Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: aldo_14 on June 15, 2004, 05:14:02 pm
-
Which do you prefer - a stupidly fast ship that handles like a barge pole, or a slow ship that can turn on a 5p piece?
And no, 'balanced' is not an option. I'm just 'researching' what extreme characteristics are best in a fighter/bomber.
-
Agility. The lack of agility was one of the main reasons why the Myrmidon sucks so much.
-
Agility. You can't outrun a laser or most anti-fighter missiles no matter how fast of a fighter engine you have. You can however dodge them if your ship is agile enough.
-
agility, hands down.
-
Mostly bomber? Speed, you're not supposed to be dogfighting anyway.
Mainly fighter? Agility, all the engine power in the world doesn't help if you turn like the Colossus.
-
Agility, definitely. With agility comes a reasonable amount of speed anyway, based on the lower mass necessary.
And the Myrmidon's not that unmaneuverable. Try dogfighting in a Medusa sometime because your idiot escorts won't or can't peel a fighter off your butt. Now that sucks.
-
Well, in real life, I'd prefer speed. But FS's flight characteristics are seriously screwed up, so I'm going for agility.
-
Fighters need speed and agility. Bomber don't need agility really, but a higher speed is nice, so you can get outa the blast area.
-
Originally posted by Blaise Russel
Mostly bomber? Speed, you're not supposed to be dogfighting anyway.
Mainly fighter? Agility, all the engine power in the world doesn't help if you turn like the Colossus.
I agree with BR, but if I had to pick one, I'd pick speed. I always preferred the Valkyrie to the Ulysses in FS1, and I got annoyed in Inferno when the basic fighter (Vesuvius, IIRC) was too agile for me to even control properly.
-
Agility all the way, heck, speed is what the afterburner key is for ;)
-
Originally posted by Goober5000
I agree with BR, but if I had to pick one, I'd pick speed. I always preferred the Valkyrie to the Ulysses in FS1, and I got annoyed in Inferno when the basic fighter (Vesuvius, IIRC) was too agile for me to even control properly.
Yeah, that really bothered me in FS1 too. Here was the Ulysses, which was supposed to be the bee's knees when it came to fighters and all I could do was jerkily miss all my targets because it was so damn twitchy.
As for the Myrmidon, the six primary banks MORE than make up for any lack of maneouverability. I found the good ol' Myrmidon equipped with dual Prom S cannon and dumbfires was the best ship to use in dogfighting. The Herc II didn't pack a big enough punch, primary wise and the Ares was too slow. The Erenies seems like a good successor to the Myrmidon, but lacks gun power. That good ol' Myrmidon can go all day firing dual Proms. ;7
-
Speed, definately. I won't make a Freespace application to this though. Rather, IL-2 Sturmovik sums it nicely. I love to fly the me-262 in multiplayer games. Once you get your speed and you're high up, nothing can touch you really. Just making highspeed passes and shooting up into the sky, there's not much the other player can do but try and hit you on a head vs. head pass, and the me-262 almost always wins those.
-
Screw you woolie, Speed owns.
See the Athena.
-
Speed. The overly manoeuvrable fighters just make the game frustrating for me, though they do make the AI more of a challenge to kill.
-
Originally posted by SA22C
Yeah, that really bothered me in FS1 too. Here was the Ulysses, which was supposed to be the bee's knees when it came to fighters and all I could do was jerkily miss all my targets because it was so damn twitchy.
I feel like I didn't play the same games as you all :doubt: first time I flew the ulysses, it was turning so fast I had a hard time aiming... and the myrm is way more agile than, say, the Hercules ( mk1 ).
-
Yeah, but it should have handled at least as good as the ship it replaced in the fleet(the Uly). I think the Myrmidon is yet another example of a collosal(sic) blunder in ship designations. It's more of a strike bomber that can dogfight relatively well after it's dumped it's payload.
-
Speed. Agility has no use against the Ai. Being able to run away from Flaks and slower fighters is more temptating. :)
-
I prefer to have to choose between speed/agility and heavy hull/shield, personally.
-
Originally posted by Nico
I prefer to have to choose between speed/agility and heavy hull/shield, personally.
Ah...but - no shields. I'm trying to figure out 'extreme' characteristics that distinguish between ships, actually. Because there's no cockpit differences, really, so if you want to make each ship unique you have to add in some interesting handling or performance characteristics.
-
Bombers - Speed. I want to zoom in and out of the combat area, unloading bombs and getting the hell out of the way of the blast/enemy fire.
Fighters - Agility. Speed is all for nothing if I can't dodge out of enemy fire/turn fast enough to keep my target in my sights.
-
Bombers - speed. I DONT want to stay near flak, no matter how much they sound like tasty cereals..
Fighters - agility. In a dogfight, especially outnumbered, agility counts a LOT.
-
It depends on the role of the intended ship.
A Dogfighter has to be Agile, bar none. Speed isn't that useful if you got a fighter that's constant nibbling away at your rear with guns. Flying away from him only gives him a chance to lock on with missiles. But of course, building the most agile speed 25 fighter is asking for trouble, he's simply too slow to make use of its agility.
On the other hand, an Intercepter has to be fast. While speeds in FS2 are quite close to one another, sometimes having a really fast interceptor can help. Especially when you have an evil mission designer who has enemy bomber wings jump on both sides of a capital ship or have you rushing back and forth two separate convoys. :mad:
For bombers, likewise:
Speed is good for assault bombers. Lock at long range, zoom in, launch at range 150 and get the hell out of AFB and flak cannon range! Imagine having a bomber zip by at a constant 100 without AB, dropping off a payload and zooming off again. This will make those high speed intercept fighters useful! :eek:
For multirole fighter/bombers, agility is more useful, especially more true when you have no or sucky escorts. This is probably one of the reasons why the Vasudan bombers perform a lot better than their Terran counterparts (esp. when you don't have a turret!).
But if I'm forced to comprimse, I'll chose Agility. Speed isn't really that worth it in FS2 except in the cases I listed above. Most of the time you're just zipping into dense dogfights and blowing every enemy ship up. :D
-
Originally posted by Black Wolf
Speed. The overly manoeuvrable fighters just make the game frustrating for me, though they do make the AI more of a challenge to kill.
Ditto. Plus for a keyboard jockey like me, it's not always easy to steer those super maneuverable ships. I like Heavy assault/bomber type ships.
-
I'm a mouser, and I agree - heavy assault all the way :)
-
We should derail this into the " 200 Reasons why the Seth is the most superior fighter in the game" thread.. ;)
-
Reason 1 - That beautiful Afterburner.
-
The Seth is really a good one, but I prefer more maneuverable ones like the Valkyrie or the Perseus. I even love the Ulysses and the Loki despite their resisting weakness in warhead capacity, because I prefer primaries in a dogfight.
Secondary weapons have little use against fighters at close range, you cannot have a lock on them even with a Harpoon if your enemy does sudden and quick maneuvers. The Tempest may be a good choice in situations like these, but with time you run out of ammo.
I wanted to write something relatively long as my 3000th post! :)
-
Reason 2 - The excellence that is Vasudan Ship Design.
For my 5000th post, I posted that Mustang Render.
-
Reason 3 - Faster in all three areas (Max. Velocity, Max Overclocked Velocity and Max afterburner Velocity than the Herc II, which was built for speed.
Reason 4 - Despite that, it still has a stronger hull.
Reason 5 - Despite 32 years of extra practice, the Herc 2 only improves on the Seth by 30 hitpoints in shields.
-
Reason 6 - and it's got Six Gunpoints like a true heavy assault fighter should.
-
Reason 6 - It supports more than sufficient weaponry configurations.
Reason 7 - Despite 32 years of 'practice' as you say, it's still preferred over the newer variant, Tuaret Class, which actually is a downgrade from the Seth and Herc II.
-
Originally posted by Black Wolf
Speed. The overly manoeuvrable fighters just make the game frustrating
Perfectly said, Black Wolf. FS should be source of fun, not frustration. Voted for speed.
-
Too maneuverable, too fast, too small = SF Dragon.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Bombers - Speed. I want to zoom in and out of the combat area, unloading bombs and getting the hell out of the way of the blast/enemy fire.
Fighters - Agility. Speed is all for nothing if I can't dodge out of enemy fire/turn fast enough to keep my target in my sights.
-
Originally posted by Raa Tor'h
We should derail this into the " 200 Reasons why the Seth is the most superior fighter in the game" thread.. ;)
Bleh, I prefer the Valkyrie :p
-
Can't go wrong with the Valk.
-
Originally posted by Moonsword
Agility, definitely. With agility comes a reasonable amount of speed anyway, based on the lower mass necessary.
And the Myrmidon's not that unmaneuverable. Try dogfighting in a Medusa sometime because your idiot escorts won't or can't peel a fighter off your butt. Now that sucks.
I did dogfight in a Medusa (Doomsday) and it did suck. But that still doesn't change the fact that a Myrmidon handles worse than a Herc II.
Originally posted by aldo_14
Can't go wrong with the Valk.
That ship is a death trap.
-
Originally posted by Knight Templar
Screw you woolie, Speed owns.
See the Athena.
The Athena isn't a fighter. Bombers need speed more than maneuverability. Fighters rely on maneuverability more than speed. That's why the Vasudans completely changed the nature of the Horus' successor from a really fast but rather unmaneuverable fighter to a moderate-speed but extremely agile fighter. Besides, the Athena automatically sucks after about halfway through FS1 because it can't carry Prometheus.
As for the Myrmidon, the six primary banks MORE than make up for any lack of maneouverability. I found the good ol' Myrmidon equipped with dual Prom S cannon and dumbfires was the best ship to use in dogfighting. The Herc II didn't pack a big enough punch, primary wise and the Ares was too slow. The Erenies seems like a good successor to the Myrmidon, but lacks gun power. That good ol' Myrmidon can go all day firing dual Proms.
First of all, the Myrmidon's weapons are not positioned very well. It is MUCH harder to hit a target in a Myrmidon than it is to hit a target in an Apollo or Hercules. Second, the Perseus' primary armament is better because it has better-positioned guns and can carry the Kayser. 4 Kaysers or 2 Kaysers plus 2 Prometheus S beat 6 Promeheus S any day. The Perseus is also almost as tough, faster, and far more agile. The Perseus is the best dogfighter in FS2 (except for the Terran Mara, which is kind of cheating), in my opinion. The Perseus is nicely balanced and very agile. Here's what's wrong with other ships compared to the Perseus:
-The Myrmidon has poor weapons compatibility, badly placed guns, poor maneuverability, and is a huge target from any angle.
-The Herc Ii doesn't have the primary armament to compensate for its poor speed and mediocre maneuverability.
-The Ares is, well, not really designed to dogfight. Shooting down a Dragon, for instance, would be very difficult.
-The Pegasus is just awful for dogfights.
-The Erinyes' reactor is too underpowered for its guns and its shields and armor aren't that strong.
-The Ulysses is not durable enough and its secondary capacity is negligble.
-You only get to fly the Mara for one mission.:(
-The Seth is not strong enough and lacks the primary punch to compete with the other heavy assault fighters.
-The Horus isn't agile enough and its hull and armor are so weak that it can kiss its ass goodbye if it gets in front of an Ares or Erinyes.
-The Serapis isn't durable enough.
-The Tauret has really bad gun placement.
-Despite its slim profile, the Thoth is surprisingly easy to hit and can't take that much damage.
-Flying a Ptah in a dogfight is suicide. Plain and simple.
-
Maybe, but the Avenger is almost as good and fires faster. Plus with it's tight primary pattern, heavier payload and faster AB. I prefered the Athena to the Herc 1.
One thing that bugs me
and it's got Six Gunpoints like a true heavy assault fighter should.
Since when does the Seth have 6 gun points?
-
Speeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed.
'cause the Horus 0wnz y00h. Not to mention the Valkyrie.
Seriously, speed is a very good tactical thingy. You can be everywhere at the same time if you're fast enough.
Agility can be improved with a good amount of skill. It is possible to out-turn Ulysseses with an Erinyes. :)
-edit: and yes, the Seth has 4 guns.
-
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
That ship is a death trap.
Only if you can;t handle a bit of seat-of-the-pants flying :p.
-
Yeah, the Valk is a damn sight better than that horrible Apollo they stick you in in the beginning of the war...
-
The Valkyrie is the best fighter in the FreeSpace universe. It is even better than the Perseus.
-
Don't downgrade the Apollo - it's the most balanced fighter of its era. Yes, the Valkyre is better suited for inteceptor roles, and the Herc I - which is vastly superior to the Herc II since the later lacks the punch of the original - is a better offense fighter....
Still there are a couple of ocassion where you need to do both - and that's the place for the Apollo.
As for the Erynes - that's the deadliest assault ship ever created. There's one problem: you need 3 arms to fly it.
This is the only fighter where a true multitasking pilot will have an edge - you have to constatnly shift power from 1 system to another, and that's not just the ETS, but diverting power from shields to guns and vice versa. - if you can't handle it, you'll never take advantage of the ship's immense power.
The only way to take down such a pilot in an Erynes is to outmanouver him - but's that not as easy as it sounds, since although the Erynes is not that agile as the Perseus, with a generous use of Afterburners its darn fast.
-
The Erinyes can literally slaughter everything (without dying) with the lethal combo. If used properly, that is.
Then again, you can dodge with a Perseus to degrees that you're (almost) invulnerable.
Against AI, however, you dont need neither speed, nor agility.
-
in a multiplayer game a while back, I remember taking a Seth (or Thoth, not sure. Only remember it was in that game with the old fighters only) and having a blast taking out everyone else in Ulysses :)
Think Karajoma played that one game with me though, so hge could prolly confirm :/
The Erynies is good if you know how to fly it.......unfortunately, I suck in multiplayer to the point that I die quickly...havent had a chance to try the Perseus though......
damnit!! Where is multiplayer??????!!!!!!
-
I love the Perseus myself but an Erinyes with double Keysers and tempest will turn any fighter/bomber into space dust in seconds. With all the system juggling and piloting Erinyes is really a ship for skilled pilots. So I agree its one of the best ships around (I only wished that they designed it to look better - the ship looks like a bunch of legos stacked together)
-
It totally depends on the role the fighter/bomber has to fulfill.
- Dogfighter: 100% Agility.
- Scout: 100% Speed
- Interceptor: 70% speed, 30% agility. It needs to be faster then the average fighter/bomber to intercept but needs enough agility to put up a decent fight.
- Light Assault: 80% Agility, 20% speed. They need to be able to manoeuvre quite quickly but also need some speed for a succesfull assault.
- Heavy assault: 90% agility, 10% speed. HA fighters are basically heavy dogfighters with a touch of added speed to make succesfull assault runs.
- Escort bomber: 50% speed, 50% agility. Needs speed to keep up with fighters/capital ships and still have the agility to fight against fighters. They mainly perform anti-fighter roles with light missiles.
- Light bomber: 70% speed, 30% agility. Usually deployed against lighter more manouvrable cap ships. Carry light to medium payload.
- All-round bomber: 80% speed, 20% Agility. Basically a multipurpose bomber. Carrying medium payloads it can run in and drop it while avoiding fighters and flak to a degree.
- Heavy bomber: 90% speed, 10% agility. Speed to get in fast, agility to not get shot down instantly before dropping the payload by flak cannons. Carry heavy payloads.
- Long range bombers: 100% speed. Obviously for long range bombing raids. Medium payload. Getin and get out before anyone sees you.
-------
At least, thats how I see it. (This is not based on FS cuz the engine is ****ed when it comes to this subject)
-
Originally posted by Flaser
...The only way to take down such a pilot in an Erynes is to outmanouver him - but's that not as easy as it sounds, since although the Erynes is not that agile as the Perseus, with a generous use of Afterburners its darn fast.
The Erinyes is like a well-armed space snail.
-
Originally posted by TopAce
The Erinyes is like a well-armed space snail.
Don't you mean Ares, the flying potato?
Personally, I like having the speed, because if all else fails I can run away from the battle, and I'm also usually the guy who has to like, fly 10km away and disable a destroyer before it gets within range or something.
That's why I designed those Epimetheus interceptors. Against heavy fighters (when flown by intelligent pilots) they can zoom within range, do some damage, and be out of range before the heavy fighter can target them.
But for the AI, they're a major pain with agility. Ulysses is just as hard to hit as it is to aim. I can't stand time based missions when I'm up against Ulysses'. They dodge your guns, and they're impossible to get a decent lock on.
-
On second thought, speed is the best, but only when taken to extremes. See, if a hostile gets behind you, you can just hit your burners and shoot off at 200m/s out into the distance and away from his fire. Easy.
'Course, you have problems if he can also go at 200m/s... so you get a better fighter that goes at 250m/s, then 300m/s, then 350m/s, then 400m/s...
Eventually, however, somebody's going to hit 660m/s and travel back in time to 1985, so perhaps that's not such a cool idea after all.
-
Wouldn't want to fall inlove with your mother, now would you?
-
:ick:
-
I prefer a reasonable agility - Ulysses at max stick-sensitivity is a couple of magnitudes too jiggly for me. Myrmidon/Herc II were A-OK, though. Inferno... was utter hell... :) Until I reduced sensitivity to, like, three dots or something with a dead-zone at 3-5 dots. Hehe!
-
Well...FS2 had a issue with speed and manuverability.
Difference in speed between fighters and bommbers(and the top speed in all cases) were rather small...
A state-of-the art fighter flies only 100kph????
Apart from that, manuverability was overdone. Bombers had the manuverability of figters and fighters were so damn manuverable that it was a real challenge to fly them...
I prefer speed...you can run away from slower opponents and from flak, while your shield re-charges... Even a middle class bomber had decent enough manuverability in FS series, wich made them actually pretty effective. I played FS1 with the Athena and kicked ass on the highest dfficulty.
For FS2 the Perseus and Ares were my choices, alltough I prefer the Ares (FIREPOWER...FIREWPOWER!!!!!!).
-
Erm, this is an evil question - I like both, but too much of either is a pain in the arse. The Ulysses, Pegasus and Horus are hideous - my ideal fighter would be a Herc2 that was as fast as the Perseus. I'd also prefer it to have another gun mount, but that's a different debate. ;)
I'll have to say speed, because I'd rather have excess speed than excessive agility.
-
Originally posted by TrashMan
Well...FS2 had a issue with speed and manuverability.
A state-of-the art fighter flies only 100kph????
Not 100kph, 100m/s... That's 360kph.
But yeah, they are pathetically slow, especially considering this is space.
(Getting some numbers from google:)
MiG-21F: 2175kph, 604m/s, so around 600 top speed in Freespace (at 42640 ft).
F-14 Tomcat: 2517kph, 699m/s, around 700 top speed in Freespace (using afterburners I assume).
F-15 Eagle: 3060kph, 850m/s, around 850 top speed in Freespace.
F-16 Falcon: 2448kph, 680m/s, around 680 top speed in Freespace.
F/A-18 Hornet: 1912 kph, 531m/s, around 530 top speed in Freespace.
F-22 Raptor: 2203kph, 612m/s, around 610 top speed in Freespace.
A10 Thunderbolt 2: 675kph, 187m/s, around 190 top speed in Freespace.
F-117 Stealth: 1224kph+, 340m/s, around 340 top speed in Freespace.
B52 Stratofortress: 1046kph, 290m/s, around 290 top speed in Freespace.
AH-64 Apache Helicopter: 296 kph, 82m/s, around 80 top speed in Freespace.
B-1B Lancer: 1530kph, 425m/s, around 425 top speed in Freespace.
SR-71 Blackbird: 4039kph, 1122m/s, around 1100 top speed in Freespace.
Porche 356: 185kph, 51m/s, around 50 top speed in Freespace.
Space Shuttle: 28296kph, 7860m/s, around 8000 top speed in Freespace (in orbit).
But then everything would be impossible to hit with anything except really fast missiles. (Not to mention the game would start thinking you're trying to abandon the battlefield if you go to far at that speed.) Although you could make it interesting by drastically decreasing the amount of agility that fighters have.
Okay, so its off topic. Big deal...
-
The numbers on the Eagle are wrong....It's slower than the F-16 as far as I recall.
And the F-14 can reach 2517kph without afterburner...it's an interceptor and still among the 10 fastest fighters in the world..
Other numbers seem o.k.
I have a fixation on the military, so I have books on warship, jets, tanks and stuff...and I look at new info all the time....
And it's completely the opposite - if you increase the speed in FS2, that you should reduce manuverability to acheve smoother turns...I tried it... Doubled the speed of everything. It was a real challenge to fight against a Astaroth. When I reduced the Manuverability it all seemed to fit in place...
-
The F-14 is awesome.
@TrashMan:
Do you still have those tables? I'd like to try that out when/if I can play fs2 again.
-
Not anymore.
But the changes are easy to make... Double the speed of fighter and decrease the manuverability by 50% (at least I think it was 50%)...
-
Originally posted by TrashMan
Not anymore.
But the changes are easy to make... Double the speed of fighter and decrease the manuverability by 50% (at least I think it was 50%)...
my my, aren't you helpful. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Arculis
That's why I designed those Epimetheus interceptors. Against heavy fighters (when flown by intelligent pilots) they can zoom within range, do some damage, and be out of range before the heavy fighter can target them.
You do realize that Epimetheus was the dumb Titan, who name literally means afterthought?:p
-
Originally posted by Mr. Vega
You do realize that Epimetheus was the dumb Titan, who name literally means afterthought?:p
Yeah, you don't think about 'em until they're gone. (The dumb titan is the heavy fighter that they hit :))
And every source I can find on google says that the F-15 is faster. But there's no guarantee that any of it is remotely accurate. The bottom line though is that if you want Freespace to be realistic, the fighters need to be a lot faster.
-
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
First of all, the Myrmidon's weapons are not positioned very well. It is MUCH harder to hit a target in a Myrmidon than it is to hit a target in an Apollo or Hercules. Second, the Perseus' primary armament is better because it has better-positioned guns and can carry the Kayser.
I'm sure Myrs can carry Kaysers too. Load up FS2 and pick a mission like Endgame. Check out the weapon load screen, you should be able to load the Kayser into a Myr. (Correct me here, maybe I unknowingly added some mod that permitted Myrs to carry Kaysers.)
-The Myrmidon has poor weapons compatibility, badly placed guns, poor maneuverability, and is a huge target from any angle.
Agreed with the huge target profile. But I think the only useful weapon you can't load into a Myr is the Harpoon. Tors, Kaysers, Trebs are all loadable on the Myr. Also Myrs can shoot four shots quickly in single shot mode when you select the second primary bank. (Great with Singleshot kaysers or Proms)
The Perseus can also do that but in double shot mode, and thus, does is more slowly. Plus Myrs even have thicker armor the Herc II.
Though I still prefer the Perseus. It's better looking and a lot more agile (easier to pull out some fancy flying, track fast moving ships and get behind your target then a Myr, IMHO) :)
-
Originally posted by Cabbie
I'm sure Myrs can carry Kaysers too. Load up FS2 and pick a mission like Endgame. Check out the weapon load screen, you should be able to load the Kayser into a Myr. (Correct me here, maybe I unknowingly added some mod that permitted Myrs to carry Kaysers.)
Myrmidons can carry Kaysers, but you do not have it available in the Endgame mission.
Actually, Endgame is one of the first missions you can use the Prometheus S.
-
Originally posted by TopAce
Myrmidons can carry Kaysers, but you do not have it available in the Endgame mission.
Actually, Endgame is one of the first missions you can use the Prometheus S.
If my memory servers me right, the Prom s was introduced during the briefing for the mission right before End game...whats its name again? Sicilian Defence?
For some strange reason I get the Kaysers in my weapon loadout in the Endgame mission (through the mission sim). I'm sure the Kaysers should be introduced later on in the last few missions. Maybe one of the dozen mods I used altered it.
-
The Sicilian Defense was two missions back to Endgame. But there is still no way you get Kaysers in that mission. WHEN YOU PLAY THAT MISSION IN A CAMPAIGN.
Individually, in the simulator you MAY get the Kayser. I am not sure I have not played any FS2 campaign missions in the simulator.
-
Originally posted by Arculis
And every source I can find on google says that the F-15 is faster. But there's no guarantee that any of it is remotely accurate. The bottom line though is that if you want Freespace to be realistic, the fighters need to be a lot faster.
Agreed.... In every SF show small fighters whizz by like lightning bolts..
-
Originally posted by Arculis
...
(Getting some numbers from google:)
MiG-21F: 2175kph, 604m/s, so around 600 top speed in Freespace (at 42640 ft).
F-14 Tomcat: 2517kph, 699m/s, around 700 top speed in Freespace (using afterburners I assume).
F-15 Eagle: 3060kph, 850m/s, around 850 top speed in Freespace.
F-16 Falcon: 2448kph, 680m/s, around 680 top speed in Freespace.
F/A-18 Hornet: 1912 kph, 531m/s, around 530 top speed in Freespace.
F-22 Raptor: 2203kph, 612m/s, around 610 top speed in Freespace.
A10 Thunderbolt 2: 675kph, 187m/s, around 190 top speed in Freespace.
F-117 Stealth: 1224kph+, 340m/s, around 340 top speed in Freespace.
B52 Stratofortress: 1046kph, 290m/s, around 290 top speed in Freespace.
AH-64 Apache Helicopter: 296 kph, 82m/s, around 80 top speed in Freespace.
B-1B Lancer: 1530kph, 425m/s, around 425 top speed in Freespace.
SR-71 Blackbird: 4039kph, 1122m/s, around 1100 top speed in Freespace.
Porche 356: 185kph, 51m/s, around 50 top speed in Freespace.
Space Shuttle: 28296kph, 7860m/s, around 8000 top speed in Freespace (in orbit).
..
And we have not yet mentioned afterburners, right?
-
Originally posted by TopAce
The Sicilian Defense was two missions back to Endgame. But there is still no way you get Kaysers in that mission. WHEN YOU PLAY THAT MISSION IN A CAMPAIGN.
Individually, in the simulator you MAY get the Kayser. I am not sure I have not played any FS2 campaign missions in the simulator.
Checked it in the game. Nope, Sicilian Defence is right before Endgame. :)
(http://www.overundertokyo.com/proof.gif)
Your right, Kaysers that early must be a mission sim only option (er, bug?). If you check the weapon loadout in Endgame in the Mission sim, strangely enough, you get the Kaysers as an option.
-
Originally posted by Cabbie
If my memory servers me right, the Prom s was introduced during the briefing for the mission right before End game...whats its name again? Sicilian Defence?
You could be correct but you're most likely wrong. The Prom S is granted in Proving Grounds which means the first mission you'll be able to use it in is The King's Gambit. Now whether you have any available in the team loadout is another matter :D
There's a big table of when weapons were granted in my FAQ so you know where to look next time this one comes up :D
-
Originally posted by karajorma
You could be correct but you're most likely wrong. The Prom S is granted in Proving Grounds which means the first mission you'll be able to use it in is The King's Gambit. Now whether you have any available in the team loadout is another matter :D
There's a big table of when weapons were granted in my FAQ so you know where to look next time this one comes up :D
Oh okay, thanks :). Hate opening up Freespace and shuffling through the briefings everytime I want to check something out.
-
Originally posted by Cabbie
Checked it in the game. Nope, Sicilian Defence is right before Endgame. :)
(http://www.overundertokyo.com/proof.gif)
Your right, Kaysers that early must be a mission sim only option (er, bug?). If you check the weapon loadout in Endgame in the Mission sim, strangely enough, you get the Kaysers as an option.
I mixed the Sicilian Defense with the King's Gambit. :)
Having the authorization to take the Kayser is not a bug, simply the campaign file doesn't allow you take Kaysers in the campaign. I think [V] allowed the players to take the Kayser in the simulator intentionally.
-
Originally posted by TopAce
I mixed the Sicilian Defense with the King's Gambit. :)
Having the authorization to take the Kayser is not a bug, simply the campaign file doesn't allow you take Kaysers in the campaign. I think [V] allowed the players to take the Kayser in the simulator intentionally.
Either that or that they simply left the kayser in when testing and simply forgot to remove it when they released the game.
I tend to do that when FREDding. I leave in all the powerful weapons to make testing easy until the final play balance testing when I actually decide what weapons to give the player.