|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:07 pm
No opinion Des? This even has blueprints so we can all see what the hell we're doing.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:16 pm
Wow, I'll read it over, but it looks a beauty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:22 pm
Compared to past Blueprints, the Deckplans alliance boys did a bang up job on her.
This ship predates the YT-series by three decades so she's old, but she's tough. With three decks and ample room for up to six or more beings it aught to work just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:32 pm
Oh yeah, plenty to do some customization, far more than most YT's could.
What are you going to do to it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:50 pm
Quality maneuvering jets (30,000) and upgrade the single canon turret to a double laser cannon (25,000). Update the engines (20,000) and finally add about 1 metric ton of smuggling space (1000).
Total bill: 81,000 credits.
Thats over 15 years of cargo hauling so it works out.
So I suppose we'll need to name it now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:35 am
Looking at those Barloz schematics, I've noticed that there are six modular accessory arms, two on each level.
The bottom two hold escape pods, mid two hold extendable docking tubes, and the top two hold lounge pods; all of which can be taken out and switched around or replaced with other options.
This, plus 120 tons of cargo space and a comparatively spacious design compared to the Yt series and I have a hard time seeing how this thing could possibly be replaced.
The only things the Yts have going for them seem to be speed, maneuverability, and superior ease of modification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:32 pm
I love Star Destroyers. mrgreen
Thank you for making frigates obsolete, Imperial-class Star Destroyer!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:37 pm
Truely an awesome piece of military hardware.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:03 pm
What time period was the E-wing? I think it was a great fighter. Alot better than the X-wing. Thats just my opinion though.
Ooh, speaking of X-wings, StealthX all the way. Woot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:08 pm
NJO time frame i think? Nelo's got some particular angst with it and something...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:13 pm
Angst with the E-wing? Hmm...
As long as he doesn't hate hte StealthX, I'm fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:18 pm
He likes the e-wing, i know that much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 12:16 pm
Nelo hates X-wings because they're overused.
The New republic/Galactic Alliance wont stop producing them because they were the ships that killed Death Stars.
He likes the E-wing because its a new model, like the way a TIE Interceptor is a new model of TIE Fighter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 4:18 pm
Didn't the E-wing have some major design flaws?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 4:57 pm
They were corrected within a year.
Said flaws were the blaster gas burning out too quicky and the requirement of the R7 droid. Both were simple problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
