| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 809
Location: Sweden
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:30 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Regarding the guns, I've been thinking.
I didn't get any pushback on my previous posting about this:
8 octuple turbolaser batteries (4 each side, with side arcs and the ability to rotate forward)
50 heavy turbolaser batteries (20 fire front, and 15 to each side)
26-50 turbolaser cannons
20 ion cannons (10 fire front, and 5 to each side)
10 Tractor Beam Projectors (6 front, 2 to each side)
So, I'd like to raise the criticism myself.
I think WEG's classification of firing arcs is perfectly fine for a simple game, yet the wedge-shape of the ISD really should be taken seriously for our purposes.
Of course, the octuples are not mentioned by WEG, but we know where they are. They're visually present, and we can easily impute their firing arcs, as follows:
That gives them both front and side arcs.
So far so uncontroversial.
Some of these weapons should be on the broadsides, rather than on the superstructure. I think that the 50 heavy turbolaser batteries (which do not face aft) should be along those broadsides, with 25 on each side being able to cover 144deg. starting with directly forward and sweeping to the side.
I'm deriving that arc from the angle of the wedge. The wedge is at 36 degrees (according to my measurement anyway). Assuming that the standard position of the battery is 90 degrees to the broadside it needs to angle (90-36/2=) 72degrees forward. If it can angle 72 degrees forward, it should probably also be able to angle 72 aftward, and 2x72=144.
That keeps their arcs out of the aft (and in agreement with WEG in that regard, but they can all fire directly forward. However, they cannot all cover the full 90deg. forward arc.
The schematic would looks as follows:
Now, the 26-50 individually-firing turbolaser cannons, I would say that these are on the superstructure. I'd say, let us just put them in the locations where we see those elongated ports that we talked about back on pg. 25.
I don't think we're really going to get anywhere being too meticulous about the original Avenger model, because the people making the model and the film weren't meticulous about it themselves.
Anyway, I'll draw something up for those - and the other things as well, after I've had some shut-eye. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apologies, I'm out of town with limited internet connectivity, but I'll try to answer your questions!
First on the crew numbers: that sounds great! You calculate the total numbers of each crew type in each section, and I can block in the space. I'm thinking the crew types would fall into different rank categories. For example, Enlisted and below would be in shared bunks. Lieutenants get separate rooms, Commanders and Captains get staterooms, etc. Knowing not only total numbers but also types of personnel in each area lets me assign room sizes.
In regards to secondary facilities (mess halls, med bays, and training rooms, recreation facilities, shops, laundry rooms, detention bays, office blocks for the administrators, and security stations), I was thinking some of these would be "per deck" and some would be part of the block system. I'll explain. Training rooms might be one per deck in crew areas, or even one per three decks. Some essential services, however, I'd think would be part of the stamped, repeated "block" structure for quartering: as in, for crew, you'd have a repeated block structure that would have 16 bunks (just an estimate, no real figure), a med station, a group shower, and a laundry room. Thoughts? Maybe we could sort secondary facilities into essential and ancillary, and then the ancillary as priority 1,2, or 3 (multiple per deck, one per deck, and one per several decks). What's your take on this?
Water and liquid stores - well, we know the major water source from the cutaway,in the bow. I don't know enough about liquid filtration, but we should look at large terrestrial warships - we'd need gasses (Tibanna), liquid fuel (maybe, for some things?), lubricant, bacta, and then things like food - liquid nutrient paste, auto chef ingredient paste, etc. I remember reading that the Titanic (an 833' liner, but upper class dining - unlike Imperial fare) had something like 1,000 gallons of orange juice. I'm just thinking of things that add up when you have a city in space. A giant tank for blue milk  ?
I'm definitely thinking about waste water and sewage infrastructure - power, liquid, and equipment intraship (moving components about) will be laid out in a vital circulatory system once we know basic structures. In fact, I figure many of the systems in the ship will be laid out like the lymphatic system - security posts as lymph nodes, clustered around the nerve fibers of power systems and the arteries of lift tubes. Compartmentalization is also vital, I agree.
I'm not sure I understand the segregation of port and starboard water recycling - are you saying the hangar you made currently runs too far aft to fit a central recycler? Just so we're clear. It's fine either way, I just want to understand.
On the hangar, don't worry - that's not lost work. If I have your faster files I can pretty easily convert it over to vector, and quickly rebuilt what doesn't convert. It will be VERY helpful! If you'd like to continue to build information in pixels, you can just focus on accuracy rather than color and rendering, since I'll be using it as a roadmap - like a circuitry diagram.
As to the weapons, your diagrams are VERY helpful! Maybe I missed it, but did WEG really forget the octuples? That seems like a major oversight (and perhaps we already discussed it...?). But in either case, we know they're therr. As to the heavy on the trench vs the standard on the superstructure - I'm ok making that distinction. It always makes me nervous to make a call like that without info, but I suppose there no information on where the heavy vs standard are located? The only other option would be having a few of each type mixed in, say 14 standard on the superstructure with 10 heavy, and 6 standard on the trench (3 each side), with 40 heavy (20 each side). But honestly, I defer to your judgement in their organization, since I'm unsure what the "common sense" call is. That seems to be how I keep trying to make calls - if it's not in the literature, I assume we'd want the decisions we make to be same ones another team would make in our place - ie, the "obvious call."
As regards the round portals and the firing arcs: I agree on the arcs. I think the forward/side arrangement is a WEG simplification for ALL ships, but is NOT one we should rigidly hold to when designing a *triangular* ship. Side=forward in this case. With the portals on the superstructure - do you recall the count we had? Are there 20 on the superstructure? If not, how many, and aren't there some on the trench? I figure if we're assigning them to a gun type, we should try to be consistent as to their function.
However, as to your last point, I also concede that the model is 6' of nonsense and "that way lies madness," so lip service to model consistency is probably the best course.
I also apologize if my phone's autocorrect rendered any of my words into unintelligible gibberish speak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 809
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good to hear back from you, again.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I'm thinking the crew types would fall into different rank categories. For example, Enlisted and below would be in shared bunks. Lieutenants get separate rooms, Commanders and Captains get staterooms, etc. Knowing not only total numbers but also types of personnel in each area lets me assign room sizes. |
Yes!
We have six levels of officers.
The top is the Captain (1)
The Department Commanders (6 Senior Commanders, incl. XO and High Colonel)
The Division Commanders (6x6=36 Junior Commanders)
Starting at the division level, I'm thinking that we have one Junior Commander to cover the captain's shift, and then two subordinates at the Snr. Lieutenant rank to cover the other two shifts. However, I'll count those subordinates at the section level, ie. the Senior Lieutenant Rank. I'll do the same for every level lower. So, basically I'm counting ranks rather than stations, but... I think you'll bear with me.)
The Section Chiefs is where the x6 standard starts to break down.
Helm Division: 5 Snr Lieutenants
Weapons: 7 Senior Lieutenants
Shields: 6 Senior Lieutenants
Engineering: 8 Senior Lieutenants
Computers: 10 Senior Lieutenants (1 per ship segment: command, neck, engineering, broadsides, hangars, quarters, bow & supply)
Maintenance: 10 Senior Lieutenants (idem dito)
...anyway, I'll flesh that out, but I have a scheme to do so now.
I think that the senior and junior lieutenants might be quartered in locations having to do with their stations. So, e.g. the Starfighter and Shuttle lieutenants would be somewhere close to the hangars, the engineers will be in the engineering segment, the weapons department people close to their stations, etc.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | In regards to secondary facilities (mess halls, med bays, and training rooms, recreation facilities, shops, laundry rooms, detention bays, office blocks for the administrators, and security stations), I was thinking some of these would be "per deck" and some would be part of the block system. I'll explain. Training rooms might be one per deck in crew areas, or even one per three decks. Some essential services, however, I'd think would be part of the stamped, repeated "block" structure for quartering: as in, for crew, you'd have a repeated block structure that would have 16 bunks (just an estimate, no real figure), a med station, a group shower, and a laundry room. Thoughts? Maybe we could sort secondary facilities into essential and ancillary, and then the ancillary as priority 1,2, or 3 (multiple per deck, one per deck, and one per several decks). What's your take on this? |
Yes, to all that. I think we need to start to get a sense of scale for all this. Since we already have a precise breakdown of how many people we have for the stormtrooper legion, can you simply already create their quarters block? That way I can see the size of that block, compared to the rest of the ship.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Water and liquid stores - well, we know the major water source from the cutaway,in the bow. I don't know enough about liquid filtration, but we should look at large terrestrial warships - we'd need gasses (Tibanna), liquid fuel (maybe, for some things?), lubricant, bacta, and then things like food - liquid nutrient paste, auto chef ingredient paste, etc. I remember reading that the Titanic (an 833' liner, but upper class dining - unlike Imperial fare) had something like 1,000 gallons of orange juice. I'm just thinking of things that add up when you have a city in space. A giant tank for blue milk ? |
Okay, so gasses:
Pure Oxygen
Breathable Air
Tibanna
Argon (an inert gas, for purposes like welding or maybe fire suppression)
Liquids:
Fuel
Fresh Water
Brown Water
Grey Water (also as coolant)
Lubricant
Solvent
Bacta
Consumables (juices & blue milk)
Semi-Liquids
Food pastes
Medical pastes
Semi-liquid lubricants (ie. grease)
What else?
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I'm definitely thinking about waste water and sewage infrastructure - power, liquid, and equipment intraship (moving components about) will be laid out in a vital circulatory system once we know basic structures. In fact, I figure many of the systems in the ship will be laid out like the lymphatic system - security posts as lymph nodes, clustered around the nerve fibers of power systems and the arteries of lift tubes. Compartmentalization is also vital, I agree. |
Okay, as long as that's on your mental map, I'll leave that to you.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I'm not sure I understand the segregation of port and starboard water recycling - are you saying the hangar you made currently runs too far aft to fit a central recycler? Just so we're clear. It's fine either way, I just want to understand. |
Yes, exactly.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | On the hangar, don't worry - that's not lost work. If I have your faster files I can pretty easily convert it over to vector, and quickly rebuilt what doesn't convert. It will be VERY helpful! If you'd like to continue to build information in pixels, you can just focus on accuracy rather than color and rendering, since I'll be using it as a roadmap - like a circuitry diagram. |
Hm... should I perhaps save each level of the .xcf as a .png? (and by level I mean image level, not deck level)
| Mojomoe wrote: | | As to the weapons, your diagrams are VERY helpful! Maybe I missed it, but did WEG really forget the octuples? That seems like a major oversight (and perhaps we already discussed it...?). But in either case, we know they're there. As to the heavy on the trench vs the standard on the superstructure - I'm ok making that distinction. It always makes me nervous to make a call like that without info, but I suppose there no information on where the heavy vs standard are located? |
There really is no information on it that I'm aware of.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | The only other option would be having a few of each type mixed in, say 14 standard on the superstructure with 10 heavy, and 6 standard on the trench (3 each side), with 40 heavy (20 each side). |
That's an idea too. I think we really could go either way. While the mix would be tactically advantageous, I think, I imagine that structurally speaking, the separation would be easier and more efficient to build. (Also for you to copy and paste.)
Another solution, which we see on the new Raider-class corvette, which Lucasfilm and Fantasy Flight Games just collaborated on, has the weapons pop up from the angled surfaces, like so:
That makes a lot of sense to me. Perhaps we should look at the hull plates on the angled surfaces to see where those might be. However, I think I prefer the batteries just being lined up all along the broadside. It just seems more broadsidesque to me, with the flavor of 18th-century navies.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | But honestly, I defer to your judgement in their organization, since I'm unsure what the "common sense" call is. That seems to be how I keep trying to make calls - if it's not in the literature, I assume we'd want the decisions we make to be same ones another team would make in our place - ie, the "obvious call." |
I don't think there's an obvious call. All the calls seem to have benefits and drawbacks. I think we're doing alright by debating the matters and then making a decision on the matter.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | As regards the round portals and the firing arcs: I agree on the arcs. I think the forward/side arrangement is a WEG simplification for ALL ships, but is NOT one we should rigidly hold to when designing a *triangular* ship. Side=forward in this case. With the portals on the superstructure - do you recall the count we had? Are there 20 on the superstructure? If not, how many, and aren't there some on the trench? I figure if we're assigning them to a gun type, we should try to be consistent as to their function. |
I've been looking at your images from Pg. 25, which give us 7 on each side on the superstructure, six on the command tower, and 2 on each side of the broadsides. That adds up to 14+4+6=24. I don't see any on the aft section, but we can maybe say that they're in that exhaust-looking thing on the back of the lower neck, or did you have some other purpose for that hole?
We can perhaps think of it like this: those round portals are for the individually-firing heavy laser cannons, and there's two per portal, side by side. The portals are large, so that the gun can tilt and pan freely in order to track targets.
The 6 portals on the command tower have 2 each (=12), facing forward
The 4 portals on the broadsides have 2 each (=8 ), facing forward, but also to the sides, because they're on the broadsides.
The 7 portals on each side of the superstructure also have 2 cannons each (2x7x2=28 ), facing to the side (14 starboard, 14 port)
That gives us the 20 forward - which is accurate to the ImpSB, but (14+4=28 ) that face each side - which is not. Though, if we say that two of the superstructure portals are actually tractor-beam projectors, then we have the side-facing tractor beams accounted for, and we reduce the side-only facing cannons reduced to 10 on each side, as per the ImpSB.
Saying that a 4 of the lights on the model (2 on each side) are actually tractor beams, rather than ion cannons, also solves that problem. We have 4 tractor beams on the superstructure (as I wrote above), 4 facing forward from the broadsides, and 2 by the hangars (those satellite-dish-looking things).
Seeing as we have 7 lights per broadside, if we say that two of them are tractor beams rather than ion cannons, gives us (7-2=)5 per broadside. If we're saying that the broadsides fire both front and to the side, then we have all our ion cannons accounted for.
Like so:
The blue circles point to the ion cannons, and the yellows to the tractor beams (minus those that are on the superstructure).
| Mojomoe wrote: | However, as to your last point, I also concede that the model is 6' of nonsense and "that way lies madness," so lip service to model consistency is probably the best course.
I also apologize if my phone's autocorrect rendered any of my words into unintelligible gibberish speak. |
Agreed, and no worries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zarm R'keeg
Commander
Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Posts: 481
Location: PA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This may be a really stupid suggestion (especially because I don't know how much attention/detail they really put into this), but has anyone thought about checking out the X-wing series of games to see where they put the origination points for weapons fire from the Star Destroyer, as a guide to where the emplacements are?
_________________
Star Wars: Marvels, the audio drama: www.nolinecinemas.com
Hard core OT, all the way! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2015 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aha! Digging back in with a good internet connection!
I'm liking your organization of naval personnel, and it's absolutely fine if it doesn't adhere to the 1:6 rank ratio - that was an EXTREME shorthand in order to ballpark ranks. What you have works. As to your question of certain departments being housed near their charges; I suppose that depends on the department? The Starfighter Lt. who deals directly with the starfighter crews would likely be housed with them. However, if we're talking shipwide starfighter coordination, (ie, with bridge officers), they should be in Command with the other higher ranking officers in Command and Neck. I'd say the rule here is that, barring RARE exceptions (General Veers), nobody is expected to ever make a cross-ship journey; you are housed where you work, and there you remain. Veers was presumably different because he both coordinated a fleet wide ground assault AND led the assault; as such, he was expected in Command (where he received direct orders from Vader), and in the landing bay, from where the assault was actually launched. In general, though, I assume no one lives in Command and works in Starfighter Control. Such transport is wasteful and unnecessary, I'd wager. We had assumed earlier that crew rarely - if ever - left their section and mingled.
To that end, your continued organization of the crew and their sections is MOST useful. As to a sample room block, what would help you the most? A Stormtrooper block will be different from a Starfighter block, which is different from Enlisted, Officer, and Division Commander blocks. EDIT - I see you'd like the Stormtrooper block, which I can accommodate. I assume we need more numbers data to determine the sizes of the other blocks.
Come to think of it, how many types of room blocks do you think we'll have? We have a little info from the Death Star and some ISD room schematics, showing different room sizes and amenities for different ranks. If we can start grouping these, it would help.
CONSUMABLES
I think this list is a great start, we can add to it later. For now, let's start to assign rough amounts to each of these. What do we know about air filtration on Star Wars ships? Do we have a canon sense for how much O2 the Falcon, for instance, carries? We can guesstimate water from the Cross-Sections ISD book. Maybe numbers aren't important, but do we need half as much air as water? A third?
As far as images, yeah - if you could kick out a PNG or JPG of each layer it would help. You're using Photoshop, right? If so I should also be able to access your whole layer structure, so that shouldn't be a problem. Do I have a sample file to check?
WEAPON EMPLACEMENTS
I agree that broadside makes more sense than retracted panel covers. That just seems to violate Occam's Razor a little overmuch for my tastes, but I'll take another look at canon sources of laser emission - just to make sure nothing originates from the dorsal surface.
I'll admit, I'm really warming to your circular opening / double gun theory. And I KNOW trying to rationalize the model is nonsense - but since we'll be placing guns down to the METER on this map, I'd like to try *one more time* to rationalize the greebles and make a match (I know  ).
First off, I wonder if it would be worth it to take all the high res shots of the trenches and superstructure and try to make SOME kind of rough cut map, so we can look at all the structures at once and count them. Thoughts?
So, for my own edification, and to be sure I'm 100% understanding: could you run through your double-wide rounded portal theory in detail one more time (pretend I'm stupid). Assuming your best-guess, do we have all the guns/ions/fire arcs accounted for? Or are we missing some/have too many?
And last point: I will certainly check the Xwing game! That's a great idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 809
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zarm R'keeg wrote: | | This may be a really stupid suggestion (especially because I don't know how much attention/detail they really put into this), but has anyone thought about checking out the X-wing series of games to see where they put the origination points for weapons fire from the Star Destroyer, as a guide to where the emplacements are? |
Hi Zarm,
I have not looked at that. Do you recall those games being particularly precise about where the weapons fire originated from? I played them about 20 years ago now, and don't recall anything that precise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| At least to my memory, the low-poly ISD was simply covered in gun turrets at random locations, but I could be misremembering. I'll check the youtubez. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 809
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I'd say the rule here is that, barring RARE exceptions (General Veers), nobody is expected to ever make a cross-ship journey; you are housed where you work, and there you remain. Veers was presumably different because he both coordinated a fleet wide ground assault AND led the assault; as such, he was expected in Command (where he received direct orders from Vader), and in the landing bay, from where the assault was actually launched. In general, though, I assume no one lives in Command and works in Starfighter Control. Such transport is wasteful and unnecessary, I'd wager. We had assumed earlier that crew rarely - if ever - left their section and mingled. |
In principle I would agree. The reason I would like to see some provisional visual models of the housing blocks is so that we can get a sense of scale. The larger these housing blocks need to be, the less freedom we have in their placement, and they more they're going to be shoved to the lower super structure, where the Victory Class has its housing blocks.
Right now I feel like I'm in a bit of chicken/egg catch 22, because I want to think about who goes where, but that also depends on the amount of bodies and where that amount of bodies can go. It might not matter, but still my thought process is running around in circles right now.
I did short-hand quite a lot of the crewing by calculating proportions based off the crew complement of an Iowa-class battleship. I found this page giving us some raw numbers on departments and divisions. It also verifies that I have some of my nomenclature right. Anyway, in the administrative divisions, where the numbers of administrators relate to the numbers of crew (rather than reflecting particular technologies such as weapons systems and fighters/shuttles), it seems to me simple just to divide by 1,450 and multiply by 46,785. That gives us the following at least:
Medical & Dental: 1267 (a division of the Administrative Department)
Bookkeeping: 1877 (a division of the Administrative Department)
Food services: 1968 (a section of Supply & Logistics, also a division of the Administrative Department)
As impressive as the numbers look, it's taking quite a lot to get to the 46,786. Thus far I have 17,855 accounted for in my spreadsheet, which includes the stormtrooper legion, the TIE pilots and most of the weapons department.
I'm hoping to get a lot of numbers from security, engineering and maintenance, but security and maintenance will likely be focused around where people are. There's not too much need for security or maintenance in the bow, if there's not a lot of people working there to get out of hand or to mess things up. I can probably just run some factor based off the (1450/46785=)x32.2 factor, but I imagine that at Imperial society is a bit more totalitarian than the US Navy, and that they'll want more of a security presence than the US Navy does.
| Mojomoe wrote: | To that end, your continued organization of the crew and their sections is MOST useful. As to a sample room block, what would help you the most? A Stormtrooper block will be different from a Starfighter block, which is different from Enlisted, Officer, and Division Commander blocks. EDIT - I see you'd like the Stormtrooper block, which I can accommodate. I assume we need more numbers data to determine the sizes of the other blocks.
Come to think of it, how many types of room blocks do you think we'll have? We have a little info from the Death Star and some ISD room schematics, showing different room sizes and amenities for different ranks. If we can start grouping these, it would help. |
If we have room to spare (as in, housing doesn't actually take up all that much space, but we still want cramped quarters, just to make it uncomfortable for people on principle) then we can really just make everything standardized, and have the size of quarters determined purely by rank. That IMO fits the stratified hierarchical society that we're building around. So, the command crew nice and spacious, stormtroopers stacked like cordwood.
I guess the reason that I'm asking for stormtroopers is because we already know the numbers, and it represents the bottom of the hierarchy. Stormtroopers are an extremely bottom-heavy department, where the ratio of lowest-rank enlisted to the rest is the highest. Still, they too have ranks, and higher-ranked troopers will be quartered in more spacious quarters than the buck-privates.
| Mojomoe wrote: | CONSUMABLES
I think this list is a great start, we can add to it later. For now, let's start to assign rough amounts to each of these. What do we know about air filtration on Star Wars ships? Do we have a canon sense for how much O2 the Falcon, for instance, carries? We can guesstimate water from the Cross-Sections ISD book. Maybe numbers aren't important, but do we need half as much air as water? A third? |
I just ran a number. by my math, which may be faulty, I figure that to house 46785 people for a year, we will need to store 10,753 cubic meters of liquid oxygen. Of course, if they just want convert CO2 back to C and O2 by zapping it with a laser, then maybe that's just a more efficient process. of dealing with the oxygen question. Your thoughts?
| Mojomoe wrote: | | As far as images, yeah - if you could kick out a PNG or JPG of each layer it would help. You're using Photoshop, right? If so I should also be able to access your whole layer structure, so that shouldn't be a problem. Do I have a sample file to check? |
Remember that I'm using GIMP.
How eager are you to get these pixels sooner rather than later?
| Mojomoe wrote: | WEAPON EMPLACEMENTS
I agree that broadside makes more sense than retracted panel covers. That just seems to violate Occam's Razor a little overmuch for my tastes, but I'll take another look at canon sources of laser emission - just to make sure nothing originates from the dorsal surface.
I'll admit, I'm really warming to your circular opening / double gun theory. And I KNOW trying to rationalize the model is nonsense - but since we'll be placing guns down to the METER on this map, I'd like to try *one more time* to rationalize the greebles and make a match (I know ).
First off, I wonder if it would be worth it to take all the high res shots of the trenches and superstructure and try to make SOME kind of rough cut map, so we can look at all the structures at once and count them. Thoughts? |
I'm glad you're volunteering yourself for that. Below I have an image for you, in the same series as the ones I had before. Here you have the firing arc of what I imagine the aft-most ion cannon to be, along with 25 yellow dashes along each broadside to represent even spacing of heavy turbolaser batteries.
| Mojomoe wrote: |
So, for my own edification, and to be sure I'm 100% understanding: could you run through your double-wide rounded portal theory in detail one more time (pretend I'm stupid). Assuming your best-guess, do we have all the guns/ions/fire arcs accounted for? Or are we missing some/have too many? |
Okay, the double-wide rounded portal theory is as follows:
We're talking about just the heavy turbolasers - not the heavy turbolaser batteries. I am thinking of these heavy turbolasers as being something like this:
And then two of them side-by side in a large rounded porthole. That would give them a wide arc of fire, and be able to move more rapidly than the batteries, representing the extra dice of fire control.
Now, as I write this, I'm realizing that what that image represents may not be anything like a heavy turbolaser cannon; a HTC being maybe a LOT bigger than that. After all, this is what a heavy turbolaser cannon cannon looked like on the Death Star:
Still, that's just a question of scale. We could still have two of those sitting side-by-side in each one of those long portholes.
On the model, you saw the following:
On the frontal image (ie. the front firing arc), we see 10 of those porthole (6 on the tower, 4 on the broadsides). If we have 2 HTCs per porthole, then we have the 20 front-firing HTCs accounted for.
On the side image, we see 9 of those portholes (2 on the broadside, and 7 on the superstructure). If two of those portholes on the superstructure are tractor beams, then we are left with 5 portholes on the superstructure. If each of those has 2 HTCs, then we have our 10 side-firing HTCs.
(As I write this, I realize that I didn't account for the ones on broadsides in their side-firing capacity, but I'm allowing myself the fudge on that.)
That leaves us with 10 aft-firing HTCs to account for.
Of course, we have the controversy over these. I'm getting 50 HTCs from the ImpSB. According to the Star Wars: The Official Starships & Vehicles Collection 5 there are 26+ "Additional turbolaser batteries", and according to that same source as well as Starships of the Galaxy (Saga Edition RPG), it has 50 turbolasers (as opposed to heavy turbolasers). I don't have that S&V Collection book, so I can't speak to its quality.
I'm interested in what the S&V collection might be, but I don't feel like paying ~$70 to get it on eBay from Australia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RyanDarkstar
Commander
Joined: 04 Dec 2014
Posts: 351
Location: Chambersburg, PA, USA, Earth
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
X-Wing Alliance Upgrade - http://www.xwaupgrade.com - attempts to fix a lot of the graphic shortcomings of the original X-Wing Alliance video game, but I'm not sure how well they placed all of the weaponry on the Star Destroyers.
If I can find my game, I'll let you know.
Update:
Found my game, but unfortunately the game is a bust. Even with the upgraded graphics, there are no discernible locations for the turbolasers. Laser blasts seem to randomly exit from all over.
_________________
Currently playing D&D 5E and painting an unholy amount of miniatures.
Last edited by RyanDarkstar on Sun Jan 11, 2015 3:54 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zarm R'keeg
Commander
Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Posts: 481
Location: PA
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mikael Hasselstein wrote: | | I have not looked at that. Do you recall those games being particularly precise about where the weapons fire originated from? I played them about 20 years ago now, and don't recall anything that precise. |
I do not recall. They were just the only potential source I could think of. They could be random garbage, for all I know. But if they put enough time and detail into it...
_________________
Star Wars: Marvels, the audio drama: www.nolinecinemas.com
Hard core OT, all the way! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, I just want to give a quick update.
First, try as I might, there's no way to make head or tails from the Avenger studio model shots, as regards a complete map of the equatorial trench. Simply put, the photographer did not capture enough in each shot to build a continuous map. This is frustrating.
Second, I found some footage of the Star Destroyer from one of the Xwing games, Alliance I believe, wherein they have decided that the gun emplacements are exactly that - tiny, Death Star-like cubic emplacements - and that they are supremely SMALL compared to the size of the ship. Seriously, in low flyovers, I have trouble even freezeframing and spotting them, they're THAT small. This might be something we consider: As regards the shot of the gunners in their gun bays that you posted previously ^, we might want to run a quick scale test and see JUST how big those guns would be on the model; it's possible we're looking for a needle on Mount Everest, and the guns may be placed LITERALLY anywhere on the trench. They might even be in one of those many (MANY) small holes we assume to be portholes in the studio model.
One other thought, to further gum up the works, is that we still have the (admittedly latter-era canon) cutaway of the Venator-class showing the equatorial docking vestibule in the similarly-shaped rounded portal. If we use the portals for the guns, we lose them for station docking and umbilical. Just a thought.
I apologize for the back and forth on this one, I really do. I don't want to stick on this one point, but I'm not sure the best course of action. Thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 809
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey man,
That's some serious research. Cool!
Presuming that what you saw in the game was coherent with all the rest of what we know (big presumption, but let's go with it), then my theory is that you were looking at an ISD-I, which does have 60 of the XX-9 Heavy Turbolaser towers, which were also on the Death Star.
Those correspond with the 60 Heavy Turbolaser Batteries mentioned in the ImpSB. Those roll 5d damage with 4d fire control. So far, so slightly coherent (except that the Wookiee has more guns on the ISD-I than the ImpSB mentions - similar to our problem).
On the ISD-II there are 50 heavy turbolaser batteries, which - just judging by the name and the number - would of be similar size and similarly placed - except that they shoot 10d damage with no fire control bonus.
I'm very much of a mind to say "the ImpSB has it all screwed up", because we're going with the Octuples being the big guns, which would be the 10d damage heavy turbolasers.
Ugh, all the inconsistency is making my head hurt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed. One of these sources is going to have to give.
How do you feel about the portals, and losing them to the guns? Maintaining them for docking would be a nice touch, especially since that one in the equatorial indent matches up nicely with a similar structure we know is used for docking on the Venator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 809
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | Agreed. One of these sources is going to have to give.
How do you feel about the portals, and losing them to the guns? Maintaining them for docking would be a nice touch, especially since that one in the equatorial indent matches up nicely with a similar structure we know is used for docking on the Venator. |
I'm in favor of the interpretation I wrote earlier... whatever that was. I think we need to hammer this out and be done with the where-are-the-guns debate.
BUT - I do think we need a proof-of-concept scaling exercise. How large would a gunport with two guns being swivelled by three guys and a spotter each (as in the image) be in comparison to what we see on the model?
Also, remember that this is canon now:
It looks like it's got a bunch of cannon slots, rather than a bunch of greebles. Also, one of its ancestors was a giraffe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll do a quick scaling test.
Having not seen more than the pilot episode of Rebels, do they ever show the ISD firing at all, or more info on the weapons? I know we got a lot of good looks at the interiors in the pilot.
Also very much agreed, we should pin the guns soon and move on to the next area! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
