[Iain Baker]

Hi folks!

I have been playing around with FRED doing 'who would win' missions. 1 Sathanas Vs X numbers of destroyers.

Results thus far: To reliably take out a Sathanas using Zapp Brannigan tactics (i.e. all ships attacking head on so all are in the fire-arcs of the Sath's main beams) whilst still leavling at least one destroyer alive at the end requires a minimum of:

9 Orions / Hatshepsuts / Hecate / (Mix and match of these, not 9 each)

2 Titans + 2 Erebus  (Which just goes to show just how much more powerful they are) 

[Iain Baker]

Who should I put up against who next? 

[Cyborg17]

How many Collossi vs one Sathanas.  How far can 1 Collossus bring down 1 Sathanas with the same tactics.

[Colonol Dekker]

Infinity bombers vs 2 big fat saths.

[Mito [PL]]

Note: I think that if you're using FSBlue, the allied destroyers will have their stats boosted a bit. Or the Sath's main cannons aren't as powerful like they used to in FS2.

[Colt]

Hmm...

How many Mjolnirs vs 1 Sath?

Or, how many Ravanas vs 1 Sath? 

[Trivial Psychic]

Try the Hades.

[Rhymes]

Honestly that's not a really meaningful comparison. There's so many different variables that go into an actual engagement that just smashing them together like action figures doesn't really tell you much about "who would win?"

OTOH it's fun watching ships shoot giant beam cannons at each other, so what the heck.

[X3N0-Life-Form]

OTOH it's fun watching ships shoot giant beam cannons at each other, so what the heck.

Indeed it it. I wonder how Fenris attacking head on it would take to bring down a Sath.

[0rph3u5]

2 Titans + 2 Erebus  (Which just goes to show just how much more powerful they are) 

... but is that a good thing?

Say what you will about the Sathanas being the "this is where the mission ends and the cutscene begins"-presence it still remains - for the lack of a better word - playable; something that cannot be said about BPs overgunned with specialized guns capital ships.

Part of what makes capital ships in FS2 such a compelling presence is also the fact that they are not the game's version of a terrain piece of scenery or "shoot the glowy bits"-boss fight (notable exception of the Lucifer)... Now that doesn't mean that you shouldn't find better ways to interact with them, if you are set on keeping capital ships a neccessary presence (and no lobbing TAG missiles at them instead the usually dive bombing runs is not sufficent innovation IMO)

[Nightmare]

Post some screens!

[General Battuta]

2 Titans + 2 Erebus  (Which just goes to show just how much more powerful they are) 

... but is that a good thing?

Say what you will about the Sathanas being the "this is where the mission ends and the cutscene begins"-presence it still remains - for the lack of a better word - playable; something that cannot be said about BPs overgunned with specialized guns capital ships.

Part of what makes capital ships in FS2 such a compelling presence is also the fact that they are not the game's version of a terrain piece of scenery or "shoot the glowy bits"-boss fight (notable exception of the Lucifer)... Now that doesn't mean that you shouldn't find better ways to interact with them, if you are set on keeping capital ships a neccessary presence (and no lobbing TAG missiles at them instead the usually dive bombing runs is not sufficent innovation IMO)

what

[Nightmare]

@Orpheus: Err, this thread isn't a "Do you think BPs capship combat model could be improved?" but "Lets have ships beamed to death by Saths!!!"...

@Iain: Actually, does debris count too?

[0rph3u5]

@Orpheus: Err, this thread isn't a "Do you think BPs capship combat model could be improved?" but "Lets have ships beamed to death by Saths!!!"...

For the record, it is not just BP (its just because it has come up), I've been saying it for a while that many of the community-made ships are not very useful as they tend to have (*deploying hyperbole for effect*) turrets on every free surface and then two more for good measure; and in all honesty I am beginning to have the same reservations about the Aelous, the Deimos and the Sobek as well (the Moloch and the Mentu deserve the same kind of scrutiny if their retail armaments were as ... perculiar as they are)

And why not have a discussion about how to evaluate what can be seen by throwing capital ships at the Sath - about the design of both the Sath and any ship you pit against it.

Let's face it the Sath belongs to these terribly utilized ships, probably because of its role as the big show-stopper of FS2 - Now, I personally have no inclination to spend time on "making the Sath work as mission centerpiece", because none of the campaigns on my slate require me to (my next target is the SSD Bhaal FYI)

[Nightmare]

IMHO that sounds like a mere aesthetical issue at best... what would be the point about having fewer turrets?

[Rhymes]

Orpheus, I honestly have no idea what you're on about. Your complaint is that capital ships are bad because . . . they have too many turrets? What?

Capital ships are props and scenery (and occasionally characters). They exist as tools for the designer to provide backdrops, or story beats, or alter the area layout, or to put a thumb on the scales of an engagement. Talking about them in terms of balance is meaningless because the player's ability to interact with them is so much more limited than with a fighter. Their handling doesn't matter. Their speed doesn't matter. Their armor and loadouts don't matter since those can be changed easily through one of about a billion tools in FRED. You're not going to find people who design ships with thin coverage like an Aten because something like that isn't very useful as a prop because weapons are the primary way that a capship interacts with the mission.

[General Battuta]

The whole BP capship combat paradigm is about slowing things down so ships live longer and get to do more instead of vaporizing each other in beam discos. A BP destroyer has more effective HP than the colossus. And there are far more mechanical interactions with capships than in retail. It’s the opposite of what you’re trying to argue.

It comes off like you’re saying “I’m the only one who’s thought about this and everyone else is doing it wrong.” That is not very pluralistic.

[General Battuta]

Also the first BP campaign uses the Sath very well, it’s not just a big lump once its forward beams are gone. So there’s still urgency to the fight.

Using capships well is really more about the mission designer than the model.

[Asteroth]

Say what you will about the Sathanas being the "this is where the mission ends and the cutscene begins"-presence it still remains - for the lack of a better word - playable; something that cannot be said about BPs overgunned with specialized guns capital ships.

Just to be sure, you're saying BPs capitals are unplayable? That's a bit of a strange statement if that's what you really mean given how much of a significant centerpiece they are in a large and highly successful mod! You might disagree with their design methodology, but to claim they're unplayable is patently and obviously false.

[0rph3u5]

an Aten because something like that isn't very useful as a prop because weapons are the primary way that a capship interacts with the mission.

The Aten is a good a example for what my point of dissent is: As a ship with less weapons to make it a piece of scenery you have to stay away from (a fact combounded with weapons designed to more a ship more like scenery e.g. massed Flak), and makes it more a prop. Additionally, it provides you with much more of an incentive to actually work out it role as a prop - to find a role for ship to be there other than to shoot its guns.

I am not saying there are no other ways to go about it - Solaris made it work perfectly well by utilization of ship-to-ship missiles: while the ships themselves on continuum from prop to scenery were much more scenery, the missile combat allowed for a point of interaction. (so does the use of ship-to-ship torpedoes in BP, as seen in AoA's Forced Entry)

Likewise, if another factor is involved, let's say a thematic throughline about the technology not being able to make up for poor decision making, you can also make ships armed to the brim work (which is how FS2 works that angle IMO)

Say what you will about the Sathanas being the "this is where the mission ends and the cutscene begins"-presence it still remains - for the lack of a better word - playable; something that cannot be said about BPs overgunned with specialized guns capital ships.

Just to be sure, you're saying BPs capitals are unplayable? That's a bit of a strange statement if that's what you really mean given how much of a significant centerpiece they are in a large and highly successful mod! You might disagree with their design methodology, but to claim they're unplayable is patently and obviously false.

What I mean with saying the Sathanas is playable is that besides its role as "steamroller", as it has in Bearbaiting and Straight, No Chaser, you can technically move action around at any distance and have the model at least give you the option to provide an managable impact - something I don't see working quite as well with the BP capitals ships, due to the abundance of overlapping fields of fire.


Now, I am currently mostly occupied with rehashing old stuff (the Rain on Ribos IV and Drums of War re-releases are around the corner basically), but I will put up in support of what I am saying in due time. I think once I get the whole sorry affair out as something playable, it will probaly be easier to understand what I am trying to get at.