[Martinus]

Ummm. Why?

I felt that unfamiliarity with the feel of the the fighter, the wide, flat shape of the miner and the response speed of your wing made it even more of a chore than in FS2.

It doesn't make a lot of logical sense either; detonating a large explosive or series of explosives along the line of travel prior to entering such a field sounds far more plausible. Potential cover from enemy combatants only really applies to cap-ship bombardment from outside the field and it would need to be a significant force for risking a path through the unpredictable asteroid field. Also, an enemy detonating a warhead close to the location of the convoy is going to turn said asteroid field into a pretty effective blast-bomb. FS2 had armed cap-ships that could have mashed up the field from within and had shielding. Contrast this to the convoy which is unshielded, has a tiny contingent of fighters and has no armament (IIRC). It just struck me as a crazy scenario, needlessly risky and harder to defend than in open space or above/below the asteroid field which kinda kicked the suspension of disbelief. There are a lot more reasons why it doesn't make sense than why it does.

It did give me deja-vu though as I had been used to command making weird decisions.

[General Battuta]

Ummm. Why?

I felt that unfamiliarity with the feel of the the fighter, the wide, flat shape of the miner and the response speed of your wing made it even more of a chore than in FS2.

It doesn't make a lot of logical sense either; detonating a large explosive or series of explosives along the line of travel prior to entering such a field sounds far more plausible. Potential cover from enemy combatants only really applies to cap-ship bombardment from outside the field and it would need to be a significant force for risking a path through the unpredictable asteroid field. Also, an enemy detonating a warhead close to the location of the convoy is going to turn said asteroid field into a pretty effective blast-bomb. FS2 had armed cap-ships that could have mashed up the field from within and had shielding. Contrast this to the convoy which is unshielded, has a tiny contingent of fighters and has no armament (IIRC). It just struck me as a crazy scenario, needlessly risky and harder to defend than in open space or above/below the asteroid field which kinda kicked the suspension of disbelief. There are a lot more reasons why it doesn't make sense than why it does.

It did give me deja-vu though as I had been used to command making weird decisions.

I concur. I hope there are no asteroid defense missions at all in Diaspora.

It's been canonically demonstrated in Galactica (Home, Part I) that Vipers attacking asteroids with missiles and guns simply turn them into enormous, hazardous minefields. I just don't think it fits with the feel of the show.

It doesn't seem to make too much sense for those teeny-caliber KEWs to be shattering asteroids into dust anyway.

[BigDamnHero]

Oh God, the asteroids were the BAND of my existence in the BtRL demo. I only ever managed to get past that part 3 times out of probably 12-15 play throughs. I frustrated me to no end. Then One time I reached the ace and ran out of bullets :|

[Herra Tohtori]

It was not terrifically difficult to just fly ahead or behind the mining ship, then match speed (and direction), let it stabilize, then engage Glide and start tracking the asteroids traveling towards the mining ship. Also, as it only required about three rounds or so (?) to destroy an asteroid, destroying them isn't exactly ammo-consuming...

[General Battuta]

It was not terrifically difficult to just fly ahead or behind the mining ship, then match speed (and direction), let it stabilize, then engage Glide and start tracking the asteroids traveling towards the mining ship. Also, as it only required about three rounds or so (?) to destroy an asteroid, destroying them isn't exactly ammo-consuming...

But it was silly, and onerous, and inordinately difficult on higher difficulties.

[Col. Fishguts]

Yep, those protect-ships-from-active-asteroid-field missions are extremely dependent on your difficulty seetings. The amount of roids thrown at the ship increases to a frusttrating amount even at the medium setting, and it only gets worse from there. I had to lower the diffculty to very easy to beat that mission with my sanity intact.

I wouldn't miss this type of mission even the slightest bis if it were omitted.

[karajorma]

Altering the AI Profile would stop that happening. And Asteroid defence missions are about as realistic as heavy asteroid belts are in the first place

[Martinus]

Altering the AI Profile would stop that happening. And Asteroid defence missions are about as realistic as heavy asteroid belts are in the first place

What? You're telling me there are no fields of large floatie-rocks in space?!? I've been lied to so many times by video-games and bad sci-fi.

[Ace]

Altering the AI Profile would stop that happening. And Asteroid defence missions are about as realistic as heavy asteroid belts are in the first place

Except for Chapel Perilous:
http://homeworld.wikia.com/wiki/HW_Campaign:_Chapel_Perilous

[Meleardil]

What? You're telling me there are no fields of large floatie-rocks in space?!? I've been lied to so many times by video-games and bad sci-fi.

You were...  There are huge fields of floating rocks in space, but they are not that dense, and could not be as dynamic as you have seen them in TV shows. It is possible, but only if the field is "freshly created" by a cataclysm., and not as something which exists in equilibrium since billions of years. In solar systems asteroids tend to group around the Lagrange points. Around planets rings usually created and smoothed by the tidal forces of the fellow moons.

[Martinus]

What? You're telling me there are no fields of large floatie-rocks in space?!? I've been lied to so many times by video-games and bad sci-fi.

You were...  There are huge fields of floating rocks in space, but they are not that dense, and could not be as dynamic as you have seen them in TV shows. It is possible, but only if the field is "freshly created" by a cataclysm., and not as something which exists in equilibrium since billions of years. In solar systems asteroids tend to group around the Lagrange points. Around planets rings usually created and smoothed by the tidal forces of the fellow moons.

I was being somewhat (i.e. very) facetious but thank you for the information.

[Zmur]

What? You're telling me there are no fields of large floatie-rocks in space?!? I've been lied to so many times by video-games and bad sci-fi.

You were...  There are huge fields of floating rocks in space, but they are not that dense, and could not be as dynamic as you have seen them in TV shows. It is possible, but only if the field is "freshly created" by a cataclysm., and not as something which exists in equilibrium since billions of years. In solar systems asteroids tend to group around the Lagrange points. Around planets rings usually created and smoothed by the tidal forces of the fellow moons.

In solar system we have one asteroid field which is between Mars and Jupiter as I remember. I don't know about the density, but I think you're right - they aren't very dense. The density should be a problem only if the ship is travelling at high speeds. Anyway, the NASA launched two "pioneer" satellites and they didn't bother about that field.

[IceFire]

What? You're telling me there are no fields of large floatie-rocks in space?!? I've been lied to so many times by video-games and bad sci-fi.

You were...  There are huge fields of floating rocks in space, but they are not that dense, and could not be as dynamic as you have seen them in TV shows. It is possible, but only if the field is "freshly created" by a cataclysm., and not as something which exists in equilibrium since billions of years. In solar systems asteroids tend to group around the Lagrange points. Around planets rings usually created and smoothed by the tidal forces of the fellow moons.

In solar system we have one asteroid field which is between Mars and Jupiter as I remember. I don't know about the density, but I think you're right - they aren't very dense. The density should be a problem only if the ship is travelling at high speeds. Anyway, the NASA launched two "pioneer" satellites and they didn't bother about that field.

I'm pretty sure you could float something the size of the Earth through our asteroid field without hitting anything of note.  Its not that dense at all.

[Shade]

You might even get lucky and acquire a few extra moons if you do that

[Zmur]

BTW I liked the asteroid defence mission in the demo. It added some "realism", made me feel as the pilot who is not only fighting, but also does something "routinic".

[Echelon9]

I too thought the miner asteroid defence mission had lots to offer; and some here might be too quick to berate it.

If you want to develop an engrossing story, you've got to have some believable characters. Of course, when the 'characters' appear as all relatively similar ships on screen visually, you've got to use the comm chatter and other methods to flesh out each personality. When you're fighting in the thick of a dogfight, let's be honest, we miss most of the comm chatter.

These quieter misions - insights into what the everyday life for a Viper pilot of sensor sweeps, CAP picket duty and riding shotgun for Colonial One is like - gives that opportunity. Take a look at Blue Planet, which uses whole missions where you don't fire in anger to build their characters and the story.

[General Battuta]

Right, quiet missions are great, but frustrating and inexplicable asteroid defense missions aren't.