www.ditl.org

We've looked at some good ships recently, so I think it's time to examine a godawful piece of shit. It's meant to be an anti-starfighter ship, but not only can most of them outrun it pretty easily, they're pretty vulnerable to them as well, as "Rogue Squadron" shows. They've got no weapons worthy of their size, and they're pretty flimsy - even a bulk freighter a fraction of their size can be refitted to be a match for one of the blasted things. In short - a waste of money. Discuss.

Unfortunate. A waste of a good concept.

Needs better defenses from fighter attack (better shields, and more small laser cannons).

Yeah, 20 quad lasers seems like a good idea. Unfortunately, being unshielded and slow means that it suffers from the same vulnerabilities of cap ships that it was supposed to combat. Of course, that also means that if it is being effective then it is little more than target practice for a capital ship.

Another problem is the cost of the ship. It costs as much as a pair of A-wing squadrons which would be at least as useful.

I thought it costs as much as a larger cruiser?

Reminds me abit like the AA cruisers of WW2.

Neat idea but execution sucks.

Deepcrush wrote:Another problem is the cost of the ship. It costs as much as a pair of A-wing squadrons which would be at least as useful.

From where do you get cost figures? I don't doubt you, and that fact makes the Lancer suck even more, I'm just curious as to where to find those figures.

I read it that the Lancers cost as much as a heavy cruiser/cruiser from the Essentials. Obviously those books are not to be entirely trusted. Though the line drawings are greats except for the Executor.

@mikey. Its cost was a foot note in one of the RPG books. It didn't say an exact number so feel free to disregard a direct price tag. However the balance is that someone could replace a single Lancer with fighters rather easily.

@macavoy. If that were the case then a single lancer could be replaced by a whole wing of advanced fighters which seems unlikely to me.

Pretty much agree with the general consensus, good idea, lousy execution. At least it showed the Imps were starting to realize the rebel fighters were a serious problem. Probably would have been much more effective as a missile boat rather than a gun boat though. Aside from cost and weak defense, part of it's problem was trying to fight fighters at their ranges, rather than at cap ship ranges. Since it was, as was pointed out, slower than the fighters, that made it near impossible for them to fight on their terms instead of the enemy fighter's.

Well regardless it was always said that the Lancers were failure and too expensive to be put in numbers.

Deepcrush wrote:@mikey. Its cost was a foot note in one of the RPG books. It didn't say an exact number so feel free to disregard a direct price tag. However the balance is that someone could replace a single Lancer with fighters rather easily.

Understood. It makes sense - 20 quad lasers + hyperdrive by themselves count for a good-sized price tag. I think the Lancer is an excellent example of someone looking at the armament of a ship and deciding what it should do, rather than having a ship purposefully designed for that role.

20 quads sound good to start but really that's rather weak When you figure that a ship has six angles to cover. A single fighter squadron could engage a lancer from a flank.

Deepcrush wrote:20 quads sound good to start but really that's rather weak When you figure that a ship has six angles to cover. A single fighter squadron could engage a lancer from a flank.

And then outrun it after an attack run. That's why it seems like someone just saw the armament and decided what it would be good for without any practical experience.

Deepcrush wrote:20 quads sound good to start but really that's rather weak When you figure that a ship has six angles to cover. A single fighter squadron could engage a lancer from a flank.

In which case the Lancer would be able to hit them with 60% of its firepower. A much bigger problem the ship has is the effectiveness of its weapons - if Rogue Squadron is to be believed, its weapons' range is less than the maximum range of a proton torpedo, although much greater than the maximum range of a fighter's targeting sensors. This allowed a squadron of Y-wings to fire from well outside its range, using an X-wing as an aiming mark, which flew in close, dodged everything the Lancer threw at it, ducked under the ship, and the torps struck and destroyed the Lancer. The sequence has several problems, not least the claim that said range is less than 14.5 km, but it handily demonstrates the weakness of the class.

It's one of those classic cases of the best defense against a plane is another plane, not the AA defense of a ship. Problem is that the weapons have an X speed which they can train and track targets. In which the best way to fix this problem would be more guns.