Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: AlphaOne on May 23, 2006, 04:41:18 am
-
Oki the title is pretty obvious. I wuld like if posible to reimagine the way ships would look in fs universe and theyr uses if the shivans would not of blasted the GTVA also GTA/PVN but rather helped them.
I know this is somewhat strange since it kinda of beats the whole storry but rather a "what if" posibilaty!
-
Spikier.
-
lool aldo! its not that simple. Well we would of had the sol node opened all this time and by the time Fs2 timeline 2367 i mean what would the direction of weaponry tech regarding weapons and subspace tech would of been. Since then the terrans would of had full acces to what 90% of theyr economical,industrial reaseaerch and development and so on and so forth capabilities. I mnea we have see how far they have gone in just 30+ years which time they also rebuilt theyr worlds so to speak. I mean we could see the GTVA streched all the way past the nebula and the second and third knossos.
Yah i know without the shivans there would of been no GTVA but nonetheless lets put that aside.
Also i would suspect the GTVA would of had beam weapons comparable in power to the shivan ones since welll how shall i put it theyre that good at stealing and adapting tech.
-
If the Shivans were that benevolent, they probably would have not developed beam weaponry. Nor would the Ancients have been destroyed, so instead the GTA would have been annihilated by them thousands of years ago, and the Vasudans would probably be a slave race.
-
Heres an idea what if everyone in the universe was hippy'esqe and shared love and all that jazz. But made big guns anyway to shoot 'roids for fun :D
( out of nowhere ponders if the collossus could whoop unicron)
-
hmm got it i never said they were one big happy famili but rather what if the shivans hadent attacked the GTVA GTA PVN but rather took them under theyr wing. Hell no what be a slave race for the ancients blast them ....! i just wanted a imagination exercise ! oh well mi mistake!
-
Another imagination excersise, What if the Aincents are an offshoot of the shivans or vice-versa. But i digress, I reckon if the shivans "nursed" us for a while before going on their merry red glowing way. We would be either hard as a diamond coated nail dipped in Uber-Poison!! Or.... So dependant on Shivan hand outs that we'de fade into a self defeating stupor.
Either way it would make for good TV.
-
say what?? why?? i mean i can see any posible reason for us depending so heavely on the shivans other then say some tech and stuff...
-
I reckon, as do most i believe that thew shivans are a collective or hive based society if not a shared conciousness, theyd probably imbue/instill it upon us as weel (Imagination exercise rember :nod:) ANyhoo thats my take, Its not the only take anyone fel free to add/comment/resuggest....
A humble opinion is given.
-
well it wont exactly work because neither terrans nor vasudans are capable of a hive mind so to speak. Also i would imagine the architecture of the ships as well as the overall pourpose of the ships would change some what with the more ofensive attitude beeing transfered but i do believe that they will still be a lot more balanced then theyr shivan counterparts.
OffTopic: Ineed a ship by ship description of every ship in the game cap ships that is. I mean wht kind of weapos thy have how many and what are theyr enplacement on the ship itself. could someone help. I cant seem to find something this detailed.
-
run, the grammar inquisition will eatchoo!!!111 :shaking:
-
ALPHAONE, Just rip open ships.tbl :D.. Its all in there.
-
OffTopic: Ineed a ship by ship description of every ship in the game cap ships that is. I mean wht kind of weapos thy have how many and what are theyr enplacement on the ship itself. could someone help. I cant seem to find something this detailed.
Wiki.
-
Tried it didnt find it detailed enough. Or has the wiki been updated? I remember seeing a topic regarding the wiki which sai something about it beeing moved. and updated.
-
When was the last time you looked?
-
well i'm looking in wiki right now and unless im looking a totaly diferent wiki then it does not hold the info i need!
-
Well, you'll just have to grab out modelview, ships.tbl, and add it in there, won't you?
-
Check this (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Freespace_2_Era_Craft) wiki page.. or rather the links on that page.
-
Alpha's posts are always so...amusing. :p
-
well that did it thanx!
Also how strong would the vasudan design influence be in the era where shivans orrather let say terrans and vasudans borrow design features and suff from the shivans.
I mnea there is clearly a strong influnce in ship design regarding terran crafts from the vasudans.
I peronally prefered tho old teran design features you know the ones we see in the herc I and the Orion.
Also do we have in fs a ship that is the equivalent of of an attack submarine or a balistic submarine. a ship that can actualy lay low undetected then storm out fire a couple of heliosses or beams or something like that take out the enemy warship then make a speaddy exit?
Such a ship wouldnt actualy be involved in the kind of fighting we normaly see cuz it would get thorn to shreads really fast.
-
Also do we have in fs a ship that is the equivalent of of an attack submarine or a balistic submarine. a ship that can actualy lay low undetected then storm out fire a couple of heliosses or beams or something like that take out the enemy warship then make a speaddy exit?
Such a ship wouldnt actualy be involved in the kind of fighting we normaly see cuz it would get thorn to shreads really fast.
The idea has been kicked around for years, and comes up from time to time in discussion, but I believe nothing has really come of it. That should be a rather glaring indication of the amount of interest in such an idea right there.
-
The idea has been kicked around for years, and comes up from time to time in discussion, but I believe nothing has really come of it. That should be a rather glaring indication of the amount of interest in such an idea right there.
Beg differ, though still a WIP.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/ngtm1r/Hornet.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/ngtm1r/Hornet.jpg)
-
er....do u have some other picture of it cuz well its kidn of dark !
I magine such a ship at about 800 metters in leght and having say 2 powerfull beam cannons and a couple or burst torpedo/bomb launchers. this wai it would emerge realli fast open fire on the ship at hand and inflict a verry good damage then move out of the area fast!
-
Also do we have in fs a ship that is the equivalent of of an attack submarine or a balistic submarine. a ship that can actualy lay low undetected then storm out fire a couple of heliosses or beams or something like that take out the enemy warship then make a speaddy exit?
Such a ship wouldnt actualy be involved in the kind of fighting we normaly see cuz it would get thorn to shreads really fast.
The idea has been kicked around for years, and comes up from time to time in discussion, but I believe nothing has really come of it. That should be a rather glaring indication of the amount of interest in such an idea right there.
Both Bobbauauauauauoaua and I have made subspace 'submarine' type cruisers. However, it's worth noting there's no such thing as a one-hit-kill weapon you can mount on a ship in FS2, especially not for something GTVA and small.
-
i didnt say one say it had to be one-hit-kill but rather something that can come in reasonably fast fire its weapons at the target do a reasonable amount of damage then duck out fast. I mean they would be idael fo harrasing the enemy and if you couple 3 or 4 of these things i would imagine no ship out there would be safe. kinda like the wolfpacks used by Doenitz during wwII.
Its just and idea .
-
i didnt say one say it had to be one-hit-kill but rather something that can come in reasonably fast fire its weapons at the target do a reasonable amount of damage then duck out fast. I mean they would be idael fo harrasing the enemy and if you couple 3 or 4 of these things i would imagine no ship out there would be safe. kinda like the wolfpacks used by Doenitz during wwII.
Its just and idea .
The problem is that hit-and-run isn't massively useful in a situation where ships can jump vast distances instaneously; in WW2 convoys had to travel slowly, in FS2 they pop in and out of realspace. The latter makes it a lot more difficult to use this type of attack effectively.
-
With regards to the weapons comments earlier, Surely the cost of building a pack of smaller "beefy" ships (im not prepared to use the word deadly) could be used to equip/buil;d one (or more) larger ships with the same weapon (it was meant to be torps or meaty beams IIRC?) Cost wise argument= reactor costs, crew costs, and time spent directing logistacally, tracking and organisation as a whole would be a lot cheaper. IMHO. But i suppose Autonomy could be given.... But autonomy comes without support to extents, supplies etc. In closing "Meh" :confused:
-
Beg differ, though still a WIP.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/ngtm1r/Hornet.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/ngtm1r/Hornet.jpg)
Both Bobbauauauauauoaua and I have made subspace 'submarine' type cruisers. However, it's worth noting there's no such thing as a one-hit-kill weapon you can mount on a ship in FS2, especially not for something GTVA and small.
I stand corrected.
-
With regards to the weapons comments earlier, Surely the cost of building a pack of smaller "beefy" ships (im not prepared to use the word deadly) could be used to equip/buil;d one (or more) larger ships with the same weapon (it was meant to be torps or meaty beams IIRC?) Cost wise argument= reactor costs, crew costs, and time spent directing logistacally, tracking and organisation as a whole would be a lot cheaper. IMHO. But i suppose Autonomy could be given.... But autonomy comes without support to extents, supplies etc. In closing "Meh" :confused:
Say what? do u mean to tell me that a bigger ship with the sme weapons is actualy cheaper to operate and maintain then a smaller one?? well then why the hell dont we just get ridd of all the corvettes and destroyers and start building juggs....cuz its cheaper to run and operate...
that is if i understud you right!
-
You obviously dont then ;7
The speculated HK ship you mentioned if operating solo, by no means would be more expensive build cost wise. But a pack of ships 3 to 4 i'd imagine is similar to WW2 submarine SOP. We have corvettes already for smacky smack big ships,
I magine such a ship at about 800 metters in leght and having say 2 powerfull beam cannons and a couple or burst torpedo/bomb launchers. this wai it would emerge realli fast open fire on the ship at hand and inflict a verry good damage then move out of the area fast
Surely a demios (its about the right size) two beams, and no-one says it cant jump out if its getting battered. would fill this role.
Say what? do u mean to tell me that a bigger ship with the sme weapons is actualy cheaper to operate and maintain then a smaller one?? well then why the hell dont we just get ridd of all the corvettes and destroyers and start building juggs....cuz its cheaper to run and operate...
Simple fleasibility, Its a fine scale, same reason there isnt just a single ship displacing 30-millin tonnes parked in the atlantic replacing the US navy, cos it would be stupid :p
The GTVA already have ships as you described, They're called corvettes, If you want strike attacks use STRIKE bombers. Or a Fenris cruiser.
I aint arguing, just having my say.
-
umm you have a point only a corvette is about 1 km in leght if i'm not mistaken again.(wouldnt be the first time).
Also I somehow doubght a slasher beam has nearly enough power to do significant damage to a cap ship. I was thinking something smaller then a corvette a little sleaker looking, not that the deimos isnt sleek or anithing, and posibly give it 2 BG and a couple of torpedo/bomb launchers. Also it would have to be somewhat faster and more manouverable then a corvette. Not in a ridiculous kind of way! Or even one BG and 2 slashers would be good along with the bombs and all.
But to achieve a little better speed and manouverabylaty it would have to sacrifice some armour that is why i said it wouldnt actualy be able to survive an actual cap ship fight at least not for long. This would the kind of ship which is best described by the fraze "shoot first ask questions later and then get the hell out of the firing range"
-
Christ and hunter man!, First dont act so belligerent,.
A corvette may well be a Kilometer in length, to be honest i dont know, care, not that you spelt length correctly in the first place, What am i meant to do, guess what you mean to say, use my non-exisistant psychic powers to bridge the gap between myself and frickin romania to comprehend you lacklustre grasp of english? second you didnt say i want a ship precisely 800M in length, you said about 800m in length, Now in my eys a Corvett is the closest to that size , Dont qoute me, I dont know!
Thirdly, The Iceni, Can already do what you Say its cot non-slash beams as well, I just didnt mention it cos it contradicts your size laws.. Alphaone, grammar... all i have to say grammar.
-
Yes i know mi grammar is horrible. Also mi english speaking is a lot better then mi spelling. So it still better then nothing. Also a reason for mi horible spelling is actualy mi fast tiping well sort of fast. Usualy when i'm posting i'm at work and have to speed up the tiping process at the cost of spelling acuracy. Also the Iceny has too much firepower for what I sugested. I mean that thing has almost the same firepower as an Orion which is the most heavely armed destroyer the GTVA has.
Also I imagined something a bit smaller then that, actualy a bit smaller then a Corvette.
At about 800 m. Could be 820 or 870 i dont really care but it definetly needs to be smaller then a corvette.(Actualy you go down to 700+ metters to about 800)
the point is it has to have at least one powerfull beam preferably a BFG or 2 BG or could even use vasudan beams for that matter on the count of faster recharge rate. And at least 4 bomb/torpedo launchers. This would enable it to come in fast fire a salvo of beams and a salvo of bommbs, posibly as soon as it exits subspace in case it jumps close enough,(although i would imagine it would actualy have to aquire lock on its target) and then jump out or stay for a second salvo of beams if the situation permits it.
this would enable it to take out a corvette and cause serious damage to a destroyer. Especialy if its a Hecate cuz well the Hecate has only shashers on its sides.
The fighter cover would be a problem because they would manage to take down the bombs but then agin they cant do much against a surpise atack of beams.
Its just an idea also a i wasnt tryng to act belligerent. Sorry!
-
No harm done, i'm at work myself. apology accepted.
You've made sound suggestions and points.
-
Hm...the cost effectiveness of ships depends on may factors - one of them being the enemy youre fighting.
A fleet of smaller ships is good for covering a larger area and against SOME larger ships.
A big supership on the other hand has the advantage of surviving where smalelr ships couldn't...
It al ldepends in hte end..
-
Well its like this the mai use of these ships would be to take out shivan capships. they would come in fast in pairs say 2 or 3 of them, acting on recon intel regarding the enemy ships position do they best not the enter the forward firing ark...then open fire on the enemy ship really fast...! and because we all know that shivan cap ships have crappy aaaf defenses they can get rind of a full voley of helioss without a problem. Thus taking out the main threat then bugging out. This way no big ship deployment no fuss regarding boombers and fighter escorts. Also you could even give them adequate fighter defences not to strong though. And why not they could even be very usefull against GTVA warships.
but I bet that if the current configuration is set up properly a reasonable number of these ships could come in get a hit or 2 at the sathanas then bug out before theyre swarmed by fighters and bommbers. On the other hand if they hit the fighter bay on the first run you would be home free to do cercle around the blasted thing. I doubght even a jug has the hull strenght to resiste 5 or 6 of these ships opening fire on it with 2 or 3 beams each. thats what 12-18 beams firing on the blasted thing. and even if it bugs out fast i doubght it can bug out fast enough to avoid a salvo from the ships. (under 4 seconds that is)
-
And what if the Shivans use their recon to destroy these ships before they can get near any Shivan vessel?
-
How? These ships are suposed to stay low hide or somethin like that then jump in fast take the shot then bug out if they have to. Also i suspect that the GTVA would asign a couple of fighter wings to keep the shivan sighter wings ocupied and distracted..!
That's like saing i cant cross the street when the light is green for pedestrians cuz i might get hit by a bad driver or something like that.
There would be calcutaed risks!
-
How? These ships are suposed to stay low hide or somethin like that then jump in fast take the shot then bug out if they have to. Also i suspect that the GTVA would asign a couple of fighter wings to keep the shivan sighter wings ocupied and distracted..!
That's like saing i cant cross the street when the light is green for pedestrians cuz i might get hit by a bad driver or something like that.
There would be calcutaed risks!
Is it even possible to lay low and hide from the Shivans? These things could detect ships in the nebula with ease while the GTVA was mearly stabbing in the dark trying to see what was out there.
-
How? These ships are suposed to stay low hide or somethin like that then jump in fast take the shot then bug out if they have to. Also i suspect that the GTVA would asign a couple of fighter wings to keep the shivan sighter wings ocupied and distracted..!
That's like saing i cant cross the street when the light is green for pedestrians cuz i might get hit by a bad driver or something like that.
There would be calcutaed risks!
And why wouldn't the Shivans themselves (ignoring their tremendous subspace ability and thus likely detection of enemy travel) lay low from detection the minute they discover this GTVA tactic?
-
Cuz the Shivans do NOT use such tactics. I believed that was already established.
Also rememeber the mission where we have the jugg actualy some distance from the node? You know the one where you get the chance to actualy take out its beams.
Also the shivans are a race which prefers an agresive tactic meaning attacking the enmi positions fleets and so on not a race that uses ambush, or anything like that. Also I do not believe I have ever seen a shivan warship bug out of a battle with the GTVA that just isnt in theyr nature. Especyaly the ambush tactic. Or rather I don believe they did. Cant remember exactly every move the shivans did during the game.
-
Cuz the Shivans do NOT use such tactics. I believed that was already established.
Also rememeber the mission where we have the jugg actualy some distance from the node? You know the one where you get the chance to actualy take out its beams.
Also the shivans are a race which prefers an agresive tactic meaning attacking the enmi positions fleets and so on not a race that uses ambush, or anything like that. Also I do not believe I have ever seen a shivan warship bug out of a battle with the GTVA that just isnt in theyr nature. Especyaly the ambush tactic. Or rather I don believe they did. Cant remember exactly every move the shivans did during the game.
The Shivans have used ambush tactics. Almost every initial encounter in FS1 was an ambush; of the Bastion when it sent in fighters to investigate cargo, of convoys carrying shield prototypes, of Lt.Ash in the cutscene, in destroying the Taranis. Not to forget ambushing the GTC Vigilant, and the Erinpura and the Vauban (Triton) when they travelled to the Warspite prior to the TAG test, or even the first encounter with the Ravana. an ambush is simply an unexpected attack and the Shivans have done that extensively.
In any case, if this tactic was as effective as you think it would be, do you really think the Shivans wouldn't try to counter-act or nullify it?
It's also worth noting badly damaged GTVA ships rarely bug out either, so it's probably not any reflection on the race but upon the realities of gameplay.
-
Reality / gameplay balance... Heres a whole new topic that could spin off if we're not careful ;7
:headz:
-
Well now that i think about it that has happened. but still the GTVA i believe has a neck for luring out of theyr hiding places shivan capships at least in fs2 and then coming in with bommbers and even another capship to take them out. the point of these ships would be to get them fast where you need them, do significant damage if not destroy the enemy warship if posible then bug out. That is why they are dedicated to this role . If look carefully they do have a weak point and that is theyr AAAF defences which would have to be adequate at best. There is only so much firepower you can put on a warship.
sure they will be able to defend themselfs from attack but not a determined attack via assault fighters and bommbers. They are not ment for such action.
You will say that what is the point to such vessels when we have corvettes but then again i have failed to see a corvette mount anything other then slashers which are adequate at best for taking out warships. You need quite a lot of shots for them to do enough damage and that exposes the warship to unnecesary risks where as 2 BG or 1 BFG and 2 slashers would be a lot more usefull.
The fact that they are fast and agile is the whole point combined with theyr firepower. Agilaty is the whole point.
-
Is there an energy / reactor size minimum for different beam sizes (Like in my bestest most favouritest mech game ever - Starsiege) If so i reckon you could solve that arguement by whacking a couple of capacitors and energy banaks/batteries to cycle up your reserves of power/ammo while your HK ships are in waiting, mebbe in an asteroid belt / stealthed.
-
Well now that i think about it that has happened. but still the GTVA i believe has a neck for luring out of theyr hiding places shivan capships at least in fs2 and then coming in with bommbers and even another capship to take them out. the point of these ships would be to get them fast where you need them, do significant damage if not destroy the enemy warship if posible then bug out. That is why they are dedicated to this role . If look carefully they do have a weak point and that is theyr AAAF defences which would have to be adequate at best. There is only so much firepower you can put on a warship.
sure they will be able to defend themselfs from attack but not a determined attack via assault fighters and bommbers. They are not ment for such action.
You will say that what is the point to such vessels when we have corvettes but then again i have failed to see a corvette mount anything other then slashers which are adequate at best for taking out warships. You need quite a lot of shots for them to do enough damage and that exposes the warship to unnecesary risks where as 2 BG or 1 BFG and 2 slashers would be a lot more usefull.
The fact that they are fast and agile is the whole point combined with theyr firepower. Agilaty is the whole point.
Agility and speed are very....murky concepts when we have instantaneous point-to-point travel. Any ship, given the intelligence, has the capacity to jump and ambush enemy vessels in milliseconds - and any ship is susceptible to such an attack. That's likely why GTVA forces, the design of which is the result of the long defensive great war, are designed firstly to survive. If we're talking of a ship that can carry BFGReens or heavy beams, it's very likely that ship will need to be fairly large and impressive (even the Colossus didn't have BFGs') to have an ability to support those beams (given the comparative armament of other GTVA ships). In turn, the resultant size of that warship will make it more expensive and a tempting target for enemy ambush, particularly if AAA is only adequate (adequate in itself implies a fair whack of weaponry).
-
well we do know that vasudan beams use some sort of capacitor to acheive a bigger power output. So that would be a good idea to have the vasudans incoporate theyr engine and weapon eractors as well as theyr beams.
they mai not do as much damage as the terran ones but that is from what i have seen in another post only a marginal diference. And they have a faster recharge rate then the terran one which would be agreat thing for these ships.
-
If scaled the beams down, requirements would be less, recharge time would be faster, then just link them togetherinto an array and power requirements would be- Um probably the same "Meh :mad:
-
umm well we could use vasudan beams on the other hand and have them overload them in order to do more damage. On the other hand this ship would not be able to carry the complex equipment that the other warships have i mean beam cannons as is the case for the corvettes its closest matching size warship... well its about 200 m longer but you get the point. Fine then lets say the ship cant carry a BFG or even 2 heavy beams then just mount one heavy beam on it and 2 slashers and some bomb/torpedo launchers on it that should do the trick i mean make it more realistic so to speak.
-
I reckon if an Ursa could carry X amount of Helios', which look half the size of a Hygeia when you launch one, then Why not let a n 800m have BFG, BBFFG's in fact. In the collossususss(s/P? ;7) cutscene i'm sure it shows thevarious weapons systems being integrated, Including beam weapons. They may even be standalone units (power wise) Just look at the mjolniiiiiiiir (s/P? ;7) its not got a power lead trailing to the nearest ARcadia (although that would be cool).
-
Interesting notion...the Mljonir is a stand-alone cannon, but as I recall it is bigger than a normal beam cannon..
While I belive one could build a frigate around a BFGreen, it should have weaknesses..
Maby a forward fixed weapon..or, as someone pointed, it has to store the power in huge batteries and has heat managment problems so it can only fire a few shots and then it must bug out :D
-
well we do know that vasudan beams use some sort of capacitor to acheive a bigger power output. So that would be a good idea to have the vasudans incoporate theyr engine and weapon eractors as well as theyr beams.
they mai not do as much damage as the terran ones but that is from what i have seen in another post only a marginal diference. And they have a faster recharge rate then the terran one which would be agreat thing for these ships.
We don't know that (capacitor) atall; it's a guess as to the meaning of something a destroyer does once in the whole campaign, and in a mission scripted to show off beam weapons. Moreso, there's patently not some easy advantage of bolting on Vasudan beams and getting more power, as there are Terran ships which use Vasudan reactors and Terran beams.
-
Say what i missed the point in your post again! I think. (Colonel_D)
but the again if you have a ship which has integrated into it 2 or 3 beams anc a couple of topedo/bomb launcher you will efectively have a ship that is ment for efensive duties. and since we all know that the GTVA desperatly needs a ship with which to take the fight to the enemy instead of constantly beeing on the defensive this thing would be great.
Why? because you have a ship that is cheaper then a corvette yet more powerfull from a beam only point of view. they have a small crew to man them and are very good for hiding them in the upper layers of a gas giant or an asteroid belt perhaps even stealthd like. Prepare the killing grounds for the enemy then just order them to come in fast, attack the enemy warships while you scramble fighters to assist in theyr defence and there you have it and efective and deadly force. whitout actualy commiting destroyers to the battle or a major fleet fo that matter. and you can cover a lot of ground with them too.
I would imagine them having the beams mounted somewhere in the front as to the traditional side mounted beams.
-
well we do see use of the vasudan reactors in the deimos corvette and it says that it is the most advanced or powerfull (cant remember exactly) reactor ever designed for its size. It says that its so efective that....errr...cant remember what is says next but it has something to do with beams and speed.
-
<Speculative>Why not have the ship sporting,..............Wait for it, A n e w b e a m ! <Speculative/>
-
Well you could do that but then again everyone would be jumping on my head for pulling imaginari beams out of thin air. On the other hand a beam designed specificly for this ship would be good. This way you can have a powerfull enough beam to make the ship credible and realistic yet not have huge reactors to power them. This would ensure the ship maitanins its speed manouverabilaty yet deos not sacrifice its ofensive capabilities.
Its actualy a good idea. Something weaker then a BG yet more powerfull then the SG and with a good refire rate i mean something built by the GTVA enginiers not terran , not vasudan but a joint endeavour. This way you can conbine the terran beams range and damage with the vasudan refire rate and relative low energi usage. (if they actualy have lower energi usage) and why not incorporate the vasudan overloading technique without actualy ripping the ship apart.
-
I would imagine there are very good reasons why allied scientists have different beams with different characteristics such as one which is powerful versus one which is fast firing. Namely, that they can't do both together without melting something.
-
It may sound stupid, but with all these heatsinks, allied staff keep mentioning, why dont they keep BC's compartmentalised and vent atmos every time time they want a rapid temp drop, Like in Mech warrior 4 -Flushing coolANT.
-
BC?
-
WEll thats a good point.(C_D) On the other hand the GTVA has these beams for like what..30+ years?? they must be able to improve on the beam tech by now. surely a more eficeint beam cannon can not be far away.
BC=beam cannon , i think!
-
Colonol Dekkers acronym logic
RBC=Remote Beam Cannon
RBC- R = BC
BC = Beam Cannon
Alphaone = Correct
-
WEll thats a good point.(C_D) On the other hand the GTVA has these beams for like what..30+ years?? they must be able to improve on the beam tech by now. surely a more eficeint beam cannon can not be far away.
BC=beam cannon , i think!
what makes you think any of the beam cannon used in FS2 are 30 years old?
-
well the fact that the design of the ships and theyr building was done during peace time sugests a long period of development as oposed to the war like status. Also the fact that they alraedy had tech data on the lucifer flux cannons on wich beam cannons are based (i think) would of ment they were developed quite soon after the Lucifer colapsed the jumpnode to Sol since they really didnt know if there were more of them out there. Also the fact that the Colli is a 20 years endeavour specificly designed to incorporate beam tech means they are at least 20 years old.
-
The collossus took 20 years to build, It was designed with Beam Cannons in mind, so they must have pre-existed, Not taking into account how long a project of that scale would take to concieve, plan and implement.
-
well the fact that the design of the ships and theyr building was done during peace time sugests a long period of development as oposed to the war like status. Also the fact that they alraedy had tech data on the lucifer flux cannons on wich beam cannons are based (i think) would of ment they were developed quite soon after the Lucifer colapsed the jumpnode to Sol since they really didnt know if there were more of them out there. Also the fact that the Colli is a 20 years endeavour specificly designed to incorporate beam tech means they are at least 20 years old.
That only means they were first built 20 years (more, really, going by the Sobek) ago. It's pretty unlikely the GTVA wouldn't have kept the same beam tech for 20 years, even ignoring the NTF rebellion and any other fringe conflicts; same logic as sees the US developing new nuclear weapons despite not having any real enemy to use them against. Hell, same logic as the big C - strengthen for the future.
-
Oh so the GTVA does actualy improve its weapons designs doesnt it??? then who is to say they can't actuali improve the design in 2-3 years? Just in time for them to put them on the bew warships?? Cuz thats how long I imagine it would take to design and actualy send off the first ship for testing. Its a short period of time yeah i know but consider the fact that some of the tech already exists and it would be very usefull as a starting point as instead of starting from 0
-
Oh so the GTVA does actualy improve its weapons designs doesnt it??? then who is to say they can't actuali improve the design in 2-3 years? Just in time for them to put them on the bew warships?? Cuz thats how long I imagine it would take to design and actualy send off the first ship for testing. Its a short period of time yeah i know but consider the fact that some of the tech already exists and it would be very usefull as a starting point as instead of starting from 0
Sorry, but what, exactly, are you on about?
-
That only means they were first built 20 years (more, really, going by the Sobek) ago. It's pretty unlikely the GTVA wouldn't have kept the same beam tech for 20 years, even ignoring the NTF rebellion and any other fringe conflicts; same logic as sees the US developing new nuclear weapons despite not having any real enemy to use them against. Hell, same logic as the big C - strengthen for the future.
Thata what i was on about ! The fact that the GTVA is improving its beam tech and generally its weapons ship tech all the time. This way you could actualy see in 2 or 3 years a beam with close or exactly the same specs as the ones i said.
-
That only means they were first built 20 years (more, really, going by the Sobek) ago. It's pretty unlikely the GTVA wouldn't have kept the same beam tech for 20 years, even ignoring the NTF rebellion and any other fringe conflicts; same logic as sees the US developing new nuclear weapons despite not having any real enemy to use them against. Hell, same logic as the big C - strengthen for the future.
Thata what i was on about ! The fact that the GTVA is improving its beam tech and generally its weapons ship tech all the time. This way you could actualy see in 2 or 3 years a beam with close or exactly the same specs as the ones i said.
Except you have to be very careful vis-a-vis the laws of diminishing returns.
-
For anyone about to say somthing about a beam, ship, or animal in Freespace, do us all a favor... look it up in the Wiki (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki) first.
-
What diminishing returns i dont get it. A darn mi english.
The idea was that since a heavy beam cannon is well kind of hard to swollow ina ship that is suposed to be smaller then a corvette yet a slasher beam would be too weak to be usefull you would actualy take steps to adapt other heavy beams for this ship. Sure they would be smaller then theyre destroyer mounted counterparts and do less damage but the idea behind it was to make it fire faster as to compensate for this situation. Sure it probably wont do as much damage even with its increased firing rate as the standard BG but the diference cant be too big since it would be again unusable.
Also such beams after an initial trial test could posibly be adapted for the corvettes and why not some of them even on destroyers if you can.
But regardless if you can actualy mount them on anything else they should be more the good for the specific ship class . This combined with thery forward firing ark (all beam can fire straight ahead) and numbers should be a deadly combination. When i ment numbers i ment not only for the number of beams on the ship but actualy the number of ships involved.
Lets imagine 2 or 3 of these vesels ambushing a destroyer. I somehow doubght the destroyer would stand much of a chance. Especialy if its a Hecate...you know the whole slasher beams on the side thing.
-
What diminishing returns i dont get it. A darn mi english.
The idea was that since a heavy beam cannon is well kind of hard to swollow ina ship that is suposed to be smaller then a corvette yet a slasher beam would be too weak to be usefull you would actualy take steps to adapt other heavy beams for this ship. Sure they would be smaller then theyre destroyer mounted counterparts and do less damage but the idea behind it was to make it fire faster as to compensate for this situation. Sure it probably wont do as much damage even with its increased firing rate as the standard BG but the diference cant be too big since it would be again unusable.
Also such beams after an initial trial test could posibly be adapted for the corvettes and why not some of them even on destroyers if you can.
But regardless if you can actualy mount them on anything else they should be more the good for the specific ship class . This combined with thery forward firing ark (all beam can fire straight ahead) and numbers should be a deadly combination. When i ment numbers i ment not only for the number of beams on the ship but actualy the number of ships involved.
Lets imagine 2 or 3 of these vesels ambushing a destroyer. I somehow doubght the destroyer would stand much of a chance. Especialy if its a Hecate...you know the whole slasher beams on the side thing.
Diminishing returns is simple; technological development of a specific technology - be it a piece of software, an engine, or a beam turret - is not a linear or exponential growth of efficiency and power, etc. More of a bell curve, I think.
Essentially, we can't be sure that 2 years will bring a significant improvement; it may be that 2 years will result in the theoretical limit of some technology - perhaps not even in the cannon, but in the hull material, the power conduits, reactor output, etc - that prevents a big development leap. Putting these weapons on a craft that is small and cheap (because it will be highly vulnerable in any defensive position, and the larger it becomes the more uneconomical), does require IMO a significant advancement.
For example, if you take the Deimos - probably the newest and best ship in FS2 - and move all its beam (including AAAf) weaponry to a frontal position, is that realistic? Bearing in mind that even just shifting the turrets on the current hull would result in heat, power delivery, stress-during-firing, and soforth issues. i'm not sure that's feasible within 2 or 3 years, making a ship built around that spec which is viable in both cost and battlefield terms.
-
Late reply, but oh well.
Colonol Dekker - "Here's an idea. What if everyone in the universe was hippy'esqe and shared love and all that jazz. But made big guns anyway to shoot 'roids for fun? :D"
Such a Verse already exists, it's called STTNG... :P
-
ummm i didnt say it has to have all of its weapons in a frontal position i think i said forward firing arc.
I dont believe it is the same thing. I mean i would want this ship to be able to have adequate defences but it but be primarely an offensive weapon.
Also I didnt say they would be able to make some tech breaqthrough in beam tech but rather improve on the existing ones.
Also the beam for this ship would be a modified verios of either a vasudan big beam or a terran BG only not so powerfull cuzz well i would imagine they are too powerfull and too big for such a ship.
Also they would have to be more powerfull then a slasher a lot more powerfull i mean such a ship if it hits a corvette for example i mean a direct hit with bombs and beams it would have to at least cripple a Deimos in order to make it usefull. I wiuld imagine a deimos cant quite take the full brunt of a BG let alone 2 or 3 of them. Oh since this ship has to have weaker beam cannons the that I would imagine it leaving the corvette at about 25-to-35% hull strenght.