Starfighter Nerd Talk - Debunking "TIE Fighters are inferior to rebel ships"

[Verain]

Btw, the "X-Wings are godships" bugs me for a different reason. When you WATCH the movies, you know that the pilots are under serious pressure, with their lives on the line. Nothing in the movies at ANY point implies that the Rebels have a technical advantage. Again and again, the movies show the empire with all the engineering and new tech, and getting around that is part of the heroism.

 

 

I think that the fact that Lucas didn't add a million TIEs is the clearest indicator of intent- not just that he didn't intend them to be expendable foodships in the 70s, but that he didn't in the 80s, or the 90s, or the 2000s. Because he changed literally everything else for no reason over that time period. That's an exceptional point Nem made, and I think it answers the question unarguably. Everything else was speculation and intention-scrying, but this is just too compelling to not be the real answer.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Verain

[Nemarus]

Btw, the "X-Wings are godships" bugs me for a different reason. When you WATCH the movies, you know that the pilots are under serious pressure, with their lives on the line. Nothing in the movies at ANY point implies that the Rebels have a technical advantage. Again and again, the movies show the empire with all the engineering and new tech, and getting around that is part of the heroism.

 

 

I think that the fact that Lucas didn't add a million TIEs is the clearest indicator of intent- not just that he didn't intend them to be expendable foodships in the 70s, but that he didn't in the 80s, or the 90s, or the 2000s. Because he changed literally everything else for no reason over that time period. That's an exceptional point Nem made, and I think it answers the question unarguably. Everything else was speculation and intention-scrying, but this is just too compelling to not be the real answer.

 

Relevant:

 

Though admittedly, I do wish the Special Editions had fixed this moment:

 

Or do we take the fact that they didn't fix it as as movie confirmation that some ROTJ TIE Fighters have cloaking devices!

 

The answer is yes--if you didn't catch it the first time, there's a second wave of TIE Fighters that "appears" out of thin air (air in space is very thin) behind the first wave.

[Nemarus]

One thing about the TIE's in the Battle of Endor not doing as well as they should against the Rebel fighters...

 

... the fight was taking place around and between the Rebel capital ships. The Star Destroyers were all hanging off to the side, giving room for the Death Star to fire. So the Rebel pilots definitely had some support advantage from their capital ships. Though perhaps they are using TDM rules, and that's why you don't see them shoot...

 

Once Lando gives the order to bring the fight to the Star Destroyers (to take cover from the Death Star), we see a lot more Rebel fighters being destroyed by TIE's.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Nemarus

[Verain]

We also don't see it going that badly, or know exactly how much rebel fleet they were fighting. You could make the argument that the rebel fleet outnumbered the imperials, or the other way around, for the bulk of the fight. In the scenes we see, there's often several TIEs on a rebel, and the rebel often dies.

 

Many ships collide with capital ships, doing no damage. Blasters seem to damage anything they hit, any type of ship. The exception to the collisions is of course the A-Wing into the Super Star Destroyer, but that's prefaced by blasters destroying a shield generator, and the imperials give you exact exposition about how they no longer have frontal deflector shields, followed by the single A-Wing just ruining the ship. So this does sort of go along with the "deflector shields work versus physical objects, not blasters" thing that we sort of see in the earlier movies too.

[Ramalina]

The pilots DO consider their X-Wings powerful. They don't at any point seem to be laboring under the knowledge that it is some secret weapon- that's a clear retcon. Nor does anyone talk smack about a TIE Fighter, call them "only dangerous in numbers", or anything like that.

 

In the EU versions I've seen there's nothing really "secret-special" about the X-wing. It was a fairly recent clean-sheet design at the episode 4 timeline that drew from previous experience with the Z-95 headhunter, which was considered inadequate as a potential fleet starfighter. In terms of development, weapons contractors typically try to restrict circulation of specifics of new designs at least until new systems go into production. That's just a standard level of security practice in the arms industry.

 

Special weapons projects are a different matter entirely. Death Stars, cloaking devices, any profoundly new and different military technology. That's the sort of thing that gets you Lord Vader burning down the doors on your diplomatic ship.

 

The Navy decision is usually cited as a purely political decision. Incom engineers are a bunch of traitors, anything they touched is tainted in the eyes of the Moffs and maybe even the Emperor himself got into a snit about it (Sith do like their temper tantrums after all), so unless you can destroy entire systems with the thing (in which case an enterprising Moff changes the bodywork and renames it) the project is dead because everyone that could make it happen isn't going to touch it with a ten foot pole. After all, in the Empire association with that sort of scandal might kill you, not just your career.

 

My interpretation has been that Seinar probably had a TIE prototype or at least preliminary design work that was done during the Clone Wars and then shelved due to factors like the supply of new clones shutting down, or the Navy preferring the X-wing proposal for the next fleet fighter. After the Incom scandal the Navy desperately needs a replacement option, and is now behind schedule by at least several years of development timeline. It's a good opportunity for Seinar to take a mostly done tabled project off of the shelf and try to profit from it. In that situation a design having everything a fighter absolutely needs, but no excess amenities, contributes to getting a rush job delivered on time and on budget, which would have been a huge selling point.

 

The development of the TIE interceptor and TIE advanced suggests that the Imperial Navy wasn't fully satisfied with the performance of the base TIE fighter. The development work on that would have to have happened before the A-Wing appeared. It's not clear though if the Interceptor is a counter to the X-Wing, or if it's to make TIEs have at least a marginal strike capability against smaller capital warships and large civilian vessels. Quite possibly both. The A-wing is a clear counter to the base TIE fighter's ability to outmaneuver and outrun an X-wing, again development would have happened before the counterpart in the form of the TIE Interceptor appeared in the other faction's inventories.

 

The B-Wing design is meant to be a strategic counter to the constant stream of Y-wing pilots coming to the doors of Rebel high command to complain about their ships.

 

 

I think one reason most of the starfighter backstory appears in EU materials is that for the movies the primary issue was art design. Good guy ships that look cool, bad guy ships that look cool, miscellaneous ships that look cool, and despite the commonality of coolness all three factions need to have distinct art styles. The other main cinematic concern would be what particular swoops, loops, and explosions would look cool for a particular dogfight sequence.

 

Tactical considerations and procurement backstory are about as well considered and extensive as those for the Imperial Paperclip Production Syndicate. Until a potential starfighter centric movie shows up the starfighters just aren't very important in Star Wars except as props that the heroes use while doing heroic stuff. They're not even as well developed story-wise as Inigo's sword is in the Princess Bride.

 

Honestly, even in a movie spin-off about Rogue squadron, the history and capabilities of the X-Wing aren't really all that important for making a movie. The core function is still just as a prop for heroes to do heroic stuff with.

 

The Millennium Falcon is possibly the most famous movie spaceship ever, and it's a Corellian Freighter.

 

In the movies do we learn anything meaningful about its speed, handling, range, cargo capacity, operating costs or any other attribute that a freighter captain would really want to know before purchasing a transport ship?

 

Not really, aside from that it's implied too be impressively fast when it comes to hyperspace jumps. Oh, and it's clearly a real clunker when it comes to reliability.

 

But it's prop/background scenery. So the only really important parts are looking cool, and the actors being able to fit inside. Well, I suppose always working great except when it needs to work great is also important to the movies, especially in ESB.

 

That's why all the ship technical details are hashed out in the EU. In the EU those details matter. In the movie making process they're a waste of time and payroll money on whatever creative staff is charged with fleshing them out. That makes the EU specs and background as canonical as they get, because in the movies those aspects are functionally non-existent. Their proper values would be returned as:

 Error: undefined variable.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

One thing about the TIE's in the Battle of Endor not doing as well as they should against the Rebel fighters...

 

... the fight was taking place around and between the Rebel capital ships. The Star Destroyers were all hanging off to the side, giving room for the Death Star to fire. So the Rebel pilots definitely had some support advantage from their capital ships. Though perhaps they are using TDM rules, and that's why you don't see them shoot...

 

It's also possible that they lacked adequate point defense systems. But my point was that, just in terms of starfighter strength, there should be at least a 2:1 numerical advantage over the alliance (assuming that all those TIEs in the grand conga line were also available during the battle). Unless the Alliance capital ships had point defense systems that surpassed those of the ISDs the TIEs should've been decimating the Alliance starfighters from the get go yet they weren't.

 

At least it doesn't seem to me that the point defense systems of the capital ships could be enough to make the odds even when in ANH a numerically smaller force was able to almost completely wipe out a numerically larger force (it seems very few of the Alliance casualties at Yavin are due to turbo laser fire and that the majority are due to TIEs; in fact the whole premise of launching TIEs is that the turbo lasers are proving inadequate).

 

Once Lando gives the order to bring the fight to the Star Destroyers (to take cover from the Death Star), we see a lot more Rebel fighters being destroyed by TIE's.

 

Except that a number are destroyed during attack runs on ISDs, and as ANH demonstrated attack runs make a ship very vulnerable to enemy fighters. You're also not factoring in that the ISDs point defense systems may take their toll on the Alliance starfighter's deflector shield systems resulting in them being easier pickings for TIEs.

 

Following my above point the fact that until the ISD point defense systems come into play and the Alliance starfighters to begin making themselves vulnerable during attack runs on the ISDs the Alliance starfighters aren't dropping like flies. As ANH established while turbo lasers are effective against capital ships they're not effective point defense systems, it's outright stated that the defenses were designed to repel capital ships not starfighters. So it's reasonable to assume that capital ships had point defense systems for use against starfighters and turbo lasers for use against other capital ships. In which case the capital ship slug fest that ensues does not necessarily mean the point defense systems stopped targeting starfighters that were within range. So presumably the Alliance capital ships continued to take a comparable toll on TIEs to what they had been doing at the start of the battle. All together this could be taken as evidence that X-Wings have a slight defensive advantage over TIEs.

 

Also worth noting in ANH it seems that X-Wings cannons just fire straight forward whereas TIEs have state of the art targeting computers that allow GSF deflection shots. However, by ROTJ the X-Wings have targeting computers capable of such deflection shots as well. So we have a case of the Alliance giving the X-Wings tech upgrades to offensively match the capabilities of the TIEs. On their own though being evenly matched offensively (with a possible slight advantage to X-Wings with more guns) shouldn't be enough to overcome the numerical superiority the Empire had at Endor unless 1) the Alliance pilots had superior training or 2) the Alliance starfighters had superior defenses.

 

I just don't buy that ROTJ supports X-Wings not having a defensive edge to TIEs when the TIEs require capital ship support plus numerical superiority to begin decimating a numerically smaller starfighter force.

 

EDIT: I think we may also be approaching the purpose of shields wrong. IE still from the video game perspective we're used to where damage has minimal impact on flight characteristics. Going back to my "works like armor" hypothesis it may be that shields were designed to give a pilot a chance to make it back to base and/or bail out but that it wouldn't permit them to remain combat effective. Witness how all ships that are damaged in ANH have to break away from combat or be destroyed, which runs contradictory to how we're used to shields working in video games. But that seems to me that it would be consistent with the function of armor on fighter planes where it may allow a plane to survive a few hits but doesn't mean the plane can continue combat.

 

We may be looking for evidence of X-Wings being able to shrug off a few hits and keep fighting like we're used to in games and when we don't see that we conclude they have comparable, rather than superior, defenses to TIEs when maybe we should be comparing the ability of X-Wing versus TIE pilots to react to taking damage (namely do they just go "boom" or is there a delay between the first shots making contact and "boom").

Edited March 20, 2015 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Whizzer_]

Interesting Topic.

One thing we can only speculate about is Imperial fleet doctrine and the role Tie Fighters play in it.

From ANH we know that Star Destroyers are very capable ships. Fast enough to chase a ship class described as a Blockade Runner, while having enough armaments to easily overpower and capture it.

Even Han boasts about how he outran a couple of them.

So maybe all the focus was on capital ships, dealing with small craft was not really on the radar and therefore the budget for TIEs and pilot training/recruitment was not sufficent when faced with the experienced veterans of the Rebel Alliance in later engagements.

So one possible explanation for ROTJ is that even after the Death Star I was destroyed, fleet doctrine still put no great value on having superior Fighters and Bombers. The Rebels upgraded their ships, Imps were still on the same machines as in ANH.

So we might have had Aces in mastered ships vs. halfways decent pilots in stock versions

[Verain]

I mean, yes, of course, anything is possible. But when people say that stuff, what I hear is "I like the way the EU presents it, and I think I can bend holy trilogy to my will".

 

It's much more interesting to look at what you are supposed to think when you watch the movies. Later additions, such as redefining what Han Solo meant when he used a unit of distance instead of time, are exactly that- retcons to preserve some verisimilitude.

 

We don't have any reason to suspect that the TIE fighters are anything less than very threatening. We have NO reason to suspect that the X-Wings enjoy much superiority. Extrapolating based on things that the writers were NOT concerned about (such as how fast a star destroyer is- a star destroyer is as fast as it needs to be) is just not relevant to what you, the viewer, are being communicated to about.

 

If you saw Holy Trilogy and thought "The TIE Fighters must worse than the X-Wings because the capital ships are faster than they seem", then like... what? If that was important, or considered, someone would have said it. We'd have an old script with it, it would have been filmed and cut, or it would have been there straight up.

 

 

I don't think the attitude of "well, nothing explicitly contradicts this things so therefore..." I mean, they cut a scene where Biggs says he met Luke's father. Because, when Star Wars was filmed, Darth Vader was NEVER Luke's father. If they hadn't have cut that scene, they wouldn't have been able to do that reveal in Empire. I get that retconning for dramatic effect has been going on since Empire... but stuff like the shields and the TIE Fighters just is super not present, in any of several movies, or early merchandising even.

[Nemarus]

Interesting Topic.

One thing we can only speculate about is Imperial fleet doctrine and the role Tie Fighters play in it.

From ANH we know that Star Destroyers are very capable ships. Fast enough to chase a ship class described as a Blockade Runner, while having enough armaments to easily overpower and capture it.

Even Han boasts about how he outran a couple of them.

So maybe all the focus was on capital ships, dealing with small craft was not really on the radar and therefore the budget for TIEs and pilot training/recruitment was not sufficent when faced with the experienced veterans of the Rebel Alliance in later engagements.

So one possible explanation for ROTJ is that even after the Death Star I was destroyed, fleet doctrine still put no great value on having superior Fighters and Bombers. The Rebels upgraded their ships, Imps were still on the same machines as in ANH.

So we might have had Aces in mastered ships vs. halfways decent pilots in stock versions

 

Decent speculation, considering the first Death Star's defenses were built to repel an assault by capital ships.

 

But the presence of so many TIE Interceptors at Endor suggests the Empire adjusted its strategy post-Yavin--at least if we assume TIE Interceptors are actually a better space superiority fighter....

 

That being said, we really don't know much about TIE Interceptors--if we assume that their name is canon, then we can state with confidence that they are at the very least faster than other TIE's, and that they have four guns instead of two. But otherwise... were they a newly designed ship built in response to threat of rebel starfighter tactics? Or were they a class that already existed, but was merely deployed in large numbers at Endor because the Empire was staging a trap?

 

Are they more heavily armored or shielded than TIE Fighters? Or less? Can they do crazy strafing like a TIE Fighter can? We don't really see them do so.

 

I'd be curious to know what the early vintage toyboxes and novelizations said about all the starfighters. That's really the only way any of them even had their names publicized.

[MaximilianPower]

I have nothing to add, just wanted to declare that this thread is awesome.

[Verain]

Decent speculation, considering the first Death Star's defenses were built to repel an assault by capital ships.

 

The whole schtick is that the ability of a single fighter to kill the Death Star was never considered, and certainly not intended. Without that design flaw, the fighters would have been no real threat to the death star. It's reasonable to assume any of:

> No such thing as anti-fighter weapons (unlikely, given all the "flak" references, but they aren't by any means reliably able to kill a ship)

> No available laser turret could effectively target the fighters

> Fighters not considered a big enough threat

 

But the presence of so many TIE Interceptors at Endor suggests the Empire adjusted its strategy post-Yavin--at least if we assume TIE Interceptors are actually a better space superiority fighter....

 

We can probably assume that the TIE Interceptor was intended by *someone* to be a superior version of the TIE Fighter. The script unquestionably calls them TIE Fighters, but they clearly look much more threatening, with six apparent guns and predatory wings instead of the flat panels we had seen before. None of the characters make any distinction, and it's the first time we see them. This generally goes along with the idea that the Interceptors were there as part of the tone of the scene- the rebels have a plan, and they realize that they have been lead into a trap. Even the fighters are a different model than we, the audience, has seen before- and they are clearly more threatening!

 

That being said, we really don't know much about TIE Interceptors--if we assume that their name is canon

 

Is this the first publicized reference to the Interceptor by name? Came out at the same time as Jedi.

http://news.toyark.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2013/02/TIE-Interceptor_1360462157.jpg

 

 

Also, what do you think is going on in that scene? I see it like this:

 

(leftmost red guy): Yo, I'm gonna go cut the turkey. You guys coming?

(oddly short stormtrooper adjacent): No way, I'm only eating dessert!

(pilot): Damn Vader, you looking FINE!

(vader): Thanks, fellow mask fetishist! I'm actually going to return this particular lightsaber. It's gone to mold!

(twins on right): No turkey until we finish our SPACEBATTLE with these TWO HEADED SHOVELS!

 

I'd be curious to know what the early vintage toyboxes and novelizations said about all the starfighters. That's really the only way any of them even had their names publicized.

 

I mean, the *names* seem to have some history. We see a lot of things that have names in some versions of scripts, or in Lucas's head, and then they get that name officially later. But anything in a novel is just "what that author thought sounded good", which would be ok if the rest of the Star Wars Official Guys actually took that seriously. The moment a new movie is being considered, not one thing from a non-movie is considered useful or relevant in the slightest- even when it would be vastly uncomplicated to so do. Spartii cloning cylinders, for instance, were pretty clearly how clones happened, and what a "clone war" was about. During the space betwixt Jedi and Plastic Rabbit Steps In Doo-Doo, we had those mentioned in some EU sources. The moment they wanted to make a movie about clones, though, they didn't even briefly consider using or acknowledging the existence of the cylinders, requiring them to be retconned as still being used, but this-that-the-other-thing. That kind of crap is ALL OVER things.

 

Example: With one 10 second scene involving a magic crystal in the new movie, they could have split the timeline and kept EU in its own reality, while telling their story fresh. EU guys don't even rate that brief moment.

 

 

So if you found the interceptor discussed in a novel in 1985, that would be interesting (especially if it lines up with the later EU stuff, because those guys actually research and care), but the ship likely got its name post production or during filming, not during writing.

[Ramalina]

 

So if you found the interceptor discussed in a novel in 1985, that would be interesting (especially if it lines up with the later EU stuff, because those guys actually research and care), but the ship likely got its name post production or during filming, not during writing.

 

Well it had to have some sort of name or designation, probably starting at the stage where Lucas looked at concept art sketches and said something along the lines of, "Hey, that one's pretty cool looking, how about changing [blah, blah, blah]. If you can bring a couple more polished versions by the end of the week that would be great." If it's being developed past the concept sketch it needs a name so that everyone knows what's being talked about when, "the new TIEs," are mentioned. Otherwise you wind up with Vader flying through space in new formal neckwear. In a lot of cases you'd even have some sort of name in the request for concept sketches.

 

Of course that doesn't mean that is was the TIE Interceptor at that stage. It could have been the TIE Potato Masher. That sort of thing varies from filmmaking crew to filmmaking crew, and I have no idea how early in the process Lucas typically settles on a name, or how often he changes the intial names for things in the Star Wars universe.

 

What the movies would have you think about TIEs?

• They're the small ships that the bad guys use for attacking stuff and blowing it up, provided that 'it' is a small starship.
  
• It's hard to outrun them in an X-wing, Y-Wing, or broken down souped-up light freighter.
  
• If you shoot them, or in their general direction they're pretty much guaranteed to explode, unless Vader is flying the TIE (he chews special Sith chewing gum that can be used to patch the explode-y bits. Also his cape is made of several layers of super secret advanced space duct tape, you'd need a Death Star to blow up his TIE. ).
  
• The Imperials that get passing marks in marksmanship get to fly TIEs or drive AT-ATs, the ones that flunk become officers, AT-ST drivers, or Stormtroopers.
  
• Imperial piloting school is about flying space ships in space, where there is nothing to accidentally run into, because a hard vacuum is by definition a place where there is nothing to run into. (Scout speeder pilots receive the same rigorous training program that the space pilots do. Space pilots are the best kind of pilots after all, so their training must be the best training).
  
• They're dangerous, but not terrifying to X-wing, A-wing, and B-wing pilots.
  
• You shouldn't fly a Y-wing against them unless you have a death wish.
  
• The Imperial Star Destroyer is the host ship for TIEs. If you make an ISD angry, but it can't or doesn't want to shoot its own lasers at you, it will poop out a bunch of TIEs to shoot at you. Death Stars also do this, but being more sophisticated and having bigger budgets may also sometimes poop out TIE fighters and start having them line up for Space Ballet auditions.
  

 

There may be other things too, but it has been a few years since I've watched original versions.

 

 

Edit: going by the merchandise display there, the TIE's are VERY simple to operate. Either that or the Imperial Navy figures that if you've been flying a TIE for 16 years (and survived) by the time you're 20 you'll be pretty damn good when you're deployed for battle.

 

Also, why do the movie TIE pilots explode their ships instead of deploying the simulated battle damage panels? Do the mechanics need to grease the activation lever or something?

Edited March 21, 2015 by Ramalina

[AgentRobP]

Now an interesting thing is the question of "deflector shields"--who has them, how do they work, and how much protection do they afford? We know from ANH pilot chatter that at the very least, the rebel fighters have deflector shields, and that they can be angled forward or backward. We never see physical evidence of them actually protecting anyone though. Verain suggested that these deflector shields literally "deflect" laser fire, causing it to miss (like GSF's Evasion?). Possible!

 

Actually, we may.

 

During the Battle of Yavin, a number of X-wings don't actually explode after the first pair of bolts hit them. They usually get hit at least second time before exploding. Potentially more since the TIEs seem to keep firing, but it's hard to tell with the way the cuts occur (it could just be overkill to be certain).

 

Oddly, the Y-wings do seem to die more quickly than the X-wings even though it's generally assumed that the Y-wings have better shielding. The 3 that we see shot really do like they are taken out in the first hit.

 

You might say "that just means X-wings are better armored." Even the video game starships have some level of armor, after all, right?

 

There's some evidence for shielding in the visual effects, with varying levels of confidence:

 

An X-wing flying along the surface of the Death Star (before the TIEs appear) has several small, unexplained explosions around it over the course of the shot. They don't appear to be coming from the turbolaser bolts being fired at it. It could be the flak referred to in the script, or it could be they were supposed to be from the turbolasers but weren't aligned properly.

 

Whatever the source, the explosions were definitely put there deliberately. And it's most likely that shields were protecting the X-wing in some capacity. At the very least, it prevented flak from doing damage to the hull (flak explosions that close to a ship with no protection and still not doing any damage would just mean the flak is completely useless).

 

After the TIEs arrive, Luke's X-wing is hit in the engine by a TIE. The bolt that hits the X-wing is splintered and a significant amount of green stuff flies away from the ship. Later, Red Leader's X-wing is also hit in the engine, but the bolt is not splintered and he ends up crashing into the surface of the Death Star. It appears that Luke's shields broke up the bolt enough to keep him alive.

 

During the trench run, Darth Vader fires at Luke's X-wing and hits Artoo. There is a strange green blob that appears just before Artoo is hit. I think it's meant to imply that the bolt was broken up and that Artoo didn't take the full force of the hit. If the shields didn't lessen the impact, Artoo's dome should have been completely removed.

 

Either way, what we can say is that there is no movie evidence that TIE Fighters do not have deflector shields comparable to those on X-wings and Y-wings. No, we don't hear TIE Pilots chattering about it, but they are a quiet bunch.

 

Again, there may be. When the Millennium Falcon is firing at the TIEs, the last two TIEs have some explosions appear right under them. It could be that some kind of shields were offering some protection. Of course, it's arguable how strong those shields are (they may not be meant for combat).

 

In any case, just going by the movies alone, there's no evidence they don't have shields and some implication they do. We don't hear any discussion regarding shields from the Imperials, but we don't hear much talk from any of the Imperial pilots anyway so that doesn't mean much.

 

From this, it is very hard to assert that rebel ships are technologically superior or more resilient than simple Imperial TIE Fighters.

 

Maybe more resilient, but "technologically superior" is definitely a murky assumption.

 

Regardless of which fighter you think is better, X-wings and TIE fighters are at least comparable. Neither one seems to completely outclass the other. As noted, a TIE is very difficult to shake

 

Yet the TIE fighter is much more compact. Its lighter mass means it requires less fuel to achieve the same acceleration. Its smaller frame makes it more difficult to hit (and we already know that being difficult to hit is very important). Its laser cannons are much smaller, but are still very effective against starfighters.

 

The TIE fighter is definitely a more efficient ship. It probably uses more miniaturized technology. The TIE fighter may actually be the more technologically advanced ship, even if it is less capable in certain respects (it also has its own advantages in combat, so it's not all negative). The TIE fighter is a more specialized ship, more efficient than that X-wing in the role that it performs. The X-wing can fulfill various roles, including roles the TIE fighter was never designed to fulfill (e.g., it has no heavy weapons), but is not as efficient at any of them.

 

(This makes sense. The Rebellion needs versatile, multi-role ships like the X-wing to perform various strikes at their enemies. They need to hyper in and fire proton torpedoes at large targets. The Empire, not he other hand, doesn't need to outfit TIE fighters with with hyperdrives or heavy weapons. Typically, the capital ship that carries them into battle can provide heavy fire. If the mission requires additional heavy fire, the specialized TIE bomber can be used.)

 

A TIE craft designed with the technology level of the TIE fighter but with the role of an X-wing in mind? It would probably be some nigh-unstoppable Defender of the Empire... if such a thing existed within the canon of Star Wars, of course.

[StrixHiraeth]

This matter will remain without definitive resolution. Any such resolution would likely come in the form of a ret-con; as was mentioned above, Star Wars is fraught with such ret-cons. (i.e... Why do the lasers move so slow? Oh, because they're not really lasers, that's just a slang term for them. Same with hyperspeed/lightspeed. So saith the Lucas.)

 

Me, I say that since TIE fighters look cooler, they are the superior ship.

 

I could probably find out by searching, but I don't want to so I'll ask here: what does the acronym TIE stand for?

Edited March 23, 2015 by Ymris

[aakrea]

I could probably find out by searching, but I don't want to so I'll ask here: what does the acronym TIE stand for?

 

TIE= Twin Ion Engine, or they just look like bow ties.

[Zoom_VI]

Yet the TIE fighter is much more compact. Its lighter mass means it requires less fuel to achieve the same acceleration. Its smaller frame makes it more difficult to hit (and we already know that being difficult to hit is very important). Its laser cannons are much smaller, but are still very effective against starfighters.

 

This isn't exactly true. The only thing relevant to acceleration in a vacuum is the craft's mass, as Acceleration = Force / mass.

 

Mass is not inherently related to size. It might be, if TIEs and X-wings have the same average density, but if they don't then size becomes far less relevant to performance. Since we are throwing out the EU you can't really make density judgments based on the movie material.

 

And honestly I'm not even all that sold on TIEs being more compact. They have a significantly larger cockpit ball than the Xs, not to mention the thick connecting spars to the solar panels, plus the sheer size of the solar panels themselves.

 

In terms of targeting the cockpit ball on a TIE is arguably a equivalent sized target to a X, not to mention that a hit to the cockpit ball is effectively guaranteed to hit something important

[Nemarus]

This isn't exactly true. The only thing relevant to acceleration in a vacuum is the craft's mass, as Acceleration = Force / mass.

 

Mass is not inherently related to size. It might be, if TIEs and X-wings have the same average density, but if they don't then size becomes far less relevant to performance. Since we are throwing out the EU you can't really make density judgments based on the movie material.

 

And honestly I'm not even all that sold on TIEs being more compact. They have a significantly larger cockpit ball than the Xs, not to mention the thick connecting spars to the solar panels, plus the sheer size of the solar panels themselves.

 

In terms of targeting the cockpit ball on a TIE is arguably a equivalent sized target to a X, not to mention that a hit to the cockpit ball is effectively guaranteed to hit something important

 

We do know that the TIE Fighter (if not Interceptor) can rapidly strafe from side to side, something we don't see any other ship do.

[Verain]

Interesting:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/70920-scale-is-off/

 

I don't think we really know how big the ships were meant to be relative to each other. The fact that the TIEs shrunk in all the EU stuff, including even the "official data" released after the movies, is certainly interesting. The TIE as pictured there is the model scale, and it was apparently intended that the models be at the SAME scale. This makes the TIE as envisioned by the original special effects guys (and Lucas, presumably) larger than the one everyone expects now.

 

So you can go with the original intention- in which case the TIEs are larger and more predatory than the smaller rebel ships- or you can go with the "as sold" version, which dates from just a couple years after that, which shows them a reasonable amount smaller, especially the cockpit ball.

 

The solar panels are "solar sails"- presumably accomplishing some combination of power absorption and maneuvering with energy, or something. I think in the EU they become solar panels ONLY (and as such are pretty irrational), but it was definitely intended that they appear as some manner of control surface, like the wings they obviously stand in for.

 

 

I think that, the overall scale of the TIE makes little difference as to its efficacy. I think that in any case, the X-Wing appears more substantial- more and larger guns, R2 unit, hyperdrive, are all present in holy trilogy, and are in no way subtle or inconsistent.

[Verain]

During the Battle of Yavin, a number of X-wings don't actually explode after the first pair of bolts hit them.

 

I mean, they die a second later, right? Normally they live just long enough for us to see them in anguish in the cockpit, right?

 

The typical "TIE Fighter kills an X-Wing" scene begins with a bunch of ludicrously rapid green laser shots, some of which miss, and once the "stream" is turned on the target, they stay there for less than a second as the X-Wing explodes. That seems a reasonable interpretation, right?

 

Oddly, the Y-wings do seem to die more quickly than the X-wings even though it's generally assumed that the Y-wings have better shielding. The 3 that we see shot really do like they are taken out in the first hit.

 

The thing I mentioned earlier- that deflector shields don't ever seem to be able to stop a blaster shot at ALL, but only work on physical objects- may be at work here. Certainly we have no reason to assume the Y-Wings are "better shielded" than the X-Wings (or the TIE Fighters) based on anything we see in Holy Trilogy. Later sources give them a "bomber" role with more substantial defenses in some cases, or make them an archaic previous model, or make them maneuver like a boat, but we see nothing like that in Holy Trilogy.

 

There's some evidence for shielding in the visual effects, with varying levels of confidence:

 

None of this is referenced in the script, however. I do think that the rotoscoped effects have plenty of merit, but there could be some liberties?

 

An X-wing flying along the surface of the Death Star (before the TIEs appear) has several small, unexplained explosions around it over the course of the shot.

 

I can't find this.

 

Whatever the source, the explosions were definitely put there deliberately. And it's most likely that shields were protecting the X-wing in some capacity. At the very least, it prevented flak from doing damage to the hull (flak explosions that close to a ship with no protection and still not doing any damage would just mean the flak is completely useless).

 

This I agree with. And they wouldn't talk about shields and shield strategy unless it was meant to be some meaningful defense, right? They have to be doing something, or they wouldn't even bring them up.

 

 

After the TIEs arrive, Luke's X-wing is hit in the engine by a TIE. The bolt that hits the X-wing is splintered and a significant amount of green stuff flies away from the ship. Later, Red Leader's X-wing is also hit in the engine, but the bolt is not splintered and he ends up crashing into the surface of the Death Star. It appears that Luke's shields broke up the bolt enough to keep him alive.

 

While the script makes no mention of this ("A large burst of Vader's laserfire engulfs Artoo."), it's not unreasonable. I will confess to not seeing this at all- the scene where artoo gets hit pretty much seems to show a giant green dot right on his droidhead. If that's the only shield reference against a blaster, it's pretty damned subtle though, and entirely based on the rotoscoped effects.

 

 

In any case, just going by the movies alone, there's no evidence they don't have shields and some implication they do.

 

I mean, they definitely have deflector shields. But maybe deflector shields don't ever effect blasters or lasers in any way (maybe that's what a "ray shield" does). Jedi is a lot later in the series, but even then we see a shield that the rebel ships are concerned about colliding with, an imperial shield generator get destroyed by blaster fire close up (obviously the shield generator would be under the shield, right? So the blasters go through the shield and hit the generator...), tech talk from the imperials about putting all firepower forward to ensure nothing gets through (at which point an A-Wing ends the conversation by exploding everything, #battlescout #burstDamageBestDamage), and multiple plot devices involving shields that are consistent with that. We also see a NUMBER of fighters detonate (exploding utterly) on capital ship after capital ship, not harming the ships in any way. It's not until the shield generator is down that we see a fighter-ram actually matter as anything but a red puff.

 

If that's the case, the TIEs could have shields or not, and we'd never know unless they were fighting in an environment filled with relevant obstacles and counterfire (as the X-Wings were on the trench run). I'd say it's unknowable given just holy trilogy.

 

 

 

 

I think the silliest stuff about this is if you read all the EU caveats. For instance, at some point in some EU story, the rebels (alliance?) capture some TIE Fighters and use them themselves... but of course, being good guys, they put shields on them. I mean, that makes NO sense. If you could put a shield on it, the empire would have done that. They built a giant metal moon for no reason but to be British in it, there's just no way they'd leave it out if it was just a matter of putting it on there. That even craps on the OLDER EU, where the TIE Fighter gets extra maneuverability for its lack of shields. I mean, they can't keep anything straight!

[Nemarus]

Interesting:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/70920-scale-is-off/

 

I don't think we really know how big the ships were meant to be relative to each other. The fact that the TIEs shrunk in all the EU stuff, including even the "official data" released after the movies, is certainly interesting. The TIE as pictured there is the model scale, and it was apparently intended that the models be at the SAME scale. This makes the TIE as envisioned by the original special effects guys (and Lucas, presumably) larger than the one everyone expects now.

 

So you can go with the original intention- in which case the TIEs are larger and more predatory than the smaller rebel ships- or you can go with the "as sold" version, which dates from just a couple years after that, which shows them a reasonable amount smaller, especially the cockpit ball.

 

The solar panels are "solar sails"- presumably accomplishing some combination of power absorption and maneuvering with energy, or something. I think in the EU they become solar panels ONLY (and as such are pretty irrational), but it was definitely intended that they appear as some manner of control surface, like the wings they obviously stand in for.

 

 

I think that, the overall scale of the TIE makes little difference as to its efficacy. I think that in any case, the X-Wing appears more substantial- more and larger guns, R2 unit, hyperdrive, are all present in holy trilogy, and are in no way subtle or inconsistent.

 

Since you brought up the miniatures game, I will say that even though the miniatures game follows the tropes of the EU (i.e. only TIE Advanced and TIE Defender are the only TIE's with shields), they do a good job of actually emphasizing that you win with TIE's by swarming or outmaneuvering your foes.

 

TIE Fighters are super cheap, in terms of squad building--especially if they have poor pilots. And even being so cheap, they fly circles around X-wings--and a single X-wing has basically no hope of getting a single TIE Fighter off its tail.

 

And the X-wing's shields don't give it a tremendous advantage. The X-wing has 3 hull points and 2 shield points. The TIE Fighter has 3 hull points but is harder to hit--it has 3 Evade to the X-wing's 2. In fact all TIE's have 3 Evade I believe--even the TIE Bomber.

 

And then there are TIE Interceptors--they are ridiculously nimble, with better-than-average firepower that they can bring to bear pretty much anywhere they want. You basically have to get lucky and kill them before they get behind you, or you have to have a turret.

 

Perhaps we've been thinking about this all wrong. Perhaps "the meta" in the movies, as in GSF, is all about passive Evasion and superior speed and turning. Perhaps the rebels simply don't have the technology available to make a superbly maneuverable and fast fighter. Perhaps the rebellion are the plucky Strike pilots, trying to cling to their ideals and make excuses in the denial of the meta. "I just like my Strike." "I can get kills with Proton Torpedoes." "I like how it looks."

 

Meanwhile the Empire shakes its head. "Evasion + speed + turning + burst damage" is best build. Strikes are undertuned. The Empire knows that putting its pilots in slow Strikes, even if they are shielded, is just going to get them killed by Scouts....

[Verain]

hahahahaha!!!

 

Honestly, I had some joke post saved (and still might) about how the Empire has a huge advantage in GSF because it has cool looking scouts, decent looking gunships, decent looking bombers, and awful looking spacemower strikes, while the Republic has the best looking strikes by a mile. The gist was that this makes too many on strikes, etc. I dropped it because it was a bit too class trolly (and frankly risked being taken seriously), but it's pretty funny.

 

I don't play the miniatures game, but I will as soon as they have an electronic version of it. It's so hard to actually get my meatspace friends roped into any activity, normally has to be on the weekend, and definitely would be hard to get them into miniatures... leaving me with the comic book store option, but my experiences with those things are just... like, just.

 

Just.

Edited March 23, 2015 by Verain

[AgentRobP]

This isn't exactly true. The only thing relevant to acceleration in a vacuum is the craft's mass, as Acceleration = Force / mass.

 

If mass is reduced and acceleration is constant, then force must also be reduced. Of course, I am making the assumption that the engines on the two ships are just as efficient. I don't consider this unreasonable: if anything, I would expect the TIE to have more efficient engines for the various reasons already put forth by others.

 

Mass is not inherently related to size. It might be, if TIEs and X-wings have the same average density, but if they don't then size becomes far less relevant to performance. Since we are throwing out the EU you can't really make density judgments based on the movie material.

 

True, but I don't see any reason to believe the TIE fighter is denser than an X-wing, and the X-wing appears to have a larger volume. Both assumptions, but we have to start somewhere. I'm open to any evidence or arguments otherwise.

 

Of course, if the TIE fighter for some reason really does have more mass than an X-wing, then that means its two tiny engines are more powerful than the four large engines on an X-wing, so the TIE fighter is still more advanced in that respect.

 

(I just happen to find a TIE with less mass and the possibility of weaker engines providing roughly equivalent acceleration to be the more believable choice between the two.)

 

And honestly I'm not even all that sold on TIEs being more compact. They have a significantly larger cockpit ball than the Xs, not to mention the thick connecting spars to the solar panels, plus the sheer size of the solar panels themselves.

 

In terms of targeting the cockpit ball on a TIE is arguably a equivalent sized target to a X, not to mention that a hit to the cockpit ball is effectively guaranteed to hit something important

 

If head on, the cross section is similar, but once you are at an angle, the X-wing's cross section grows while the TIE fighter's cross section only grows if you get a better view of the panels. They are huge, yes, but damage to them shouldn't be catastrophic (whatever functionality they provide would of course be reduced). Clipping the panels in the movies can cause the fighter to lose control for a bit, which is mainly a problem when flying really close (or inside) a Death Star, in a very dense asteroid field, or similar situations that come up surprisingly often in the movies.

 

Under certain angles the panels may even act as physical shields, sacrificing a portion of the panel to protect the cockpit. I don't think we ever see a TIE's panel hit by weapons fire, though.

 

On the other hand, if you are seeing the panels and the fighter is accelerating, you'll probably have a harder time lining up the shot to begin with due to the greater (and increasing) delta-v.

 

The TIE fighter should still generally be harder to hit, and harder to get a kill shot on.

[AgentRobP]

I mean, they die a second later, right? Normally they live just long enough for us to see them in anguish in the cockpit, right?

 

The typical "TIE Fighter kills an X-Wing" scene begins with a bunch of ludicrously rapid green laser shots, some of which miss, and once the "stream" is turned on the target, they stay there for less than a second as the X-Wing explodes. That seems a reasonable interpretation, right?

 

Yes, but it is ambiguous enough that other interpretations are valid.

 

There are a few hits that do not destroy the fighters. Early on, one pair of bolts hit an S-foil, then the next pair hit the fuselage. The first hit seemed to do no damage (as opposed to causing an explosion large enough to tear the wing off), but the next hit appeared to do the fighter in.

 

There are more instances where X-wings are hit and only receive minor damage.

 

The thing I mentioned earlier- that deflector shields don't ever seem to be able to stop a blaster shot at ALL, but only work on physical objects- may be at work here. Certainly we have no reason to assume the Y-Wings are "better shielded" than the X-Wings (or the TIE Fighters) based on anything we see in Holy Trilogy. Later sources give them a "bomber" role with more substantial defenses in some cases, or make them an archaic previous model, or make them maneuver like a boat, but we see nothing like that in Holy Trilogy.

 

Given there is some evidence of shields at least reducing damage, I'm thinking either Y-wing shields are worse than an X-wing's or were battered down already by the defense turrets.

 

I agree that from the movies, there's no reason to assume Y-wings have better shielding than X-wings. They were clearly the better choice for sending first against the exhaust port, but there could be a number of reasons for that. (e.g., they may just be very bad at dogfighting and so that was the only role they could be used in at all.)

 

None of this is referenced in the script, however. I do think that the rotoscoped effects have plenty of merit, but there could be some liberties?

 

Is the script currently considered canon? I know under the old canon rules, they were. In any case, I'm not sure why something that happens in the movie that isn't in the script should be dismissed.

 

I get that there are VFX errors, but let's take those on a case-by-case basis, yes? Most of the events I've mentioned relating to shields appear to be put there deliberately, though exactly what they are supposed to mean in relation to shields may be up to interpretation.

 

I can't find this.

 

It's before the TIEs arrive. The X-wing is flying from the left side of the screen to the right side, skimming the surface. Several small, quick explosions appear around the fighter.

 

I can find the time on the DVD edition if needed.

 

While the script makes no mention of this ("A large burst of Vader's laserfire engulfs Artoo."), it's not unreasonable. I will confess to not seeing this at all- the scene where artoo gets hit pretty much seems to show a giant green dot right on his droidhead. If that's the only shield reference against a blaster, it's pretty damned subtle though, and entirely based on the rotoscoped effects.

 

You quoted me talking about the first time Luke was hit by a TIE fighter, before his trench run, but you're responding to the time Artoo was hit by Vader.

 

I agree that the one for Artoo is subtle, but I also think that Artoo's head should have been blown completely off if shields didn't offer any protection against the blast. These are weapons that cause starfighters to explode, after all, what chance does a droid have?

 

As for the first hit on Luke: the splintered bolt is pretty clear, very noticeable at full speed even though it's quick, and definitely deliberate. If the bolt wasn't broken up by the shields, then it looks like the splinters would have had to travel through the X-wing to appear under it.

 

I mean, they definitely have deflector shields. But maybe deflector shields don't ever effect blasters or lasers in any way (maybe that's what a "ray shield" does).

 

Then why put them double-front against turrets, and even them out when TIEs armed with lasers are coming behind you?

 

As for the "deflects them from a distance" theory: based on what we see in the movies, that would require the shields to reach out and affect the firing mechanisms since the bolts are off-target as soon as they appear. It's not like we're seeing them curve the bolts here. (Oh, we do see curved bolt trajectories elsewhere, but those instances aren't relevant.)

 

I mean, I'm all for going where the evidence leads, but we have evidence for a much simpler explanation.

 

an imperial shield generator get destroyed by blaster fire close up (obviously the shield generator would be under the shield, right? So the blasters go through the shield and hit the generator...)

 

What makes you think that was a shield generator, going by just the movies? It's something that looks like a modern day radar dome that was probably able to be destroyed because the shields failed.

 

I think the silliest stuff about this is if you read all the EU caveats. For instance, at some point in some EU story, the rebels (alliance?) capture some TIE Fighters and use them themselves... but of course, being good guys, they put shields on them. I mean, that makes NO sense. If you could put a shield on it, the empire would have done that. They built a giant metal moon for no reason but to be British in it, there's just no way they'd leave it out if it was just a matter of putting it on there. That even craps on the OLDER EU, where the TIE Fighter gets extra maneuverability for its lack of shields. I mean, they can't keep anything straight!

 

The silliest (well, that I've personally read)? In one of the later X-Wing series books, some of the pilots get a chance to fly the TIE Defender. You know, the ship that outclasses X-wings in every possible way? After flying them, they not only went back to the Good Guy X-wings but stated that they preferred flying them.

[Verain]

Is the script currently considered canon? I know under the old canon rules, they were. In any case, I'm not sure why something that happens in the movie that isn't in the script should be dismissed.

 

The scripts have never been canon I don't think- especially because there were substantial changes in editing. The scripts have some special effects changes (R2 doesn't have arms), some character changes (Biggs in particular, some of Han's bloodthirst is toned down), and some rather serious plot changes (the scene where "I flew with your father" is said to Luke got cut, allowing Lucas to retcon the Vader/father thing in Empire)...

 

But what is canon worth? This isn't about that anyway. In canon- what little is left after they stripped it down to Holy Trilogy, Jar Jar's Plastic Adventure Funhouse, and of course, Actual Literal Cartoons With Negative Light Come Onnnn.... it isn't relevant. It's much more interesting to look at what was displayed and intended before they started retconning everything.

 

So don't bother with canon. They'll change it to whatever they want anyway. If you cared about the EU, now you care about fanfics or something- that's not canon by decree (which IMO is mean as heck, a real stab to their most loyal base). They can do that whenever they want. When they remake Holy Trilogy in 15 years, changing a bunch of junk, they'll call Holy Trilogy non-canon (and they'll imply that you are out of touch and old for caring). Who cares what they say? In canon, Greed shoots at Han, Han's face teleports, and then he shoots back. In the script and AS FILMED AND SCREENED, Han shoots Greedo dead, and Greedo doesn't shoot at all on account of having been shot to death by Han.

 

I agree that the one for Artoo is subtle, but I also think that Artoo's head should have been blown completely off if shields didn't offer any protection against the blast. These are weapons that cause starfighters to explode, after all, what chance does a droid have?

 

The script clearly states he's hit (in fact, in blows his arms off, lol!). As filmed, it shows him being hit. Nothing about shielding or mitigation is mentioned. The shield assessment isn't unreasonable, but I think the expectation that a blaster would have the same destructive power is a sci-fi assertion that we'd LIKE them to hold themselves to, but they may have just decided not to. I think interpreting it as a glancing shot could work too, but there's nothing say that's more correct. All we know is that Vader shoots R2, and Luke is alone.

 

What makes you think that was a shield generator, going by just the movies? It's something that looks like a modern day radar dome that was probably able to be destroyed because the shields failed.

 

Ackbar calls for concentrated fire (script and as screened). Next the script and the film have a mild disagreement: The scripts says "X-wings pilots head across the surface of the huge battleship." to communicate the battle. The movie shows two A-Wings blowing up a structure on the super star destroyer. We immediately cut to the bridge, where they distress about losing their bridge deflector shield.

 

It's quite the technicality to argue that the exploding structure, followed by the bridge crew rocking, a controller checking a computer, and reporting the loss of the bridge deflector shield, is not meant to imply that the scene with the exploding structure is not, in fact, related. And it is definitely destroyed by laser fire.

 

So that's how we know- they showed us!

[AgentRobP]

The scripts have never been canon I don't think- especially because there were substantial changes in editing.

 

They were previously, but there was a whole hierarchy and some general rules to handle what to do when there were conflicts. I'm actually not certain what their current status is as I haven't looked into the current policy in much detail.

 

The script clearly states he's hit (in fact, in blows his arms off, lol!). As filmed, it shows him being hit. Nothing about shielding or mitigation is mentioned. The shield assessment isn't unreasonable, but I think the expectation that a blaster would have the same destructive power is a sci-fi assertion that we'd LIKE them to hold themselves to, but they may have just decided not to. I think interpreting it as a glancing shot could work too, but there's nothing say that's more correct. All we know is that Vader shoots R2, and Luke is alone.

 

The hit wasn't that glancing, though I'll agree that it is open to some interpretation. It was by no means the strongest evidence, anyway.

 

Ackbar calls for concentrated fire (script and as screened). Next the script and the film have a mild disagreement: The scripts says "X-wings pilots head across the surface of the huge battleship." to communicate the battle. The movie shows two A-Wings blowing up a structure on the super star destroyer. We immediately cut to the bridge, where they distress about losing their bridge deflector shield.

 

It's quite the technicality to argue that the exploding structure, followed by the bridge crew rocking, a controller checking a computer, and reporting the loss of the bridge deflector shield, is not meant to imply that the scene with the exploding structure is not, in fact, related. And it is definitely destroyed by laser fire.

 

So that's how we know- they showed us!

 

There are two domes, only one was destroyed. That takes out the bridge shields? It's more likely that while under concentrated fire, the shields fell. The scene showed that the shields fell by showing us damage to the ship. (It's like if the Enterprise is hit by enemy fire and a console explodes, then Worf announces that their shields are out, nobody anywhere, ever, assumes the console was the shield generator just because it exploded before the announcement was made.)

 

The shield generator thing was entirely an EU thing and I hope they don't bring it back. It's silly.