Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: BlueFlames on July 02, 2007, 06:38:44 pm

Title: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: BlueFlames on July 02, 2007, 06:38:44 pm
All the polls popping up about favorite capital ships started to lead me to wonder how you go about defending your favorite capital ships.

Back in the day, I used to take the Trebuchet out on intercept missions because who doesn't love sending a huge, honkin' chunk of ordinance five kilometers downrange to smack a bomber out of the sky?  It didn't take long for me to become disenchanted by the missile's huge size and ineffectiveness at shorter ranges, though.  That was when I switched over to Tempests, to compliment my primary weapons, and even though they helped compliment my primary weapons, bombers would typically have fired their first salvo before I'd be in range to use my rockets, so they weren't really increasing my effectiveness in an intercept role.  Now, I'm starting to really love the EMP missile and all of its goofy side-effects.  I just need to make sure I keep them out of the hands of my damned wingmen....
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: TrashMan on July 02, 2007, 06:49:23 pm
1 bank of Trebs to kill half hte bombers long range
1 bank of Tempests to kill what survives and comes close


Harpoons are for Maras and other pests


but regardess who I'm killing I ALLWAYS have one bank of Tempests.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Thor on July 02, 2007, 06:50:36 pm
I was always a heavy fighter kind of guy, so i'd load up with a combo of Tempest and Trebuchets in a Herc, Erinyes, or Perseus.  pump a bit of extra energy into the engines to catch up and unload the missiles, calling for the support ship before i'm out.  swap to energy weapons till the refill and then go right back at it.  oh, and i always dual fire.  its the only way to fly
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: spartan_0214 on July 02, 2007, 07:11:21 pm
It's too bad flak turrets aren't mentioned...
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Mad Bomber on July 02, 2007, 07:24:45 pm
I vote for the Brontes. ;)

Sure, it's hard to hit a bomber with it, but damn it's satisfying when you do!

(I know that no one but me has any idea what the Brontes is. You'll find out eventually.)

For stock missiles tho, I default to Tempests.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: GenericCorvette on July 02, 2007, 07:39:43 pm
Trebuchets and Tempests for anything that gets past my wingmen and Kaysers. Trebs have a funny habit of leaving a Seraphim disabled and with 3% hull when hitting from dead ahead.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: CKid on July 02, 2007, 08:13:46 pm
I like the EMP. I would make sure at least one fighter in each wing would have a bank of EMPs. When the enemy bombers are hit they spread out so the rest of my wingmen can take them down quickly.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: S-99 on July 02, 2007, 09:24:45 pm
I really don't know what i like the best to take down bombers. I like many just use what i have of course. But, trebs are beautiful for taking down bombers. And my favorite way to unload a treb is to go head on with the bombers starting from about the max range of the treb or 1km minimum and launch. It's so nice making a treb faceplant in a seraphim, the few occasions you get to equip trebs.

Trebs for me are more tactical using them against beam cannons and other turrets. If command starts *****ing about enemy beams, well soon the enemy will start *****ing about me. One hit, long range, a beam turret is gone.

I never get to use the emp missile (in fs1 they gave you more of a reason to use them), but the other day i tried out the fs2 emp missile on that mission where you're scanning the sathanas with a stealth fighter. I shot the sathanas a couple of times and nothing happened (in fs1 these things were designed to stop destroyer for a certain amount of time). I was just seeing if the missile worked on a juggernaut :lol: After that i was playing around with the nahemas wasting all of my emp missiles on them when they were in front of that sobek.

Though most of the time i end up with harpoons and hornets. Hornets are ok for bombers, but harpoons not so much, i don't really know what harpoons do to bombers, all i know is i a launch a lot of them at seraphim on at the lions at the door.

I need to try out the infyrno more, i have a feeling i would like that a lot for bombers. I wonder how good it is for a direct hit head on a seraphim?
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Polpolion on July 02, 2007, 09:34:40 pm
Trebs are very fun.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Mongoose on July 03, 2007, 12:48:40 am
Primaries.  Why give the GTVA an excuse to dock your pay by wasting ordnance? :p
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: asyikarea51 on July 03, 2007, 01:06:50 am
Don't know which one to pick. Personally I'd jump in a Loki, load up on Kayser/Maxim and distribute the power accordingly.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Vasudan Commander on July 03, 2007, 02:07:16 am
If i'm going to be purely anti-bomber, its emp missiles. They're sadly underrated. How can a bomber destroy your escort if he cant target it ?  Nothing funnier then hitting a wing of tightly-nit bombers with an emp missile and watching them run around like drunken rats and ram into eachother :lol:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: jr2 on July 03, 2007, 03:13:22 am
'poons... All-purpose.  :p  If targeting only bombers, though, I suppose Trebbys would be nicer.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: 0rph3u5 on July 03, 2007, 03:45:21 am
Trebuchet... more than 4k range speaks for itself
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: colecampbell666 on July 03, 2007, 07:01:28 am


I never get to use the emp missile (in fs1 they gave you more of a reason to use them), but the other day i tried out the fs2 emp missile on that mission where you're scanning the sathanas with a stealth fighter. I shot the sathanas a couple of times and nothing happened (in fs1 these things were designed to stop destroyer for a certain amount of time). I was just seeing if the missile worked on a juggernaut :lol: After that i was playing around with the nahemas wasting all of my emp missiles on them when they were in front of that sobek.

You're getting the EMP onfused with the disruptor. And I like trebs. They don't do a good job on bombers because 2 wastes your stock too fast and most times one won't kill 'em, but i like them for sheer range and power.   :drevil:

And as for the EMP, you rarely get 4 bombers close enough to hit them. :hopping:

What the hell is the brontes. We are talking about stock FS2, not fanmade creations. :confused:

Someone really needs to HTL the EMP, tht is the ****tiest looking missile in the game. :D
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: castor on July 03, 2007, 09:18:35 am
Temps! Waiting for target lock sucks.. Ok, maybe slip in a few trebs if time permits.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 03, 2007, 09:27:01 am
A funny tactic that works a bit is to just dive in with double Harpoons and fire without target lock. It doesn't work with Trebs since they damage you too.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Wobble73 on July 03, 2007, 10:11:12 am


What the hell is the brontes. We are talking about stock FS2, not fanmade creations. :confused:



I think he was referring to the Tempests? Little realising that the Tempest was written by Shakespeare and not one of the Bronte sisters.  :P
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Bob-san on July 03, 2007, 11:26:10 am
I prefer to fly a GTF Turkey while loaded up with Trebs and Kayser/Subach. The Subach has always been helpful while I'm dogfighting--after I waste energy on Kaysers I can switch to Subach and keep fighting. Anyways... when I do that, it's generally a pair to everyone incoming... and support ship every time I empty one bank. If the trebs don't kill them, that's what wingmen are for.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 03, 2007, 11:30:56 am
Would the Turkey be the Herc2 or the Potato?
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Bob-san on July 03, 2007, 11:32:09 am
The one that's painted like a Turkey.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 03, 2007, 11:33:54 am
Trebuchets. Cause they've got the range, and if you're in a herc, you can carry a motherload of them ... Unless i remember wrongly, or it was just the derelict mission. =S But close in? Primaries. No need to waste secondaries for close in.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 03, 2007, 11:35:17 am
Ares can carry more than Herc IIs
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 03, 2007, 11:37:56 am
Yea, funny thing is, I've never flown an Ares. Usually there's the Erynies an the Ares, so i pick the Erynies. Although I've always usually thought of an Ares as a glorified Herc ...
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Bob-san on July 03, 2007, 12:23:12 pm
That's what it is--it's a Herc with a six gun-mounts (first primaries are 2 mounts, second primaries are 4 more mounts) and some more secondary room. I prefer it, though.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 03, 2007, 12:28:12 pm
I dunno, there was something about the Ares that i'd rather a Herc 2 over it or the limousine. Probably my personal preference.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Dysko on July 03, 2007, 01:48:21 pm
I've always usually thought of an Ares as a glorified Herc ...
Strange... I always thought of the Ares as a Herc 2 that just got out of Pimp my Ride...
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Polpolion on July 03, 2007, 01:51:18 pm
Temps! Waiting for target lock sucks.. Ok, maybe slip in a few trebs if time permits.

Waiting for the temps to get in range sucks. :p
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 03, 2007, 02:14:10 pm
I'd fly the Ares over the Erinyes since I can pop more Trebs into it and it has more hull strength.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: wtf_cl0vvn on July 03, 2007, 02:54:05 pm
That's what it is--it's a Herc with a six gun-mounts (first primaries are 2 mounts, second primaries are 4 more mounts) and some more secondary room. I prefer it, though.

You disremember the MASSIVE boost to shields and armor.

Thats really what makes the Ares so much more powerful...with a herc, a wing is necessary for cruiser assault so that the defensive firepower is spread out among various targets and each fighter gets a longer lifespan.

With an Ares, it doesn't matter.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: castor on July 03, 2007, 03:37:37 pm
Temps! Waiting for target lock sucks.. Ok, maybe slip in a few trebs if time permits.

Waiting for the temps to get in range sucks. :p
Oh yeah? But my Hercs got an engine too :cool:

No thing clears the air like a few banks of temps, when the place gets overly
(http://www.cs.umd.edu/~nanda/Personal/Collections/OverCrowded.jpg)

:D
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Mustang19 on July 03, 2007, 03:50:12 pm
I don't know what difficulty level you play on, but on Insane the Trebuchet is often the only way to go. Missions like Exodus are almost boring. Fire treb, call in support while the next enemy wing replies, fire more treb, repeat. Anything short-range isn't an option because of those bomber Pirahnas (which don't really bother you on Medium or lower) and the sheer number of enemies you have to kill. On Insane you're aiming for as many kills/minute as possible, and the Trebuchet is best for this, if a little boring. Missiles will always get more bomber kills than your guns if used properly, missile salvoes move faster than you and can be in more than one place at a time.

I recommend everyone here play Exodus on Insane if you haven't already done so.  ;) This should give you a new respect for Trebuchet.

OTOH the PI Thunder is such a ridiculously effective weapon that it would almost be no contest if PI wasn't so damn hard. Think of a Rockeye with the damage of a Harpoon and 4,000m range.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Bob-san on July 03, 2007, 03:59:01 pm
I already play on insane -- the Ares/Treb combo is necessary. I rarely dogfight at the end of the campaign--guns barely hit and it's simply easier to use distance as an advantage. Poor AI is the culprit for why Trebs work so well against fighters too--they start to "dodge" too early, meaning the Treb will track the movement. I don't think the AI tries particularly complex maneuvers for a single (or double) missile--it always chooses one track and attempts it.

Anyways--maximum kills/minute are necessary... too bad your own wingmen will also call for support (they're generally 4km away from me) and distract the ship. I have to tell it to depart and then call in a new ship often.

Anyone ever really try to use a Subach against a bomber's shields, while playing in Insane? You will move at least 1km before you can get a kill... even Tempests take too long.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: castor on July 03, 2007, 04:05:22 pm
In certain missions the are just too many bombers to pick out from distance, they will be swarming around your caps no matter what.
There, Temps will, once again,  save the day :headz:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: TrashMan on July 03, 2007, 04:08:27 pm
That's what it is--it's a Herc with a six gun-mounts (first primaries are 2 mounts, second primaries are 4 more mounts) and some more secondary room. I prefer it, though.

And more armor..a lot more armor... 475 hp IIRC

This thing is tough as nails and armed to the teeth.. I prefer it to the Erynies any time.

eDIT - Didn't notive this was allready replied too...
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Bob-san on July 03, 2007, 04:12:54 pm
The GTF Limo is simply too long to be effective--you have enemies from all sides taking shots at your excessive size. It's really horrible--no matter the direction, even if you change speeds, quite a few shots are bound to hit you while you are turning. The simple fact is the Limo is too long and not tough enough to be effective. There are quite a few larger ships that work better--the Ursa tops the list as largest but I find it is also one of the most-survivable, due to the top-mounted turret. In a Limo, I can't bring firepower to bear on a target--in a Ursa, I have a turret blasting you to shreds while I keep you above me.

The Turkey is a monster of a fighter--it's better then a Herc2 in basically every way. It's not much bigger, much tougher, and has much more firepower. If not for the final missions justifying it, I'd say it's way overpowered as a fighter.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: wtf_cl0vvn on July 03, 2007, 07:09:00 pm
Quote
The Turkey is a monster of a fighter--it's better then a Herc2 in basically every way. It's not much bigger, much tougher, and has much more firepower. If not for the final missions justifying it, I'd say it's way overpowered as a fighter.

You disremember the fact that it handles like a car with no wheels.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Gamma_Draconis on July 03, 2007, 09:21:02 pm
What is the Turkey?  :confused:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: GenericCorvette on July 03, 2007, 10:18:47 pm
What is the Turkey?  :confused:

The GTF Ares. It flies like a potato.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Vasudan Commander on July 03, 2007, 10:35:24 pm
The one that's painted like a Turkey.

the Ares? 
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Alikchi on July 04, 2007, 02:47:30 am
For anti-bomber missions, I tend to load up with Tempests and Tornadoes. Tornadoes will usually take out one bomber and severely damage another by the time I get in Tempest range.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2007, 04:18:56 am
The GTF Limo is simply too long to be effective--you have enemies from all sides taking shots at your excessive size. It's really horrible--no matter the direction, even if you change speeds, quite a few shots are bound to hit you while you are turning. The simple fact is the Limo is too long and not tough enough to be effective. There are quite a few larger ships that work better--the Ursa tops the list as largest but I find it is also one of the most-survivable, due to the top-mounted turret. In a Limo, I can't bring firepower to bear on a target--in a Ursa, I have a turret blasting you to shreds while I keep you above me.

It's not that big at all - heck, the Pegasus is longer from the side. It's eight gunmounts are glory, but you're right, the Potato is better since it packs more of an overall punch. Sacrificing 2 gunmounts, a bit of speed and maneuverability for heavier shielding as well as a secondary capacity more than that of the Artemis is definitely worth it, no? Also, the Ursa's turret doesn't do ****ing **** to your attacker. :rolleyes:

For anti-bomber missions, I tend to load up with Tempests and Tornadoes. Tornadoes will usually take out one bomber and severely damage another by the time I get in Tempest range.

Tornadoes don't fire that far, though. Longer than a Harpoon, yes, but I find you can only weaken about two or three of their bombers before you have to switch to Tempests. I usually use Tornadoes against fighters that are annoying me.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: TrashMan on July 04, 2007, 04:43:40 am
Also, the Ursa's turret doesn't do ****ing **** to your attacker. :rolleyes:

Wroks fine for me...A single keyser turret is not that much, yes.. but it can kill off a Mara or Astaroth rather fast
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Alikchi on July 04, 2007, 04:44:39 am
Point taken with the Tornadoes, but at least they're flexible. Im not gonna waste a bank on Trebs.

By the way, does anyone else find the Hornet basically useless? It doesnt track well enough to reliably take down a bomber from any angle except almost directly behind, and when I'm at that point I might as well use primaries.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: TrashMan on July 04, 2007, 04:48:06 am
Quote
The Turkey is a monster of a fighter--it's better then a Herc2 in basically every way. It's not much bigger, much tougher, and has much more firepower. If not for the final missions justifying it, I'd say it's way overpowered as a fighter.

You disremember the fact that it handles like a car with no wheels.

With the player at the helm manuverabiltiy and speed aren't that big an issue.  Actually, I find less manuverbale fighters much simpler to control and for that reason my aim is more precise in a Ares than it would be in a Perseus. Add the increased firepower to the equation and it easy to see why I very often fly an Ares
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2007, 04:56:00 am
Wroks fine for me...A single keyser turret is not that much, yes.. but it can kill off a Mara or Astaroth rather fast

Only if you're targeting the damned thing. :doubt:

Hey, BTW, while I was checking out the length of the Erinyes, I placed a Mara sideways - Have you ever noticed how cool it looks from the side?
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: castor on July 04, 2007, 05:06:02 am
By the way, does anyone else find the Hornet basically useless? It doesnt track well enough to reliably take down a bomber from any angle except almost directly behind, and when I'm at that point I might as well use primaries.
Pretty much so. One thing to remember though is that you can also dumbfire Hornets! Comes in handy against bombers, but using this against fast targets is... hard.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: S-99 on July 04, 2007, 05:08:26 am
Makes you wish  you could dumbfire cyclopses, talk about unbalanced if so.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Alikchi on July 04, 2007, 05:08:55 am
By the way, does anyone else find the Hornet basically useless? It doesnt track well enough to reliably take down a bomber from any angle except almost directly behind, and when I'm at that point I might as well use primaries.
Pretty much so. One thing to remember though is that you can also dumbfire Hornets! Comes in handy against bombers, but using this against fast targets is... hard.

I like using them against cruisers and anything smaller when I get the chance. A wing of Herc Is armed with Hornets will absolutely eat up a Fenris or a whole convoy.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: castor on July 04, 2007, 05:22:18 am
Makes you wish  you could dumbfire cyclopses, talk about unbalanced if so.
Oh yes, talk about anti-bomber ordinance! Wouldn't want to get one of those in my Ursa's "windshield", even if it didn't explode :D
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Wanderer on July 04, 2007, 05:57:38 am
Flying Ares in lower difficulties in kinda ok due the AI's poor handling of shivans.. however on higher difficulties Ares is a real POS as practically every single shivan ship can out turn you (yeah.. that includes bombers)...
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 04, 2007, 06:24:21 am
Hornet spam eats cruisers for breakfast, but fail at fighter/bomber killing... unless its near point-blank.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2007, 06:29:23 am
Flying Ares in lower difficulties in kinda ok due the AI's poor handling of shivans.. however on higher difficulties Ares is a real POS as practically every single shivan ship can out turn you (yeah.. that includes bombers)...

Not if you can blow them up. The WORST thing you can do in an Ares is to turn and run. You're slow and you get pounded. Sure, you've got shields, but that doesn't last when there are ten Maras behind you. The best thing to do is to plop them from afar. It's still pretty capable in a dogfight (more so than the Ursa, which I've killed a Dragon in).
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Alikchi on July 04, 2007, 06:59:35 am
I can't stand flying an Ares.. especially during that last loop of missions.. I always get eaten up by Dragons, and I can never make it to the node before Capella blows anyhow.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: asyikarea51 on July 04, 2007, 07:41:43 am
By the way, does anyone else find the Hornet basically useless? It doesnt track well enough to reliably take down a bomber from any angle except almost directly behind, and when I'm at that point I might as well use primaries.

Errr, me too?

If it tracked better I probably would've flown the slower ships more often (mouse flyer). But I've seen the AI use Hornets to tear up a convoy really fast... makes using Cyclops bombs on Fenris/Leviathans a moot point. :wtf: Not forgetting the Hornet's added... "drama" bonus...

I see Tornadoes/Harpoons/Trebuchets as high-tech weapons, and with my playing style, I'd rather issue them to the wingmen and just go with a dependable set of primaries on something superagile. (Bleah, I still get hit though. Just an average player, I am...)
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2007, 07:49:04 am
The Ares is good for softening up capital ships and popping fighters from afar. Basically an overpowered Herc. If you hate the Herc, the Ares ain't for ya.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: TrashMan on July 04, 2007, 07:59:32 am
I can't stand flying an Ares.. especially during that last loop of missions.. I always get eaten up by Dragons, and I can never make it to the node before Capella blows anyhow.

I eat Dragons for breakfest in it...reached the node everytime to boot  :lol:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: asyikarea51 on July 04, 2007, 08:02:56 am
Yeah, well, I'm not too fond of the slower stuff, though I don't mind flying the HercI because it's FS1 tech. My life in terms of technology has always been backward - I was still on a P1 playing W95 and DOS games when the first P3's came out. (Call that an example if you like. :))

Just the slower fire rates of both Prometheus cannons in FS2 making it harder for me to cope with said HercI.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Wobble73 on July 04, 2007, 08:30:12 am
- I was still on a P1 playing W95 and DOS games when the first P3's came out. (Call that an example if you like. :))



I was still playing around with a 486 when the P3's came out!  :lol:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: colecampbell666 on July 04, 2007, 06:56:40 pm
For practically any mission I can I fly a Herc II armed with a Subach, a Maxim, a Harpoon bank, and a bank of Trebuchets. It is the perfect combo of short and long-range firepower. Depending on the mission and my mood I may sub the Harpoons for Tornadoes. I hate the Hornet in FS1/2 but it seems upgraded in Inferno R1.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: jr2 on July 05, 2007, 03:23:41 am
Hmm.... what was that missile in the FS2 demo that they changed in Retail?  Tornado or Hornet, IIRC.  I liked the FS2 Demo one better.  I can post details if you like.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 05, 2007, 03:31:55 am
Go ahead, post it. I think it was the Hornet, but idk, i've never played teh demo.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: jr2 on July 05, 2007, 03:39:17 am
Soon as I get home & can crank up FS2 and FS2 Demo.  :D
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: S-99 on July 05, 2007, 06:11:51 am
I don't mind hornets at all, they do their job just fine against cruisers and bigger ships 100% great. They don't track that great on fighters, and that's ok, everyone uses them for ship pounding anyway. Tornadoes are great too, but as long as their still used for ship pounding on stuff that's not fighters, they why make tornadoes?
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Vasudan Commander on July 05, 2007, 07:36:02 am
I don't mind hornets at all, they do their job just fine against cruisers and bigger ships 100% great. They don't track that great on fighters, and that's ok, everyone uses them for ship pounding anyway. Tornadoes are great too, but as long as their still used for ship pounding on stuff that's not fighters, they why make tornadoes?

funniest thing i ever did was during one mission, i disabled a shivan basilisk 'thing it was 'slaying ravana' , i didnt do it purposely, must've hit it in the engines hard. I left it there, and once i'd finished the mission and all hostiles were eliminated, i launched a cyclops at it, just for fun.  :lol:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 05, 2007, 08:16:11 am
I don't mind hornets at all, they do their job just fine against cruisers and bigger ships 100% great. They don't track that great on fighters, and that's ok, everyone uses them for ship pounding anyway. Tornadoes are great too, but as long as their still used for ship pounding on stuff that's not fighters, they why make tornadoes?

funniest thing i ever did was during one mission, i disabled a shivan basilisk 'thing it was 'slaying ravana' , i didnt do it purposely, must've hit it in the engines hard. I left it there, and once i'd finished the mission and all hostiles were eliminated, i launched a cyclops at it, just for fun.  :lol:

I smashed a helios into a loki's cockpit.

... Two actually.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: TrashMan on July 05, 2007, 08:22:43 am
It happens...sometime in emergency I too use bombs against fighters...rarely tough.. :P

EDIT - who the f*** is messing with my title again? :wtf: :nervous:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 05, 2007, 08:41:09 am
Lol. Take your pic =p

I like smashing Helios bombs into a Loki. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Mars on July 05, 2007, 11:17:17 am
I don't mind hornets at all, they do their job just fine against cruisers and bigger ships 100% great. They don't track that great on fighters, and that's ok, everyone uses them for ship pounding anyway. Tornadoes are great too, but as long as their still used for ship pounding on stuff that's not fighters, they why make tornadoes?

Same reason why they make Hornets or Tornados when Tempests pack four times the damage into the same bank. Hornets have some use against fighters, Tornados a little more.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: S-99 on July 06, 2007, 04:40:44 am
Never argue with me. I will drag you down to my level and beat you with experience.

Seems like something that was not on purpose by trashman's part.

I haven't used bombs against fighters in a long time, sounds like a way to go from pissed to relaxed really fast if say you somehow take out a dragon with a helios on a mission that made you pissed off.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Stormkeeper on July 06, 2007, 06:43:08 am
Never argue with me. I will drag you down to my level and beat you with experience.

Seems like something that was not on purpose by trashman's part.

I haven't used bombs against fighters in a long time, sounds like a way to go from pissed to relaxed really fast if say you somehow take out a dragon with a helios on a mission that made you pissed off.

Feeling stressed? One thing to do: Fire up derelict and SMASH THAT PIRATE DEPOT!
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: colecampbell666 on July 06, 2007, 08:07:57 am
In INFR1 I smashed a support ship with an Armageddon bomb. Great stress reliever. :lol:
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Snail on July 06, 2007, 08:46:02 am
When I encounter a bug in a mission, instead of immediately trying to solve it, I destroy every ship in the mission and then go and solve it.
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: jr2 on July 06, 2007, 10:57:45 am
Hmm.... what was that missile in the FS2 demo that they changed in Retail?  Tornado or Hornet, IIRC.  I liked the FS2 Demo one better.  I can post details if you like.
Go ahead, post it. I think it was the Hornet, but idk, i've never played teh demo.
Soon as I get home & can crank up FS2 and FS2 Demo.  :D
Had to play my way through Retail until I was authorized to carry the stupid GTM-4A Tornado.  :ick:

FS2 Retail, Hornet:
(http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/4167/fs22007070511521195rt7.th.jpg) (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs22007070511521195rt7.jpg)(http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/5069/fs22007070511544506xr5.th.jpg) (http://img159.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs22007070511544506xr5.jpg)

FS2 Retail, Tornado:
(http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/9537/fs22007070610220720ua2.th.jpg) (http://img510.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs22007070610220720ua2.jpg)(http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/668/fs22007070610220853kz7.th.jpg) (http://img406.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs22007070610220853kz7.jpg)

FS2 Demo, Tornado:
(http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/1920/fs2demo2007070508271092hs0.th.jpg) (http://img510.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs2demo2007070508271092hs0.jpg)(http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/123/fs2demo2007070508283717ep7.th.jpg) (http://img340.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs2demo2007070508283717ep7.jpg)(http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/1315/fs2demo2007070508292167gu0.th.jpg) (http://img169.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fs2demo2007070508292167gu0.jpg)
Title: Re: Anti-bomber ordinance
Post by: Bob-san on July 06, 2007, 05:39:13 pm
For me, I usually jump into the heaviest and strongest ship possible. I put all my wingmen into the fastest and most maneuverable ship. It just seems to help--you can load them with high-power primaries and some of the more-annoying secondaries. Whatever you do, never give your wingmen bombs--they have zero idea on how to use them. If I can jump into an Ursa and put them into Ulysses, that's the best thing I can do. The Kayser on the Ursa is an absolute life-saver--I've killed probably 50 fighters with it. Target and turn is the name of that game! It's so much easier trying to keep anything above you then trying to keep them in front of you. If they happen to get in front of me, I can try pounding them with horribly-misplaced primaries while turning/rotating to put them directly above me again. What's so fun is pounding Bats into space-junk while they try (and fail) to kill me. Never hit the trigger once...

Anyways--keep your wingmen on Primary-duty when playing on Insane... it just works better. They get the kill-order and you can go along with your job.