Whitestar Battleship

hat do you think

  • love it

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • hate it

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • blarse

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
still too much. the closest at that level is 6AD on a sharkan(?) for TD P beams and thats on the advanced minbari. if you want 8AD has to be really a DD beam instead.

really the 2nd ship of the 2 is far more balanced and would make a good warship.
 
Yeah I'm with katadder, 6AD is really the max it should have. But I really don't see why it is necessary to have the ships at all. The Carrier already makes an effective "battleship" for the ISA fleet with its 4AD beam and manouverability, even without the fighters! If something heavier is needed then use the Viccy.
 
Right my 2 cents, (and I havent read every single post in this thread so sorry if Im retreading ground here at all):
First off: Whitestar Whatevers:

Most of the regulars here probably already know my general opinion of the whole 'Whitestar Battleship, Carrier, Freighter, Space Station, Cheese Factory, Badger Cleaning System etc etc etc concept' as unoriginal and totally unsupported by the show.

Basically after the Vorlons leave the galaxy, I'm fairly certain Sheridan outright SAYS they don't have the technology to build any more whitestars as they dont fully understand all the principles behind it all and in fact the whole POINT of the Victory was to basically provide the ISD with a destroyer class ship to supplement the whitestar fleet (and other than that theyre supposed to use ships from member nations) so I've always hated the idea that the way to expand the ISA fleet is, rather than create some new ship desings, take an iconic one from the show and randomly strethch, squash and inflate it.

I have absolutely no problem with the ISA getting a battleship class ship, or a carrier, or a destroyer etc of their own but for the love of smeg why did it have to be all bloody whitestars. Dont get me wrong, I LIKE Whitestars but I feel it somehow cheapens them and makes them 'less cool' by having 900 plays on the same theme. Varients is one thing with the same hull with slightly different loadouts but beyond that I say if your going to make a new ship, DESIGN a new ship.

In my eyes the ISA already have 2 very capable battleships type ships in the form of the Victory and the Taralin (and in larger battles any of their member races ships). The two ships I feel they definitely should get are the new ones from Legend of the Rangers (aside from the Liandra/Nolotar) and the Valen class from Lost tales (though probably that should be a Minbari fleet ship rather than ISA).

So no. I do NOT want a 'Whitestar Battleship' (and if there was going to be one those original stats are horribly overpowered)

Secondly: Whitestars and Boresighting:

This has been defended by saying they are maneurable and thus can turn their nose and thats why theyve got forward arc guns. Sorry but no. Thats why theyre agile and have 2 90 degree turns. The only reasonably argument I can think of for NOT boresighting them is the fact that they are relatively high PL but even that doesnt hold much water now theres Bluestars to use as handy initiative sinks.

Basically as I see it they SHOULD be boresighted unless you want to start making all Drazi forward arc too for the same reasons and so on. And yes I know whitestars are more maneuverable than that but frankly thats why the SHIPS are more manueverable it shouldnt be carried into their weapon arcs. But really I dont mind them as they are. I actualy like the current whitestar in terms of balnace, power suriveability and dont think it really needs poking any more!

which brings me onto point 3:

Comparing ACTA to B5Tech. I'm sorry but B5Tech, whilst it has some pretty pictures and some good fluff text is more full of crap than a sewage plant outside of crap city, the capital city of pooalon 6 headquarters of the Fescelon empire. All the weapon names, statistics and figures seem basically to be pulled out of someones ass and backed up by precicely.... nothing. Has JMS ever said: Yep thats right to anything listed on there? No. Its just made up by some guy with too much time on his hands (and for the record I do appreciate the irony in that statement as I sit here taking the time to slag it off on a forum I frequent because I spend more of my time painting and playing with model spaceships.....).

Personally I still maintain the closest thing there is to an actual JMS sanctioned canonical tech manual for B5 there is B5 Wars Core rulebooks and ship lists. And ACTA, when you get right down to it more based of B5 Wars than actual B5. Theyve changed some things (for the worse in some cases in my eyse I'm afraid (cough, cough, stealth, cough) and in a few cases for the better (the change in name of the Centauri weapons though I maintain this is just a case of nomenclature as I feel the current 2nd Edition Primus, Dargan, Vorchans and Demos etc actually now play very much like the AoG ones, which is in my eyes a very good thing) and in some cases for no apparent reason other than what seems to me to just be a case of someone making a cockup and then covering it up with a 'yes we did that on purpose' blurb (switching the Mindriders and the Krishiak ship models around).

So basically: Neutron Cannon, fusion blater, whatever, my arse. If you want to make up new guns, fine, its a new ship after all, but I wouldnt put any weight whatsoever behind ANYTHING I read on B5Tech unless I could find it stated elsewhere as well :P
 
Thought you might show up in this thread sooner o later Locutus :lol:

How about a White Star Fat-Reducing Grilling Machine?
 
Hehehe :P

Do you know what the worst part of it is? In terms of actual gameplay I LIKE the Whitestar carrier and fighter and cannot deny they my ISA fleet would be SOOOOOO much more effective with a coupole of them... BUT I WILL NOT GIVE IN! I hate them! I hate them all!!!! :P
 
lol B5 wars again? dead my friend, along with the company. maybe it was cannon, but then JMS changed things on a whim anyway, how can anyone stay totally cannon to that? plus CGI cockups ended up with some tuff being "cannon" too.
at the end of the day this is a differant game with differant rules not played on hex maps with power dist etc. get over B5 wars when discussing CTA as they are differant games. like comparing apples and oranges both fruit but differant, B5 wars and ACTA both B5 based space games but with differant rules.
 
I liked your rant though, I even read it all :lol:

Don't agree on the WS Boresight issue. In an ideal world you are right, and I also would like to see the WS have a boresight, just like the show, and its manouverability be expressed by its turns and speed scores. But the boresight/initiative system has too many problems (see other threads). Unfortunately there isn't an easy solution (yet), so we are stuck with that system. A 5 WS fleet should always be a viable fleet; with boresight, it wouldn't be viable. 1 FAP of Tethys would render it useless. Yeah "use Blue Stars or Tethys allies" and all that. But surely a viable 5 WS fleet is just as much canon as the boresighted INL? We can't keep both, we must compromize on one of them. So which one should we lose? Maintaining a viable 5 WS fleet keeps the flavour of the game better IMO.
 
think both me and EP actually fought for boresight whitestars back in testing. especially with the 2AD beams. but as you can see that got over ruled :D
 
I didn't vote because I don't know what "blarse" means????

No, seriously, I don't. :oops:


But the ISA already has a battleship....


they just call it a Victory class Destroyer.

Probably for the same reasons as the Omega and Warlock are. :twisted:

:lol: Classed as Destroyers, that is.
 
i like the victory, but personally feel it doesnt suit my taste in alls truth, i would like a heavy hitter that goes in and bloodies some nose's and then goes for some more, with the victory you need to be more stand-off-ish i think.


@Jim
blasé (comparative more blasé, superlative most blasé)
1. Unimpressed with something because of over-familiarity
* casual, indifferent, jaded, nonchalant, unimpressed
 
katadder said:
lol B5 wars again? dead my friend, along with the company. maybe it was cannon, but then JMS changed things on a whim anyway, how can anyone stay totally cannon to that? plus CGI cockups ended up with some tuff being "cannon" too.
at the end of the day this is a differant game with differant rules not played on hex maps with power dist etc. get over B5 wars when discussing CTA as they are differant games. like comparing apples and oranges both fruit but differant, B5 wars and ACTA both B5 based space games but with differant rules.

Yes I know its long dead (and a great shame that is imho) but it still remains that reading through the two games, ACTA just doesnt feel as true to the show (and JMS did flipflop alot but really I wasnt trying to argue B5W vs ACTA, but rather more that B5Tech.com a steaming pile of horse excrement :P

And yes Burger I happen to agree that the primary reason for the WS F arc is so people can field viable 'whitestar fleets' but I'd still like to see a boresighter laser (maybe drop it to 1 dice and increase the firepower of the pulsars so we still end up with a primarily F arc whitestar that HAS a boresighter beam but isnt as reliant on it?)

To bring up B5Wars again (and yes its dead Katadder but that doesnt mean it didnt have some things RIGHT, thats why I bring it up, Id like to see some of those ideas resurected... (also I seemed to notice in 2nd Ed the Dargan mysteriously changed into a stealth cruiser carrying Rutarians oddly enough making it EXACTLY like the B5Wars version.....) the Molecular Pulsars were in fact as I recall the main damage dealers on the Whitestar (that said in B5Wars the Whitestar also had stealth and that in ACTA would just be plain broken :P)
 
Locutus9956 said:
And yes Burger I happen to agree that the primary reason for the WS F arc is so people can field viable 'whitestar fleets' but I'd still like to see a boresighter laser (maybe drop it to 1 dice and increase the firepower of the pulsars so we still end up with a primarily F arc whitestar that HAS a boresighter beam but isnt as reliant on it?)

That'd work too. Especially since in War Without End, they show that the non-beam weapon has longer range than the beam. They are out of range of the Shadow bomb, racing to get in range... when they get in range it is the non-beam that fires. If the beam had longer range then surely they'd fire that first?
 
Oh and for the record I disagree with the Apples and Oranges thing.

Id say its rather more like comparing Clementines and Satsumas.

Theyre not just 'both space based games' theyre both supposedly portreying the same sci fi univers and the same particular space ships and indeed most of the ships used in ACTA were made up SPECIFICALLY FOR B5wars. It's all well and good to say theyre different games, they are, and lord knows B5Wars had its flaws, but so does ACTA and I see no reason why some parts of BWars that just felt so very RIGHT should not be recycled.

Anyway its now past 5 and Im still sat at my desk ranting about Whitestars, see what youve gone and made me do now? [Cartman]Screw you guys, Im going home[/Cartman] :P
 
The bits I have of B5War seem very interesting but a bit daunting in terms of the ship diagrams for lazy people like me who find STbattles too complicted. Maybe its me getting older ( :cry: ) as did not find Battletech sheets too much of chore - but then only really sued them in Lance sized battles.

If the fluff/style etc from AOG sounds/feels good, all in favour of ACTA using it - however this is the MGP version of the B5 Universe - and assumptions etc are made based on that (for instance their view of Shadow fighters :shock: )

I like ACTA and most of its visions :)
 
Sock said:
yeah frikkin right a whitestar with self repair 3d6 keep dreamin, second of all a whitestars weapons should be boresighted, dont believe me, watch any episode of B5 where the whitestars engaged in combat

I think the general point made in some posts in page one is that the above post, while offering critisism, is hardly constructive.

As for what is and isnt cannon is I would use existing ships as a base rather than what a particular individual deems as cannon. After all, the point of the excercise is to make a ship that is balanced to play ACTA.
 
Here's the thing, if the whitestar were anything like what it is in the show, they would be overpowered, i mean, 3 whitestars destroy....I cant remember if it is a drakh mothership or a cruiser. three to five whitestars could defeat anything in the show and they would lose at most one ship, why because the whitestar was designed to be the perfect vessel, literally Deus Ex Machina (God in the Machine)
 
Except they aren't doing so well vs the shadow omegas until the 'components' activate. And they die just fine when supporting Sheridan in the early fight to free an EA colony. Plot powered vessels...

Ripple
 
Back
Top