2120 active members
  171 are online

Year

19

Day

323

Time

23:00:49

Guest
Login
snewsgnewsmessagegeneralfactioninventorycombatroom
Year 15 Day 52 5:11
Why has this ship been nerfed?

Unable to land and unable to carry ships, its functionally useless in the galaxy while it should be a cheap large freighter if it could land and competed with the mobquet medium transport in canon star wars which is able to land and has a hangar bay.

The Xiytiar as it starts is an ugly duckling with its purpose totally neutered.




____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 52 5:40
As long as it is not me being neutered, I am perfectly fine


____________

May the force be with you.
Daniel Skyrunner
mystats.php?uid=c5871
Year 15 Day 52 5:42
Actually you would find that its stats are more canon than most of the other haulers. However, it's not that it's been nerfed, but it has always been that way. Yes it means that it is a pretty pointless ship, but thems the breaks.


____________

Ellias_sig6.png
Year 15 Day 52 19:42
I know its always been that way but there is logical reason or proof the xiytiar cannot land that Ive seen yet other than admin did it years ago and doesnt want to have the rules fixed.

Why would people in canon sw, use, in a large scale, xiytiars if they could not land?

They would not be versatile ship that its widely described as.


____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 52 22:18
Yancy von Ismay

Is there proof that it could land?

Do all haulers deliver planetside?

Does it have landing struts?

Will it not snap in half in the gravity of a planet?

Is it equipped to handle atmospheric travel?

Just because you want it to land doesn't mean it should land. If there is evidence out there that it can land (not in a modified way)...then you have a case.

As for carrying ships, there was a single instance of it being used as a pocket carrier. Did it just haul the TIEs as cargo or as a launch pad? Does the stock version have a bay to launch from or was it modified for that task?

Saying something should do something without evidence means nothing.


____________

aLEXEIsIG_zps756fb85c.png
Year 15 Day 52 23:06
Is there evidence it did not land?

The argument could be reversed on that respect.

The fact it was used as an abandoned hidden temple seems to indicate it could land.


____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 52 23:35
The Xiytiar-class transport Sungrass lands several times in X-wing: Iron Fist.

Chapter 17 is the most prominent example: "While they waited, the command crew aboard Sungrass completed its check and did a test firing of her repulsorlifts; the aging cargo hauler lifted a few meters into the air and set down again."

No modifications noted, in fact it was mentioned to be fairly beaten up.


If we follow that proof, in addition it can carry a squad of fighters


Chapter 3, "we'll receive hyperspace transport from an old Xiytiar-class transport. Unarmed. Slow. Creaky. Leaky. And instead of having a cargo bay full of your sophisticated metal brackets to hold our fighter craft, we'll be using a few crossbeams and netting--so we can quickly switch out X-wings for TIE fighters without having to reconfigure our brackets every time."

Chapter 6, "Once it had belonged to an Imperial shipping corporation. It had been in dry dock in a repair hangar when the entire site was destroyed by elements of New Republic Intelligence. Its bow cracked, its superstructure buried under the wreckage of the hangar, it had been reported as destroyed by reconnaissance units of the Empire. Now, after a couple of seasons of repair, it flew

Nothing about modifications, just age and damage and repair.


Edited By: Zari Jinzler on Year 15 Day 52 23:36
____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 53 0:55
Jace Kavdar

We've had this discussion before, here: http://www.swcombine.com/forum/thread.php?thread=60706&page=0

The answer, in short, is that while the XST got seriously crappy stats ("it's canon" is a common refrain, despite most other ships not being even close to canon, to their great advantage. See above thread for examples), nobody cares enough to modify the stats. I hate to be a pessimist here, but that's really it. It wouldn't benefit the game as a whole to put the XST on par with other haulers, it would only benefit Drax Industries, so it's not a worthwhile venture given the potential controversies changing the stats could cause.

The stats may be changed when combat is being implemented, but that doesn't fix a problem that's been complained about several times since its initial implementation in year five. It sucks, but it's time to let it go.

Feel free to sit here and argue canon all day, though. Whether or not something is canon has less effect on its in-game implementation than you'd like to think. Compare a few random entities (especially ships) to their canon stats and have a nice, sensible chuckle. As a side note: most ships in SWC are lightweight enough to float on water, and in some cases, a sea of lithium. The Minstrel Luxury Yacht would sink if parked on molten lead. The more you know!


____________

1xnIonP.jpg

jace_kavdar_cit.png
Year 15 Day 53 1:19
Ive zero stake in the outcome but the Xiytiar has been nerfed unnecessarily. Its a ship that should be in every fleet, as a cheap disposable workhorse.

Its up to Drax Industries to make use or not use of the ship, change or no change. I personally have no income or production output benefit coming from this.

The request for evidence was requested. Its been presented.



____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 53 2:55
Well, we already got the Brayl and the Bulk? Don't think even if that ship can land it would dominate the hauling market, its to ugly anyway.


____________

OUNzz3U.png
ZE-believer.jpg
Year 15 Day 53 3:24
Doesnt matter if it would dominate nor does it matter how it looks.

By the logic we have other ships, why have any choice at all?

The issue at hand is the landing capability and the second is if it can hold a squad of fighters which according to canon, the Xiytiar can.


Edited By: Zari Jinzler on Year 15 Day 53 3:25
____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 53 6:38
There was a major project that I was primarily involved in that involved getting all teh ships stats to a more canon and equitable arrangement. However one ship got nerfed and everyone cried foul and it was scrapped, along with the months of work etc. The ASims have however said that come ship vs ship combat stats will be looked at again in that light.

Per landing, may of just been something that was overlooked, or not available when the ship was created. As for the fighter carrying, those excerpts sound more like the fighters were stored as cargo, rather than in such a way as to allow launch mid flight. In that regard there has been some suggestions before to allow fighters to be packed up into a cargo form and allowed to be stowed on haulers etc but not usable as fighters until they are unpacked.


____________

Ellias_sig6.png
Year 15 Day 53 11:07
Jesfa


There'll be large scale stat revisions as necessary with the coming phases of combat. Its simpler to do all changes at once, than to change one ship multiple times, as it would affect RMPs/Production mats required/times/etc unnecessarily.


____________

LoraxSig3copy.png
Year 15 Day 53 19:11
I respect an overall change can be done, however, this ship has been a pretty large oversight and waiting until combat which we know has been over 16 years in the making, to give this freighter the capability to land may be a little long.


In regards to carrying the fighters I am fine waiting until closer to combat but the landing issue should be resolved ASAP as it was the primary ship given to Drax and has never been resolved.

It dont see it as an issue re-opening up the canonization of all ships debate but putting this ship on the same ground as the other ships are.


____________

ncbar.png

KD_hban2.gif
Year 15 Day 53 20:20
question has been answered