitestar prototype vessels mentioned in the book or was a later development after the formation of th ISA remains to be seen.

It isn't the prototype, as it doesn't match the description given in the books which talked about it having a cockpit you climbed into, where as the "Bluestar" clearly had a bridge.
 

deathlynx

Mongoose
I think that as a Patrol Class single ship the WSC-L would work well...That way it could be given a full set of stats even if they were miniscule...Then again I'm biased in my desire to see more selections in the ISA fleet...
 
Top