[Jal-18]

Unlikely, seeing as one was taken down just by the beam weapons on the Colossus.

[Woolie Wool]

Uh, there was a whole squadron of Sekhmets with Helios bombs assisting the Colossus. In many cases, the player even gets the kill!

[NGTM-1R]

We're not totally sure how beams work and how much energy they deliever, though. Plus it took the Colossus a fairly long time even so.

[Drew]

Originally posted by Mongoose

I know this was much earlier in the topic, but I did want to clear this up.  The Nereid was sent through the Vega-Capella node to collapse it, even after the supernova.  I'm sure that, for all the GTVA knew, the Shivans could have had ships capable of withstanding the forces of the supernova.  Heck, we never even see the Sathanes that remained behind actually get destroyed; who knows, maybe they had strong enough armor to make it?

supernovas have enough explosive, radioactive power to wipe solar systems clean. and remmeber the black hole that forms.


any sathanas that stayed behind, didnt make it.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by karajorma


I've already explained above that the fact you want to make a battleship isn't what means you have no respect for canon. I'll say it again because you apparently didn't get it last time. The fact that you decided that not only does the maxim not have a range of 3km in your universe but also try to use that as a reason why I am wrong is what means you have no respect for canon.

Putting uber weapons on your ship is the lack of respect for canon I thought you had. Arbitrarily changing the range of a canon weapon because you want to win an argument is the even bigger one you have.

The maxim has a range of 3km. For it to be a mistake by [V] as you seem to believe it would have to have been missed by the table designers, the mission designers and the playtesters. Do not hold up the myrmidon/helios thing up for comparison as there is no situation in the entire main campaign where you can actually put the helios on a myrmidon anyway so it was very easy for them to have missed.  

Do not even think of daring to claim you have more respect for canon while spreading such herasy.

Heresy? No at all...
You are REALLY stretching it here. Who ever said putting UBER weapons on my ships? Like I told you before, I'm a master at balancing things, so everything would fit in.

And unless you haven't figured it out by now - changing any tbl entry of ANYTHING completely is warranted when making a campaign. My campaign won't be canon anyway ,so why would I worry over the range of a singel weapon.

and on another note - the Maxims range can easily pass undetected. I passed FS2 dozens of times, and I did use the Maxim, but I never noticed it's long range... I guess it normal when youre allways less than 800m from the target.
..

 

No you didn't. Had you said that I'd have have made a completely different argument because it is obvious to anyone not dead from the neck up that without fighter cover both are equally vulnerable to long range maxim style attacks while the battleship is obviously less vulnerable to short ranged attacks or bombing runs.
 My whole complaint was in the way you refused to admit that a battleship without fighter escort was a sitting duck.
 In fact you have continued to argue that a battleship could destroyer enemy fighters at maxim range. (A comment that only makes sense when you LATER tell people that you don't mean 3km by that.
 That's not me twisting your words. That's you failing to make yourself clear. If you meant 1km say 1km. Don't reduce the maxim's range to 1km in your head and expect us all to realise that's what you mean telepathically.
 If I made an error in assuming you meant putting bigger weapons on battleships when you said that they could deal with fighters at maxim range that's because I assumed you knew what maxim range was. The thought that someone would simply change the range of a canon weapon and not say so didn't even occur to me.

Anyway you've finally managed to say that the battleship is vulnerable to fighters which is what I wanted so I'll leave it here.

Again...you got it all wrong. Read my posts again, and you'll notice that I never said a BB wouldn't be vulnerable to fighters.
and when I wrote that thing I didn't know Maxim had a 300m range, so I assumed fighters would be close enough to get pounded by Flak/AAAf..

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool

I kind of disagree. Capships shouldn't be big targets, but fighting one should not be excessively difficult or unfair. Besides, large ships in FS carry all those fighters for a reason.


The Sathanas will do fine. Why do you call this class battleship and not juggernaut?

Battleship - smaller than a Sath/Colossus, has no fighterbays, has ****loads of frepower.

Oh - and whay make capships a bit tougher? Well, they don't cray DANGER when you approach them.
Ever played X-Wing Alliance? Now there's a game where a warship was friggin dangerous. Those Star Destroyers spit a hail of laser beams at you in bursts, and 3-4 hits and you're done for.
Extreemly difficult to take out singlehandedly, but still doable (did it 2-3times)....

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by Drew


supernovas have enough explosive, radioactive power to wipe solar systems clean. and remmeber the black hole that forms.


any sathanas that stayed behind, didnt make it.

A supernova of Capella would form a neutron star, not a black hole. You need a REALLY big star to make a black hole. Most supernovas result in neutron stars.

[Ghostavo]

Originally posted by TrashMan



Battleship - smaller than a Sath/Colossus, has no fighterbays, has ****loads of frepower.

Oh - and whay make capships a bit tougher? Well, they don't cray DANGER when you approach them.
Ever played X-Wing Alliance? Now there's a game where a warship was friggin dangerous. Those Star Destroyers spit a hail of laser beams at you in bursts, and 3-4 hits and you're done for.
Extreemly difficult to take out singlehandedly, but still doable (did it 2-3times)....

Can't Star Destroyers carry tons and tons of fighters?

[StratComm]

Originally posted by TrashMan


Heresy? No at all...
You are REALLY stretching it here. Who ever said putting UBER weapons on my ships? Like I told you before, I'm a master at balancing things, so everything would fit in.

Not very modest, are we...

Somehow I have a hard time believing that statement.  Just because you make everything overgunned to the point where factions are roughly equivalent does not mean that you've balanced things well for playability.  By its very nature as a storytelling flight sim, Freespace tends to be fighter-centric in its gameplay.  Making a battleship bristle with flak and AAAf makes it extremely annoying to fight against, because it's a crapshoot rather than any symbolance of skill to take one down.

Of course, from what I've seen you're preference in gameplay is a lightshow rather than something requiring actual skill.  Your disposition toward overgunned, oversized craft with no real weakness besides getting overwhelmed points highly to this.  I can't think of a single ship you've posted, ever, that had a weakness that could be taken advantage of, except for the Typhon-clone if you forget to give it a turret in between the engine legs.

Originally posted by TrashMan

and on another note - the Maxims range can easily pass undetected. I passed FS2 dozens of times, and I did use the Maxim, but I never noticed it's long range... I guess it normal when youre allways less than 800m from the target.

There is a difference between playing a game and testing a game.  In testing, you try every possible scenario.  That's why I still think the Myrmidon/Helios combo is deliberate; it would have been considerably easier to simply remove the comment from the tables when someone noticed it than to dissalow the combination in every single mission, yet did not.  Likewise, had the Maxim's range not been intentional, someone would have noticed quite quickly that it was all too easy to take out AAAf or Flak turrets without getting shot at.

[NGTM-1R]

Originally posted by TrashMan

Ever played X-Wing Alliance? Now there's a game where a warship was friggin dangerous. Those Star Destroyers spit a hail of laser beams at you in bursts, and 3-4 hits and you're done for.
Extreemly difficult to take out singlehandedly, but still doable (did it 2-3times)....

Yes. On the highest difficulty I took down an ISD with my X-Wing. ALONE.

The ship you propose would eat a lone fighter alive. Hell, I can take on a Sathanas alone at mid-level difficulty and stand a reasonable chance of living to tell about it. Not so this...thing.

If I can take on the biggest, toughest, meanest ship in the game with nothing more then an Artemis D.H. and some Cyclops bombs, and win, that should tell you something. FS capital ships ALL need fighter support to work effectively. They are combined-arms weapons for a combined-arms environment. Making them otherwise is a complete and utter lack of respect for the canon.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Drew
supernovas have enough explosive, radioactive power to wipe solar systems clean. and remmeber the black hole that forms.

Supernova's don't always result in a black hole.

That said I consider it unlikely that anything could have been hit by the supernova and survived.

Originally posted by TrashMan
Heresy? No at all...
You are REALLY stretching it here. Who ever said putting UBER weapons on my ships? Like I told you before, I'm a master at balancing things, so everything would fit in.

For goodness sake Trashman! I've already explained this several times. I assumed that you must be putting uber weapons on the capship to get around the Maxim's 3km range. The thought that you didn't know the range of the Maxim cannon didn't occur to me because I had already stated that the Maxim has a 3km range several times. In fact I stated that fact 3 times in one post!

 It's looks like you're not reading my posts very carefully before you respond to them so I suggest that you re-read this before you comment because I'm not trying to flame you.  (or at least trying hard NOT to flame you )

Originally posted by TrashMan
And unless you haven't figured it out by now - changing any tbl entry of ANYTHING completely is warranted when making a campaign. My campaign won't be canon anyway ,so why would I worry over the range of a singel weapon.

You're more than welcome to do whatever the f**k you like in your campaign. You can make your ships fly backwards for all I care. In fact I've even offered to help when you had problems with your missions in FRED. I can't stress this enough. I have nothing against you doing whatever you like in your campaign

However this thread was not about your campaign. This thread was a discussion about why carriers were not used in the FS2 universe. Later on a discussion of battleships in the FS2 universe was also added but at no point was the thread about reasons battleships can't be used in Trashmanverse. The entire argument revolved around the real FS2 universe and any extentions to it which try to remain true to its canon.
  We don't care about Trashmanverse because you hold all the cards there so there is no point in arguing with you that you're wrong. You could have a giant pink bunny rabbit eat the shivan fleet at the end and it still wouldn't be wrong.
 Try to claim that the GTVA were idiots for not having a giant pink bunny defence system in FS2 however and we'll quite rightly regard you with a mixture of pity and horror.
 

Originally posted by TrashMan
and on another note - the Maxims range can easily pass undetected. I passed FS2 dozens of times, and I did use the Maxim, but I never noticed it's long range... I guess it normal when youre allways less than 800m from the target.

How's it my fault that you were so unobservant as to not notice the Serapis fighters shooting at things you could hardly even target in "The Fog of War"?

Originally posted by TrashMan
Again...you got it all wrong. Read my posts again, and you'll notice that I never said a BB wouldn't be vulnerable to fighters.
and when I wrote that thing I didn't know Maxim had a 300m range, so I assumed fighters would be close enough to get pounded by Flak/AAAf..

You might have never said it outright but you most certainly implied that a battleships AA would be able to defend it against enemy fighters even wthout its own fighter screen. If you weren't arguing that why the hell did you respond to me at all?
 Now if you made that error due to you not realising the range of the Maxim that's forgivable but the fact that you didn't post a comment to retract that implication when I told you that the maxim had a 3km range is what I find less admirable.

Instead of simply admitting that you were wrong because you didn't know the range of the maxim you instead decided that you were going to claim it was a mistake and reduce the range in Trashmanverse. Again that is fine in and of itself but it has no relevence whatsoever in this discussion.
 Changes to canon in your universe can not be used to make my reasoning for the vulnerabilities of battleships invalid. Either you stick to FS2 canon in arguments like this or you simply stay out of discussions about their weaknesses in the FS2 Universe.

Originally posted by Woolie Wool
A supernova of Capella would form a neutron star, not a black hole. You need a REALLY big star to make a black hole. Most supernovas result in neutron stars.

From what data I can see in the ISDB Capella may be just large enough to form a black hole (i.e 3 times the mass of Sol). I like to say that whether a black hole would be formed or not is completely up the campagn designer as it is completely dependant on how the shivans made the star go nova in the first place.

[NGTM-1R]

It will lose about 75% of that mass in the supernova, though.

[StratComm]

The mass calculation is made before the blowoff from a supernova, IIRC, so Capella could be said to form a black hole, as kara said already, if the campaign designer sees fit.  The reverse would also be true (if capella was too light but somehow formed a black hole anyway) because again, the supernova process was not a natural phenomenon but a forced reaction by a technologically advanced species.  I think the end cutscene discounts that if you take it as part of canon (I tend to treat all of the cutscenes with skepticism since they have some rather notorious mistakes, though the latter few are, for the most part, ok), but there's nothing saying it couldn't happen.

karajorma: well said.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by StratComm
That's why I still think the Myrmidon/Helios combo is deliberate; it would have been considerably easier to simply remove the comment from the tables when someone noticed it than to dissalow the combination in every single mission, yet did not.  

I tend to agree that it was most likely an easter egg. However it is easy to miss if it wasn't. You only get the Helios in two missions. Bearbaiting and High Noon. In both missions you're scrambled in a bomber. There is quite simply no mission in which you could test the two together without cheats or editing the mission.

This is not true for the maxim. As I said before it would have had to have been missed in over 10 missions, with a varienty of ships by both the mission designers and the playtesters. As you say Strat there is a difference between playing and playtesting.

[StratComm]

That's quite true.  The only other thing to point out is that while we see the end result of mission testing, we really don't know how many iterations of missions were passed through before they were cleared for publishing.  It's possible that it came up in an early version (as forgetting to restrict the loadout the first time through isn't uncommon) but we'd never see it.  But yes, if it weren't for us looking through the tables, that combination would have taken forever to find.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by karajorma

For goodness sake Trashman! I've already explained this several times. I assumed that you must be putting uber weapons on the capship to get around the Maxim's 3km range. The thought that you didn't know the range of the Maxim cannon didn't occur to me because I had already stated that the Maxim has a 3km range several times. In fact I stated that fact 3 times in one post!

 It's looks like you're not reading my posts very carefully before you respond to them so I suggest that you re-read this before you comment because I'm not trying to flame you.  (or at least trying hard NOT to flame you )

Looks like we're both assuming to much...

And no, I never tough you actually flamed me.. I tough more you supported your oppinion with great zeal. And that's not bad...

How's it my fault that you were so unobservant as to not notice the Serapis fighters shooting at things you could hardly even target in "The Fog of War"?

My point is - If I missed it(and I played FS2 a zillion times), then so can many others, including the testers.
I can't calim for sure it was a mistake, but since the maxims range is wierd, you can't be sure either is intentional.

for a wing of FIGTERS(not bombers) to be able to pund a destroyer away without even getting hit  is... well...redicolous

You might have never said it outright but you most certainly implied that a battleships AA would be able to defend it against enemy fighters even wthout its own fighter screen. If you weren't arguing that why the hell did you respond to me at all?

// That depends what you exactly mean by defend. Against how many craf of which type? You see, even the weakes destroyer in FS2 can defend itself alone if attacked by..let's say a wing of Lokis. My whole point is that a BB would have a far better AA defence (as good as having it's own interceptor wing), and you would need a sizebale attack to breach it's defences...

Now if you made that error due to you not realising the range of the Maxim that's forgivable but the fact that you didn't post a comment to retract that implication when I told you that the maxim had a 3km range is what I find less admirable.

Instead of simply admitting that you were wrong because you didn't know the range of the maxim you instead decided that you were going to claim it was a mistake and reduce the range in Trashmanverse. Again that is fine in and of itself but it has no relevence whatsoever in this discussion.

Quite frankly, I couldn't belive a [V] would make something like the Maxim cannon on purpose. It kinda kills the realistic feel of the FS universe for me.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by TrashMan
My point is - If I missed it(and I played FS2 a zillion times), then so can many others, including the testers.
I can't calim for sure it was a mistake, but since the maxims range is wierd, you can't be sure either is intentional.

I'm 100% sure it was intentional. Just cause you missed it doesn't mean that everyone else would. I spotted it right away. Besides as I said that whole thing with the serapis fighters firing their guns would just scream bug!!!!11111 at any halfway competent playtester. Considering that very few bugs got past them I have to conclude that the [V] playtesters were indeed competent.

It's also worth noticing that the maxims range was still not corrected in FS2 v1.2 after its release.

Originally posted by TrashMan
for a wing of FIGTERS(not bombers) to be able to pund a destroyer away without even getting hit  is... well...redicolous

That's cause you're stuck with your WWII mentality. Look at Babylon 5 for a more realistic example of how vulnerable a capship is without fighter cover.  
 As I explained earlier the battleship is an enormous target while the fighter is a tiny one. Remember that you're not dealing with a WWII situation. FS2 fighters carry weapons which are pretty damn powerful even if you ignore the maxim. There is nothing overpowered or unrealistic about the maxim. It fits into the weapons spectrum pretty easily.

Originally posted by TrashMan
Quite frankly, I couldn't belive a [V] would make something like the Maxim cannon on purpose. It kinda kills the realistic feel of the FS universe for me.

Quite frankly what you believe or don't believe has no bearing on me or most likely everyone else reading the thread. As for the FS2 universe having a realistic feel

[StratComm]

Trashman, please take no offense to this.

Originally posted by TrashMan
It kinda kills the realistic feel of the FS universe for me.

Freespace...   realistic....

[NGTM-1R]

They would have tested the multiplayer missions as well, wouldn't they? In some of those you have access to both the Myrmidon and Helios, I think. It's been too long since I played them to be sure...

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by karajorma


I'm 100% sure it was intentional. Just cause you missed it doesn't mean that everyone else would. I spotted it right away. Besides as I said that whole thing with the serapis fighters firing their guns would just scream bug!!!!11111 at any halfway competent playtester. Considering that very few bugs got past them I have to conclude that the [V] playtesters were indeed competent.

You know, a wise person is never 100% sure in thing one hasn't proved correct.

That's cause you're stuck with your WWII mentality. Look at Babylon 5 for a more realistic example of how vulnerable a capship is without fighter cover.  
 As I explained earlier the battleship is an enormous target while the fighter is a tiny one. Remember that you're not dealing with a WWII situation. FS2 fighters carry weapons which are pretty damn powerful even if you ignore the maxim. There is nothing overpowered or unrealistic about the maxim. It fits into the weapons spectrum pretty easily.

That has nothing to do with WW2 mentality. Both carriers and battleships were vulnerable to fighter attacks in WW2, but battleships were a lot tougher.

When I say battleship, immgine a Orion with heavier beams and two Aeoulus cruisers glued to it's sides.

And you Babylon 5 argument has no real value, since how tough capships are to take out depends on the weaponry, armor and shieldsing of the fighters/bombers attacking and the capship itself.

As for the FS2 universe having a realistic feel

FS2 has a realistic FEEL to it..more realistic than most other space sims I've seen. More realistic than Star Wars and Freelancer...

Starlancer was for instance very realistic.

As for the ship movement - ships can move like that in space in real life. Think computer controled thrusters spread out across the fighter (and if you look at the FS2 concept art, you'll see they are there). Those thrusters are used to simulate in-atmosphere like movement.