[CT27]

How do you think the people at RNI felt when one of their engineers came into a board meeting and said, "Hey guys, I've found a way to modify the Myrmidon so it can carry a few of the new Helios bombs"?  I bet that was a surprise. 


The Hammerhead squadron was probably happy I'd imagine.






(EDIT:  I know some have said the Myrmidon was never meant to carry the Helios and that it was a table error on someone's part, but for the sake of creating a somewhat lighter thread, I'm running with the assumption that it actually can carry the Helios).

[Megawolf492]

Well, the Myrmidon has three secondary banks. No other "fighter" has that many, but EVERY (playable) bomber does, AFAIK. Therefore, I postulate that the Myrmidon was initially designed as a bomber, but was rushed to production as a fighter because of the NTF rebellion. Later, it was retrofitted to carry the Helios as it was initially intended to.

BTW, there is really no reason why this couldn't be done to most, if not all, fighters. If I'm able to carry 50-100+ tempests in one secondary bank, then I should be able to carry at least two bombs, if not more. We know from "Tenderizer" that a fighter can be loaded with warheads (read bombs) and still be just as fast as before. Sure, those weren't fireable, but the mass is still there.

[Mongoose]

The scale is the real issue, since I think the Helios bomb model is as big as one of the Myrmidon's entire secondary pods.  Now if you want to fanon it as an externally-mounted bomb, then sure why not.

[Axem]

[Megawolf492]

Wow. Then I don't know how any bomber could carry multiple Helios. Because I believe you carry 4 of them in one bank in the GVB Bakha.

[Kolgena]

The 4 that you carry in the Bakha are actually hacked in via the red alert. The banks aren't actually large enough IIRC.

[Darius]

The Antares government did an underhanded deal with RNI, crowding out Subach-Innes from future dealings in the Myrmidon project.

That's why it carries only the Helios and not also the smaller, less complex, standard-issue GTM-Cyclops (never mind the signature dogfighting weapon GTM Harpoon).

[AdmiralRalwood]

The 4 that you carry in the Bakha are actually hacked in via the red alert. The banks aren't actually large enough IIRC.

There is no hack involved. If you make a mission with the Bakha and Helioses available, you'll find that the Bakha can fit a total of 7 Helios bombs (3 in the first bank and 4 in the second).

[Goober5000]

It's a hack not because the banks are too small, but because Volition made a mistake and put Helios in the Allowed PBanks list.  In non-scramble missions using the retail tables, it's not possible to equip Helios bombs.

[Klaustrophobia]

Helios as a primary sounds terrifying (ly awesome). 

[Damage]

I've always been a fan of unorthodox assignments.  Stretch the capabilities of a space fighter, see what it can do in extreme circumstances.  Like using an A-Wing as a strike craft.  (Not saying it's feasible or practical, just fun as a thought exercise.)

In keeping with the lighter tone, I like the idea of the Myrmidon being originally a bomber design that was pushed into another capacity, or possibly even that the Myrmidon was always a fighter, but some over-zealous engineer or bureaucrat in the company said "Hey, the GTA will pay more for this if they know it'll haul bombs too!"

[Kestrellius]

Well it was two A-wings that took out the Executor's bridge shields with concussion missiles. (Also, why are they called concussion missiles?) Star Wars has a weird habit of putting light interceptors in assault roles.

[NGTM-1R]

Well it was two A-wings that took out the Executor's bridge shields with concussion missiles. (Also, why are they called concussion missiles?) Star Wars has a weird habit of putting light interceptors in assault roles.

A-Wing has big weapons bays, it does better than you think.

Also if you can actually do that, there are good reasons to strike and leave in a hurry.

[Trivial Psychic]

I've always been a fan of unorthodox assignments.  Stretch the capabilities of a space fighter, see what it can do in extreme circumstances.  Like using an A-Wing as a strike craft.  (Not saying it's feasible or practical, just fun as a thought exercise.)

Kinda reminds me of how the Americans modified the land-based B-25 Mitchell to launch from a carrier for the Doolittle raid.

[Valrog]

Here are three mysteries even more difficult to solve:

1. How the tiny Serapis "fighter" *cough* *cough* is able to mount the Maxim, while larger Vasudan ships cannot. 

2. How the Serapis paper plane is able to actually fire the Maxim, without its wings violently breaking off. 

3. Why huge capital ships don't carry 200 Maxims each, and instead get destroyed from 3.5 kilometers away by paper planes. 

[DavelXaris]

3. Why huge capital ships don't carry 200 Maxims each, and instead get destroyed from 3.5 kilometers away by paper planes. 

I assume people have tried mounting maxims on turrets. I'm curious how that works out tactically. Any reason BP went the way of pulse cannons rather than maxims?

[General Battuta]

It's because Maxims are hella degenerate and make things boring. We're still looking at ways to soft nerf mass Maxim fire - retcon in ammo, add a subtractive threshold to warship armor, add damage falloff with range...

[Galemp]

I just assumed the bombs came out of those four huge secondary ports on the front of the fighter.

[Damage]

Re: Maxims as turret mounted weapons:  the techroom description itself says it uses ammunition.  From a logistics standpoint alone, it would be simpler to use the big fancy wave-motion cannons that just need recharged from your ships' preexisting reactors, rather than haul around thousands of tons of spent uranium (itself not the most common of minerals existing.)
Plus the beam cannons do look cooler.

Going the other way though, let's say a ship like the Orion--whose bigger turrets look like multiple cannons (or at least used to, not sure what they look like lately with newer models?).  Suppose one of those turrets mounted three to six Maxims instead of a BGreen, I have to think that would be something fun to shoot.

Is there even a way to script that currently?  Mounting multiple-identical weapons in one turret?

[DavelXaris]

Top of my head idea is add some $FOF inaccuracy to the turreted version of the maxim so that at long range it's more of a suppression and saturation weapon than precision anti-fighter/anti-turret. But I guess that's pretty much the pulse cannon, isn't it? Just with less shield damage and some range differences.

To explain in-fiction why fighters could retain maxim precision but not turrets... it's got shudder, so supposedly it recoils, yet it's just a visual effect, right? Maybe fighters have been using their fly-by-wire to get back on target between shots, but to mount the hardware to absorb the recoil on turrets takes up enough space to keep maxims from fitting on small turrets. Would also be another explanation, in addition to size and energy, for why so few fighter classes can carry them. There's the ammo issue too but it's more fun to avoid using that reasoning since the ammo dependence isn't reflected on fighter loadouts.

And you could still have some specialty capships carry accurate maxims on bigger/next-gen tech turrets. I'd hate to deal with a cruiser class that jumps in klicks out and nails every turret and bomb in sight with pinpoint firepower, even in the face of beam jamming. Of course if you ever got close/broke through the beam jamming, its advantage would be gone. But cruisers don't have to fill every role well or fight independent of other capships. Again though, this could be accomplished with BP pulse cannon. No doubt someone has already tried this ...

And now I'm picturing an AWACS/cruiser class that mounts maxims and sprint drive, beam jamming and harassing the heck out of everything without shields. Tactically I'm feeling it would be a foil for the Diomedes, without the need for a big frame to power anti-capship beams.