[SaltyWaffles]

Well it does seem rather odd that you guys have Steele on such a relatively ****ty ship.

Power does not directly equate to usefulness as a command ship. Raynors could well have been designed with better command spaces or a better flag bridge than Titans or Hecates.

Even though Titans are fleet carriers with exceptional direct-engagement capability? Sure, it's totally possible, but a bit odd--like, say, WW2-Pacific admirals using a battleship as their flagship instead of the fleet carrier nearby. It was done, of course--mainly on the Japanese side--but carriers established themselves as the vastly dominant capital ship early in the conflict (Pacific Theater conflict, post-1941), and treated as the literal or figurative flagships for their battlegroups/fleets.

As for the Titan being more expensive than the Raynor--what.

No, really. What.

I specifically mentioned that the costs of building a Titan DOES NOT include whatever craft and munitions you put inside it. This is because, unlike a Raynor's numerous beam cannons, a carrier's craft complement can be changed at (technically) any time, and can simultaneously feature the oldest and newest stuff in the fleet. The costs of the complement are separate (though still needing to be kept in mind) because the real costs of that complement stand on their own. Those fighters and bombers are their own costs; the Titan is just a platform for them.

And in terms of other potential expenses:
1) Shorter, and possibly smaller overall compared to the Raynor.
2) Less armor.
3) Fewer beam cannons, no HBlue, and fewer pulse turrets as well.
4) Is not specified to have, unlike the Raynor's tech description, and advanced electronics suite (relatively speaking).
5) Hangar space/flight deck/logistics, while much larger than a Raynor's, is something that the GTVA has had many decades to work with, improve, and build on continually larger scales. From the Orion, to the Hecate, and even the Colossus, carrier capability has been the Terran specialty. And again, I fail to see how a dozen state-of-the-art beam cannons (including the brand-new HBlue, which requires its own dedicated meson reactors and metric tons of coolant slurry), another dozen (ish) pulse turrets, AFB's, heavier armor, seemingly more advanced electronics, and greater length/size are less expensive than the Raynor's hangar bay. Especially since, if that were the case, why bother with such a heavy focus on increased carrier capacity, and just throw a ton of heavy beams into the design instead? Maybe shore up the AA defenses, and you'd have a potentially more cost-efficient design. Unless I'm missing something here, it's a little confusing.
6) Oh, and as an addendum to 5--all of those extra heavy beams (including the HBlue) means many more high-grade reactor and coolant systems. I can't imagine high-grade meson reactors being that inexpensive...

[An4ximandros]

The problem with the Titan is the fact that it's the "Hecate 2" of the GTVA, from all we have seen through FS2, the Hecates are simply not good warships (especially when put against the Orion)

The whole idea (I think) for the Raynor\Titan combo, is to split what would have been made into a super-destroyer before the stoor failure of the Colossus, you should see both ships as one (the Raynor as the firepower and the Titan as the carrier/strategic component.)

I am certain the the GTVA's pride and bravado would have made sure they took more risks making larger ships, while trying to reduce to costs of a Colossus (whatever class it's supposed to be)

[Scotty]

Well it does seem rather odd that you guys have Steele on such a relatively ****ty ship.

Power does not directly equate to usefulness as a command ship. Raynors could well have been designed with better command spaces or a better flag bridge than Titans or Hecates.

Even though Titans are fleet carriers with exceptional direct-engagement capability? Sure, it's totally possible, but a bit odd--like, say, WW2-Pacific admirals using a battleship as their flagship instead of the fleet carrier nearby. It was done, of course--mainly on the Japanese side--but carriers established themselves as the vastly dominant capital ship early in the conflict (Pacific Theater conflict, post-1941), and treated as the literal or figurative flagships for their battlegroups/fleets.

As for the Titan being more expensive than the Raynor--what.

No, really. What.

I specifically mentioned that the costs of building a Titan DOES NOT include whatever craft and munitions you put inside it. This is because, unlike a Raynor's numerous beam cannons, a carrier's craft complement can be changed at (technically) any time, and can simultaneously feature the oldest and newest stuff in the fleet. The costs of the complement are separate (though still needing to be kept in mind) because the real costs of that complement stand on their own. Those fighters and bombers are their own costs; the Titan is just a platform for them.

And in terms of other potential expenses:
1) Shorter, and possibly smaller overall compared to the Raynor.
2) Less armor.
3) Fewer beam cannons, no HBlue, and fewer pulse turrets as well.
4) Is not specified to have, unlike the Raynor's tech description, and advanced electronics suite (relatively speaking).
5) Hangar space/flight deck/logistics, while much larger than a Raynor's, is something that the GTVA has had many decades to work with, improve, and build on continually larger scales. From the Orion, to the Hecate, and even the Colossus, carrier capability has been the Terran specialty. And again, I fail to see how a dozen state-of-the-art beam cannons (including the brand-new HBlue, which requires its own dedicated meson reactors and metric tons of coolant slurry), another dozen (ish) pulse turrets, AFB's, heavier armor, seemingly more advanced electronics, and greater length/size are less expensive than the Raynor's hangar bay. Especially since, if that were the case, why bother with such a heavy focus on increased carrier capacity, and just throw a ton of heavy beams into the design instead? Maybe shore up the AA defenses, and you'd have a potentially more cost-efficient design. Unless I'm missing something here, it's a little confusing.
6) Oh, and as an addendum to 5--all of those extra heavy beams (including the HBlue) means many more high-grade reactor and coolant systems. I can't imagine high-grade meson reactors being that inexpensive...

I'm glad you're more qualified than the developers of the mod to tell us about how the mod works.  Imagine how much better the mod would be if they actually knew what they were doing.

[SaltyWaffles]

I'm glad you're more qualified than the developers of the mod to tell us about how the mod works.  Imagine how much better the mod would be if they actually knew what they were doing.

I don't think I'm more qualified. I don't think they don't know what they're doing--not at all. The dev team is ****ing amazing, and their work is incredible. And while I can and do really appreciate all of their work, am I wrong in thinking that it isn't perfect, and that perhaps by discussing these *potential* flaws/problems, future content can be even better?

I could be wrong about a given topic, sure. I definitely have been in the past, and I probably will be in the future. My intention--and sentiment--is to either improve future content if I happen to be right, or to learn and clear up my confusion/misunderstandings if I'm wrong. To be clear, though, I'm generally not going to leave things at "No, X." If I don't understand why it's X and not Y, and where my reasoning/impressions/etc. went wrong, I'm still left confused. And I wouldn't be asking or talking about it in the first place if I didn't care so much and appreciate BP as much as I do. Sorry if I have or am giving the wrong impressions--I probably use stronger/more absolute language than I than I should, but I am very willing to correct my mistaken understandings/impressions if proven wrong in a way I can understand at all. Hopefully I have made good on that, in your eyes. If not, I apologize, and I'll continue to work on it.

The problem with the Titan is the fact that it's the "Hecate 2" of the GTVA, from all we have seen through FS2, the Hecates are simply not good warships (especially when put against the Orion)

The whole idea (I think) for the Raynor\Titan combo, is to split what would have been made into a super-destroyer before the stoor failure of the Colossus, you should see both ships as one (the Raynor as the firepower and the Titan as the carrier/strategic component.)

I am certain the the GTVA's pride and bravado would have made sure they took more risks making larger ships, while trying to reduce to costs of a Colossus (whatever class it's supposed to be)

Except that the Titan isn't really that similar to the Hecate. And the Raynor isn't a super-destroyer. It's more of a battlecruiser, I think. The Hecate is definitely analogous to the RL archetype of nuclear supercarrier. But the Titan...it's different.

It's a full-fledged fleet carrier, but it also features durability that can at least compare to the Raynor (and very much surpasses the Orion). It has pretty good speed, and its forward armament is brutal. In a sense, the Titan is like a cross between a battlecruiser and fleet carrier, or maybe a hunter-killer submarine that doubles as a fleet carrier? Okay, that analogy just fell apart; let me put it this way...

The Hecate is not a bad ship; sure, it has some major flaws, but it also has some major strengths that are often overlooked. Part of the reason for that is that the player rarely sees or hears of it in FS2--the Hecate's massive craft complement and excellent carrier capability, along with its substantial AA defenses. The Hecate sucks in direct combat in most circumstances, yes, but that's not too much of a flaw when you consider its role and strength as a fleet carrier--far from deploying a few wings to an operation at a time, a Hecate is a mobile base for many fighter squadrons of varying types/roles, and can technically replenish its main armament, defense, offensive ability, and strategic impact as soon as more allied wings link up with the ship. Considering the strengths of and potential necessity of asymmetrical warfare against the Shivans,  that's pretty considerable. If there's any major failing of the Hecate, it's that it is designed to be a dedicated carrier, but for some reason makes room/cost/complexity for four heavy, very fragile beam cannons that could only take on something stronger than a Cain from the front. If you're going to put heavy beams on something, put it on a ship that's not designed for/specialized for being a fleet carrier away from the front lines.

The Titan, on the other hand, is rather different. Its weapons and their configuration are something of a far more efficient approach, and the ship seems to be designed from the ground up to effectively utilize both large carrier capability and heavy-beam fire support. A Titan can shock-jump a ship and deal 99,000 damage in a few seconds, sure, but it also fares well in general--so long as it is either the one attacking, or is itself not being shock-jumped from a flank (if it weren't a shock-jump from the flank, the Titan may very well have time to just turn to face you and then one- or two-shot you).

The Raynor is not a super-destroyer. It is, perhaps, subtly implied to be in certain places, but it's actually something else. To put it one way, the Titan is akin to a Sathanas, while the Raynor is akin to the Colossus--not in terms of overall power/strength, but in terms of role, strengths, and weaknesses. The Colossus fares well when it is facing opponents smaller than it, and can take on multiple destroyers at once, and win by a significant margin. It's not particularly vulnerable from any angle, and it lacks glaring design flaws. However, where the Titan is designed to take advantage of opportunities to shock-jump or launch a concentrated thrust without fear of flanking attacks, the Raynor is designed to dominate engagements with multiple smaller enemies. It has more guns (and bigger guns) spread out over a wide area/coverage, while the Titan takes 90% of its firepower and dedicates it to attacking stuff from one general direction--the front. A Raynor should avoid engagements with ships of its size/power, but seek engagements with one or several ships of lesser size/power. A Titan should avoid engagements with a bunch of smaller foes (except under the right circumstances, like DE, or when shock-jumping without fear of major flanking attacks before you can flee), but seek opportunities to shock-jump or attack an opponent's weak (or just not-strong) spot blitzkrieg-style.

There's just one problem...

The Raynor is disturbingly fragile for the ultimate line-combatant, direct-engagement destroyer. Armor SEXP's aside, a Raynor has a mere 5K more hitpoints than a Titan, and only 40K more hitpoints than an Orion...from FS1. As for Armor SEXP's, well...IIRC, the table standards have them with the same kind of armor, leaving changes up to the mission designer in FRED. While I may be of a different opinion/mindset regarding that style than some (or all) of the BP devs, it makes for an inconsistent impression/experience with a given ship (or ship class). After all, when it is sometimes surprisingly durable and sometimes shockingly fragile--yes, relative to the given situation, of course--it's confusing and jarring. It breaks immersion, to me, and can result in all the wrong impressions. I don't think I'm the only one who came away from AoA and Darkest Hour thinking that the Raynor was extremely underwhelming. Steele doesn't come off as a brilliant and bold strategist when I play Darkest Hour, he comes across as confusingly inept when he has a golden opportunity and total surprise on his side, but does absolutely nothing to take advantage of it and runs away at the first sign of trouble (not without taking major damage while casually giving his monologue, though...). From the Dev Commentary, I know that the team was trying to avoid the Worf Effect here, while still introducing/establishing Steele and the Atreus as devious, powerful threats. And while it succeeds in some respects, to me--the Atreus performs the shocking with his jump from Luna to Rheza Station, and then the impossible when jumping right back out again to Jupiter--it utterly fails in others, leaving me with a contradictory and confusing impression.

The two Narayanas showing up to drive off Steele--okay, sure, I could see how two Narayanas in good position, with some backup from a heavily damaged (but still combat-capable) Karuna would be enough to warrant a jump-away if possible, but that was never really the problem. Before those two Narayanas showed up, he just stood still and did nothing to finish off Rheza Station or the Indus--both of which would have been easy. It would have been one thing for him to clearly try for it, but it seems like he just doesn't even care. He sits there, lets the heavily damaged Indus slowly come to him, and doesn't immediately try to get in firing position with his HBlue to finish off Rheza Station (he could easily just use the other beams to finish off the Indus without slowing down or changing course). And even though he does the impossible by jumping right back home, it isn't until well after the situation is clear to him, after his decision is already made, after his monologue, steadily taking significant damage from just half (if that) of his opponents' firepower at a shockingly fast rate, that he actually gives the order to jump out (and the Atreus does so). I expected the Big Damn Heroes to drive off Steele, yes, but it was a surprisingly one-sided engagement that occurred--rather than the two forces standing off and having their dialogue/exchange, ending with Steele casually doing the impossible and jumping right back out, Steele is immediately hammered while he doesn't even hit back at all, jumps away after taking significant damage--during which Steele is giving an almost aloof monologue, seemingly unaware or uncaring of the steady, significant damage his ship is taking. The Big Bad comes across as not very threatening or effectual; he accomplishes very little even when it would be easy to accomplish a lot, and rather than being barely driven off by a potential engagement that wouldn't be as much in his favor as he would like (and casually jumping right back out), he gets hammered, driven off without any kind of damage being dealt to the UEF ships/Rheza, and performs his impossible jump to escape  from a surprisingly-fast approaching defeat/death, rather than to perform the impossible jump while casually choosing to fight that battle another day (while still seeming like he could win it, or make it very close).

Rather than the mere appearance of the Atreus in a mission giving me a sense of "Oh Crap", I feel "how do we kill this guy/ship before it just runs away again?" Even if the UEF forces present just aren't a match for the Atreus, it feels like a matter of just calling in some support, not "send in the cavalry or we're all doomed".

[Scotty]

I interpreted that mission completely differently.  Far be it from ineffectual, Steel jumps into withering fire from some of the most powerful guns in the UEF, calmly delivers a monologue and an ultimatum, and then declares that the player's meager force isn't worth dealing with and engages his sprint drive in flippant disregard for the supposed inability of a jump drive to recharge that fast.  He may have initially been there to deliver a material blow, but when there were more ships than he expected, he shifted stance and struck a morale blow instead. 

"I can do the impossible and escape from under your very noses without breaking a sweat.  You are all toys compared to me."

[SaltyWaffles]

I interpreted that mission completely differently.  Far be it from ineffectual, Steel jumps into withering fire from some of the most powerful guns in the UEF, calmly delivers a monologue and an ultimatum, and then declares that the player's meager force isn't worth dealing with and engages his sprint drive in flippant disregard for the supposed inability of a jump drive to recharge that fast.  He may have initially been there to deliver a material blow, but when there were more ships than he expected, he shifted stance and struck a morale blow instead. 

"I can do the impossible and escape from under your very noses without breaking a sweat.  You are all toys compared to me."

Oh, I'm sure that many people interpreted it that way, emotionally and/or intellectually. It's totally valid. I'm trying to explain why I never got that impression--the one the devs were intending the player to have--and hopefully find some way of avoiding that situation in the future, either with myself or other players. I'm not trying to say it's bad, I'm trying to say that, for me and some other people,  this didn't quite work as well as you were intending, and maybe we can figure out why, so that it can be avoided in the future. And, really, the dev team can actually implement/figure out whatever possible solution there is far better than I could; I'm just hoping to bring the "problem" to their attention, and provide enough feedback to make figuring out what went wrong, why, and how to fix/prevent it, easier.

[The E]

Salty, you keep making the same mistake over and over again. You keep interpreting table entries and mission events (in the sexp sense) as canon information when they are not intended to be. Armor tbl values do not exist in-universe. Hitpoints do not exist in-universe. The only thing that counts as canon in BP are what happens in a mission from a story standpoint, as well as briefings and tech entries. And regarding tech entries, one should consider them to be the kind if blurb you would find on a Wikipedia stub page, they never tell the whole story.

In the end, though, we are making q game here. Were this a novel series, we would be spending much more time on making everything as consistent as possible. As it is though, we are far more concerned with making an enjoyable game first, and just as a tv show might occasionally bend its own rules in order to tell a specific story, so will we when it comes to making a mission fun.
The reason why your nitpicks are getting such terse replies is that to us, they are just nitpicks. We simply aren't interested in building a campaign to the SaltyWaffles level of internal consistency, because it would take more time and effort spent on verifying everything, time that in our opinion is better spent on things like game balance and enjoyment.
The other thing is that as far as I can tell, most of your points were just lists of things that annoyed you, with very little suggestions how to address these things in terms of changes made to the missions.

[Colonol Dekker]

It better still look like a Vulture bike, or the name would no longer make sense

I've just noticed that




@ Salty, You're ovbiously a big fan, and i'm sure the Team appreciate your devotion.

Don't feel shunned, just reign the enthusiasm in a tiny little bit. I see where you're coming from with the Raynor - Supercarrier analogy. Buuuuut, the Titan is a Megacarrier and they are the Orion/Hecate 2.0....

I spent a long time on the Orestes, and i WUV Raynors.

[NGTM-1R]

Even though Titans are fleet carriers with exceptional direct-engagement capability? Sure, it's totally possible, but a bit odd--like, say, WW2-Pacific admirals using a battleship as their flagship instead of the fleet carrier nearby. It was done, of course--mainly on the Japanese side--but carriers established themselves as the vastly dominant capital ship early in the conflict (Pacific Theater conflict, post-1941), and treated as the literal or figurative flagships for their battlegroups/fleets.

Actually if you look into it, a lot of time the commanding admiral on both sides chose to command a surface force from a heavy cruiser rather than a battleship; Halsey commanded from aboard New Jersey and Spruance usually led the fleet from a heavy cruiser. The flag bridge of the carrier was dedicated to the carrier group commander, not the admiral in charge. You have been lured into believing that modern practice is going to hold true, and there will be only the carrier group. This clearly isn't the case. We after all have the Raynor/Titan duos and Hecates, and we've seen plenty of corvette/cruiser groups running around.

Additionally, usefulness as a command ship is mainly dependent on a small number of factors. The first is the amount of communications equipment at hand; the second is that the command spaces be designed to accommodate the staff of an admiral without being cramped; as staffs are somewhat personalized to the needs of the admiral their size and extent can be difficult to predict. You may also wish to provide separate communications links for the admiral and staff beyond those that pass through the rest of the ship, which is more people and more space. All told, commanding a large force in action could easily require space for a hundred and fifty people, most of them engaged in communications and interpretation of incoming data about friendly and enemy forces. A distant last is that the command spaces be tenable in action (something World War 2 ships tended to fail at, with the shock of main battery fire carrying away radios or even light fixtures on the flag bridge).

It really has nothing to do with combat capability at all.

And as we've noted, the Titan does many things, very well. It has made sacrifices for that. We saw some of them in AoA, like the need to bring the logistics ship with it on a relatively short hop while the Raynor could go without. It's quite possible they just couldn't find space for another 150 people and all their paraphernalia on a Titan.

[MatthTheGeek]

We saw some of them in AoA, like the need to bring the logistics ship with it on a relatively short hop while the Raynor could go without.

Wrong. The Orestes had its own logistics ships. There were two Anemois in the 14th battlegroup, and they ended up separated along with their respective destroyer fleet during the events of AoA.

It's quite possible they just couldn't find space for another 150 people and all their paraphernalia on a Titan.

On a ship with a crew of ten thousands ? Sounds a little far-fetched.

[NGTM-1R]

Wrong. The Orestes had its own logistics ships. There were two Anemois in the 14th battlegroup, and they ended up separated along with their respective destroyer fleet during the events of AoA.

Whoops. Still, the point stands that they actually took it and actually needed it for major repairs, which is something of a departure from previous instances where we've seen GTVA destroyers undertake major repairs without external assistance.

On a ship with a crew of ten thousands ? Sounds a little far-fetched.

And the Eos batteries and the aerospace wing and all its supplies and the beams and the self-defense weapons and the engines and the armor and the supplies for the crew and the supplies for the ship and the fuel for the ship and the fuel for the fightercraft and the support ships and the pilots and the ground crew and the stuff they'll need to eat/drink/sleep and the...

You get the idea. Space for a hundred and fifty people, all the comms gear, all the quarters, all the supplies, is a non-trivial matter when designing a warship. Especially as when it comes to the ship itself, an admiral and their staff and everything they consume is purely dead weight and does nothing to enhance the performance of the ship. (This exact issue has lead to a lot of navies skimping on it down the years, and though it's had some serious consequences, there's no reason to believe they'll stop anytime in the future.) There are good reasons to outfit the minimum number of ships possible with admiral's command spaces. As The E noted, the Atreus has been Steele's ship from the keel up. It's possible its interior layout in this regard is divergent from other Raynors, let alone the Titans.

[Aesaar]

SaltyWaffles: The Raynor isn't as bad as you're making out.  Sure, the Titan's more dangerous directly forward, but the Raynor has three times the broadside firepower, making it a much, much better ship at close range, and a lot harder to disarm.  It's also got a lot more torpedo launchers, which are the same model as the Titan's, so they're perfectly capable of firing Supernovas.

What you're doing is like comparing the direct engagement capabilities of a Diomedes and a Bellerophon and saying the Bellerophon is better because it can focus its firepower better and has longer range.  Neither is better, they're just suited to different tasks.

Question for the team: what was the reason for giving the Raynor a pair of SBlues?  Another pair of TerSlashBlues makes so much more sense from a design perspective.


Also, I never noticed it looked like a Vulture bike.  The atrocious name suddenly makes sense.  I thought it just looked like a dagger. 

[An4ximandros]

The Raynor has 3 unused beam slots near the back of the "Dagger" section.

Seriously, that thing has enough guns to qualify as a mini-Colossus (design wise.)

[SaltyWaffles]

SaltyWaffles: The Raynor isn't as bad as you're making out.  Sure, the Titan's more dangerous directly forward, but the Raynor has three times the broadside firepower, making it a much, much better ship at close range, and a lot harder to disarm.  It's also got a lot more torpedo launchers, which are the same model as the Titan's, so they're perfectly capable of firing Supernovas.

The Raynor isn't so much a bad design as it is just always put into situations where it is either ill-suited or surprisingly underperforming. It seems to lack the durability to make it a heavy brawler, like the Colossus, but it has the firepower (and distribution of such), speed, and versatility to make it a great battlecruiser--hunt what you can kill and run from what can kill you--but it's never given a chance to actually fill that role. It's kind of like a modified Serker Team--less shock-jump and forward firepower, but greater versatility, durability, and simultaneous-multiple-engagement capability.

If the Raynor's adaptive armor ever actually comes into play, that impression might change, sure. But given how we've only seen the opposite of notable durability in all of its appearances, and how it never gets a chance to actually do much of anything (not counting a few of its bomber wings on Bearbaiting ), it all feels like informed--but not demonstrated--attributes.

Question for the team: what was the reason for giving the Raynor a pair of SBlues?  Another pair of TerSlashBlues makes so much more sense from a design perspective.

Yeah, I wondered the same thing. I was very surprised when I found that out myself--the TerSlashBlue's seem much more fitting of the overall design, role, and aesthetic. Especially when you add in the 40 second cooldown for SBlue's, as well as the UEF's ECM/beam-jamming, it just seems like an unexpectedly odd/bad armament design decision, without some kind of clear justification for it. That, or I just love how awesome a bunch of TerSlashBlue's look like when spamming a broadside.

The Raynor has 3 unused beam slots near the back of the "Dagger" section.

Seriously, that thing has enough guns to qualify as a mini-Colossus (design wise.)

Wait, really? I never noticed that...are you sure they aren't just docking points, or AAAf's?

As for the number of turrets--yeah, for the most part. It doesn't quite have the Colossus' area coverage (the underside is relatively sparse in terms of beams, and only the HBlue can fire forward), but it feels similar, sans the Colossus' impressive durability.

Although, I do find it odd that it has so many Terran Turret 2's. Sure, they're pretty good at warhead interception (when said warheads are coming from the right angles), but as they're pretty much limited to just that, it seems like having them replaced with STerPulse's (or downsized versions of them--I've actually made one, and it's pretty fun/interesting), or flak guns, and somehow giving the AAAf's AI a "target bombs first" priority.

[Aesaar]

We have no idea how well a Raynor performs in a brawl.  We see it once in WiH making a precision strike, and had it not been for the Jovian Narayanas, it would have mopped the floor with the Indus and Rheza Station's fighter group.  In AoA, it (with its half of the 15th) throws back the Lucifer repeatedly, and could have destroyed the Sathanas alone once those BFReds were gone. 

It's very possible that the armor was specially tailored to be effective against beams, and it might be less effective against UEF torpedoes and railguns.  Something like a superconductor web that spreads a beam's energy over the whole hull, while railgun rounds and torpedoes just punch right through.  The Raynor was built to fight Shivans, after all.

Although, I do find it odd that it has so many Terran Turret 2's. Sure, they're pretty good at warhead interception (when said warheads are coming from the right angles), but as they're pretty much limited to just that, it seems like having them replaced with STerPulse's (or downsized versions of them--I've actually made one, and it's pretty fun/interesting), or flak guns, and somehow giving the AAAf's AI a "target bombs first" priority.

I get the impression that the TT2 is meant to be a stopgap measure until Morgan Technologies gets the Pulse Cannon spread issue resolved.  Right now, that spread makes the STerPulse useless at torpedo interception.

Although once the war ends, I expect the GTVA will adapt the UEF's Khatvanga for the job, given how effective it is.  Hell, they probably captured more than a few with Jupiter, so they might be working on that already.

The Raynor has 3 unused beam slots near the back of the "Dagger" section.

Seriously, that thing has enough guns to qualify as a mini-Colossus (design wise.)

I'm pretty sure those are AAAfs.

[James Razor]

Hm... i am sorry, but i have to agree that the Raynor does make a rather poor impression. The HBlue in particular is something i dont understand. As it seems it is a prototype cannon, yet they mounted it on their next destroyer generation and started mass producing them.

And from what i have seen from the stats of that thing, it would have made much more sense to use BBlues and shorten their refire cycle with the added energy from the HBlues reactor. Or maybee use the energy to keep the BBlue permanent firing.

I just try to imagine what a permanent firing beam with the power of a BBlue could do if u place a few of those around a jump node.

Also, while i have to agree that the Collie is butt ugly and didn't perform that well against the shivans, you also have to consider 2 things:
1st.: The GTVA could only prepare for that they knew and this is still the case. And from what they knew the Colossus was the perfect answer to all their problems regarding the shivans.
2nd: FS2 Command are the greatest idiots i have ever seen, especially if it comes down to how they used the Collie in FS2. That first Shatanas could have been brought down way easier and with way less loses, if they just had the Colossus jump in behind it.
3rd: I realy think that the GTVA did mess up their next destroyer generation if the Titan and Raynor are what came out of it.

Why? Because they are too fragile.
The entire Battlegroupe in AoA was allready dead, they just didnt know it, before the Vishans saved their asses. And before the Sathanas showed up, they where not relay facing something out of the ordinary when fighting Shivans.
And i realy missed the shivan fighter swarms in that Sathanas Fight. The outcome would have been quiet different.

What the alliance needs is something that can stand up against hordes of shivan capitals. I mean, the new ships are just about a match for Capella Era Shivan Ships (if u leave the Sathanas out of it). Imagine how a post capella era shivan destroyer would look like.
If u let a Ravana shock jump one of the new destoyers (shock jump: Jump in in Beam range, not like forced entry) they are still screwed. In best case they can get out heavily damaged.

While i still think BP is a great campaign, i also think that ships wise the devs need to pull a lot of tricks to make it work the way they want.

Given the choices to build a fleet of new destroyers or one Colossus (better said its succesor) with the same techlevel, i would choose the Colossus. Because unless it runs into a Juggernaut, it can clean house with everything below that. And if u mount a sprint drive on it, i am pretty sure that i can survive even with a Juggernaut in the area, either by avoiding it or by simply choosing the engagement in such a manar that the Juggernaut would lose it (i.e. simply jump in behind, cripple it and win).

[The E]

1st.: The GTVA could only prepare for that they knew and this is still the case. And from what they knew the Colossus was the perfect answer to all their problems regarding the shivans.

Except for the part where, even if it hadn't been destroyed, the Collossus would have been unable to fight 80 Saths.

2nd: FS2 Command are the greatest idiots i have ever seen, especially if it comes down to how they used the Collie in FS2. That first Shatanas could have been brought down way easier and with way less loses, if they just had the Colossus jump in behind it.

Assumes facts not in evidence. To wit: That such a maneuver was possible from an intelligence Standpoint.
Also note that Command tried to keep the Colly alive, only for the Colly CO to throw away his ship.

The entire Battlegroupe in AoA was allready dead, they just didnt know it

In-mission dialogue makes it pretty damn clear that they knew that the chances of survival were slim.

And before the Sathanas showed up, they where not relay facing something out of the ordinary when fighting Shivans.

Actually, yes, they were. They were facing the fact that there was no support coming from other parts of the GTVA, they had one ship taken over and its crew incapacitated by forces unknown, the Battlegroup had been split up (sure, in hindsight, it was a bad idea, but it isn't like anyone knew that beforehand). So yeah. Ordinary circumstances these ain't.

And i realy missed the shivan fighter swarms in that Sathanas Fight. The outcome would have been quiet different.

As we've seen in FS2, Saths are rarely accompanied by sizeable fighter swarms.

What the alliance needs is something that can stand up against hordes of shivan capitals.

Like every military in the history of ever, the GTVA can only really prepare for what they have seen previously. In this case, it was shown in FS2 that putting all your hopes and dreams into one big megaship is a bad idea. So the strategists went back to the drawing board and crafted a reorganization plan for the GTVA armed forces that transformed the fleet into a more flexible tool, both in strategic and tactical terms.
In other words, the GTVA knows that it cannot fight the Shivans on even terms, so they aren't planning to do that. Isolate, contain, rebuild is the order of the day when it comes to dealing with new incursions.

If u let a Ravana shock jump one of the new destoyers (shock jump: Jump in in Beam range, not like forced entry) they are still screwed. In best case they can get out heavily damaged.

Shipbuilding technology has not advanced far enough to mass-produce ships able to withstand Ravana shock jumps. Sure, the GTVA could build another Colossus. But given that it takes the Shivans only two Sathanas', or a few Ravanas to kill one, it is not a cost-effective move.

Because unless it runs into a Juggernaut

Which it will, eventually. You cannot build a fleet and hope that your adversary will decide to fight you with only a selection of the tools at his disposal. You have to plan for the worst case, and that case is 80 Saths dropping by for a Barbecue.

And if u mount a sprint drive on it, i am pretty sure that i can survive even with a Juggernaut in the area, either by avoiding it or by simply choosing the engagement in such a manar that the Juggernaut would lose it (i.e. simply jump in behind, cripple it and win).

Lolno. A sprint drive is a great tool, sure. But it can not magically overcome the technological and logistical advantages the Shivans possess. Sure, you can drop behind a Sath and get a few shots in. But what stops Sath #2 to do the same to you? What about Sath #3? Or new, hitherto unseen ships? What if the Shivans come up with a new Beam cannon with jump drives like the Lilith?

[Aesaar]

James Razor: I don't know, the ships in AoA were doing quite well.  The Orestes and half its battlegroup drove off the Lucifer repeatedly before the Vishnans showed up, they just couldn't leave because they were cornered against the planet.  In a non parallel universe, they wouldn't have been alone, and another group could have pursued and destroyed the Lucifer.  Honestly, considering the circumstances, I'd say the 14th performed admirably.

On the HBlue, we haven't seen enough of it to form any meaningful opinions about it.  Yes, the table info shows it isn't that good, but we've been told repeatedly that table info doesn't mean that much.  There are plenty of things tables can't show.

If u let a Ravana shock jump one of the new destoyers (shock jump: Jump in in Beam range, not like forced entry) they are still screwed. In best case they can get out heavily damaged.

Let's ignore what I just said for a moment.  Having tried this, I can say you are very wrong.  If the Titan and Ravana are facing each other, all it takes is one shot from the BBlues followed by a few shots from one of its TerSlashBlues or its TerPulse batteries.  Seriously, the 3 BBlues will reduce it to 1% health on the first volley.  On the flipside, the Ravana is lucky if it can get the Titan down to 60%.  Capella-era Shivan destroyers, as they are in the tables, just can't compete with TEI destroyers.

The Raynor takes a little more time, but it still wins with just a little maneuvering to bring its broadside guns to bear after the HBlue shot.  However, it does a lot better than the Titan if the Ravana comes from a direction other than the front.

But again, tables don't mean much.

[James Razor]

If u pull the 80 Sath Card, even with 160 Raynors and Titans i would still bet on the Saths tbh.

And if Sath 2 Shows up on my MK II Collie, well, thats why i have that sprint drive. And enough EHP to survive the initial volley of its 4 BFReds and GTFO. Tell me what happens if a Raynor or Titan get caught by a Sath? Why didnt Sath Nr. 2 just jump on the Orestes and its battlegroupe (i know they where proably busy with the Vishnans at that point, still, in FS2 if the Shivans even would have used 2 Saths at one time at any moment in the campaign the GTVA would have been screwed).

Remember that the Sathanas 1 had just destroyed an entire fleet that tryed to stop it. That might be the reason why it was allready low on fighters, not to mention Bearbaiting where there also had been a number of fighters present. Not to mention that a good portion of the fighters you did see after the Ravana got destroyed could have been from it and that Demon that followed it.

So yes, it made sense that it didnt have much fighters left when it engaged the Collie. But in AoA at that point i simply made little sense. Sry, that i just how i feel about it.

And tbh.: I dont have much clue about tables either. I get most of my impressions from what i see ingame.

Also, i still do not think they stood against extraordinary odds when u simply keep in mind that even in GTVA space it can happen pretty quickly during a full scale invasion that a battlegroupe get isolated and has to duke it out in its own. As GTVA planer u simply have to assume that u are outnumbered all the time.

And there is a reason why i wanted to keep the Sathanas out of this. If u pull the 80 Sath card i do not see any chance for the GTVA to win this (win in that case = survive), not with 160 Raynors/ Titan, not with 80 Collies. Actually, not even with 200 collies.

A ship with Colossus like dimensions and WiH GTVA Tech on it and someone like Steele commanding it, well... thats something that i would at least bet that they have a fighting chance.

Also, until now i did not see any arguments that convince me that i am wrong and the Raynor is not too weak compared to shivan ships.

And to the Titan, the scenario i imagined was that the ship is allready engaged in combat and than the Ravana jumps on it in a way that it has all the advantages on its side. And that is definatly not jumping in in front of a Titan.

Edit: On the other side, while it might look like, i do not want to see a Colossus (or a MK II) in BP. What i want though is to see the Raynor get a serious buff in most regards, so that it actually can duke it out with a Lucifer and win even IF cornerd to a planet. In short: Buff its HP, buff its armament and make it closer to its original incarnation and seriously, remove those SBlues and put something worthy there.

[The E]

If u pull the 80 Sath Card, even with 160 Raynors and Titans i would still bet on the Saths tbh.

I am not "pulling a card". I am informing you of the environment GTVA planners have to take into account.

And if Sath 2 Shows up on my MK II Collie, well, thats why i have that sprint drive. And enough EHP to survive the initial volley of its 4 BFReds and GTFO.

And then you get jumped by other shivan ships. If there's one thing certain about the Shivans, it's that they have ressources to spare. A sprint drive can get you out of a tight spot, but only if it is ready for use; when both it and the primary drive are in their recharge cycle, you're ****ed when you get jumped.
In addition, as WiH shows, jumps are not untraceable. Especially not when AWACS ships are around (and guess what capabilities a Sath has in addition to being humongous?).

Also, i still do not think they stood against extraordinary odds when u simply keep in mind that even in GTVA space it can happen pretty quickly during a full scale invasion that a battlegroupe get isolated and has to duke it out in its own. As GTVA planer u simply have to assume that u are outnumbered all the time.

It's "you". And you are straight wrong. In GTVA space, the next Battlegroup is one, maybe two node transitions away, a process that takes an hour or so, at most. Even though GTVA BGs are built to operate for extended periods without support, they are not designed to be able to stand up to a full-scale invasion for long.

And there is a reason why i wanted to keep the Sathanas out of this. If u pull the 80 Sath card i do not see any chance for the GTVA to win this (win in that case = survive), not with 160 Raynors/ Titan, not with 80 Collies. Actually, not even with 200 collies.

Translation: I want to be right, no matter what the in-game canon says. You cannot take the Sathanas fleet out of the equation, that is not how strategic planning works.

In short: Buff its HP, buff its armament and make it closer to its original incarnation and seriously, remove those SBlues and put something worthy there.

We will do what we have to do. We are not, at this time, taking suggestions from the public in this regard.