[Aesaar]

That'd not make for a fun gaming experience.

If done right, it could be. But the end result would be very different from original FS.

To be fair, BP is already quite different from the original FS.  I'd say for the better.  If/when we see Shivans again in BP, I really hope they get rebalanced.  The powerful fighter opponents we have fighting the GTVA make for much more interesting gameplay than the rather boring Shivan ones.  It'd be a real shame if that wasn't preserved.

[Qent]

I mean really, imagine Shivan ships and guns being highly superior to yours like they are in the canon lore. That'd not make for a fun gaming experience.

They are not canonically highly superior, except for being much more maneuverable, which was also stated in the mission dialog.

But this is BP, where I think there's a real explanation somewhere in the tech room....

[qwadtep]

The weakness of Shivan fighters made sense through FS2. Their shield tech was stolen very early in the Great War and the GTVA has been improving it and their anti-shield solutions ever since. It would have been a much different story if you had to kill the Lucifer with an ML-16.

That said, after having everything beneath superdestroyer turned to nebular gas in FS2, I really hope the Shivans have learned something about the Tevs, too.

[crizza]

I could live with a beam painting me for long range missiles rather then a GAuss projectile hitting, and most likely piercing my fighter...

Or not even piercing your shields.  Gauss cannons don't do much damage against shielded targets (just 300.  The Perseus has 350 shields).

Oh, don't know why, but I thought we were speaking about a capship massdriver/gaus-cannon thing^^

[Hades]

They are not canonically highly superior, except for being much more maneuverable, which was also stated in the mission dialog.

But this is BP, where I think there's a real explanation somewhere in the tech room....

In FS1 they practically screamed that Shivan ships were drastically superior every mission or so, even with shields.

Fairly certain it had been said as well in FS2, at least in a couple of command briefings. At the very least, I distinctly remember it being implied, like in the first mission fighting them.

[MatthTheGeek]

From the debriefing of FS1's "Out of the dark, into the night" :

The ships are not detectable by our sensors.  Worse, they appear to have some type of energy-shielding system, making them nearly immune to our attacks.

But the greatest concern is their weapons.  They are more powerful than anything in the GTA or VPE arsenal.

[Aesaar]

Oh, don't know why, but I thought we were speaking about a capship massdriver/gaus-cannon thing^^

We were.  And I was saying that capital ship gauss cannons do next to no damage (relatively speaking) to shields, so your concerns about your fighter getting destroyed by one was unfounded.

[General Battuta]

Why would the GTVA need a corvette as a Treb platform? Long range subsystem disabling? Anti-fighter/bomber sweeper?
Because existing fighter wings can already do that.

They also run out of ammo.

If the Shivans ever reappear in BP they will show expanded capabilities. Remember that the Shivans in AoA existed in a parallel universe in which they had never encountered beam-armed Terran vessels.

[Dragon]

From the debriefing of FS1's "Out of the dark, into the night" :

The ships are not detectable by our sensors.  Worse, they appear to have some type of energy-shielding system, making them nearly immune to our attacks.

But the greatest concern is their weapons.  They are more powerful than anything in the GTA or PVE arsenal.

Note, by that time, you were armed with ML-16 and Furies. Then, it was correct, as neither GTA nor PVE really had anything better. This did not stayed true for long though, Avenger outclassed Shivan weapons by a fair margin.

[Qent]

I skimmed through the BP tech room, and regardless of what's in FS2, BP explicitly points out that the inferiority of Shivan primaries (to BP-era weapons) is because they're operating at a fraction of their peak effectiveness. They could outperform the Kayser, but they don't.

[Jellyfish]

It'd be a good idea to operate under the assumption that they realize this and up the kill-o-huertz settings on all their guns.

[-Norbert-]

As I see it, there are only two good reasons for saying their weapons are operating on half efficiency.
1) They are not in controll of their own tech (replication of captured/given tech they don't understand, being stupid clones, being controlled by a higher evil, in their constant warring they lost the knowledge they once possesed.... non of these are particularly likely scenarios for the BP Shivans I think).
2) To have room to make them stronger in BP3, without the need to invent new weapons for them.

My money would be on 2).

[Dragon]

Well, you could say it's all part of some bigger plan. It'll most likely be explained at one point, in a way you'll never expect. 

[Hades]

Note, by that time, you were armed with ML-16 and Furies. Then, it was correct, as neither GTA nor PVE really had anything better. This did not stayed true for long though, Avenger outclassed Shivan weapons by a fair margin.

There's no canon information for that and game balance isn't really evidence for an argument like this.

[Qent]

Avenger outclassed Shivan weapons by a fair margin.

There's no canon information for that and game balance isn't really evidence for an argument like this.

What's wrong with game balance? It could be the case that there is a canon universe with facts contradicting the tables, but that doesn't have to be the case. I think it's okay to take the in-game stats as canon especially in the absence of any contradictory canon.

EDIT: That was the part you were referring to?

EDIT2: And once again this is all moot, because Blue Planet explicitly draws attention to the inferiority of Shivan weapons, along with epic confusion as to why.

[Klaustrophobia]

wasn't the BP entry about shivan weapons specifically for the purpose of rectifying the gameplay balance with the fluff that shivan tech is vastly superior?  that's what i got out of it anyway, and i think i remember a BP team member saying something to this effect.

[The E]

Then you are not thinking about this in the right way. There is a reason for the discrepancies that has nothing to do with fluff vs gameplay, but with what the shivans are.

[Scotty]

Shivan technologies operate at a fraction of their total potential.

Shivan's destroy species to preserve the balance of the universe.

Inferrance: Shivan technologies operate at whatever level they must in order to force the current subjects to adapt or die.

[Crybertrance]

Shivan's destroy species to preserve the balance of the universe.

I thot those were the Vishnans....

[Hades]

What's wrong with game balance? It could be the case that there is a canon universe with facts contradicting the tables, but that doesn't have to be the case. I think it's okay to take the in-game stats as canon especially in the absence of any contradictory canon.

EDIT: That was the part you were referring to?

EDIT2: And once again this is all moot, because Blue Planet explicitly draws attention to the inferiority of Shivan weapons, along with epic confusion as to why.

In-game balance is typically the way it is not because of fluff. Like how the Deimos nearly has the same hull hit points as most destroyers, or the Hecate supposedly having more firepower than the Orion but in-game processing next to nothing in comparison, the Orion supposedly having 'dozens of death dealing turrets' while having a mere 17, etc etc.

I thot those were the Vishnans....

FS1 pretty much said that it was the Shivans in what, every Ancient's cutscene?