Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Antares on September 13, 2004, 07:45:46 pm

Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Antares on September 13, 2004, 07:45:46 pm
I seem to remember a thread discussing this topic before, but out of curiosity, have any of you FS1 vets managed to destroy the PVD Prophecy in "The Great Hunt"?
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: phreak on September 13, 2004, 07:47:47 pm
no and because of that, every "rebirth of the HOL" campaign has the Prophecy in it. :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 13, 2004, 08:03:53 pm
I think I actually did one time, by ordering every other ship to attack it.  Of course, Command was none too pleased ("1 minute left!  Get your @$$ to the node!" :p), and the Ursas probably didn't have any Harbingers left for the big Lucy, but it is doable.  Personally, I always thought that the Bastion and any fighters/bombers left on it would have taken care of it after you left, although there's nothing to support this as far as I know.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Swamp_Thing on September 13, 2004, 08:14:45 pm
I destroyed it once, allthough i don´t remember getting anything for my efforts...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 13, 2004, 08:29:48 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Swamp_Thing
I destroyed it once, allthough i don´t remember getting anything for my efforts...

No, Command doesn't even mention it.  Apparently, the impending destruction of Earth take precedence over killing a destroyer for skill points :p.

P.S.  Speaking of that, has anyone ever made a campaign in which the Lucifer does destroy Earth?  It would be interesting to get someone's take on what the rest of the GTA/PVN would do if "Good Luck" failed.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Taristin on September 13, 2004, 09:00:55 pm
It would all be over if that happened. You'd only sit along and wait for the Lucifer to destroy every destroyer in the galaxy, and raze every planet... :p
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 13, 2004, 09:41:21 pm
Well, you could attempt another attack at a different node.  A few destroyers could lead  the Lucifer on a wild goose chase until everything was set up properly for a bigger, more well-prepared strike.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Ghostavo on September 13, 2004, 09:51:08 pm
Am I the only one to simply go to the node and jump in that mission? :nervous:
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Axem on September 13, 2004, 09:53:27 pm
Or the Shivans, being enigmatic as usual, just vanish without a trace...

Or the Shivans suddenly realise that the Terrans and Vasudans didn't like the Extreme Makeovers given to their homeworlds and they make peace with them.

Either way, the Shivans still win... they always win... ;)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Goober5000 on September 14, 2004, 01:48:48 am
Quote
Originally posted by Mongoose
P.S.  Speaking of that, has anyone ever made a campaign in which the Lucifer does destroy Earth?  It would be interesting to get someone's take on what the rest of the GTA/PVN would do if "Good Luck" failed.
There should be a few campaigns on the VWatch Archives about that.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Black Wolf on September 14, 2004, 11:11:01 am
Quote
Originally posted by Mongoose

P.S.  Speaking of that, has anyone ever made a campaign in which the Lucifer does destroy Earth?  It would be interesting to get someone's take on what the rest of the GTA/PVN would do if "Good Luck" failed.


Theoretically, an0n is doing a campaign based around that, though, as I understand it, he's doing it somewhat sporadically.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 14, 2004, 11:32:36 am
You can get a good amount of score if you destroy it. I would say ignore it, you may lose too many wingmen.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: an0n on September 14, 2004, 11:52:07 am
Quote
Originally posted by Black Wolf
Theoretically, an0n is doing a campaign based around that, though, as I understand it, he's doing it somewhat sporadically.
I'm amazed that you remembered I was making a campaign

I'm terrified that you remembered the plot.

And I've almost finished that first mission. I still need to add a ton of dialogue and make it less ****ty.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Hippo on September 14, 2004, 03:51:11 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Mongoose
Well, you could attempt another attack at a different node.  A few destroyers could lead  the Lucifer on a wild goose chase until everything was set up properly for a bigger, more well-prepared strike.



Whats the thing though, the Lucifer couldn't be destroyed outside subspace... So it never has to go anywhere... I'm wondering why it wouldn't just turn to the bastion and take it out, and then let some Dragons take out the wingmen and A1...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Blitzerland on September 14, 2004, 03:58:27 pm
When you first arrive, the Lucifer is only 10 or so seconds away from jumping, so perhaps it was too late for it to turn around.

Valid point, however.

P.S.

Sorry you couldn't do the Hades, Hippo. Magatsu1 is fairly enthusatic, though.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 14, 2004, 07:42:52 pm
Hippo, my thought is that the Shivans didn't see the Bastion and its complement as any threat.  Why bother stopping to destroy a measly Orion when you're on your way to toast all of humanity?  It was really only through the skill of your wing that the Lucifer's weakness was able to be exploited.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 15, 2004, 08:26:21 am
TECHNICAL REASONS! It would have taken a hell amount of time for the Lucifer to turn, destroy the Bastion, turn back and jump out. The Ai is too stupid to do scriptings like these.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 15, 2004, 08:52:35 am
I think the Lucifer turning would have wrecked the mission flow, anyways.  It's going to finish the war off with a final strike against Earth (or at least, as far as the player knows), why bother with minnows like an Orion.

Incidentally, the chase in that mission is one of my favourite FS missions.  IIRC we tried to put a mission like that into CoW (the one where you attack the Ogdoad).
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Kie99 on September 15, 2004, 01:14:24 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Ghostavo
Am I the only one to simply go to the node and jump in that mission? :nervous:


No I do that too
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 15, 2004, 01:15:54 pm
For the first time, nobody dares attack the Typhon, in my opinion.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Galemp on September 15, 2004, 02:18:42 pm
Never tried, actually. Mostly I'm in a Herc just trying to get to the node as fast as I can, so as few of my wingmates die as possible from those Manticores that keep chasing us.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: an0n on September 15, 2004, 02:25:28 pm
I ran my mother****ing ass off in the heaviest, most ass-kickingest bomber they let you have. I forget which one exactly, but I'm guessing it was an Ursa.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Goober5000 on September 15, 2004, 02:40:29 pm
The thing with that mission is that they don't launch the Ursas or Thoths until later in the mission.  One time I was in a Valkyrie and made great time to the node, but when I arrived in the next mission I had only Alpha and Beta wing. :eek:
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Aspa on September 15, 2004, 03:01:11 pm
Once I hit a bug in that mission, where the Lucy doesn't depart when it reach the node, but starts spinning around, and shoots at the Bastion every time it turns in it's direction.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 15, 2004, 03:52:56 pm
I know the first time, I just ran right to the node.  Now, I usually stick with my wingmen to try to get them all to the node.  It's not that hard if you stay by them and help them fend off the Shivan wings.  Quad Banshees own Basiliks :D.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Stealth on September 15, 2004, 04:09:17 pm
yeah.  i usually tell everyone to form on my wing, put the time compression on x4, all subsystem energy to engines, and haul ass to the node...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 16, 2004, 09:41:44 am
Quote
Originally posted by Goober5000
The thing with that mission is that they don't launch the Ursas or Thoths until later in the mission.  One time I was in a Valkyrie and made great time to the node, but when I arrived in the next mission I had only Alpha and Beta wing. :eek:


Same happened to me. [V] do not seem to have spent much time testing that mission.

Quote
Originally posted by Stealth
yeah.  i usually tell everyone to form on my wing, put the time compression on x4, all subsystem energy to engines, and haul ass to the node...


I do not rush to the node for several reasons:
[list=1]


Quote
Originally posted by Aspa
Once I hit a bug in that mission, where the Lucy doesn't depart when it reach the node, but starts spinning around, and shoots at the Bastion every time it turns in it's direction.


FSPort or FS1?
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: ionia23 on September 16, 2004, 02:49:25 pm
Bear in mind something,.  the first Shivan "invasion" was little more than a scouting party.

I doubt that as of the end of the FS2 campaign we'd seen even a minor node of the Shivan Armada.

(entirely speculation, btw).
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 16, 2004, 02:51:54 pm
Scouts destroying an entire planet? I mean Vasuda Prime obviously. The GTVA also needs scouts like those.

The following transmission has been intercepted coming from an Unknown location to the Lucifer:
You will fly a reconaissance mission today. Destroy Vasuda Prime and Earth and neutralise all remaining hostile forces.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: ionia23 on September 16, 2004, 03:23:38 pm
I'm thinking it was more like:

Activity directed in subspace node blah.  Dispatch investigate team to asses.

Hostile presence detected.

Eliminate hostile presence.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 17, 2004, 04:31:22 am
Considering the Lucifer was apparently quite unique...I'm not that open to thinking of it as a scout ship writ large.

My question, though, was why didn't they send ships from the Earth side of the node to attack the Lucifer? Have one Valk sit on the other side to give warning when the Lucifer shows up, then send in the whole of the 1st Fleet. Lucy fall down go boom.

Or maybe just park an Orion infront of the node, so the Lucifer rams it as it exits subspace and they both blow up.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 17, 2004, 06:01:24 am
Quote
Originally posted by TopAce
Scouts destroying an entire planet? I mean Vasuda Prime obviously. The GTVA also needs scouts like those.

The following transmission has been intercepted coming from an Unknown location to the Lucifer:
You will fly a reconaissance mission today. Destroy Vasuda Prime and Earth and neutralise all remaining hostile forces.


It's only a planet, after all.  Not a major demolitions job or anything.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Stealth on September 17, 2004, 12:56:31 pm
Quote
Originally posted by TopAce

I do not rush to the node for several reasons:
[list=1]
  • I like dogfighting
you like dogfighting when you're flying an ursa? :lol:
  • I do not trust my wingmen to defend me while I am making the run to the node.
i'm more afraid of them dying, which is why i keep telling them to form on my wing... so they don't get 0wned in the battle
  • Taking down Basilisks and Thoths is fun
not in an ursa it's not ;)
  • There is a lot of time
yeah, but lots of time sitting in an ursa isn't fun
[/list]
[/B]


...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 17, 2004, 01:19:31 pm
Um, the default ship for that mission is a Herc :p
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 17, 2004, 01:27:46 pm
People certainly like the Ursa, because it is the only bomber that can carry almost all types of warheads. My favourite bomber is the Zeus or the Medusa, they are not that slow.

I have never taken the Ursa in that mission, for this simple reason my points are invalid for the Ursa. :nod:
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Swamp_Thing on September 17, 2004, 02:58:18 pm
Why would anyone use a bomber in that mission (and the next)??
I mean, you have to fight several wings of fighters, including Dragons. And your wingmen will take out the reactors in  just a couple of minutes anyway...
I always used the Herc, because it´s well armed and heavy hulled. And there IS a lot of time, so stop to take out any fighters that come along, while you fly to the node. When the Typhoon appears, send them to take it out, while you make your way to the node. If you time it right, they will blow it up, and you will just have to jump.
Then in subspace, keep the fighters occupied while you order your wingmen to take out a reactor, any reactor. They will proceed on their own to destroy the other 4 without any orders at all.
I never get near the Lucy, because the reactors blowing up would kill me too, so i stay well away. The fighters that come along always target me, so your bombers should be safe.
:)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: ionia23 on September 17, 2004, 03:07:26 pm
Agreed.  Really no point in flying an Ursa yourself.  The strategy I always use is:

1. Herc
2. Dual prometheus (no point in bringing a shield buster as they'll be pointless in the next mission)
3. Don't bother with afterburners on the way to the node, just cruise at max speed.
4. keep all wingmen close.  When being attacked, wait until they are 1.2 km out, then order all wingmen to engage enemy.  Works fast.
5.  Don't plan on pumping the burner until the Prophecy jumps in.  You should make it to the node before your wingmen get killed.

You can also use a well-documented trick to double the rate of fire on the prometheus.  Switch to single-fire mode, hold down your primary fire button and while doing so switch to dual fire mode.  Blammo.  As long as you keep your fire button pressed you'll fire at roughly double-rate.  Absolutely awesome for taking down Dragon fighters.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Ghostavo on September 17, 2004, 03:10:50 pm
I think those like me that use ursas in that mission use it because we don't trust the AI to blow the reactors so instead we like to do it personally :p
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 17, 2004, 03:11:18 pm
Considering this thread is exclusively about the Great Hunt, what I am going to post cannot be considered a spam:
I use the Ulysses or the Valkyrie most of the times, with dual Prometheus cannons and the Fury in the secondary bank(s).
The only situation you make a good choice with the Ursa is when all your stupid Delta wingmen die. It is another situation you can defend them if you fly interceptor fighters, but don't touch this yet. :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Trivial Psychic on September 17, 2004, 03:52:33 pm
I always chose a Herc with Prom in the 4 bank and disruptors in the 2 bank.  I stick with the Proms to engage fighters so I don't lose anything in fire-rate.  I keep the disruptors on hand to help take out the reactors if I lose too many bombers.  As far as secondaries, I load both banks with Interceptors.  I used to keep a bank of Phoenix Vs, but those are hard to use against fighters and they won't take out the turrets on the Lucy very well.  I just load up with Interceptors and can pretty much take out a fighter with a single hit (once I'm in subspace).  I usually do race for the node in the Great Hunt.  I find that at top speed, even the Manticores eventually give up on me and turn back.

Later!
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 17, 2004, 03:59:54 pm
I find that if I just order my wingmen to engage the enemy and make a solo run for the node at top speed with the engine power maxed out and heavy on the burner, I get there intact, my wingmen are in the next mission all intact, and it's all pretty easy.

I used to do it in an Ursa 'cuz I didn't trust Delta very much. Now I just use the Herc and concentrate on living long enough to let Delta do their job, which they usually can, fighters or no fighters. They do it a lot better in the Port, although that might have something to with the fact they were armed with Cyclops bombs in that mission...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TrashMan on September 17, 2004, 04:02:34 pm
I prefer the Athena packed with Furies and Stilletos and double Avengers.
First I thin the fighter cover and then I help with the reactors. But one of my favorite missions was Clash of the Titans.. too bad the normal cpaship weaponry sucked. I actually played a modified FS1 in which I gave capships powerfull weapons.. boy, was that fight great!
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 18, 2004, 05:02:06 am
Why don't you take the Prometheus? I like the Athena as well as any other fighters, but why not take a powerful weapon when it is available? Is the nergy Comsumption the problem?
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 18, 2004, 05:21:17 am
Athena can't carry it.

...I think.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TrashMan on September 18, 2004, 07:53:26 am
Nope it can't...But I still love that ship.. I got myslef a special version of the Athena - the Athena DH..
Textured in darker tones and with a skull symbol. Real cool looking SOC ship that makes the Zeus and Artremis look like toys.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 18, 2004, 09:57:29 am
Quote
Originally posted by ngtm1r
Athena can't carry it.

...I think.


Rarely do I say somebody is right, but now it is time I confessed this:
YOU ARE RIGHT!
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 18, 2004, 10:18:46 am
I thought the Athena was pretty damn ugly, actually.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 18, 2004, 10:19:33 am
She is a nice ship, in my subjective opinion.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Flaser on September 18, 2004, 10:37:10 am
Fastets bomber in the entire fleet - it's the best lightning bomber IMHO even better then the Artemis if you're to cripple the capships instead sinking them.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 18, 2004, 11:30:16 am
It was a nice "bomber", but at the time it couldn't carry any bombs. Which was kind of odd. The only thing it could really carry in FS1 was stilettos. I hope TVWP is rectifying that issue.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 18, 2004, 11:40:20 am
It is almost as sure as this is the 50th post in this thread.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 18, 2004, 12:21:32 pm
Quote
Originally posted by TopAce
It is almost as sure as this is the 50th post in this thread.


I F**king hope they aren't correcting that. Bombers weren't supposed to kill capships. Their job was to kill turrets and subsystems so that the other caps could move in and finish them off. Now it may be that at the start of the war before capships got so heavily armed and armoured they killed enemy ships but I'll be pretty disapointed if towards the end of the campaign we're still seeing wings of bombers taking down anything over cruiser size.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 18, 2004, 12:40:06 pm
Direct them at that post and discuss it in their forums.

or

Ask in the FAQ! (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,20303.0.html)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 18, 2004, 01:07:12 pm
I kinda like the Athena's looks, myself...but the lack of weapons compatibly is the end of it, really. It can't carry bombs, it can't carry Promethus cannon, and it can't carry Hornets.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 18, 2004, 01:26:07 pm
Quote
Originally posted by TopAce
Direct them at that post and discuss it in their forums.

or

Ask in the FAQ! (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,20303.0.html)


Well since I only have your word that they were planning to f**k up I'll just assume that they aren't idiots and aren't planning to f**k up :D
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 18, 2004, 02:00:01 pm
They will certainly get some less powerful bombs, probably some which are as powerful as the Trebuchet.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Mongoose on September 18, 2004, 02:44:55 pm
My take on the whole T-V War bombers is that we can assume that there were other anti-capship bombers/bomb-like weapons before the development of the Medusa, Ursa, Tsunami, Harbinger, Stiletto, etc.  I don't think the whole GTA was flying Apollos and using ML-16s at the start of FS1 :p.  Obviously, the bombers wouldn't have been as effective, but they had to have at least some impact on capital ships.  I seem to remember the Tech Room descriptions talking about Vasudan bomber capabilities with regards to capital ships.  If this is true, then it's perfectly fine for the TVWP to include new bombers/bombs.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TrashMan on September 18, 2004, 03:33:47 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ngtm1r
I kinda like the Athena's looks, myself...but the lack of weapons compatibly is the end of it, really. It can't carry bombs, it can't carry Promethus cannon, and it can't carry Hornets.


Who needs Hornets? With Furies it's childs play kicking shivan asses. And the Avenger is a really good cannon - fires faster then the Prometheus.

And in my oppinion FS1had some flaws. Capships really didn't have any anticapship guns, there is too little heard of bombers at the start of the campaign.
You DO get the feeling that all the GTA has is Apollos with ML-16..

I do hope they will correct that - in fact, I would be glad to give them my weapons.tbl with rebalanced capship weapons..
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Goober5000 on September 18, 2004, 03:43:46 pm
Hm.  Could a mod split the T-V war posts and move them to the T-V war forum? :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 18, 2004, 05:19:07 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Mongoose
My take on the whole T-V War bombers is that we can assume that there were other anti-capship bombers/bomb-like weapons before the development of the Medusa, Ursa, Tsunami, Harbinger, Stiletto, etc.  I don't think the whole GTA was flying Apollos and using ML-16s at the start of FS1 :p.  Obviously, the bombers wouldn't have been as effective, but they had to have at least some impact on capital ships.  I seem to remember the Tech Room descriptions talking about Vasudan bomber capabilities with regards to capital ships.  If this is true, then it's perfectly fine for the TVWP to include new bombers/bombs.


Bombers did have an impact. They took out subsystems. Trying to do that in a fighter is pretty suicidal without shields. Once the enemy ship couldn't fight back a destroyer could close and deliver the deathblow.

Remember that before the shivans appeared losing an Orion was considered a major blow. That suggests that destroyers didn't get killed often. Which further suggests that bombers were pretty ineffective at killing ships like the Orion.

It's perfectly fine for TVWP to show the older ships getting owned by bombers but the Orion should be pretty much impervious to them. It's an easy matter to say that the Orion's armour is so new that standard bombs bounce off of it without doing much damage. That means you can have bomber missions in the earlier parts of the campaign.  

As for what ships the GTA were using we know they had both the Angel Scout, the Apollo, Apolloyon (or whatever you want to call it) and IIRC the Athena itself wasn't newly introduced either.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 18, 2004, 08:13:03 pm
And PVB Amuns had killed 3 Orions over the past 5 years, which implies that they were capable of kill Orions.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 18, 2004, 10:05:11 pm
I'm not advocating the invention of some Tsunami-type bomb for the athena, but I think it should have a smaller, less powerful bomb of some design.  If the capital ships have the big damage flag, then bombs, no matter how pathetic will be the only thing that can hurt them anyway.

As other people have suggested, I think what makes ships vulnerable to bombs is the shields, not the bombs themselves. Heck, any sentry gun is pathetic versus any fighter with shields except in larger numbers. Take away the shields, and ANY capital ship becomes a serious threat to fighters/bombers. One of the hardest missions for me in FS1 was the one where there were a bunch of Ma'at freighters and an Aten flying around. I got my Valkyrie busted up so many times it wasn't even funny.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 19, 2004, 03:46:17 am
Quote
Originally posted by ngtm1r
And PVB Amuns had killed 3 Orions over the past 5 years, which implies that they were capable of kill Orions.


3 Kills in 5 years is a pretty pathetic ratio wouldn't you say though?

Sure an FS1 bomber might be able to kill a destroyer but it's not easy thing to do and I doubt that those three wings were achieved by simply launching fighter and bomber wings at an Orion and letting them get on with it.

Almost certainly there were extenuating circumstances that made the kills possible.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TrashMan on September 19, 2004, 08:04:49 am
Considering the war lasted for 14 years and that a destruction od a destroyer is considered a big blow, I say it-s not a pathetic ratio...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 19, 2004, 09:35:49 am
Quote
Originally posted by TrashMan
Considering the war lasted for 14 years and that a destruction od a destroyer is considered a big blow, I say it-s not a pathetic ratio...


:wtf: Seriously what the hell are you on about Trashman.

I'm talking about how bombers at the start of FS1 weren't supposed to kill capships. Occasionally they might have gotten lucky and killed one but that isn't the main reason for having bombers.

Now lets look at the statistics. In five years of open warfare the vasudan bombers have managed to kill 3 capships. Are you seriously telling me that bombers are meant to kill capships and that is the best they could do? Even flying one bombing mission a week that's 250 bombing missions and 3 kills.

Are you seriously looking at those statistics and telling me that bombers are meant to kill capships? If you're telling me that then I stand by my phrasing. That is a pathetic kill ratio.

What I believe is that bombers weren't supposed to kill Orions. Their job was to drive them off or disarm/disable them so that they could be killed more easily.
 That's the bombers primary role at the start of FS1. Sure if they get the chance they'll kill the enemy but a kill ratio of 3 kills in 5 years is beyond pathetic if that is their primary function.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 19, 2004, 10:48:37 am
If you people are arguing for or against a point you should at least check your numbers:

Quote
The Amun is the Vasudans heaviest bomber class ship.  It carries a massive payload and has been responsible for the destruction of at least 3 Orion class destroyers in the past 2 years.  Fortunately, it is slow and has low maneuverability, making it an easy target for our fighters.  Fighter pilots should be wary of the two turrets on this ship: they are not to be ignored.
The Amun is considered a B class threat to all cruisers and capital ships.  They should be given top priority in target selection during escort operations.


Just to re-emphasize:
-responsible for the destruction of at least 3 Orions in the past   2 years.
-The Amun is considered a B class threat to all cruisers and capital ships.
- They should be given top priority in target selection during escort operations.

       Okay, in case you missed it, the length of time is _2_ years, not 5 which is a significant difference. One might say that's still pathetic, but realistically, how intense is the combat after 14 years? I mean the first few missions of the campaign are defending a cruiser, combat patrol, etcetera. We never really see any ship-to-ship engagements between the Terrans and Vasudans before the Shivans arrive. I don't think that after 14 years the fighting will be at its peak, there'll be lulls as well as highs were the most intense fighting is skirmishes between fighters.

       But the fact is, the Amun is a class-B threat to capital ships, which I'd say is significant. It's a higher threat value than the Shaitan. I know that it's just subjective and means diddly-squat but the fact is, that the description gives the impression that the Amun is a threat to terran capital ships. And by saying it's "responsible", I take that to mean that the bombers killed the Orions on their own, rather than disabling them so another cruiser/destroyer could smoke 'em instead. I think that three Orions _is_ a big deal, especially in the Freespace 1 era. Where several missions are based around capturing a lowly Cain cruiser of all things and where Destroyers, on any side, are seldom ever destroyed.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 19, 2004, 11:53:03 am
Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
If you people are arguing for or against a point you should at least check your numbers:


I made the assumption that ngtm1r had his numbers correct and didn't check them. My bad. Still three kills in two years isn't anything to write home about either.


Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
But the fact is, the Amun is a class-B threat to capital ships, which I'd say is significant. It's a higher threat value than the Shaitan.


Somewhat strangely however

Quote
The Osiris has now become the standard bomber for use in PVN operations.  It has replaced the Amun, correcting many of the faults of its predecessor.  It is not quite as sturdy, but it has nearly the same weapons capacity, and is faster and more maneuverable.
The Osiris should be considered a C class threat to Fenris class cruisers, and a D class threat otherwise.


Make of that what you will.

Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
I know that it's just subjective and means diddly-squat but the fact is, that the description gives the impression that the Amun is a threat to terran capital ships.  


Ah, but where does it say that the threat is in terms of it killing Orions? Maybe the threat is that it can very quickly kill an Orion's turrets leaving it defenceless. That's a huge threat cause any FS1 era ship can kill a capship given long enough to do so.

Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
I think that three Orions _is_ a big deal, especially in the Freespace 1 era. Where several missions are based around capturing a lowly Cain cruiser of all things and where Destroyers, on any side, are seldom ever destroyed.


You're making a fundemental error here. I agree that taking down three Orions is a big deal in the FS1 Universe. I agree 100% with that. It's even stated in the tech room. What you haven't considered is why it's a big deal.

If taking down an orion is a big deal it suggests that they are very rarely killed. So now we have to ask ourselves why are they very rarely killed?
 If bombers can take down capships do you not think that they would be doing so? This is what I am on about when I say that 3 kills in 2 years is pathetic. If bombers can easily kill Orions why is that number so low? Are the vasudans scared to send their bombers out for some reason?

The explaination for the low kill ratio is quite simple. Bombers find it hard to kill capships. Sure they can do it. In FS1 even a fighter can kill a destroyer but it take a fair bit of effort to do so.

Somehow I doubt that the GTA and PVN built bombers and sortied them regularly in the hope that they might get lucky. If Bombers can only kill a capship once or twice a year then the GTA would have started to use them for something else. Like I said the primary role of the bomber would have been to disarm and disable the enemy.

Once the ship was disarmed the bomber would probably have helped in the destruction but considering the low yield of FS1 era bombs it would probably have been simpler to just bring in the big guns than to keep rearming the bombers.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Flaser on September 19, 2004, 01:15:23 pm
Both the Typhoon and the Orion were very expensive super ships of their own time - so über that they couldn't have given the backbone of the fleets only the fine edge.

There were a lot of other capship classes, that simply became way too outdated, scraped and or completely destroyed during the long war, so they never made it to the Great War.

Bombers going against an Orion is like trying to stop a Tsunami - the new capships simply were too powerfull for initial designs - instead destroyers bombers porbably hunted cruisers and monitors.

Any capship in this era is a major fighter/bomber killer so even bombers have to be fast to avoid flak.

Probably initial capships had an anti-capship firepower of their own, but the invention of the powerful fighter/bomber platforms negated their usefullness since once in system these ships had a broader range of operation.
Since destroyers were extremly powerful on their own, they became the premier blockade busters / blockade runners.

Late into the war their anti capship weponry could have been degraded to field more fighters when resources became scare and covering more ground gained even further priority.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TrashMan on September 19, 2004, 04:12:46 pm
The reasons not many destroyer get destroyed is simple:

a) They are valubale and powerfull units and allways have escorts. Wit hescorts in place, it is a VERY difficult task to destroy a destroyer.

b) Bombers in FS1 are weaker and it takes moe of them to take down a destroyer - and they have no shields

c) Seeing that a destroyer is so important, I don't think it will sit around and wait for the enemy to finish it off. It would rather run away.

d)As Akalabeth Angel said, after years of conflict, battles were less intense and large capships were never put at any risk unless it was absolutely necesarry.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 19, 2004, 07:38:46 pm
Yes, any sensible captain of a ship would retreat once his ship became badly damaged (assuming it could). There may have been lots of battles where Orions were damaged by bombers, but the ship got away.

    And if there is some doubt as to worth of a destroyer, remember the Typhon description claims it took out the 4th fleet or something like that (hard to believe), so it must be pretty good (or maybe its pretty good, with its bombers??).

    But as for Karajoma(spl?), it seems we're in a bit of an agreement  anyway as I've said the bombers would have weaker bombs. And maybe it takes a lot of time to take out a Destroyer, and its possible that there are more efficient ways like disabling turrets and the like but bombers should be able to destroy Destroyers on their own if necessary. But at the same time they'll need a hell of a lot of bombers and a hell of a lot of escorts to guard 'em.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Hippo on September 19, 2004, 07:56:00 pm
Ok, time to start commenting:

Kara: I agree with you 100%...

Iona: Yeah, thats a fun tactic... It only works with a joystick though... I usually use it with Subachs more often, but it fires at the same rate as it would with double linked, but they're more constantly firing, usefull for spray and pray, or taking out turrets (since it may only take half of that double shot to take a beam turret down, but it might fire before the slow linked one hits it) or something like that...

Thats why i liked the part of FoW i tested... You had to:
Spoiler:
Spoilered, incase Goober wants this hidden, if you want it gone Goob, ust tell me :p:
One had to disable the Anvil, inorder to keep it from moving to a more defensive position...



Meh...
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Goober5000 on September 19, 2004, 11:16:25 pm
That's vague enough that it won't give away too much if someone highlights it.  Thanks, Hippo. :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 05:04:12 am
Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
Yes, any sensible captain of a ship would retreat once his ship became badly damaged (assuming it could). There may have been lots of battles where Orions were damaged by bombers, but the ship got away.


Exactly. And this would have become the primary role of the bomber. To drive away the capships by damaging them enough that they retreated :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 20, 2004, 06:00:10 am
It's possible that in the TV war destroyers simply weren't front line ships... they would sit as a deterrent and a C&C post, providing fighter cover for the cruisers and supply convoys actually fighting.  

Only in a major operation - such as Operation Thresher, or when defensive lines were compromised, would they actually fight.  In the former case, it'd be likely that the loss of a destroyer would result in the failure of said operation.

Insofar as bomber effectiveness goes, it's mentioned that the Athena was for a long time the primary GTVA bomber, until the GTVA started developing its bigger warheads.  Given the Athenas characteristics, this kind of implies that, for a long time, bombers weren't even intended for attacking destroyers, but more for destroying supply convoys and presumably cruisers.

One other possibility is that after the initial skirmishes it just wasn't cost effective to attack destroyers.... instead of a straight-up military vicotry, both sides may have elected to attack the infrastructure of each - i.e. tageting civillian installations, supply convoys, etc, ala the use of U-boat attacks / naval blockades in WW1/2.    This might have eventually led to more node blockading and more or less a military stalemate... with the only attack operations ending in a fashion akin to the battle of the Somme.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Black Wolf on September 20, 2004, 06:40:09 am
I think we're working off a flawed basis here in assuming that the only ships the Terrans and Vasudans had during the TV War were Destroyers, cruisers, fighters and bombers. This doesn't make any logical sense, especially since, if you accept the FS1 shipset, the Vasudans only had Atens, which even in FS1 were pieces of crap. Why wouldn't they develop a larger cruiser or corvette to combat the heavy hitting firepower of the Terran Leviathan? Why did neither side seem to develop a starfighter carrier that was less than 2kms long?

It makes no sense to go from ships around 250 m long to ships almost an order of magnitude or so bigger with nothing in between, since it wouldn't take such a leap to give one side or the other the tactical advantage in ship to ship combats. Even if, for some odd reason, these vessels had all been retired by the time of FS1, bombers would still be around as an aftereffect of these smaller ships vulnerability to the two sides lighter bombs.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 09:26:19 am
Quote
Originally posted by Black Wolf
I think we're working off a flawed basis here in assuming that the only ships the Terrans and Vasudans had during the TV War were Destroyers, cruisers, fighters and bombers.  


I didn't assume that. I did say that there might have been other ships that the Athena, Amun and Osiris were effective against. They're just not effective when used to kill destroyers. :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 20, 2004, 09:28:39 am
That makes good sense, Aldo...particularly regarding the outcome of Operation Thresher. 500-something pilots dead...? *goes to check first command briefing again*
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 20, 2004, 09:31:37 am
Quote
Originally posted by Black Wolf
I think we're working off a flawed basis here in assuming that the only ships the Terrans and Vasudans had during the TV War were Destroyers, cruisers, fighters and bombers. This doesn't make any logical sense, especially since, if you accept the FS1 shipset, the Vasudans only had Atens, which even in FS1 were pieces of crap. Why wouldn't they develop a larger cruiser or corvette to combat the heavy hitting firepower of the Terran Leviathan? Why did neither side seem to develop a starfighter carrier that was less than 2kms long?

It makes no sense to go from ships around 250 m long to ships almost an order of magnitude or so bigger with nothing in between, since it wouldn't take such a leap to give one side or the other the tactical advantage in ship to ship combats. Even if, for some odd reason, these vessels had all been retired by the time of FS1, bombers would still be around as an aftereffect of these smaller ships vulnerability to the two sides lighter bombs.


Well, we have to go with what we have evidence of, in terms of ship classes.  In terms of the size gap, it's possibly due to cost & simplicity - i.e. more spare parts available (less types of parts to manufacture), economies of scale in mass-manufacturing, etc.  The Vasudans may have been able to get along with a piece of crap like the Aten because they had more destroyers, or different tactics (like more use of fighter and bomber attacks), or maybe because their freighters were better equipped for offensive purposes.  

Maybe the Vasudans simply decided to make the best they could of the weakness of the Aten, and use it for decoy missions - i.e. to lure a Terran fleet into an ambush.  Or maybe the long war waged such a heavy toll on supplies that it was simply unfeasible to research and construct a large, new ship class.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 12:15:14 pm
We know that the Vasudans used other warships besides the Aten, it's clear in the description from FS1:

The Aten class cruiser, while far stronger than most of the Vasudans warships, falls short as a attack cruiser.  It does not have the armor or the firepower to stand up to GTA weaponry.  With a cruiser speed of 25 m/s and only six weapon turrets, the Aten just cannot muster the kind of firepower needed to do real damage to targets of size.

-Far stronger than _most_ warships - which means there are other warships, both weaker in capability and stronger in capability.  (BTW - the Satis is not considered a warship)

I don't think the Aten was ever that weak in FS1 anyway, I mean it has 10,000 more hitpoints than the Fenris. Enough to go toe-to-toe with the main Terran Cruiser.


     Getting back on the subject of bombs in FS1. Remember the Amun has been responsible for the destruction of 3 Orions in 2 years. A fact which has been belittled by some sides of the argument, but the description of the Orion seems to be disagree with the stance that it is a "pathetic" amount.

In the course of the 14 year war, very few of these have ever been lost, making the destruction of an Orion a truly horrible defeat.

Amun is pathetic as a bomber versus Capital ships, but is responsible for three truly horrible defeats for the Terrans.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 12:52:37 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
Getting back on the subject of bombs in FS1. Remember the Amun has been responsible for the destruction of 3 Orions in 2 years. A fact which has been belittled by some sides of the argument, but the description of the Orion seems to be disagree with the stance that it is a "pathetic" amount.

In the course of the 14 year war, very few of these have ever been lost, making the destruction of an Orion a truly horrible defeat.

Amun is pathetic as a bomber versus Capital ships, but is responsible for three truly horrible defeats for the Terrans.


I've already explained this several times so I really can't see why you're repeating the same arguement. Are you just not looking at my post or something?

If bombers could kill capships easily the vasudans would have inflicted more that three defeats upon the terrans by now. They'd send their capships into Terran space and wipe out all the terrans capships.

I never said the Amun has inflicted a pathetic number of defeats on the Terrans. I said that its kill ratio is pathetic if that is it's main purpose.  I happen to believe that the main purpose of a bomber is to tackle weaker capships and disarm destroyers. Under those circumstances 3 kills is an impressive kill ratio but if you're saying that bombers are meant to kill Orions then it is pathetic and I stand by that usage of the word.

Yes those three strikes were crippling defeats for the terrans but they were crippling defeats precisely because bombers rarely kill capships.

Let's try this from another angle. If a squadron of Bahka's managed to kill a Sathanas it would be a great victory wouldn't it? However the fact that a Bahka can kill a sathanas doesn.t mean that killing juggernauts is it's primary role when deployed against one.

When you deploy FS2 bombers against a juggernaut their job is to disable/disarm it so that something bigger and more dangerous can be used to kill it. Sure if there is nothing around that can do the job then you can try the same thing using more bombers but that still wouldn't change the bahka's primary role.

Scale everything down one level and you end up with the same situation. FS1 bombers who's primary role is to hunt weaker ships are deployed against an Orion. IF they kill it their commanders will be happy but the commanders haven't sent them in to do that job. Their job is to disable the Orion same as it was with the Bahka's and the Sathanas.

Now do you get what I'm on about?
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 20, 2004, 01:04:03 pm
The destruction of an Orion is not a horrible defeat for the Terrans, it is a major victory for the Vasudans. The Amun is simply too slow and without shields, it has little use. Consider that bombers did have no shields. Even if they had bombs, the explosion of the bombs would certainly kill the bomber itself. Neither does GTA or PVE command want it, so they rather did not develop heavy bombs. Have you ever tried to hack the Good Luck mission and arm the bombers with ORIGINAL Harbringers?
I would say this is the reason why pre-FS1-era ships do not have powerful bombs. I haven't even talked about warhead capacity, older warheads are PROBABLY bigger and the warhead capacity was PROBABLY lower.

What do you think about this?
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 20, 2004, 01:12:10 pm
A horrible defeat for the Terrans is a major victory for the Vasudans, BTW.  Kind of implied by the whole Terran-Vasudan war scenario.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 01:21:05 pm
It was a pity to spoil your post by arguing semantics like that TopAce.

The rest of the post actually makes quite a good point. Since these bombs would have been launched from the small capacity of the Athena they would almost certainly have sacrificed weapons yield for being tougher or maybe faster so that there was less chance of killing the ship that launched them.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: aldo_14 on September 20, 2004, 01:25:12 pm
The design of the Ursa to specifically carry a new heavy warhead would support that, too.   As does the Athena tech description.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 01:30:16 pm
Quote
I never said the Amun has inflicted a pathetic number of defeats on the Terrans. I said that its kill ratio is pathetic if that is it's main purpose. I happen to believe that the main purpose of a bomber is to tackle weaker capships and disarm destroyers. Under those circumstances 3 kills is an impressive kill ratio but if you're saying that bombers are meant to kill Orions then it is pathetic and I stand by that usage of the word.

Yes those three strikes were crippling defeats for the terrans but they were crippling defeats precisely because bombers rarely kill capships.


     I don't see why a bomber has to be designed to kill any type of warship, and I've never argued that an Amun was made to kill an Orion specifically. A bomber is designed to kill ships, whether they be Poseidons, Leviathans or Orions.  Save apparently for the Ursa, but that's because of the bomb it carries and the fact that'd be overkill versus other ships. If the Amun is comparable to the Medusa and the Medusa's description says "Suitable for any size target." I'd say that the Amun is designed, in part (not its main purpose) to kill Orions. And I don't believe that three Orions would be killed because the commanders haven't sent them to do that job. Weapons are designed to disable, and weapons are designed to kill. You're not sending Amuns to disable an Orion when they're not carrying Stillettos or the equivelant.


     But anyways the origins of this argument lie in the fact that I believed the GTA or PVN should have anti-ship bombs prior to the Tsunami because it didn't make sense that the Athena only carries Stillettos. You've just said that the pre-shivan bombers are designed to destroy Cruisers, but if the Athena can only carry Stillettos and the only anti-warship action of the Athena is to disable a Cain it doesn't exactly fit into your argument either. Therefore there should be a smaller bomb that can be used on the Athena, as I stated in my first post:

It was a nice "bomber", but at the time it couldn't carry any bombs. Which was kind of odd. The only thing it could really carry in FS1 was stilettos. I hope TVWP is rectifying that issue.

       It seems to me that you were the one that wasn't reading my post.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: TopAce on September 20, 2004, 01:40:39 pm
A note to the Medusa being suitable for any size targets: It is written because it actually could carry some firepower with Tsunamis and they were not as slow as the Amun, so it is better against fighters.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 01:49:30 pm
Amuns can carry Tsunamis
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 02:01:05 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
I don't see why a bomber has to be designed to kill any type of warship, and I've never argued that an Amun was made to kill an Orion specifically. A bomber is designed to kill ships, whether they be Poseidons, Leviathans or Orions.  


Nope. That's simply not true. That's why I gave you the example of the Bahka and the juggernaut. A Bahka is not designed to kill such large ships because there is no canon ship designed to kill such large ships.

Every ship has a role. If you say that ships are simply designed to kill a certain class why are there interceptors, space superiority fighters etc? After all they are all designed to kill fighters?

Ships have a role. The role of the Athena was to disable capships and kill smaller craft. I see nothing that shows the Athena was meant to kill Orions.

Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
If the Amun is comparable to the Medusa and the Medusa's description says "Suitable for any size target." I'd say that the Amun is designed, in part (not its main purpose) to kill Orions.


The medusa had shields. If pre-FS1 ships had shields too I'd stop arguing the point. Shields make all the difference to the role of the craft.

Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
But anyways the origins of this argument lie in the fact that I believed the GTA or PVN should have anti-ship bombs prior to the Tsunami because it didn't make sense that the Athena only carries Stillettos. You've just said that the pre-shivan bombers are designed to destroy Cruisers, but if the Athena can only carry Stillettos and the only anti-warship action of the Athena is to disable a Cain it doesn't exactly fit into your argument either. Therefore there should be a smaller bomb that can be used on the Athena, as I stated in my first post


Maybe the Athena simply uses its larger secondary banks to carry more missiles? Maybe pre-shields the term bomber was just the name used for a heavy strike fighter. If you look at the Athena it does after all have much more in common with a fighter than it does with the heavy Ursa and Medusa bombers.

Besides who says you only carry Stillettos to diable a capship? I prefer to use normal missiles most of the time so that I'm actually inflicting hull damge. Most likely athenas worked in a similar fashion. Or maybe they employed a two phase attack. Launching their Stillettos from long range and then closing to kill the now disarmed cruiser with missiles.

See? No need for a new smaller bomb class. I have no objection to the introduction of one but there certainly isn't a need.

Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
Amuns can carry Tsunamis


Without shields they'd suffer heavy losses trying to use them though.


Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
It seems to me that you were the one that wasn't reading my post.


Don't take my comment about you not reading my posts as an attempt at points scoring. I was honestly puzzled as to why you were simply restating a set of questions I had already answered further up.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 03:12:36 pm
Quote
Besides who says you only carry Stillettos to diable a capship? I prefer to use normal missiles most of the time so that I'm actually inflicting hull damge. Most likely athenas worked in a similar fashion. Or maybe they employed a two phase attack. Launching their Stillettos from long range and then closing to kill the now disarmed cruiser with missiles.

See? No need for a new smaller bomb class. I have no objection to the introduction of one but there certainly isn't a need.


      If Bombers don't carry bombs what's the point of them even existing? An Amun is a slow moving target, if all it is going to do is carry missiles why use it at all? Why not employ Seths with large loads of missiles to destroy Orions instead?

       The very existance of bombers before the Tsunami suggests that there are other bombs in existance during the great war. Otherwise there is _no_ reason for the bomber class to even exist. If the chief objective is delivering missiles to the target and surviving then more-nimble, less armoured craft would be the better choice.

        Therefore, there must be a bomb before the Tsunami with enough oomph to warrant its use. Now maybe a light bomb for the Athena . . . erm, nevermind, the Athena has the Phoenix-class of missiles (which are supposed to be anti-bomber but anyway). Okay, maybe the _athena_ doesn't need a light bomb (other than previous, suckier Phoenix models)

        But all of the other bombers do. Maybe FS1 bombs are similar to SW bombs with little means of propulsion and are easy to shoot down, so instead you have Amuns first disabling Orion turrets and then launching bombs which are designed, in-part to kill capital ships, and that otherwise wouldn't normally get through the Orion's defensive fire. But on the whole, Amuns should be able to kill Orions on their own (with escort) without resorting to using missiles which any old fighter could bring along. A heavy bomb, for a heavy bomber.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 20, 2004, 03:20:56 pm
Some sort of heavy warhead is needed for a destroyer, although I suppose a massed assault with all-Furies loadouts is a possiblity, provided you can knock out enough weapons to create a safe area from which to do it. As for cruisers...
Athena wing loaded up with MX-50s parks itself at about max range for the MX-50 from an Aten and commences emptying their secondary bays. Aten explodes shortly thereafter. This is also safer then a bombing run with Tsunamis, since the MX-50 outranges the Aten's weaponry.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: StratComm on September 20, 2004, 03:32:57 pm
Remember that the Harbringer pre-dates FS1; it was only refitted to serve as an anti-cap bomb when the Ursa came out.  

Lets not forget that in the Freespace universe, bombing without shields is often a quite lethal endeavor.  And I'm not talking about hostile fire.  The blast radius on a Tsunami (nevermind a Harbringer) does heavy damage to any unshielded fighter in its radius, and bombers are often caught in the blast radius of their own bombs.  With shields, the blast washes fairly harmlessly around them and so bombing runs remain feasable.  Without them, they become completely suicidal.  That's why there really isn't canon evidence supporting heavier munitions for early bombers.  Of course, I agree with Kara in that I wouldn't object to the introduction to early bombs.  I just don't see them being at all practical.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 03:59:45 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
If Bombers don't carry bombs what's the point of them even existing? An Amun is a slow moving target, if all it is going to do is carry missiles why use it at all? Why not employ Seths with large loads of missiles to destroy Orions instead?


I was talking about the Athena and answering your objections to that. Like I said there is no need for the Athena to carry a heavier load to justify it's status as a bomber. For the terrans a bomber was simply a heavier fighter comparable to the fighter bombers of modern airforces (i.e a ship that isn't as nimble as an interceptor but which can carry a heavier load).

The vasudans have taken that principle further. The amun's are slower but they pack a bigger punch. They don't need to rearm all the time. They are deployed once the fighter cover has been whittled down a little so that they have some survivability.

Why not deploy seths instead? Quite simply a Seth would have to stop and make a target of itself rearming all the time. When stopped a few hits can take out a seth. And that ignores the fact that it's easy to concentrate too hard on the capship in front of you and be surprised by an enemy blatting you from behind.

The Amun on the other hand can defend itself while recharging and is less vulnerable to this kind of rear attack due to its turrets.

Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
 If the chief objective is delivering missiles to the target and surviving then more-nimble, less armoured craft would be the better choice.  


Not when a couple of shots from a destroyer result in you having to write a letter to the pilots family. The Amun and Osiris can take a little more punishment than a Seth can. That is important in bombing missions.


Quote
Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
 Maybe FS1 bombs are similar to SW bombs with little means of propulsion and are easy to shoot down, so instead you have Amuns first disabling Orion turrets and then launching bombs which are designed, in-part to kill capital ships, and that otherwise wouldn't normally get through the Orion's defensive fire. But on the whole, Amuns should be able to kill Orions on their own (with escort) without resorting to using missiles which any old fighter could bring along. A heavy bomb, for a heavy bomber.


I'll give you that as a possibility for the vasudan bombers. I don't agree with it 100% but it certainly is feasable. I don't see the Terrans doing this with the Athena though. So we're back to asking what the Athena carries if this is the case?
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 04:26:20 pm
Nevermind about the Athena, the Phoenix missile can be its "light bomb".

One ambiguity with the Athena's description however is that it was written post-shivan contact as its described as "shielded". Therefore, it's hard to say whether its Light Bomber status is in relation to the Medusa or in relation to previous bombers not seen in FS1. Maybe the Vasudans with their devotion to the cause over personal safety empoy anti-ship and anti-capital bombers whereas the Terrans use bombers in the role you've described? That would help distinguish the two parties in the war.

I'm still not sure about the lethality of launching bombs in FS1. While the shockwave is a problem the obvious solution is to not be near the bomb when it goes off and as far as I can remember the bombs have a decent launch range so the bomber shouldn't have to be 50 metres from the hull before they launch the bomb. Of course when the bomb is shot down it poses the same problem, but perhaps bombers launch their payload and then afterburn away from it rather than in shielded-era where you can launch, switch banks, and launch again or just keep on firing to draw fire from your bombs.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 04:41:14 pm
Why can't an equivalent of the phoenix be the "bomb" the Amun and Osiris carry. They just carry more of them :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 04:54:34 pm
Because if Interceptors are designed to chase down both enemy bombers and enemy bombs, they'd be of little use against long-ranged, high speed missiles like the Phoenix.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 20, 2004, 05:06:53 pm
Maybe they have a more primative version of the interceptor which is basically similar but has the bomb flag and is a little slower :)
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 20, 2004, 05:45:18 pm
Possibly, it really depends on what TVWP decides on. Hopefully it'll be good whatever it is.
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: karajorma on September 22, 2004, 12:16:11 pm
Well hopefully this topic has been of interest to them :D

Personally I like this kind of topic cause it gives me idea. Much better than your standard "What's your favourite ship" topics :D
Title: Run, Alpha 1, Run!
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 22, 2004, 01:26:30 pm
Bomb shockwaves in a shieldless bomber aren't so much of a threat to you as they are to the people intercepting your bombs.

I've see an Apollo shoot down a Shivan bomb, or done it myself, and gotten blown away by the shockwave far too many times...