A research paper that endeavors to analyze, correct, and translate the game assets of the “Star Wars® X-Wing Alliance” PC Game into the game statistics of The Star Wars® Roleplaying Game published by West End Games®. Research paper compiled, written, and edited by Frank V Bonura with help from Charles McNeill, the membership of The Rancor Pit Forum, Paul Cargile, and the membership of the Star Wars® Deckplans Alliance.
I would like to extend special thanks to the team at X-Wing Alliance Upgrade whose help, in understanding the programming of the PC game, and the MXvTED and OPTech software that made this project possible.
Click/tap on image to see in full size.
Fig. 1 — Relative Speed / Maneuverability Chart, artwork by: Joe Johnston, “Return of the Jedi Sketchbook”, page 95 (c. January 1, 1983)
The oldest source of starfighter performance data comes from the Relative Speed / Maneuverability Chart from the production of “Return of the Jedi”. It is believed these specifications were for the motion control cameras to simulate starfighter movement in the movies. By moving the camera a specific distance and angle, per frame, different flight characteristics could be achieved prior to the adoption of computer graphic imagery. The chart makes comparisons to the flight characteristics in “Star Wars” (A New Hope), and “The Empire Strikes Back”. It should be noted the TIE Bomber from “The Empire Strikes Back” was not included on this chart. The effects of this omission will be addressed later in this paper.
You will note the flight characteristics of the X-Wing, Standard TIE Fighter, and Y-wing are all the same. The A-wing, and TIE Interceptor share the same maneuverability and are the two fastest ships on the chart. Lastly the Millennium Falcon, and the B-wing share the same flight characteristics being the slowest, least-maneuverable on the chart. From these specifications we can quantify relative metrics for computer, tabletop, and roleplaying games.
Click/tap on image to see in full size.
Fig. 2 Spacecraft Performance Data Chart, “Star Wars® Sourcebook”, first Edition, page 23 (c. November 1987)
The oldest source of compiled starfighter data for the roleplaying game comes from the Spacecraft Performance Data Chart in the first edition of the “Star Wars® Sourcebook”. You will note here the maneuverability of the X-Wing, Y-wing, and the Standard TIE Fighter (TIE/ln) are not the same as they were depicted in the Relative Speed / Maneuverability Chart (see Fig. 1). The sublight speed of the Y-wing is now slower than the X-Wing, and the Standard TIE Fighter (TIE/ln) is faster than both.
Likewise the maneuverability of the A-wing was improved to be slightly better than the TIE Interceptor, and the sublight speeds were kept mostly the same. The Millennium Falcon is now slightly less maneuverable but faster than the B-wing. The exact reason for these changes from the original motion control resources are unknown. These deviations from the original source may have been the result of early playtesting, and an attempt to make the roleplaying game easier and more survivable for the Player during starfighter combat.
In the PC games changes to power distribution between engines, shields, and weapons, effect the performance of starfighters with shields that have surplus power to distribute to different systems. TIE Fighters differ in power distribution as follows:
“TIE/ln Now the standard fleet-based TIE fighter, this model carries a separate power generator for its laser cannons.”
— Bill Slavicsek and Curtis Smith,“Star Wars® Sourcebook”,
first Edition, page 23 (c. November 1987)
In October of 1992 the Second Edition of Star Wars®, The Roleplaying Game was published and the rules for play were changed for movement from the more abstract D6 mechanic (see Fig. 2) to a static distance per combat round mechanic. The new movement rules now provide for separate rates of speed for space flight in hard vacuum or atmosphere.
Fig. 3 — Ships in an Atmosphere Chart, “The Star Wars Roleplaying Game”,
Second Edition, Revised and Expanded, page 129 (c. August 1996)
Listed below are all the comparable statistics for starfighters that have contemporaries in the “X-Wing Alliance” PC Game.
| Ship Type | Space Speed | Atmosphere Speed | Maneu- verability | Hull | Shield Rating | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-wing Starfighter | 12 | 450; 1,300 kmh | 4D | 2D+2 | 1D | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 16 |
| Assault Gunboat | 8 | 365; 1,050 kmh | 2D | 4D+1 | 2D+2 | Star Wars AJ, No. 15, pp. 81-82 |
| Authority IRD-Aa | 9 | 400; 1,150 kmh | 2D+1b | 4D | 1Dc | Han Solo & the CSA SB, p. 103 |
| B-wing Starfighter | 6d | 330; 950 kmhd | 1D+1 | 3De | 2D | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 17 |
| CloakShape Fighter | 6f | 330; 950 kmhf | 1D+1g | 4D+2 | 1Dh | Dark Empire SB, p. 106 |
| Firespray-class | 5i | 295; 850 kmhi | 1Dj | 4D | 1D | Pirates & Privateers, p. 75 |
| Preybird Fighter | 9 | 400; 1,150 kmh | 2Dk | 3D+2 | 2D | The Far Orbit Project, p. 96 |
| Pursuer Enforcement | 7l | 350; 1,000 kmhl | 1Dm | 4D | 1D | Pirates & Privateers, p. 75 |
| Skipray Blastboat | 8 | 415; 1,200 kmhn | 1D+2o | 2D+1 | 2D | Imperial SB, 2nd Ed, p. 50 |
| TIE/ad Advanced | 10 | 415; 1,200 kmh | 1D+1 | 3D | 1D+1 | Star Wars Trilogy SB, SE, p. 126 |
| TIE/ln Fighter | 10 | 415; 1,200 kmh | 2D | 2D | - | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 26 |
| TIE/sa Bomber | 6 | 295: 850 kmh | 0Dp | 4D+1 | - | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 28 |
| TIE Interceptor | 11 | 435; 1,250 kmh | 3D+2 | 3D | - | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 27 |
| Toscan 8-Q Starfighterq | 5r | 295; 850 kmhr | 1D | 2Ds | - | Pirates & Privateers, p. 53 |
| X-Wing Starfighter | 8 | 365; 1,050 kmh | 3D | 4D | 1D | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 25 |
| Xizor Fighter (Virago)t | 11 | 435; 1,250u kmhv | 3D+2w | 6Dx | 1Dy | Shadows of the E SB, p. 125 |
| Y-wing Starfighter | 7 | 350; 1,000 kmh | 2D | 4D↓ | 1D+2↑ | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 19 |
| Z-95 Headhunter | 7 | 400; 1,150 kmhz | 1Daa | 4Dab | 1D | Star Wars SB, 2nd Ed, p. 15 |
|
||||||
The Assault Gunboat was the only starfighter officially translated (extrapolated) from the X-Wing series of games.
A: The following stats (extrapolated from TIE Fighter: The Official Strategy Guide by Rusel DeMaria, David Wessman. and David Maxwell) should suffice:
— Eric S. Trautmann, “1SB Intercepts”, “Star Wars Adventure Journal”,
number 15, pages 81-82 (c. November 1997)
The Assault gunboat was changed the most game-over-game in the X-Wing PC Game series, and was translated to RPG stats 2 years before the release of “X-Wing Alliance”. Translation adjustments are necessary to harmonize the RPG stats with the PC game metrics.
a The IRD-A not the IRD will be used for this translation due to the source below:
“The limited production run fighters are seeing limited service. IRD-A ships were used against Jessa's outlaw-tech band, and while that particular engagement didn't go well for the Authority fighters, other combat sorties have had favorable results.”
— Michael Allen Horne, “Han Solo and the Corporate Sector Sourcebook”,
page 103 (c. November 1993) (emphasis added)
b The IRD-A has a Maneuverability: 2D+1 (2D in atmosphere)
, the space rating will be used for comparison in this paper in spite of this maneuverability being the only IRD-A statistic that is higher than the “X-Wing Alliance” data for the other metrics of this fighter.
c No shield statistics were ever published for the Authority IRD or the Authority IRD-A in the “Star Wars® Roleplaying Game”. The lack of shielding is inconsistent with the original text below.
“The IRDs began firing from extreme range with yellow-green flashes of the energy cannon in their chin pods. Deflector shields were up.”
— Brian Charles Daley, “Han Solo at Stars' End”,
chapter 4, page 53 (c. April 1979) (emphasis added)
“The IRD swooped past. She swerved and shot at it instinctively. The burst scored, penetrating the IRD's shields.”
— Brian Charles Daley, “Han Solo at Stars' End”,
chapter 4, page 56 (c. April 1979) (emphasis added)
As a result of this information, shielding has been added, and Hull rating reduced to this example to match the fighter from the “X-Wing Alliance” PC Game.
Note: It is highly suspected that IRD
stands for Imperial Research and Development
not Intercept Reconnaissance Defense
, and the fighters described in the original novel were similar to Darth Vader's prototype TIE Fighter. These theories exceed the scope of this research paper and are only noted for completeness.
d B-Wing speed when comparing the two game systems is slower in the RPG than in the PC game. The speed of the newer B-Wing/E is a better fit to the PC game (see “The Jedi Academy Sourcebook”, page 126 for more info).
e The Hull rating of Hull: 3D
was to compensate for the fragile cockpit rotating assembly (Gyro-servo System) that provides for a stable cockpit
and flexible firing platform
. This fragility does not account for the B-wing having the most robust armor of any starfighter which makes for difficulty in translation with “X-Wing Alliance”. The hull of the newer B-Wing/E is a better fit to the PC game (see “The Jedi Academy Sourcebook”, page 126 for more info).
fIn “Dark Empire 3: The Battle for Calamari”, pages 18-21, we observe the CloakShape Fighter pass the Slave II and keep up with the Millennium Falcon. The Millennium Falcon had a speed of Space: 9
(see the “Dark Empire Sourcebook”, page 97 for more info). Comparing the metrics and stats between the PC game and RPG it was decided to correct the fighter's speed to: Space: 9 for translation comparison.
g It is assumed that the aftermarket Maneuvering Fin by Curich Engineering is installed on the CloakShape Fighter used in this translation, granting Maneuverability: 2D+2
. Subsequently the base maneuverability was reduced slightly when comparing the RPG stats to the PC game metrics.
h No shield or sensor statistics were ever published for the CloakShape Fighter in the “Star Wars® Roleplaying Game”. The stats published were for the specific ship that was encountered in “Dark Empire 3: The Battle for Calamari” as indicated below.
“The CloakShape destroyed on Nar Shaddaa included mounted fire-linked double laser cannons and a pair of concussion-missile launchers. Adding the launchers' large ammo bays meant stripping out the shield generators in order to make room.”
— Bill Smith, “The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels”,
page 22 (c. March 19, 1996) (emphasis added)
As a result of this information, shielding has been added to this example to match the fighter from the “X-Wing Alliance” PC Game.
The game stats for Slave I can be found in four publications:
All four of these sources have similar descriptions copied from the original First Edition. The First Edition Slave I lacked any stats for shields, and used a different stat block for First Edition rules. The below First Edition text was copied in the three Second Edition sources in spite of the contradiction of the addition of 2D+2 shields to the ship's stats in those publications.
“The outer hull of the vessel has reinforcement plating and contact ray shielding, which to a large degree made up for the ship's overall lack of adequate deflector shielding.”
— Michael Stern, “Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back”,
First Edition, page 57 (c. 1989) (emphasis added)
The description in the Essential Guide disagrees with the above text but agrees with the Second Edition stats.
“In addition to combat-grade shields and sensors, Slave I has an illegal sensor masking and jamming system that allows it to slip through sensor grids undetected.”
— Bill Smith, “The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels”,
page 144 (c. March 19, 1996) (emphasis added)
The stock statistics for the Firespray-class were written almost 7 years after the stats for Slave I and can be found in two publications:
These stats are identical and only “Pirates & Privateers” has a descriptive capsule.
Four identical West End Games® sources describe the modifications of Slave I, and these descriptions do not agree with stock and modified stats. These discrepancies are described below.
“Very little remains of the original model, the Firespray-31, an early Kuat design which had a very brief production run some standard years ago. Very few of these almost unique vessels can be found traveling the space lanes today. When you do find one, it is likely to be as highly modified as Slave I.”
— Michael Stern, “Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back”,
First Edition page 57 (c. 1989) (emphasis added)
“Capsule: The Firespray is an older patrol model currently found mostly in territorial patrol forces and navies in the more remote areas of the Galaxy.”
— Timothy S. O'Brien, “Pirates & Privateers”, page 75 (c. February 1997)
Due to the descriptions' differences in rarity, it is suspected that the stock Firespray-class described in “Pirates & Privateers” may be reference to an old but newer, more widely-manufactured model than Slave I.
“Two-thirds of the ship's total hull area is dedicated solely to the engines, which accounts for its speed and also for its initial lack of popularity, since there is not much room in the vessel for much of anything else.”
— Michael Stern, “Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back”,
First Edition page 57 (c. 1989) (emphasis added)
The above text compares the features of the stock Firespray-class to Slave I. The tendency of West End Games® to excessively reduce the performance of stock ships when a highly modified ship was published first is common. The Z-95 Headhunter Mark I is another example of this trend. The stock Firespray-class is no exception.
i With speed performance as slow as Space 5, and Atmospheric of 295; 850 kmh, such a vessel would have difficulty performing its intended role as a Patrol/Attack ship when pursuit of faster pirate/criminal ships would be near impossible.
Considering the tonnage of added equipment added by Boba Fett, and additional modifications for speed, the two factors are a wash and both the Stock model and Slave I should be similar with a Space Speed of 7, and an Atmospheric Speed of 350; 1,000 kmh or possibly all the performance modifications have pushed the Slave I to Space Speed of 8, and an Atmospheric Speed of 365; 1,050 kmh.
Note: In “The Empire Strikes Back”, Slave I followed the Millennium Falcon undetected in realspace and the Falcon had Space: 8
speed in the RPG at the time.
“The ship's engines gave Slave I remarkable sublight speed for a ship of that type. While this sacrifices some of the ship's overall maneuverability, Fett undoubtedly opted for this modification because it allows him to immobilize victims before they have a chance to escape.”
— Michael Stern, “Galaxy Guide 3: The Empire Strikes Back”,
First Edition page 57 (c. 1989) (emphasis added)
Remarkable sublight speed???
The above text also suggests the published speed stats for Slave I are too slow, and by association the stock model is too slow as well. The above text strengthens the argument for a Space Speed of 8, and an Atmospheric Speed of 365; 1,050 kmh for Slave I. Likewise Space Speed of 7, and an Atmospheric Speed of 350; 1,000 kmh are a better fit for the stock model.
j If the Slave I was modified to sacrifice maneuverability for speed (see quote above), then it is logical to assume the stock model would have superior maneuverability. Unfortunately we find that the stock model was published with the same Maneuverability: 1D
as Slave I in both publications (see above). Due to this TYPO, the stock model will have increased maneuverability for comparison in this translation.
k The Raptor and Skyclaw Preybirds were published with only 1D of maneuverability. The description below is inconsistent with the stats.
“The control interfaces of the ships are a combination of classified Imperial technology and custom-designed components, making these craft highly maneuverable.”
— Eric Trautmann, “The Last Command Sourcebook”, pages 132-133 (c. March 1994)
“Thrawn Trilogy Sourcebook”, pages 225-226 (c. April 15, 1996) (emphasis added)
The rating of Maneuverability: 1D
is believed to be a TYPO that was published in both above references. The rating of Maneuverability: 2D
found on the two Preybirds owned by the Tarnished Blades pirates on page 96 in “The Far Orbit Project” seem to better reflect a cutting-edge starfighter, for the time, and stock Preybird performance.
At 30.1 meters long, this is the largest ship in this category (Type 0, Fighters) of the study. The Pursuer Enforcement Ship may be as long as 42.14 meters but this issue exceeds the scope of this research paper and is only noted for completeness.
l The descriptions of the performance of Slave II, and the Pursuer-class Enforcement Ship are not consistent with their respective stats as noted below:
“Based on a Mandalorian police ship design, the Slave II is a less heavily armed ship, though that is a relative concept. To compensate, it is faster and more maneuverable than Slave I.”
— Michael Allen Horne, “Dark Empire Sourcebook”, page 100 (c. June 1993) (emphasis added)
“Capsule: This older-model Mandalorian police ship is still used in patrol forces through the Galaxy, although it is no longer known to be produced. The Pursuer's main advantage is speed, although it has a formidable weapons package.”
— Timothy S. O'Brien, “Pirates & Privateers”, page 75 (c. February 1997) (emphasis added)
This means that the speed of the Slave II, considering the corrections made to Slave I above, should be at least Space: 9 and Atmosphere: 400; 1,150 kmh. Likewise, the maneuverability would most likely be Maneuverability: 2D.
m The stock stats for the Pursuer Enforcement Ship would logically be a speed of Space: 7 or 8, and Atmosphere: 350; 1,000 kmh, or 365; 1,050 kmh, with Maneuverability: 1D or 1D+1.
The scale of this ship is listed as Scale: Capital (due to power output)
. The ship's piloting skill is Skill: Starfighter piloting: Skipray Blastboat
which is a Starfighter-scale skill. The only Capital-scale skill listed on this ship's stats are for its Medium Ion Cannons Skill: Capital ship gunnery
. For the purposes of this translation, this ship will be treated as Starfighter-Scale.
n The ship is aerodynamic, and has faster than normal atmospheric speed.
o The ship has Maneuverability: 1D+2 (2D+2 in atmosphere)
.
p The TIE/sa Bomber has the worst maneuverability in this category (Type 0, Fighters) of the study Maneuverability: 0D
. It is suspected that because the bomber was not included in the Relative Speed / Maneuverability Chart (see Fig. 1), it was biased negatively by an increased measure when game balance was being considered. When compared to the X-Wing Alliance data it becomes apparent an error was made in the stats of this fighter that were carried over to all editions and iterations of the ship in the RPG. For purposes of this paper, this bomber will be given improved maneuverability for this translation.
q This fighter has had inconsistent spellings of its model name throughout its RPG publication history.
Tocsan 8-Qin: “Alliance Intelligence Reports” (8x), pages 44, 47, 50, 51.
Tocsan Q-8in: “Secrets of the Sisar Run”, page 24.
Toscan 8-Qin: “Pirates & Privateers” (4x), pages 53, 128.
r The stats for the fighter do not match the descriptions below:
“Capsule: One of the few production starfighters to come out of the Shobquix factories, the Tocsan 8-Q starfighter uses a Koensayr cockpit. The Tocsan 8-Q remains popular with pirate groups and other small military forces. particularly in lower-tech regions such as Wild Space and the Unknown Regions. The m'Yalfor'ac models have been stripped of their hyperdrives and their ship systems modified to substantially increase speed and firepower.”
— Craig R. Carey and Trevor J. Wilson “Alliance Intelligence Reports”,
page 50 (c. June 1995) (emphasis added)
substantially increase speed and firepower
??? Space: 7
, Atmosphere: 350; 1,000 kmh
does not sound like a substantial
increase in speed for a ship stripped of hyperdrive, shields, missiles/torpedoes, and any other ship systems
included in the modifications.
As for firepower
the m'Yalfor'ac models have the identical weapons as the stock model on page 53 of “Pirates & Privateers”. The published stats do not match the included descriptions and artwork (see side graphic), suggesting the published stats contain TYPOs. In the side graphic we see 4 wing-mounted weapons and 2 front-mounted cannons. It is possible the stats for the four wing-mounted weapons were omitted in error in the publication, as it is possible they would have appeared at the end of the stat block and were clipped. In X-Wing Alliance, these wing-mounted weapons are 4 Laser Cannons, and the 2 front-mounted weapons are Ion Cannons. The X-Wing Alliance interpretation of this fighter resemble the original image and descriptions from pages 50-51 of “Alliance Intelligence Reports” better than the published stats.
Just like the Firespray-class above, West End Games® excessively reduced the performance of the stock model when a highly modified ship, of the same model, was published first. The Z-95 Headhunter Mark I is another example of this trend. The stock Toscan 8-Q is no exception.
sHull: 2D
and no shields makes perfect sense for a modified
ship stripped down for speed. This also suggests the stock model would have significantly more armor (Hull rating) being that it uses a Koensayr cockpit
(Y-Wing), and would also be equipped with shields. The model used for translation will have an increased Hull rating, and be equipped with Shields like the equivalent model used in X-Wing Alliance.
t It is highly suspected due to the comparative metrics that the Xizor Fighter is representative of the mass-produced StarViper-class Attack Platform and not the personal transport of Prince Xizor, the Virago. Adjustments to reduce ship performance will be noted on data charts with specifics to compensate for translation.
u Atmospheric speed TYPO published as 1,200 kmh instead of 1,250 kmh.
v Atmospheric speed: 210; 600 kmh (with wings extended).
w Maneuverability: 1D in atmosphere with wings extended.
x Hull: 6D (front), 3D (back). Hull ratings front and back, will be averaged for simplicity in this translation.
y Shields: 1D (front), 4D (back). Shield ratings front and back, will be averaged for simplicity in this translation.
Note: The Y-wing BTL-A4 Longprobe on page 83 of “The Rebel Alliance Sourcebook”, Second Edition, has the same Hull and Shield Rating as the First Edition Y-wing (see Fig. 2). All Second Edition standard Y-wings (BTL-S3) have consistent 4D Hulls and 1D+2 Shields throughout the Second Edition RPG.
Comparing the X-Wing Alliance metrics of the Z-95 Headhunter and X-Wing, it was determined the best match for comparison is from the latest models so comparisons will be based on the Z-95 AF4, and the Z-95 Mark II.
z The mismatched space speed of 7 and atmospheric speed of 400; 1,150 kmh that was published do not match the chart Ships in Atmosphere
on page 110 of “Star Wars® The Roleplaying Game”, Second Edition (blue Darth Vader cover) and page 129 of “Star Wars® The Roleplaying Game”, Second Edition, Revised & Expanded (see Fig. 3 for more info).
This suggests a Z-95 Headhunter that can outrun an X-Wing in atmosphere (365; 1,050 kmh) and must be significantly more aerodynamic than an X-Wing. It is believed the original Z-95 Headhunter stats are for the swing-wing bubble cockpit model described in the novel “Han Solo at Stars' End”.
It is also suspected the slower Z-95 Mark I Headhunter is incorrect but exceeds the scope of this research paper and is only noted for completeness (see pages 103-104 of the “Han Solo and the Corporate Sector Sourcebook” for more info).
The Z-95 Headhunter that appeared in the X-Wing Alliance PC game is a newer model possibly the Z-95-AF4 (Assault Fighter 4) with upgraded engines, and weapons with a fuselage of similar aerodynamics to the T-65 X-Wing (see “The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels”, page 200 for more info).
aa Z-95 Headhunter Mark II maneuverability is used, Maneuverability:1D+2
, in this translation. For more info see “Classic Adventures”, Volume 1, page 50.
ab Newer Z-95 Headhunters are noted as follows:
New generations seem to be coming along every few years — it wasn’t that long ago that a Z-95 Headhunter could hold its own under the right conditions. Now, it is simply a very fast coffin.
— Michael Allen Horne, “Dark Empire Sourcebook”, page 101 (c. June 1993) (emphasis added)
Comparing the data between both systems, it was discovered that the newer Headhunters trade Hull rating for speed and hyperdrive capabilities.
In the chart below are the Starfighter Performance Metrics for the “X-Wing Alliance” PC Game. Due to the fact the PC game is only played in the regime of space, we will solve for those metrics and interpolate atmospheric performance. These metrics will be combined and added to a scatter diagram to solve for:
The starfighter performance data between the X-Wing PC Game (c. February 1993), and the TIE Fighter PC Game (c. July 1994) are identical. Subtle adjustments were made to the starfighters seen in the Original Trilogy, and Z-95 Headhunter in the X-Wing Vs. TIE Fighter PC Game (c. April 1997). Here we see evidence of thorough playtesting with the first two PC Games over thousands of sorties of play. This third main installment, X-Wing Vs. TIE Fighter, with multi-player capability allowed Lucasarts ample play data with player vs. player gameplay to polish and refine performance data by many orders of magnitude over the tabletop RPG. With the advent of the fourth main installment, X-Wing Alliance (c. February 1999) performance data was refined and tuned to further improve game balance. Specific changes are noted on the chart below.
Rebel fighters are believed to have been given enhanced stats to make RPG gameplay easier for players. In contrast Imperial fighters were given weakened stats for the RPG. These bias corrections are noted on the data charts marked in orange to indicate changes needed to harmonize the data of the two game systems.
| Ship Type | Speed MGLT | Accel- eration MGLT/ sec | Decel- eration MGLT/ sec | Roll | Pitch /Yaw | Maneu- vera- bility DPF | Hull Rating RU | Sys- tem Hits | Explosive Power/ Collision Damage | Shield Rating SBD | Shield Re- charge | Shield De- charge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-Wing RZ-1 (A-W) | 120 | 21 | 40 | 48 | 24 | 96↓a | 14↓b | 10 | 500 | 50 | 20 | 15 |
| Assault Gunboat (GUN) | 90 | 20 | 33 | 40 | 18 | 76↓↓c | 28 | 10 | 2,500 | 100 | 20 | 10 |
| Authority IRD (IRD) | 102 | 18 | 27 | 31 | 17 | 65 | 18 | 8 | 1,300 | 35 | 11 | 8 |
| B-Wing (B-W) | 91 | 16 | 23 | 34 | 18 | 70↑d | 60 | 20 | 4,500 | 100↓e | 20 | 6 |
| Cloakshape Fighter (Clk/F) | 93 | 20 | 29 | 35 | 19 | 73 | 28 | 10 | 2,300 | 96 | 16 | 10 |
| Firespray Attack Ship (FRS) | 91 | 16 | 23 | 35 | 19 | 73 | 62 | 14 | 4,500 | 106 | 22 | 8 |
| Preybird Fighter (Pry/F) | 100 | 13 | 19 | 36 | 28 | 92 | 18 | 10 | 1,000 | 46 | 13 | 8 |
| Pursuer Enforcement Ship (PES) | 94 | 15 | 20 | 33 | 17 | 67 | 60 | 12 | 4,400 | 100 | 21 | 6 |
| Skipray Blastboat (S/B) | 91 | 16 | 23 | 32 | 16 | 64 | 61 | 14 | 4,500 | 102 | 20 | 6 |
| T-65C A2 X-Wing (X-W) | 100 | 16 | 27 | 36 | 20 | 76 | 20 | 10 | 700 | 50 | 15 | 10 |
| TIE Advanced (T/A) | 133↓f | 16 | 22 | 50 | 28/26g | 104↓h | 14↓i | 10 | 1,000 | 40↓j | 25 | 18 |
| TIE Bomber (T/B) | 80 | 13 | 20 | 42 | 22 | 86↑k | 28↓l | 10 | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TIE Fighter (T/F) | 100 | 20 | 23 | 46 | 26 | 98 | 9 | 10 | 500 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TIE Interceptor (T/I) | 111↑m | 21 | 27 | 50 | 28/26n | 104↓o | 16↓p | 10 | 1,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Toscan Fighter (TOS) | 86 | 14 | 21 | 35 | 19 | 73 | 23 | 10 | 1700 | 68 | 13 | 9 |
| Xizor Fighter (Xiz/F) | 98 | 16 | 24 | 36 | 20 | 76 | 22 | 10 | 1,100 | 50 | 14 | 10 |
| Y-Wing BTL-A4 (Y-W) | 80 | 11 | 20 | 28 | 16 | 60↑q | 40 | 20 | 3,000 | 75 | 10 | 4 |
| Z-95 Headhunter (Z-95) | 100↑r | 16 | 23 | 42 | 22 | 86↑s | 14↓t | 10 | 500 | 20 | 8 | 4 |
|
||||||||||||
f 145 MGLT in X-Wing PC & TIE Fighter PC, decreased to 133 MGLT in X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter PC and X-Wing Alliance PC.
In spite of a 9% reduction in speed, in the PC Game, it is believed the speed of the TIE Advanced may still be too fast when compared to the following text:
“The vessel mounted a Sienar Fleet Systems (SFS) I-S3a solar ionization reactor and paired SFS P-s5.6 twin ion engines for a for more powerful drive system than that of the standard TIE/In. Speed was only slightly improved over earlier models, due to the added mass and to the fact that a good deal of the extra power was bled off to the shield generators.”
“The Empire instead opted for the TIE interceptor, which featured the TIE Advanced x1's drive system, but in a more compact ship.”
— Bill Smith, “The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels”,
page 30 (c. March 19, 1996) (emphasis added)
If the TIE Advanced and the TIE Interceptor used the same drive system and the TIE Advanced was the more massive ship, the 133 MGLT
is too fast and a TYPO in the metrics of the PC Game.
Hyperdrive: x2. The final translation will include a class 2 hyperdrive.
The four statistics to be translated will each require their own formula to solve for and will be calculated separately. One can not be sure, when observing the PC game data, that Totally Games® decided to start over with a clean slate when designing the metrics for the X-Wing series of games or they coordinated with West End Games® to correct issues with the stats. By translating any game balance biases, mistakes, and TYPOs, inherited from the roleplaying game stats, can identified, and be eliminated.
Using the X-Wing Alliance Speed MGLT metric and comparing it to the West End Games® Space Speed stats, we used a linear trendline and linear regression to extract the translation formula. A linear trendline was the best fit for translation of the two systems.
Fig. 4 X-Wing Alliance compiled data comparing PC Game Speed MGLT metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
The first calculation compares the raw uncorrected published data from West End Games® to the extracted data from X-Wing Alliance. The results of the raw translation can be observed on column F (purple).
The second calculation includes corrections to the published RPG game stats (column D, in red). The results of the corrected translation can be observed on column J (blue).
Fig. 5 X-Wing Alliance scatter chart comparing PC game speed metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
In the above scatter diagram, we plotted the relationship of the published, corrected, and translated game stats. Two linear trendlines illustrate the change in formulae due to the corrections made to the West End Games® stats.
Translation of ship maneuverability was accomplished by first creating a geometric mean of all the X-Wing Alliance acceleration metrics using the following formula:
x = (Acceleration-MGLT/sec * Deceleration-MGLT/sec * Roll * Pitch * Yaw) ^ (1/5)
Using the above geometric mean and comparing it to the West End Games® stats, we then used a linear trendline and linear regression to extract the translation formula. A Linear trendline was the best fit to balance the least and most maneuverable fighters in the segment.
Fig. 6 X-Wing Alliance compiled data comparing PC game maneuverability (acceleration) metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
The first calculation compares the raw uncorrected published data from West End Games® to the extracted data from X-Wing Alliance. The results of the raw translation can be observed on column N (purple).
The second calculation includes corrections to the published game stats (column J, in red). The results of the corrected translation can be observed on column Q (blue).
Fig. 7 X-Wing Alliance scatter chart comparing PC game maneuverability metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
In the above scatter diagram, we plotted the relationship of the published, corrected, and translated game stats. Two linear trendlines illustrate the change in formulae due to the corrections made to the West End Games® stats.
Translation of ship Hull (Damage Resistance) was accomplished by first creating a geometric mean of all the X-Wing Alliance structural metrics using the following formula:
x = (Hull-Rating * System-Hits * Explosive-Power/Collision-Damage) ^ (1/3)
Using the geometric mean and comparing it to the West End Games® stats, we then used a power trendline and linear regression to extract the translation formula. A power trendline was the best fit to extract the very incompatible data between the two very different game systems (hit points vs. damage resistance).
Fig. 8 X-Wing Alliance compiled data comparing PC game Hull (Damage Resistance) metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
The first calculation compares the raw uncorrected published data from West End Games® to the extracted data from X-Wing Alliance. The results of the raw translation can be observed on column I (purple).
The second calculation includes corrections to the published game stats (column G, in red). The results of the corrected translation can be observed on column L (blue).
Fig. 9 X-Wing Alliance scatter chart comparing PC game Hull (Damage Resistance) metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
In the above scatter diagram, we plotted the relationship of the published, corrected, and translated game stats. Two power trendlines illustrate the change in formulae due to the corrections made to the West End Games® stats.
Translation of ship Shields was accomplished by using the Shield Rating metric and comparing it to the West End Games® stats, we then used a power trendline and linear regression to extract the translation formula. A power trendline was the best fit to insure minimum shielding of 3 pips (1D) and to prevent excessive game-imbalancing shielding for the more powerful fighters in the category..
Fig. 10 X-Wing Alliance compiled data comparing PC game Shield (Damage Resistance) metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
The first calculation compares the raw uncorrected published data from West End Games® to the extracted data from X-Wing Alliance. The results of the raw translation can be observed on column F (purple).
The second calculation includes corrections to the published game stats (column D, in red). The results of the corrected translation can be observed on column I (blue).
Fig. 11 X-Wing Alliance scatter chart comparing PC game Shield (Damage Resistance) metrics to West End Games® RPG stats.
In the above scatter diagram, we plotted the relationship of the published, corrected, and translated game stats. Two power trendlines illustrate the change in formulae due to the corrections made to the West End Games® stats.
