Remove ads

Grand Army of the Republic: A Star Wars Plan Quest

Reader mode
Khop said:
I'm a little biased becuase I love the machine but no, I refuse to have us producing the same number of ARC-170's as the A-7 Hunter which we want to relegate to a trainer role. Feel free to scale the others up even further afterwards but come on people we have a goal to hit, limited time, and effectively unlimited credits.
The ARC provides a long-range strike capability in a package that looks after itself, it doesn't need to be a mainline fighter but for raider groups it'll be absolutely killer.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We can throw a dice at it, but unfortunately it's a bit to high maitenance. It doesn't have the staying time we need for more protracted battles, so we are gonna have to continue to lean on the Z95/Z96 for most of our starfighter needs.
 
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Small production. (-25 R) (-10 R per turn) (++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
RandyTrevelyan said:
We can throw a dice at it, but unfortunately it's a bit to high maitenance. It doesn't have the staying time we need for more protracted battles, so we are gonna have to continue to lean on the Z95/Z96 for most of our starfighter needs.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We will be making 18 units of Z-95/96s vs 8 units of ARC-170s and that difference can only grow. This order is to just create the strike wings to make use of it's strengths to compliment the mainline force.
I just don't understand the motive behind giving a hard pass to 88 units in one of our largest shortfalls that improves the strategic flexibility of the final force.

Edit: I should qualify when I say 88 units that is how many ARC-170 units that will be created by the large order by the end of the plan.
 
Last edited:
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-10 R per turn) (++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
Changing vote.

[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
Khop said:
We will be making 18 units of Z-95/96s vs 8 units of ARC-170s and that difference can only grow. This order is to just create the strike wings to make use of it's strengths to compliment the mainline force.
I just don't understand the motive behind giving a hard pass to 88 units in one of our largest shortfalls that improves the strategic flexibility of the final force.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oshha said:
The second design is a proposed heavy fighter design for performing independent scouting and raids on enemy military targets. Whilst a bit heavy on the crew requirement as it requires a crew of three plus an astromech, the Aggressive ReConnaissance-170 Starfighter is a very capable starfighter. In addition to sporting a hyperdrive, the ARC-170 has both durable armour and some serious deflector shielding instead of favouring one or the other. While its agility is nothing special, it isn't lacking either as the ARC-170 can outmanoeuvre a Z-95 Headhunter and keep up with an A-7 Hunter Interceptor.

The ARC-170 also supports a substantial amount of firepower. It mounts a heavy laser cannon on both wings in addition to a proton torpedo launcher. Most interestingly, it has a pair of rear-mounted laser cannons, one mounted dorsally and the other ventrally. These two tail-guns allow one of the crew to open fire on any hostiles chasing after the ARC-170. The ARC-170 isn't without its flaws however as in addition to being crew intensive, it also has a high upkeep cost that will limit how much action it can see as it will rapidly use up both spare supplies an
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The problem, based on it's description, is that it's a maintenance and parts heavy fighter class ship that needs a lot of spare parts supplied and our space fleet have subpar carrier/transport capital ships that will have difficulty supporting ARC's needs if we over commit on them. It's a case of it being a great ship and our less than satisfactory carriers strangling it's potential. It would still be fine in numbers up to 32, but not higher do to the need to keep our fleet supplied with spare parts for the Arc wings. It's a transport issue more than a case of quality.
 
The vote is still open.
Adhoc vote count started by Oshha on Sep 7, 2021 at 12:37 PM, finished with 27 posts and 18 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Themarineguy said:
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-10 R per turn) (++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You borked the vote here. It should be [] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-10 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn) not [] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-10 R per turn) (++ Heavy Starfighters per turn).
 
RandyTrevelyan said:
The problem, based on it's description, is that it's a maintenance and parts heavy fighter class ship that needs a lot of spare parts supplied and our space fleet have subpar carrier/transport capital ships that will have difficulty supporting ARC's needs if we over commit on them. It's a case of it being a great ship and our less than satisfactory carriers strangling it's potential. It would still be fine in numbers up to 32, but not higher do to the need to keep our fleet supplied with spare parts for the Arc wings. It's a transport issue more than a case of quality.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

If you mean the Venator than it's described as a totally fine carrier that just lacks the punch to stand up in a direct gunfight, I would argue the reach of the ARC is beneficial here not detrimental. The small bays of the Warrior should be packed with the highest firepower to ship ratio as possible which again I think the ARC makes a good case for. If I was director of naval doctrine (and I'm not but let's imagine) one or two wings of ARC-170's on my Venators would be very welcome to run recon in force duties so my squishy carrier had the intel to maneuver away from as many potential gunfights as possible.
 
Last edited:
Khop said:
If you mean the Venator than it's described as a totally fine carrier that just lacks the punch to stand up in a direct gunfight, I would argue the reach of the ARC is beneficial here not detrimental. The small bays of the Warrior should be pack with the highest firepower to ship ration possible which again I think the ARC makes a good case for. If I was director of naval doctrine (and I'm not but let's imagine) one or two wings of ARC-170's on my Venators would be very welcome to run recon in force duties so my squishy carrier had the intel to maneuver away from as many potential gunfights as possible.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fair enough. Honestly any expansion is preferable to contacting more manufacturers this early in the cycle, so I'm happy to support the arc, not that I was ever against it being bought or expanded upon. Lets just agree to not lose sight of our goals.
 
RandyTrevelyan said:
The problem, based on it's description, is that it's a maintenance and parts heavy fighter class ship that needs a lot of spare parts supplied and our space fleet have subpar carrier/transport capital ships that will have difficulty supporting ARC's needs if we over commit on them. It's a case of it being a great ship and our less than satisfactory carriers strangling it's potential. It would still be fine in numbers up to 32, but not higher do to the need to keep our fleet supplied with spare parts for the Arc wings. It's a transport issue more than a case of quality.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
ARCs should be aimed at enemy bombers and cap ships, not general dogfighting. Or for that matter stations. And with our carriers acting as mobile bases capable of repair and resupply, load a carrier group up with ARC fighters, have the carrier group hyper to a system near the target system, have the ARCs launch and hyper to the target, hit it and than hyper back to the carrier group to land for repair and resupply while the carrier group than hypers away.
 
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
Void Stalker said:
ARCs should be aimed at enemy bombers and cap ships, not general dogfighting. Or for that matter stations. And with our carriers acting as mobile bases capable of repair and resupply, load a carrier group up with ARC fighters, have the carrier group hyper to a system near the target system, have the ARCs launch and hyper to the target, hit it and than hyper back to the carrier group to land for repair and resupply while the carrier group than hypers away.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We could Pair them with the A-class Light Carriers that don't have hanger bays for hit and run tactics. A-Class turbo lasers will be able to do more damage while the arc can keep fighters and bombers off them.
 
To be diplomatic I agree with the general idea that the ARC-170 should not be a mainline fighter that's on standby to do regular CAP or interception duties but it's got a bunch of interesting features that I think makes it a fantastic tool to add to the Navy's box.
 
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn
 
Now here's a thought. The Venator's could get retrofitted with SPHA-T cannons from the start as opposed to it coming later at Anakin's suggestion. That could make up for the relatively weak main weapons by being able to defend itself against escorts at close range.
 
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
the venator is a EXCELLENT carrier
but gods sake it sucks at ship tp ship combat

ideally you would want to use the venator to deploy figthers and escorts
and leave the ship to ship combat to something like the imperial destroyer

because the venator alone would get outmatched by the providence class ship,as the separatists fleets have higher amounts of space figthers and better armor/main guns,it means that the separatist ships can outlast the higher quality figthers deployed by the venator,and then slowly chip away its escorts through sheer numbers of vulture droid figthers

a clone takes 2.5 years to grow up and then some more training time,so pilots are expensive to produce,vultures can be mass produced

to counter that we should produce a dedicated ship destroyer that should go paired with venators when entering combat,the venator that way can focus on its porpuse as carrier and command,where the destroyer covers its back

does anyone know some good destroyers from the old republic and clone wars period?
 
Last edited:
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
[X] [Z96] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Starfighters per turn)
[X] [ARC] Large production. (-25 R) (-40 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Starfighters per turn)
[X] [NTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [PTB] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Bombers per turn)
[X] [LR] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATI] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [LAATC] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Gunships per turn)
[X] [ATPT] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Light Walkers per turn)
[X] [SPHAT] Large production. (-25 R) (-80 R per turn) (++++ Heavy Walkers per turn)
[X] [Falchion] Large production. (-25 R) (-20 R per turn) (++++ Medium Speeders per turn)
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top