Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Desert Tyrant on January 30, 2007, 05:52:51 pm
-
I dont want to turn into a ZOMG! crusier thread, I'm just asking which of the capships need desperate upgrades. :)
-
- GTD Hecate (just a bit more firepower)
- GTD Hades (subsystem armor damn it)
-
The Hecate needs more armor and better beam cannons, exchange the current ones with their vasudan counterparts and the problem is solved.
-
The Hecate needs fewer beam cannons, more fighter bay room and more AAAF.
The Hatshetsup should have more beam cannon ownage.
-
This really wouldn't be an upgrade of any sort, but I'd say rip the hull structure right off the Colossus and rebuild it from the ground up to make a sexier looking flagship... :doubt:
-
Fenris - modified into space junk/spare parts. :D
Leviathan - change current weaponry to 9 AAA beams.
Aeolus - 6 MSes, 4 Heavy Flaks and two UltraAAAs instead of two SGreens, two THTs, two AAAs and six flaks.
Hecate - change beams into Stiletto II launchers, limit AF weaponry to about 20 MSes and avaible space spend for two additional hangars with additional 150 fighters (now it would be 300 total).
Colossus - put hangar down, limit weaponry to about 50 MSes and install four huge front beam cannons able to rip out Sathanas in two volleys (one minute fire wait) plus some StilettoII launchers for self-defence.
Aten - modified into space junk/spare parts.
Mentu - low armor and increase AF weaponry (4 Heavy Flaks, 3 AAAs plus some Maxims and MSes).
Typhon - complete change of weaponry to LRFlaks and UltraAAAs only so it could be excellent AF destroyer.
Hatshepsut - strip it down from fighterbays and increase power of beams (3 BFVases and 1 BVas should be fine).
IMHO only Deimos, Sobek and Orion are current GTVA designs with their abilities fully used. All others have got at least one flaw.
-
Fenris - mod it to become a Hippocrates-like vessel, but retain the firepower
I'd love to suggest the Orion, but by the end of FS2 it's obsolete... and my thinking cap isn't put on right now...
-
Well the Orion is still much more powerfull then the Hecate and is almost as powerfull as the Hatshepsuit. The orion really needs more aaaf defences and it would prove to be more powerfull then anyone ever imagined. Even noew by the FS2 era the Orion is still the most hevy hitter in terms of beam cannons whem compared to any other FS2 era destroyer. It is the "heavytank" of the fleet and a job at which it is vcery very well suited for. I believe an Orion MKII would be very very well suited for the fleet more armour better powergrid and more aaaf defences keep its existing fighterbay or even shrink it to about 100 spacecrafts and you would have something which can withstand a lot of punishment yet can give out a lot of hurt to anione crosing its path.
The Orion in FS2 is still used for heavy defence of a node or sistem.
Remember that quote form the game where it says that when an Orion is seen in a sistem relief is brought to the citizens since they know they are very very well potected yet when an Orion stays too much in one sistem the citizens start to wory because almsot all of the time war is gooiing to arive in theyr sistem.
Basicly after more then 50 years of service the Orion is still the most feared and respected ship in the game along with the Aeoulous.
-
Cant believe I forgot the Mentu! :ick: Cool looking ship, just add another turret on its lower side and a good beam cannon at its front. Has anyone ever done this?
-
Orion: five-ten more blob turrets and a pair of AAAfs (one for each side). Heavy Flaks for the big turrets. Replate with some of that funky collapsed-core molybendum armor the Deimos is using.
Aten: chop off end of pointy bits. Install SVas. Replate with collapsed-core molybendum. Add a few more turrets. Three or so should do it. AAAs for the new turrets, flaks for the old big guns. (This one actually exists. If I ever figure out why that table induces FRED borkage, you'll see it; it's of Madbomber's design.)
Mentu and Hecate: scrapheap. Poor firearcs endemic to design.
Hapshepsut: swap Fusion Mortars for flak guns. Possibly a few more turrets along the spine. Has surprisingly poor broadside defenses.
-
Aten: chop off end of pointy bits. Install SVas. Replate with collapsed-core molybendum. Add a few more turrets. Three or so should do it. AAAs for the new turrets, flaks for the old big guns. (This one actually exists. If I ever figure out why that table induces FRED borkage, you'll see it; it's of Madbomber's design.)
Mentu and Hecate: scrapheap. Poor firearcs endemic to design.
Are you mad? Why scrap the Mentu and upgrade the Aten? It would be a much better and economical decision to replace and add turrets on the Mentu than upgrading the Aten's armor with collapsed-core molybendum and upgrading its weapons. No offense, just really want to know why.
-
The Mentu is, simply put, poorly designed. You can't give it good firearcs because of the shape of the hull, it's always going to have a problem with broadside and frontal coverage.
That and I suspect Post-Capella there are not many left, and it would be cheaper to upgrade mothballed Atens then build new Mentus.
-
Sathanas, it needs more firepower... the frontal coverage is non-existant.
Oh, more hitpoints as well! [/sarcasm]
-
Eh hehe...
Colossus; get rid of terran blobs and replace with Morning Stars. Add some Maxim's instead of flak. Watch and learn as anything tries to attack it!
Do that with every terran and vasudan ship as well!!
-
So you're saying give the capital ships nothing but weapons that still do little to no shield damage...and where's the relevance in that?
-
- GTD Hecate (just a bit more firepower)
- GTD Hades (subsystem armor damn it)
Yeah, thinking the same thing I was, but the Hades needs better Beam placement
Oddly enough, I found the Hecate was a good ship, all-in-all. While not as good as the Orion, the Hecate, at optimal conditions, can bring 3 terslashers and that BGreen to bear on a target, which can give brutal fire. If the forward terslasher was changed to a Bgreen, the Hecate would give a hell of amount of trouble to say... a destroyer for once (shockarooney :p) The Hecate was, dare I say, a great ship.
Also, the Hecates that we see in the main campaign never really went into a battle willingly. (Aquataine twice over, Phenocia once, and died a quick death :eek: :eek:
-
The Hecate is a fine ship, capable of unleashing far more fighters and bombers on its targets than can the Orion, the issue people have with it is that they expect a battleship and they get a super carrier instead.
-
So you're saying give the capital ships nothing but weapons that still do little to no shield damage...and where's the relevance in that?
Morning Stars = high kinetic damage + shield damage
Maxim = high hull dammage
Combining the two can do the required fighter destruction. Furthermore, with the range of the Maxims it can assist quite well for engaging cruisers, and its ability to shoot down bombs would be fantastic.
-
Not to mention Morning Stars'll kick the targets back as well... we try and try so hard to get close, only to get pushed back further away :mad: Like the Arcas installation in one of the missions in Inferno R1 that gets outfitted with Mace guns... :shaking:
-
Morning Stars cause very little shield damage, as you can check both on stats and by trying to remove the shields of a Basilisk with it.
-
I'd like to see ANY bomber get close to a capital ship with morning stars. And with their great range, only trebuchets would be effective in response.
-
That sure sounds FUN! ::)
-
Actually, the Mentu needs an anti-warship beams... right now, is no even correspond to they actuall tech room desc... maybe a single Svas...
-
I'd like to see ANY bomber get close to a capital ship with morning stars. And with their great range, only trebuchets would be effective in response.
Which is what I would use to shoot down the turrets...
-
I'd like to see ANY bomber get close to a capital ship with morning stars. And with their great range, only trebuchets would be effective in response.
Which is what I would use to shoot down the turrets...
Yeah, but trebuchets pretty much make the capital ships laughable to the snubfighters =/
-
I always thought the Aten (FS1 and FS2) was the game's biggest freaking pushover.
-
Speaking of Hecates, anyone remember that crappy and unfinished mission I made? I think I swapped the front beams for something with a little more kick. Only problem would be all that heavy firepower being up front - have to attack using Shivan tactics as opposed to the typical broadside manoeuvre (which is the basic tactic used against Shivan opponents)...
I don't mind upgrading the Orion, but... I dunno. To me, when things start serving for a very, veeeeery long time, it might actually be cheaper to start from scratch with a new design but keep the existing principles of heavy anti-cap firepower. I also feel that somehow in one way or another, the Orion looks out of place in comparison with the FS2 fleet. Like the Hecate, Perseus, Ares, Erinyes, etc... Not sure if I were to include the Aeolus or the Deimos to that though.
-
I think you guys make one fatal mistake: you don't consider teamwork. Situations like "lone-mentu-attacked-by-Rakshasa-and-blown-to-bits" can't happen. Let's consider situation with one GTVA fighter wing+Mentu vs one Shivan fighter wing+Rakshasa. GTVA will win. Why? Because Rakshasa's beams won't do anything to Mentu, the most heavily armored GTVA cruiser. Mentu will eliminate Shivan fighters with GTVA wing's help, then fighters will disarm Rakshasa and slowly put it down. As c914 said "capships for everything are for nothing". 3km universal superdestroyer *will* loose against team of smaller specialised warships. So putting SVas to Aten/Mentu or 100-fighter hangar to Orion MKII (anyway next Orion is VERY hypothetical as technologies will be probably completely merged and next-generation GTVA fleet will be common for both Terrans and Vasudans) isn't good idea. If you don't believe me, we can do little wargames on ICQ/MSN/IRC. ;)
BTW little digression about current non-beam and non-prototype weaponry that could be given to capships:
- Subach/Mekhu - better than standard capship turrets but MS would be much better
- Morning Star - one of the most powerful AF weapons, low energy usage (comparing to flaks or AAAs, however also two times larger usage than Prom S and 18 times more than standard turret but considering old age of standard turrets and incompatibility with modern systems changes things for better) gives it possibility for wide use on all capships, is quite good against shields, has got large range (2000) and, the most important, it deals serious kinetic push, I think almost all GTVA capships should be armed with it (mostly AC and Carrier-oriented) as it's very good in fending off fighters and shooting down bombs
- Akheton SDG - could be good in AC self-defence, but has got large energy usage and much shorter range than Maxim (750)
- Prometheus S - good weapon, 1500m range and less energy usage than Morning Star but becomes obsolete as MS+Maxim duo can do the job better
- Maxim - another very good weapon, VERY long range and large hull damage, altough energy usage even bigger than MS (three times as much as Prom S) note about modern systems applies to it too, weak against shields but MS can do this job, also can be used as AC self-defence
- Kayser - I think it's even worse for capships than Prom S, energy usage as large as MS and shorter range (1500)
- Circe - unnecessary crap with not-so-great shield damage and short range
- Lamprey - as above, could be good for fighter suppression if it had larger range, less energy consumption and EMP effect on impact
- Terran Turret - C.R.A.P, can't do anything to fighters, better against bombs, but it's very old and becomes incompatible with modern systems
- Terran Huge Turret - C.R.A.P, more damage but even less velocity than standard turret making it even more useless against fighters
- Terran Turret Weak - C.R.A.P, nothing different than standard except very few shield damage = even more useless against fighters
- AAA - very large energy usage limiting it to capships only and IMHO should be used only on AF/universal capships, anyway it's powerful due to shield penetrate abilities, overloaded version with 4000m range, rapid fire and damage enough to blow up Seraphim in two shots is the best AF weapon
- Standard Flak - quite powerful weapon, altough without ability of shield penetration and takes more place, it deals more overall damage per second and is better in fighter suppression, also good for AF/universal capships
- Heavy Flak - weaker counterpart of Standard Flak, can be used when Standard flak would take too much place (like in Aeolus with two UltraAAAs)
- Long Range Flak - basically LR version of Heavy Flak, IMHO useless, Maxim has got bigger range
- Rockeye - this could be powerful weapon for capships, rapid fire, long range and seeking ability would make it good weapon for both fighter killing and suppression, in theory it could "spam" and force enemy to either turn back and launch countermeasures or face with lots, lots of rockets
- Tempest - short range = unnecessary crap
- Hornet - like Rockeye good for "spamming", but shorter range and less maneuverability makes it less useful, it's also older and less compatible with modern systems
- Harpoon - like above, only with better maneuverability and better compatibility
- TAG X - gives better accuracy, but it'd be much better to give it to fighters rather than waste space on capship
- Stiletto II - pure AC self-defence, with rapid fire and 5500 range (1500 more than typical beams) it can disarm enemy capship and is more place&energy-efficient than Slash beams leaving more place&energy for other weapons, good for specialised capships (AF cruisers or carriers for example)
- Infyrno - AF weapon with the biggest damage, takes lots of place limiting it to large capships and has short range, however no fighter or bomber can survive when hit by it, also good for disarming capships that will get too close
- Cyclops - C.R.A.P, less range, damage and fire rate than beams, not to mention it can be taken down
- EMP Adv. - short range, but great for anti-bomber defence, good fighter supression weapon.
-
Okay, I'm sorry, this is beginning to drive me insane... what is this about the Morning Star being powerful? Will someone please explain? Especially mounted in turrets, the Maxim could take it out at 3 times the range.
It does no shield damage... I can't find the saving grace I keep hearing about.
-
I think you guys make one fatal mistake: you don't consider teamwork. Situations like "lone-mentu-attacked-by-Rakshasa-and-blown-to-bits" can't happen. Let's consider situation with one GTVA fighter wing+Mentu vs one Shivan fighter wing+Rakshasa. GTVA will win. Why? Because Rakshasa's beams won't do anything to Mentu, the most heavily armored GTVA cruiser. Mentu will eliminate Shivan fighters with GTVA wing's help, then fighters will disarm Rakshasa and slowly put it down. As c914 said "capships for everything are for nothing". 3km universal superdestroyer *will* loose against team of smaller specialised warships. So putting SVas to Aten/Mentu or 100-fighter hangar to Orion MKII (anyway next Orion is VERY hypothetical as technologies will be probably completely merged and next-generation GTVA fleet will be common for both Terrans and Vasudans) isn't good idea. If you don't believe me, we can do little wargames on ICQ/MSN/IRC. ;)
Of course a Mentu would do that with a fighter wing but they may not be always avaliable so it'll to take care of itself alone, that's why it needs a beam cannon. I really agree that the next ships of the fleet will be using tech from both sides, I really want to see a Terran/Vasudan made destroyer.
-
There will always be something available.
Look at the US Navy, it is rare to never that a Destroyer travels alone, it almost always has a number of other vessels along with it, as well as plane cover.
-
mmm i will work on "GTVA Fleet weapons upgrade" today and lets see in what finish :P
-
GTVA Colossus?
-
hell even the Hipocrates have an Lterslash.... even the Hipocrates can defend herselft from anything big, better than a Mentu....
-
There will always be something available.
Look at the US Navy, it is rare to never that a Destroyer travels alone, it almost always has a number of other vessels along with it, as well as plane cover.
Not exactly, with the size of the territory the GTVA has to cover in a system its not always that they could have backup avaliable, even more in a combat situation.
-
Okay, I'm sorry, this is beginning to drive me insane... what is this about the Morning Star being powerful? Will someone please explain? Especially mounted in turrets, the Maxim could take it out at 3 times the range.
It does no shield damage... I can't find the saving grace I keep hearing about.
That's a pretty stupid thing to say since a Maxim would take out anything on current capital ships anyways.
The MS would certainly make it extremely difficult to do a bombing run though, plus it's not really a stretch of imagination to conceive that a capital ship mounted version could have more range.
Just to be clear, have you actually been the target of the MS?
-
Yes, on an Aeolus's turrets, it throws you back by a kilometer or so, and leaves you almost totally undamaged, compared to the Flail, the MS is a worthless piece of **** that happens to throw fighters around, and honestly, if you replaced every turret of a ship with Kaysers, I think would get far more fighter kills in the same amount of time as a ship covered in MSs
FRED works on your comp I hope? Try it, tell me how that works out, I hate text FREDing
-
And like I've said, just snipe the turrets off the capital ship first, I always use Trebuchets in conjunction with Helios or Cyclops missiles.
-
I think you guys make one fatal mistake: you don't consider teamwork. Situations like "lone-mentu-attacked-by-Rakshasa-and-blown-to-bits" can't happen. Let's consider situation with one GTVA fighter wing+Mentu vs one Shivan fighter wing+Rakshasa. GTVA will win. Why? Because Rakshasa's beams won't do anything to Mentu, the most heavily armored GTVA cruiser. Mentu will eliminate Shivan fighters with GTVA wing's help, then fighters will disarm Rakshasa and slowly put it down. As c914 said "capships for everything are for nothing". 3km universal superdestroyer *will* loose against team of smaller specialised warships. So putting SVas to Aten/Mentu or 100-fighter hangar to Orion MKII (anyway next Orion is VERY hypothetical as technologies will be probably completely merged and next-generation GTVA fleet will be common for both Terrans and Vasudans) isn't good idea. If you don't believe me, we can do little wargames on ICQ/MSN/IRC. ;)
BTW little digression about current non-beam and non-prototype weaponry that could be given to capships:
- Subach/Mekhu - better than standard capship turrets but MS would be much better
- Morning Star - one of the most powerful AF weapons, low energy usage (comparing to flaks or AAAs, however also two times larger usage than Prom S and 18 times more than standard turret but considering old age of standard turrets and incompatibility with modern systems changes things for better) gives it possibility for wide use on all capships, is quite good against shields, has got large range (2000) and, the most important, it deals serious kinetic push, I think almost all GTVA capships should be armed with it (mostly AC and Carrier-oriented) as it's very good in fending off fighters and shooting down bombs
- Akheton SDG - could be good in AC self-defence, but has got large energy usage and much shorter range than Maxim (750)
- Prometheus S - good weapon, 1500m range and less energy usage than Morning Star but becomes obsolete as MS+Maxim duo can do the job better
- Maxim - another very good weapon, VERY long range and large hull damage, altough energy usage even bigger than MS (three times as much as Prom S) note about modern systems applies to it too, weak against shields but MS can do this job, also can be used as AC self-defence
- Kayser - I think it's even worse for capships than Prom S, energy usage as large as MS and shorter range (1500)
- Circe - unnecessary crap with not-so-great shield damage and short range
- Lamprey - as above, could be good for fighter suppression if it had larger range, less energy consumption and EMP effect on impact
- Terran Turret - C.R.A.P, can't do anything to fighters, better against bombs, but it's very old and becomes incompatible with modern systems
- Terran Huge Turret - C.R.A.P, more damage but even less velocity than standard turret making it even more useless against fighters
- Terran Turret Weak - C.R.A.P, nothing different than standard except very few shield damage = even more useless against fighters
- AAA - very large energy usage limiting it to capships only and IMHO should be used only on AF/universal capships, anyway it's powerful due to shield penetrate abilities, overloaded version with 4000m range, rapid fire and damage enough to blow up Seraphim in two shots is the best AF weapon
- Standard Flak - quite powerful weapon, altough without ability of shield penetration and takes more place, it deals more overall damage per second and is better in fighter suppression, also good for AF/universal capships
- Heavy Flak - weaker counterpart of Standard Flak, can be used when Standard flak would take too much place (like in Aeolus with two UltraAAAs)
- Long Range Flak - basically LR version of Heavy Flak, IMHO useless, Maxim has got bigger range
- Rockeye - this could be powerful weapon for capships, rapid fire, long range and seeking ability would make it good weapon for both fighter killing and suppression, in theory it could "spam" and force enemy to either turn back and launch countermeasures or face with lots, lots of rockets
- Tempest - short range = unnecessary crap
- Hornet - like Rockeye good for "spamming", but shorter range and less maneuverability makes it less useful, it's also older and less compatible with modern systems
- Harpoon - like above, only with better maneuverability and better compatibility
- TAG X - gives better accuracy, but it'd be much better to give it to fighters rather than waste space on capship
- Stiletto II - pure AC self-defence, with rapid fire and 5500 range (1500 more than typical beams) it can disarm enemy capship and is more place&energy-efficient than Slash beams leaving more place&energy for other weapons, good for specialised capships (AF cruisers or carriers for example)
- Infyrno - AF weapon with the biggest damage, takes lots of place limiting it to large capships and has short range, however no fighter or bomber can survive when hit by it, also good for disarming capships that will get too close
- Cyclops - C.R.A.P, less range, damage and fire rate than beams, not to mention it can be taken down
- EMP Adv. - short range, but great for anti-bomber defence, good fighter supression weapon.
ZOMG!!!!! Cruiser...
-
And like I've said, just snipe the turrets off the capital ship first, I always use Trebuchets in conjunction with Helios or Cyclops missiles.
A reasonable strategy. Much like Wild Weasel missions today - Trebuchets are good for SEAD, suppression of enemy air defenses.
Though not always an option, and - given any degree of sense - warships so targeted might just jump out. I hesitate to call this a universal method of eliminating capital ships as a tactical presence.
-
I'm surprised that there isn't a reconstruction of the Deimos-Class corvette. Those things were rock solid kick ass machines. The only weakness they had was the lack of a fighter bay, and a lack of decent beams at the rear.
-
I'm surprised that there isn't a reconstruction of the Deimos-Class corvette. Those things were rock solid kick ass machines. The only weakness they had was the lack of a fighter bay, and a lack of decent beams at the rear.
The Deimos only needs to change those two rear anticap beam cannons to something better and thats it, adding a fighterbay would be useless since it would get its fighter cover from the Hecate.
-
ok ppl, this has been a long, dificult and little boring Fred day :P, so, i decided "play" with the GTVA Fleet Weapons, using data from this tropic.
Basicly, i decommised all "Terran Turrets" and his variants...
I especialy prouly of what i have done with the Colossus, Hades and the Mentu, the Colossus is now much more powerfull, i reeplace some of those terslash for SGREENs (just 4 o 5, not all...), and i change the SGREEN of front for a BGREEN, and al lot of turret change... the Colossus have 63 turrets (And dev info on the table sugest that in a beginning the Colossus have 80 turrets).
The Hades... well... is better to not get close without "some" trebs... i warnt you, and you didt listen :P
The Mentu... well i noticed that the GTVA dont have a cruiser capable of shoot beams at sides, so now the Mentu have 2 SVAS... one on each side, and keep they "anti-fighter" role very high too... be adviced to be caution on the Iceni mission :P
And the Aten now have a anti-cap beam
and a lot more changes... take a look... xD
Put this ships.tbl in your "mediavps/data/tables"... and you can play the retail fs2 campaign with the modified ships weaponry (as long :V: didt not change one of then).
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
the Colossus have 63 turrets (And dev info on the table sugest that in a beginning the Colossus have 80 turrets
i made a collosus with 86 turrets but the game would crash when it fired all its beams
-
I think you guys make one fatal mistake: you don't consider teamwork. Situations like "lone-mentu-attacked-by-Rakshasa-and-blown-to-bits" can't happen. Let's consider situation with one GTVA fighter wing+Mentu vs one Shivan fighter wing+Rakshasa. GTVA will win. Why? Because Rakshasa's beams won't do anything to Mentu, the most heavily armored GTVA cruiser. Mentu will eliminate Shivan fighters with GTVA wing's help, then fighters will disarm Rakshasa and slowly put it down. As c914 said "capships for everything are for nothing". 3km universal superdestroyer *will* loose against team of smaller specialised warships. So putting SVas to Aten/Mentu or 100-fighter hangar to Orion MKII (anyway next Orion is VERY hypothetical as technologies will be probably completely merged and next-generation GTVA fleet will be common for both Terrans and Vasudans) isn't good idea. If you don't believe me, we can do little wargames on ICQ/MSN/IRC. ;)
Fact: Rakshasa will get off at least one unopposed salvo from the forward beams. Three SReds will at the very least inflict a severe mauling on the Mentu. In all likelyhood it will manage to fire a second salvo of at least two beams no matter what happens.
Fact: Shivan fighter wing does not have to play your game, which pretty much invalidates your whole argument. They may instead opt to defend the Rakshasa from the GTVA fighter wing.
Fact: The Mentu cannot contribute significantly to its own defense against enemy capital craft.
-
Yes the fleet of the future integrates both terran and vasudan tech into single ships. But then again that could also be done right now. Also the scrapping of the Orion class now after capella would a mistake of monumental magnitude and would most definetly make things worse for the political council of the GTVA which is already in a very bad shape after the destruction of capella.
The Orion is the most seen and feared simbol of power in all of the GTVA ! It is something that terrans have come to love and fear and something which states the power of the terran species and its origins from SOL.
There is no other ship in the GTVA that can match the ORION is sheer firepower. I'm not talking about fighter crring abilaty but sheer firepower. The Hecate was suposed to be the ship that would take over from trhe Orion but as we see they overestimated its sheer firepower and well most of the times you see a hecate it either needs to be bailed out of trouble or is destroyed. So the question of scrapping the Orions has a definite answear by now and that is : HELL NO! Those things are just too powerfull to be discarded.
After capella I believe GTVA engenieres would try and further upgrade the Orion and reduce some of its weak points while keeping the overall flat boxy design of the ship which has proven to be much more efective then any other ship design so far.
So I believe that an Orion MK II would not only be very posible but even desirable.
-
ngtm1r - Mentu can take 5 salvos before being destroyed, due to high top speed (35m/s) it can maneuver and avoid beams, it can theoretically increase life to 6/7 salvos. Each of them is per 25 seconds. That means Mentu can stand for 125 (or 150-175 when maneuvering) seconds. Let's say Rakshasa will emerge 3000m from Mentu and open fire. Mentu will need one minute to get into fire range of AAA beams to get to fighters guarding Rakshasa. Two upper AAAs can help GTVA fighters a lot. I think GTVA will leave with two (maybe three) fighters. Then maneuver fight beetwen Rakshasa and Mentu will begin. Rakshasa has got its beam pointed froward and is 15m/s slower than Mentu so it could give perhaps one more shot (and only when lucky). That means Mentu will leave with around 20% before fighters disarm Rakshasa, one more will be lost because of Rakshasa's AF fire but that one-two remaining ones will help in beating it of. Everything becomes MUCH easier when fighters have got Stilettos, Rakshasa will get one salvo before its main cannons are destroyed. Also as I said before upgraded Mentu with less armor and improved AF weaponry (maybe even Stiletto II launcher, makes things even easier) would take down Shivan fighters quickly so GTVA fighters could concentrate on main Rakshasa beams. Even if everything I said fails, Mentu can simply retreat. ;)
AlphaOne - as I said Orions aren't bad design, they can remain in fleet for some time because of its superior AC firepower and quite large fighterbay. However Orion MKII isn't good idea, destroyer using both Terran and Vasudan tech will be much harder nut to crack. I think next generation GTVA destroyers should be split into two groups: AC Destroyers with massive froward firepower (Remember Asarte from Inferno R1? >D ) but weak AF weaponary and Carriers with lots of fighters and fighterbays but no beams (only disarming weapon like Stiletto II).
ShivanSPS - hmmm...let's see...:
- Fenris as old piece of junk with very weak reactor surely can't take Trebuchets (and remember, Trebs were prototypes available to elite squadrons only, I doubt any capship could have it in that short time, MAYBE 10 years after IIGW), not to mention other weapons, your Fenris would experience reactor failures if all its turrets would come into party.
- Leviathan much better but still a) Trebuchet, b) UltraAAA, it'd also have reactor failures if that beam would come online
- Faustus...well that thing now has got HUGE AF firepower, way too much for a civilian vessel :p
- Orion - that warship is already very powerful, it was miracle (or desingers' genius) that this old design has got both large fighterbay and the largest amount of AC firepower in regular fleet, adding additional BGreen and LRFlaks will cause VERY serious reactor failures
- Deimos - WAY too much AF firepower, I don't know where you plan to put all these Standard Flaks :p
- Aeolus - that thing is already very overpowered and reactor barely staying in one piece, like Orion massive reactor failure
- Aten - no comments, that ship would blow up if it'd fire SVas, not to mention VSlash :p
- Mentu - original set, weaker armor or reactor failure, the choice is yours ;)
- Typhon - Trebuchet
- Hatshepsut - Tornado+Trebuchet+way too much AF firepower, reactor failure sure.
Some other ships are also little too overpowered, but less than those above. BTW I'm preparing my own version of upgraded capships, should be released today evening. ;)
-
ngtm1r - Mentu can take 5 salvos before being destroyed, due to high top speed (35m/s) it can maneuver and avoid beams, it can theoretically increase life to 6/7 salvos.
This is pure fantasy. You don't dodge at 35m/s. You don't dodge anticap beams at all. Also your numbers are too high; it's less than that. A Rakshasa can destroy a corvette in five salvos. Believe me, I've watched it do it to a Demios. Similarly assuming the Shivans will be kind enough to jump in at anything short of max range (which is another kilometer!) is ridiculous.
Each of them is per 25 seconds. That means Mentu can stand for 125 (or 150-175 when maneuvering) seconds. Let's say Rakshasa will emerge 3000m from Mentu and open fire. Mentu will need one minute to get into fire range of AAA beams to get to fighters guarding Rakshasa. Two upper AAAs can help GTVA fighters a lot. I think GTVA will leave with two (maybe three) fighters.
You're again assuming that the Shivans will be kind enough to wander into the Mentu's firearcs. Which they probably will not be. And if the Shivan fighters choose to duck under it and attack? What then?
-
QWER i have just one thing to ask you: How in gods name did you figure out all of those pure fanatasy things?
The Orion had no powefailures due to reactor overload. It was the Typhoon that had such problems.
Also the Orion pays for its heavy AC firepower with aaaf defences. That ship is in desperate need of some more aaaf defences. Mi idea of an Orion MKII does not mean it has to have more AC firepower altough that could be a posibilaty (adding another beam cannon in front of it) but rather increasing its aaaf defences and hp to that of the Hathshepsuit. Such and upgrade and some minor tweaks in its overall design would make it a dedicated AC weapons platform with an average siuze fighterbay and more hp to withstand more punishment. Also we ahve seen that vasudan reactor's and powergrids can be succesfuly implemented in terran designed warship with a LOt of succes.
Want an example? DEIMOS! Also since when is the Deimos overpowered???? That thing is in desperate need of some upgrades to its main beam cannons I mean it is a superb aaaf defence platform for the fleets but then again it needs ideal position to make full use of its beams which a weak to say the least. Mi Idea would be to just scrap 2 of its beams and replace them with BG or vasudan heavy beams. Less damage from the vasudan beams but higher refire rate. then they BG counterparts.
Let's not forget that the tech room states that due to the masive amount of power generated by its reactors the Deimos can wield that much weaponry and has such a high top speed.
I believe that replacing the 4 slashers with just 2 heavy beems would put just as much strain on the Deimos's reactors as the 4 slashers but it would make it that much deadlier.
Also at this point cruisers at least GTVA cruisers can not stand theyr ground agains any shivan warship especialy the newer cruiser designs or the Leviathan for that matter ! Hell even Destroyers can be in serious trouble if a Leviathan showes up and rely on theyr fighter/bommber wings to take out theyr beam cannons. I mean I have seen cruisers taken out in less then 3 seconds by shivan cruisers so dont tell me that a Mentu can duck it out with a shivan warship because that is pure fantasy.
THERE IS NO GTVA WARSHIP THAT CA DUCK IT OUT WITH ITS SHIVAN COUNTERPART!
Want to know why? Go check the weapons descriptions for shivan beam cannons and then compare them to theyr GTVA counterparts.
The only way GTVA warships can take out a ravana for example is because they send in wings of fighters/bommbers/interceptors to take out its heavy beam cannons and then and only then do they send in capital warships. I mean you have one ravana that took out 2 deimos corvettes almos at the same time faster then they could even get a reading of what it was that hit them and faster then they could initiate a subspace jump to flee or use theyr superior manouverabilaty to get out of its forward firing ark.
Also you keep sayng that the future of GTVA warships is in designs with forward mounted heavy beam cannons. I say to you go take a look at how i in a heavvy bommber can take out a destroyer by simply getting out of its forward firing ark and taking out from a distance its side mounted flacks aaaf beams etc with trebs.
Also since GTVA beam weaponry is desperatly inferior to shivan designs it would be a waste of time to try and beat them with theyr tactic. The shivans have greater numbers and superior tech to the GTVA. You anly build such ships if you are waging a war where you are the one that does the attacking but as we have seen the GTVA is the one dooing the DEFENDING!
Also look a the Ravana destroyer which a super offensive ship with masive amounts of firepower in its forwards firing ark. But when that ship is put on the defensive it is a piece of JUNK. I mean that ship could be taken out by a god damn cruiser from the side or a corvette in this case! Abnd it did got blown away by a corvette if you want to know a Sobek if i'm not mistake after GTVA Erynyes fighters took out its forward heavy beam cannons.
The GTVA has ships with all round firepower with a slight emphasis on defensive abylaties of the ship both in terms of AAAF and AC weaponry.
-
ngtm1r - I've just made mission with me on Mentu with 35m/s vs Rakshasa 4000m in front of me and tested it three times. I had from 35% to 60% and dodged pretty well before I got to 1500m range. When Mentu gets close enough, Shivan fighters will be forced to engage GTVA (unless they want to be shot down by AAAs :p ).
AlphaOne - yeah yeah, techroom says Typhoon has got reactor failutes because it had the biggest problems with it, but using little logic you can conclude that Orion is already close to that. Why? Typhon and Orion are warships in similar age. Assumption that Typhon powergrid, reactors and so on aren't compatible with beams is right. But as you can see Orion has got little bigger firepower than Hatshepsut, brand new destroyer. The only driffence beetwen these two is AF coverage (Orion's AF is virtually nonexistant, Hatshepsut has got quite good one, still AF weapons takes less place&energy than beams) and hull. That means Orion must be quite close to problems Typhon had. That's why Typhon has got only two BVas'es.
About your vision of Orion MKII you describe universal desing = easy target for fleet of specialised ships. We had discussion on freespace.pl and came to conclusion that only corvettes can be universal, cruisers can hold little weapons and are either crap (Leviathan) or expensive (Aeolus) while making universal destroyer is complete waste. Look at Hecate. Average AC, average AF and average fighterbay (or at least similar, AC is smaller than AF and fighter capability). AC is sufficient for corvettes and cruisers, but destroyer will beat it. Fighter capability is enough to flood universal destroyers like Ravana or Demon, but what if it encounters carriers with bigger fighter capability? It'll encounter situation 150 vs 300 fighters and the only option will be to withdraw. Your Orion is just like Hecate, but more advanced and with smaller fighterbay. Don't you think making destoryer with two froward LRBGreens able to take down destroyer in two salovs remaining untouched plus some AF cruisers as escort would be better? If you don't belive me, we can do wargames on ICQ/MSN. ;)
About Deimos it doesn't need changed configuration. Deimos and Sobek are just two diffrent corvettes for two diffrent tasks. Deimos is escort corvette with better AF and larger number of weaker beams while Sobek is assault one with worse AF but all AC firepower in two VSlashes. If it can have much more powerful weaponary due to better reactor then why we don't see Deimos with two BGreens anywhere in campaign? Also Deimos and Sobek are warships from the same generation. Take a look at Aeolus comparing to Leviathan. Better hull, better top speed, better weaponary. The same could go to Deimos&Sobek vs. older corvettes (in theory because they don't exist). That kind of jump you're talking about (two BGreens instead of four TerSlashes) is impossible to be maintained. True, in theory Deimos could turn off two TerSlashes, increase reactor power and turn created reserve to froward beams changing them into BGreens, however it would be able to give only one salvo and then one-minute break before another BGreen fire or change into normal else it'd overload powergrid, everything has limitations (four TerSlashes deal 46200 damage per 30 seconds, two BGreens 52800, 6600 damage isn't much, but take a note that all 52800 comes from only two cannons while standard 46200 from four, that means front cannons' powergrid would be seriously overloaded if another 52800 would come after 30 seconds only).
About another few next lines a) read note to ngtm1r b) destroyers wouldn't be in serious trouble because Leviathan with one fighter wing would have to counter destroyer with 20 fighter wings c) Ravana destroyed Deimos (whenever I play Acidum escapes) because it overloaded its four beam cannons to BFReds (I wouldn't be suprised if it waited three minutes until its powergrid and reactors stabilised) d) GTVA could take down Shivan counterpart eaisly, imagine destroyer with no fighterbay, small AF coverage and two/three LRBGreens hitting Demon/Ravana from 8000m distance, if Shivans would get out alive then in very bad shape.
About few last ones I don't think future of GTVA will be large capships. I think their future are fighters and carriers. Look at Capella. Fighters handled themselves quite well while warships dropped down like flies. However basing completly on fighters and carriers isn't good idea so I think some capships are needed, mostly cruisers and corvettes, but also larger ones, including my proposition of destroyer with two/three long range beams. I just think universal capships (excluding corvettes) are for everything, but for nothing. Also fleet made of specialised capships requires TEAMWORK, not situations like "single X attacked by Shivan X and destroyed". So if you'd attack my AC destroyer with bomber, you'd have to face corvette with Trebuchets plus some escort fighters. ;) About beams I don't think GTVA beams are much weaker than Shivan ones (they're weaker, but not that much). Look closer at Shivan desings. Moloch has got weaker beams than Deimos/Sobek because of fighterbay, Liliths are rarely encountered (probably because Shivans have got very few of them), Rakshasa is powerful in AC, but it's AC desing, not universal like Aeolus/Leviathan, if GTVA would have AC cruiser, it'd be little weaker than it (maybe next-generation one would be stronger), the same goes to Ravana and Demon, they've got weak AF and smaller fighterbays than GTVA counterpart, that's why they've got superior firepower. About your last line I don't agree with you. Subspace changes war rules completly from static war (where defence counts more) to manevuer war (where it counts less and the best defence is assault). I think next-generation GTVA desings should have multiple jump drives (two for regular warships, three for carriers and assault desings). That'd allow GTVA warships to quickly change positions. Now defence doesn't count that much because AC warships can simply emerge in front of enemy battlegroup, destroy it with powerful front weaponary and escape. Side AC weaponary would be limited to small beams (on escort corvettes and large AC desings) and Stiletto II (on everything). Of course as I said before there'd be lots, lots of fighters, but in that case giving too many side AC weaponary is impractical and unnessesery because they limit assault abilities.
BTW little note on Colossus vs Sathanas. As you might've seen Colossus has got 240 fighters in its fighterbay. I think that's reason why it's seriously outclassed by Sathanas in AC firepower. Colossus with LRBGreens (overloaded) deals 400000 damage per 30 seconds, Sathanas with normal weaponary (4 BFReds) deals 1200000 per 30 seconds. Now let's take fighterbay from Colossus and half of AF weaponary. I've calculated that would increase Col's firepower by 3. Now it's 1200000 vs 1200000. Still Sathanas ouclasses Colossus because it's still got fighterbay (probably something around 80 fighters) and better AF weaponary.
-
This is worse than any political or religious arguement I've been in. :doubt:
-
What the??? From where do you get these figures it's beyond me! The Collie can do all that damage when overloading most of its beam cannons ! Shivan beam cannons i believe it was calculated somewhere can do about 10 times the damage per designated time period i believe it was about one or 2 minutes because they have this ridiculously shor refire rate and more then double the sustained fire time per shot i believe it is something like 3 seconds for GTVA beams compared to something like 10 seconds for the shivan beams.
Also i never said the Deimos should have 4 beam cannons on it but rather GET RID of 2 of them and replace the other 2 with BG !
Also since the Orion as we can see can manage to fire all of its beams with absolutely no problem what so ever is clear enough to me that it does not have such problems when it comes to reactor overloads. And assuming that it does with absolutely not a sigle proof of it beeing in danger of dooing so is absolute fantasy. Also the whole ter slashers dooing all that damage is absolute bulls*** ! Since when does a Deimos able to fire ALL of its 4 beam cannons at a single target?? NEVER. 90% of the time it can bring to bear just 2 of them.
Also i imagine that when they refited the Orion with beam cannons they overhauled its powergrid as well to some degree.
And again when designing in part a new generation of warship based on its previous generation you kinda want to replace its powergrid to a more powerfull one tha same goes for its engines .
Also how the hell did you come up with the conclusion that the Sath has ust about 80 fighters in its huge belly?? The ravana had about the same fighter capacity of a Hecate and they are about the same size yet it has 3 or 4 LRed's if i'm not mistaken.
Hell you made me want to chech the Fs wiki so that i can prove just how wrong you are.
-
You guys know that you're fighting about something called science-FICTION, don't you? This almost looks like a "my fantasy is better than yours"-battle. ::)
-
ShivanSPS - hmmm...let's see...:
- Fenris as old piece of junk with very weak reactor surely can't take Trebuchets (and remember, Trebs were prototypes available to elite squadrons only, I doubt any capship could have it in that short time, MAYBE 10 years after IIGW), not to mention other weapons, your Fenris would experience reactor failures if all its turrets would come into party.
- Leviathan much better but still a) Trebuchet, b) UltraAAA, it'd also have reactor failures if that beam would come online
- Faustus...well that thing now has got HUGE AF firepower, way too much for a civilian vessel :p
- Orion - that warship is already very powerful, it was miracle (or desingers' genius) that this old design has got both large fighterbay and the largest amount of AC firepower in regular fleet, adding additional BGreen and LRFlaks will cause VERY serious reactor failures
- Deimos - WAY too much AF firepower, I don't know where you plan to put all these Standard Flaks :p
- Aeolus - that thing is already very overpowered and reactor barely staying in one piece, like Orion massive reactor failure
- Aten - no comments, that ship would blow up if it'd fire SVas, not to mention VSlash :p
- Mentu - original set, weaker armor or reactor failure, the choice is yours ;)
- Typhon - Trebuchet
- Hatshepsut - Tornado+Trebuchet+way too much AF firepower, reactor failure sure.
Some other ships are also little too overpowered, but less than those above. BTW I'm preparing my own version of upgraded capships, should be released today evening. ;)
hehe, well i did this in less than an hour -.-, is no susposed to be "balanced" xD
About the Aten... what is the less powerfull anti cap beam in the Vasudan? i was thinking in put it a terslash... but hell is a Vasudan ship :P
The Mentu has about the Same weapons load, but addicional 2 SVAS.... i think is needed... for 2 reasons...
1) They dont have a front turret
2) The GTVA dont have much ships capable of shooting beams at sides...
EDIT: You didt say anything about the Arcadia :P
and about the missiles for the Leviathan and Fenris... i think that Fusion mortal was ok for both...
OK i have edited it to readuce a little the firepower of ships.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Ya know, I'm rather doubtful than the Orion has ZOMG!!!!! REketor OVERLOADS!!!!111eleventy :mad: :mad2: :mad2: :mad:
If the Orions reactor was so ****ty, than just why the **** does it have six beams? Hmm?
Also, I dont think that flak takes as much energy as even a aaaf beam. Further more, flaks on an Orion would be a welcome addition, as an Orion will last much longer.
Also, the Typhon simply wasent built for Beams, and thus, why the Hatsephsut has more beams, yet on the flipside, the Hecate is newer, but dosent have as many beams.
(Yeah, I'm a bit pissed, school sucked ass today, sorry for sounding like a grade a prick
-
Also to invalidate a previous arguement about the Sobek and the Deimos beeing built at the same time! That is a mistake ! The Sobek was developed soon after the end of the first great war or rather as soon as beam cannons beacame available in they current form. The sobek was built to take advantage of them at lead 10 years before the Deimos was built or rather a lot sooner then the Deimos was even on the drawing boards. The Deimos class corvettes as first built a few years before the start of the second great war! They did manage however to build quite a few !
But somehow i get the distinct impresion that the fisheaters actualy built a lot more then the terrans ! I believe that they must of actualy had something like 2 sobeks per deimos built because the Sobek was in production a lot sooner and was the only cap ship of its class available for a period of time to the GTVA so i believe they wanted to capitalize on this.
-
This is worse than any political or religious arguement I've been in. :doubt:
Only because people are now making it personal.
Folks, there's no need to insult each other, don't you know, a simple "you're wrong" would suffice.
-
Ekhem people, we're not auguring, insulting each other and so on, we're just having typical conversation where two people have diffrent point of view and want to persuade the other one. ;) Also this discussion isn't pointless, FreeSpace is science fiction, but it's got rules and I don't agree with some ideas of others because I think they're breaking those rules.
AlphaOne - about first paragraph well I don't understand you. :p
Second - well if you'd do that, you'd have to make serious changes in Deimos design, including lowing AF weaponry. It's possible, but breaks whole Deimos concept because it'd become IDENTICAL to Sobek. If you'd do that, having two corvettes would be pointless.
Third - have I ever said Orion has got reactor overloads when it fires all its beam canons in standard config? I said it's CLOSE to it, not IS. I just wanted to point that any increase of reactor's power would probably cause power crash and it'd be impossible to install another BGreen on it like ShivanSPS did. Deimos can't bring all four cannons on one target, but what if it engages two of them? I count capship maximum power in situations where in brings all turrets into play, not single target. You can't limit your accounts to just part of them because you can't see real use of reactors' power.
Fighterbay - where did you get that info about 150 fighters inside Ravana? o_0 Or much more than 80 fighters inside Sath? My count on Sath's capability was based on what we've seen in main campaign. Let's assume there were 200 Shivan destroyers and 100 Juggernauths. In my calculations about fighter capability it'd be 20000 Shivan fighters flooding Capella, If GTVA had 20 destroyers there it'd give 2000 GTVA fighters. And in main campaign we've seen Shivans having around 10 times more fighters. I think large number of Shivan fighters wasn't because of large fighter capability of destroyers, but large number of destroyers themselves. That'd fit Shivan strategy perfectly (small crafts only as support and whack enemy with large number of heavy tanks).
Sobek vs Deimos - in main campaign there was similar number of Deimoses and Sobeks. That means Sobek mustn't have been built too soon after IGW (because there were no beams then and Sobek couldn't have do its job, having it released after beams' invention is much more logical and beams were invented around 20 years after IGW). That means age difference beetwen Sobek and Deimos is at most 6 years. That short amount of time doesn't mean anything to capship construction. Visible difference beetwen them would be shown if it'd be something around 12 years.
-
If there had been large numbers of Shivan destroyers, we'd have been dead before the Sathanas arrived.
-
Chrono - not really, we had touch with only few of them before Sathanas armada invaded. That's why it's gone so easily until we were caught into trap.
-
Actualy by the time you engage the Sath you can safely asume that most of the fighterrs you see around it come from the Sath . Let us not forget that the Sath deployed its bommber and fighters on numerous ocasions and lost quite a great deal of them. It's fighters and bommbers had to take out the Psamtik and they were involved in numerous other battles. Also when you go and take out its forward beam cannons you see quite a few wings of bommber and fighters. Remember the Sath has only 5 beamc cannons and a few flacks and aaf beams to it. So I ask you what was all that belly of the sath filled with??
And do not tell me it was with reactors and stuff...!
-
Yeah, those were reactors and stuff. :p Remember Sathanas has got powerful subspace weapon, where would it get power for it, from Stanta Claus? :p And yeah, Sathanas deployed...20 fighters in mission where it's attacked plus 8 when it's owned by Colossus, prehaps more when it breached GD-Capella blocade. Other fighters could've been deployed by attending destroyers.
-
So I ask you what was all that belly of the sath filled with??
Food?
Hey, it looks like a giant tick...it must have been eating ship hulls or something... ;7
-
There were no destroyer anywhere near the sathanas when it engaged the GTVA forces and the GTVA blokade. Also the subspace weaponry as it was named is not a weapon in its own right ! Remember it took over 80 jugs to make capella supernova. Not just one.
Also the sath deployes much more then just 8 fighter wings ! if you take the time to take out the fighters you will see the sath deply aditional wings.
Also we are all aware that shivans poses very very advanced subspace tech for all we know they could have jusp drives the size of a car for an entire jugg.
Also asuming that the belly of the sath was filled with reactors and ubspace stuff if pure fantasy there is no evidence to suport that absolutely no evidence.
I'm just surprised Aldo is not here to slam the cannon stuff around. Man he comes when you least want him and leaves when you need him the most! Talk about bad timing :P
See Aldo we do agree on some things :D
-
AlphaOne - there were no info indicating that no destroyer jumped into Gamma Draconis after Sathanas except Beleth. And Sath deployed what I've said before, I've looked into FRED. Shivans have got advanced subspace tech, but still powering such a powerful device requires huge, really huge amount of energy and can be delivered only by lots of powerful reactors. There's no evidence for that, but I'm using logic to make that conclusion.
-
Yeah sure and the fact that they might of diverted the power from they beam cannon reactors to power up that subspace field of each Sathanas would be absolutely insane to believe no? Come on you make it sound like its cannon ! Also if there were other destroyers anywhere near the area where sathanas number 1 was destroyed dont you believe they would of jumped in fast and rescued the blasted thing?
Come on this s stuff you made yourself believe are true and now you try and convince the rest of the peoiple that it should be some sort of cannon or fannon or whatever.
It's comon sense to believe based on the info we have about the shivans and theyr advanced subspace tech that they could of generated that kind of energi from dry peanuts for all we know ! Want to know why? Because we do not know anithing about the shivan subspace tech except the fact that its extremely advanced..that they can use nodes too small for a GTVA fighter to go through let alone a cap ship and nodes so unstable that it makes everyone tremble at the simple though that the shivans can use them. And that is all.
Also thsoe fighters clearely come from the sath since well...they do not jump in and unless i'm totaly blind ia have failed to see them coming from a nearby destroyer.
-
Notice it took those 80 Sathanses 72 hours to charge up subspace weapon and about 20% of them overloaded their powergrids during launch (you can see powering down Saths when they launch their weapons and then consumed by Supernova). Their tech may be advanced, but blowing up star is much harder than planet or Colossus and requires huge, really huge amount of energy.
There are 5 missions with first Sathanas. In first it deploys nothing (or at least we don't see it because we don't know if these earlier fighters were from Sathanas or destroyers so it can't negate my theory). In second it deploys 19 fighters&bombers. Third - nothing. Fourth - nothing (it might've deployed fighters earlier when it was destroying blockade but when player jumps in to disarm it fighters are coming from subspace, not Sath). Fifth - 8 fighters. That gives us 28 fighters. If we assume it deployed 3,5 times more (in fifth one it probably ran out of fighters, otherwise it'd deploy more than just two wings) we get about 100 fighters, the same as Orion. It makes sense IMHO.
And I don't know where do you see my arrogant non-canon->canon behavior, I'm just defending my theory giving arguments. If none of my assumptions remains in conflict with what we've seen in main campaign, my theory can't be negated.
BTW I've missed one more weapon earlier when I was making list of weapons and my opinion about them:
- Piranha - good fighter suppression weapon because of its area effect, very dangerous when launched in large numbers
-
Actualy when you are tring to support a theary or asumption you have to have real cannon evidence for that. Also we do not see anywhere the sath overloading its powegrid. WE just see them stoiping in anithing they were dooing and changing colour. Wich to me would sugest they might of died which would sugest the sath are grown at least in part rather then built.
Usualy when a ship overloads its powergrid to that point it explodes it does not change colour.
What you have provided so far in defence of your theories are your own opinions and no cannon proof whatsoever.
Also if thge sath had not deployed fighter wings to cover it they you can rest asured that its beam cannons would of been taken out at the blocade and it would of been destroyed ther as well since the beam cannons would of been a priority for the GTVA fighter/bommber crews.
Or are you gooing to tell me that the blocading fleet decided to go by theyr beam cannons and not use fighters and bommbers to disable or take out the Sath. Especialy since GTVA beam cannons are so much more "advanced" then they shivan counterparts.
GTVA comand may be stupid may even be retarted or labotomized but they are not suicidal.
I want cannon evidence from the game about all those things you stated about the sath. Not theories but hard proof.
-
I want cannon evidence from the game about all those things you stated about the sath. Not theories but hard proof.
Gunnery control, power up photon beam cannons! Commence plasma core insertion!
But seriously, man, you're speculating just as wildly. Who says ships who overload their reactors tend to explode? Have we ever once seen that? Did the Colossus explode in High Noon when it stressed its power grid to the limit? Nooooo, it made other stuff explode.
I think the assumption that some of the Saths overloaded and lost power is not unreasonable.
-
Sath - General Battuta already said about subspace weapon thing. About blockade it'd be logical if Sath had saved its fighters for that engagement by blockade to protect it from GTVA fighters and managed to do their job but in cost of large looses.
Canon - so in your opinion everything that hasn't been said/shown in main campaigns isn't true. If everybody would think like you, there wouldn't be philosophy. :doubt: I gave arguments on why to not negate theory and that increases its probability. You can't interpret events from FreeSpace basing entirely on literal stuff you've seen in campaign and tech descriptions.
-
Ok i have uploaded the final version of my GTVA Fleet Weapons upgrade, so, take a look xD!.
-
My own version of capital ship upgrade. Notice it's uncompatible with main FS campaign.
Changes I've made but you can't see:
- Hecate has got 300 fighters in its fighterbay
- Hades has got only repair bays that can't house fighters pernamently, but can temporarily take few fighters to repair and rearm them
- Colossus also has got repair bay instead of fighterbay
- Hatshepsut also has got repair bays
- Demon like higher
- Ravana has got 300 fighters in fighterbays
- Lucifer also repair bays
- Moloch now has got 36 fighters
- Sathanas also repair bay.
That should explain all changes I've made and seems to be under/over-powered. ;)
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
:wtf:
A Moloch carries 36 fighters and a juggernaught carries none?
-
Well now ships are specialised. ;) I had problems when I tried to figure out how to upgrade Shivan capital ships as we know virtually nothing about them so I've decided it'd be good to adjust ship stats to their basic roles. Now Moloch is corvette-carrier and Sath is Star-Killer with huge froward firepower.
-
Oki for the love of god it is comon sence to believe that a sath can carry at least an equal amount of fighters to the collie simply because the collie has them. Shivans are much more advanced in ship design (altough some of they designs i find to be totaly useless) weapons tech and subspace tech. At least in terms of subspace tech you can safely asume they can pretty much use the jump drive of a fighter for they juggs for all we know. Also when the collie overloaded its beam cannon powergrid it lost 20 of its hp. Also since a masive overload was located mainly n its beam cannon powergrid and not its main reactor providing power to most of the ship and engines a total catastrophy has been avoided.
Also i'm not saing that everithing that goes on in the main fs campaingns should be take literaly but still at least something on which you base your asumptions would sufice.
I said the sath changed its collort in the cutscenes whych to me would sugest it died and since only organic things can die...well.....you get the point. I base my asumptions on something which happenes in the game and is in generalor at least in some way or another related to what we know from the game and tech room cutscenes monologues etc.
You just base them on your own asumptions with absolutely no relation to what goes on in the game.
-
I said the sath changed its collort in the cutscenes whych to me would sugest it died and since only organic things can die...
Tell my Pc that.
-
AlphaOne - all we know is that they've got far more advanced subspace tech (Sath subspace weapon, ability to travel through very unstable jump nodes and fast regeneration of their jump drives), but their weapons are on level similar to GTVA, about ship desings we don't know anything so my assumptions can't be negated by what we've seen in campaign, yours can. Why? All 100 Saths were around Capella and didn't invole into fightings with GTVA forces. That means somebody else kicked GTVA butt badly and didn't allow to launch attack on Saths. That large force would be about 200 destroyers (basing on force proportion). Now if Shivan destroyers would have both powerful weaponary (what we can see and I don't negate) AND large fighterbays (that's how you think) then GTVA would be owned much, MUCH quicklier than we've seen (their forces would last at most 24 hours, not to mention player would meet far more enemies). BTW looks like my common sense is broken as it concludes that fighter-scale jump drive on Sath is impossible. :p Everything has a limit.
Question of nature of Shivan ships (organic or fully mechanic) is one we can't awnser. Anyway Shivan ships can't be fully organic, altough ship interiors and desings looks kinda organic, they've got fully metalic interior (according to boarding cutscene) and outer armor. Also command didn't say anything about organic nature, even when they've caputed several Shivan fighters and bombers (unless they wanted to hide it). Maybe capships have got some organic components inside, but IMHO theory that it's just their architecture is also possible.
-
As for fully organic technology, I be glad if the Shivans didn't have it as so many advanced Sci-Fi races do, to the point where it is boring.
[rant] Why do they call it organic, anyway? Organic materials are those based on hydrocarbons, which are not the best things to make ship out of. What they mean is biological technology, where either the ship is made of living organisms, or is manufactured by them.[/rant]
-
Qwer By the time you get to capella most of the GTVA fleet had already been destroyed! Are you sure you played the game?
Also we have cannon proof of a ravana taking out the collies fighter bay and disabling the collie. Also we have cannon proof that a sath jumped in and destroyed the collie !
Also we have canon proof that the shivans launched numerous cruisers and corvettes at the GTVA forces in an atempt to destroy the fleeing fleet.
Also if 200 freaking destroyers would of been involved the blasted GTVA would of been anihalated so fast it would of made your head spin.
Also since when the HELL do GTVA beam weaponry go anywhere near shivan weaponry?? Now this I have to see! First one of the most powerfull weapons available to you the player as a main gun to use on fighters and bommbers is the KAiser which is based "on extensive research into SHIVAN WEAPONS TECH" ! Also shivan beam cannons can do about 10 times the amount of damage GTVA beam cannons can so how the hell are they anywhere near equal. Thei have a 7second per shot time period and a god damn 5 second or 10 second recharge rate can remember exactly !
The god damn GTVA not only does less damage per second but it has less the half that fire time 3 or 4 seconds if i'm right and a recharge rate...are you ready....of 35 seconds for its most powerfull beam cannons. So you tell me how in god's name are these two weapons suposed to anywhere near equal in temrs or raw firepower and tech.
Such powerfull beam cannons could only be achieved if the tech was advanced enough.
I can pretty much bet that it would take GTVA scientists and engeniers at least a decade to mach the current power of the shivan beam cannons and that is only posible because you can bet they are working with shivan tech or rather studiing shivan tech to achieve theyr goal.
Also whre the hell did you get 100 jugs when the game states over 80 jugs. if it were anywhere near 100 it would state over 90 or 100 jugs.
And where did you get over 200 destroyers?? we dont see anywhere near that many destroyers in the game in fact we do not see anywhere near as many destroyers as the GTVA has thrown at the shivans.
Better get your facts toghether since to me it seems like you smoked something you were not suposed to!
And for the love of god go check the FS wiki! It has all the cannon evidence about the game detailed enough ship descriptions as well as veteran coments, which seem the most conclusive and generaly agreed upon in the whole FS comunity since the time of the VBB.
The bottom line is you are out dreaming with those kinds of figures.
I'm not saing that the shians dont have some 200 destroyers out there i'm just saing they are nowhere near the GTVA space or have ever engaged GTVA forces or they would of at least be mentioned in the game debriefings or something !
-
I'd guess that the Sathanas was more of a shipyard then a carrier. It is gigantic with lots of room inside... similar with the Demon.
It seems to me that the Shivans are without deticated shipyards; there is utter lack of destroyers in comparison with 80+ Sathanai--how many do we really see? Not very many...
The more I look at the Demon, the more it seems like it is what could be the insides of a Sathanas... its a very tough nut to crack and is faster then the Sath.
-
First off, Qwer... although you may scorn canon as overly restrictive, and limiting creativity, it's a necessary evil I'm afraid, otherwise any argument could fly, and that would get pretty stupid... on the other hand, in a thread such as this, it is a little beyond its purpose.
Qwer By the time you get to capella most of the GTVA fleet had already been destroyed! Are you sure you played the game?
I was under the impression that the fleet was holding its own until the star got nuked.
Also we have cannon proof of a ravana taking out the collies fighter bay and disabling the collie. Also we have cannon proof that a sath jumped in and destroyed the collie !
The word is canon, and the Ravana did not take out the Collie's fighter bay, nor did it disable the Juggernaut, the Colossus started the mission that way, for whatever reason
Also we have canon proof that the shivans launched numerous cruisers and corvettes at the GTVA forces in an atempt to destroy the fleeing fleet.
True
Also if 200 freaking destroyers would of been involved the blasted GTVA would of been anihalated so fast it would of made your head spin.
Given that the SD Ravana managed to destroy the GTD Delecroix, the GTCv Lysander and damaged the rest of the warships in the 3rd Fleet, I'm not inclined to disagree.
Also since when the HELL do GTVA beam weaponry go anywhere near shivan weaponry?? Now this I have to see! First one of the most powerfull weapons available to you the player as a main gun to use on fighters and bommbers is the KAiser which is based "on extensive research into SHIVAN WEAPONS TECH" ! Also shivan beam cannons can do about 10 times the amount of damage GTVA beam cannons can so how the hell are they anywhere near equal. Thei have a 7second per shot time period and a god damn 5 second or 10 second recharge rate can remember exactly !
The god damn GTVA not only does less damage per second but it has less the half that fire time 3 or 4 seconds if i'm right and a recharge rate...are you ready....of 35 seconds for its most powerfull beam cannons. So you tell me how in god's name are these two weapons suposed to anywhere near equal in temrs or raw firepower and tech.
Actually, in a technical sense GTVA weaponry isn't that far behind the Shivans... look at the SVas compared to the SRed, or the Deimos compared to the Moloch. Recall that in the first stages of the Shivan incursion, the GTVA thought they were winning, in part because of the fact that their formerly defenseless warships could now go toe-to-toe with their Shivan counterparts, with several very notable exceptions (the Ravana).
The main advantage for the Shivans, it becomes clear, is their massive numbers, far more than their technology... and is it any wonder? They've been known to build ships capable of mass genocide for around 40 times the amount of time the Terrans or Vasudans have.
I can pretty much bet that it would take GTVA scientists and engeniers at least a decade to mach the current power of the shivan beam cannons and that is only posible because you can bet they are working with shivan tech or rather studiing shivan tech to achieve theyr goal.
These time estimates come from out of your ass I'm afraid... but I guess it works. Really we have no proof that GTVA beams and Shivan beams are the same technology. If we assume current GTVA beam tech is derived from the Hades destroyer, I suppose. Silent Threat really didn't explain that well though.
Also whre the hell did you get 100 jugs when the game states over 80 jugs. if it were anywhere near 100 it would state over 90 or 100 jugs.
And where did you get over 200 destroyers?? we dont see anywhere near that many destroyers in the game in fact we do not see anywhere near as many destroyers as the GTVA has thrown at the shivans.
Once again I'm inclined to agree
Better get your facts toghether since to me it seems like you smoked something you were not suposed to!
Depending on what it is, it can be quite good for you, reliving stress, and preventing heart attacks.
And for the love of god go check the FS wiki! It has all the cannon evidence about the game detailed enough ship descriptions as well as veteran coments, which seem the most conclusive and generaly agreed upon in the whole FS comunity since the time of the VBB.
The wiki is an excellent resource, the Ship section is quite good, it's the rest of it that needs work :ick:
The bottom line is you are out dreaming with those kinds of figures.
Agreed...
I'm not saing that the shians dont have some 200 destroyers out there i'm just saing they are nowhere near the GTVA space or have ever engaged GTVA forces or they would of at least be mentioned in the game debriefings or something !
I think it's clear that the Shivans do have additional forces besides the Sathani, personally... the fact that a Ravana destroyer jumped in to the system beyond the nebula in Into the Lions Den should be taken as evidence.
-
Mars - I'm not changing anything that is canon. Everything I've written above and now writing below is fully compatible (or at least I think so :p ) with what we've seen in FreeSpace. And I know we're making offtopic, but evolution of threats is unavoidable ;) (at some point you could split the topic into original and "fs.pl vs HLP" :p ).
AlphaOne - GTVA has lost about 40 destroyers (about 2/3 of their forces) before Sathanas invasion. That means they'd have about 20 vs 200 Shivan ones (if we'll temporarily mark my conception as true), if Shivans have also spent over half of them on Sathanas protection we'll have 50-100 destroyers on our tails and GTVA forces can last about 72 hours. Let's take a look at your theory. If Shivans would have smaller regular forces (less destroyers and other ships) then GTVA wouldn't have so much problems and would probably take out at least one Sathanas which wasn't mentioned. That means your theory goes out. Also your theory about allmighty destroyers&juggs with lots of everything has got one defect - how would you explain so huge tech abyss beetwen corvettes&cruisers and destroyers&juggs? This doesn't make sense to me. Now GTVA weaponry: Kayser, Terran Mara and Sekhmet are product of merging GTVA and Shivan technology. Kayser is A LOT more powerful than Shivan lasers. This is because GTVA engineers merged some Shivan tech with some GTVA creating the most powerful GTVA fighter weapon. The same goes to Terran Mara (two times better than Shivan Mara) and Sekhmet (Nahema with a lot larger loadout). Don't forget other GTVA fighter weapons: Infyrno, Tornado, EMP Adv., Maxim, Morning Star. And since Shivan primary weapons are crap (yeah, crap, Shivan fighters depends mostly on secondary weapons which actually stands in little lower level than GTVA). Now about Shivan beam cannons I think you don't know what is LRed, TerSlash, SVas and other weapons. They've simply PHASES, phases based on amount of energy delivered to beam launcher and cannon's configuration, not cannons alone. Cannons are Terran, Vasudan and Shivan beam weapons. Your whole 7 life, 10 fire wait and 600 damage isn't because of Shivan cannon tech, but power and configuration. If it would be tech, Shivan cruisers and corvettes would be much more powerful but they aren't so that leaves you with both tech abyss and smaller beams' problem. And about GTVA beams, remember Mjolnir? Hyper-advanced beam platform. Next-generation prototype GTVA beam weaponry. It proves that GTVA technology gets more advanced than Shivan one (take a look at Mjolnir size).
GTVA were getting pwned by Shivans because they had little technology superiority and huge, HUGE number superiority. On the other hand GTVA had better tactics and pilots. By the end of FS2 campaign we've got tech superiority, addition of skills made us survive so long (72 hours).
BTW those 200 destroyers can be indirectly confirmed by Command Briefing in mission with Col's destruction where Command says that Shivans have got huge number superiority.
I checked FS Wiki and there was nothing about huge number of fighters and bombers on Demon and Ravana. The only thing I've found is about hundreds of fighters on Sathanas, but that note has no evidence in main campaign as we don't see hundreds of fighters deployed from Sath, don't read that in (command) (de)briefings and nothing about it is mentioned, so yeah, it's non-canon and I disagree with that.
Conclusion - altough there's no direct evidence for my theory, you can see there's no conflict beetwen it and canon FreeSpace things. So it has as much probability (or even more - holes I've pointed) as yours (yeah, your point of view is also theory). It's at first look funny and impossible, but when you get everything to one piece, it starts to make sense.
-
I always find it worth noting that the Shivans have a habit of upping the ante whenever it seems the GTVA is getting close. In FS1, as we get the ability to target and break the shields of their ships, they deploy the Lucifer (admittedly, a gameplay chronology rather than a timeline one, as the Lucifer is there from the start in some capacity). In FS2, the Terran fleet has flak and beams - then so do the Shivans. The Terran fleet destroys the Ravana - the Shivans then deploy the Sathanas. The GTVA destroys the Sath; the Shivans deploy 80, and destroy a star. Whilst it's obviously speculative, I think there's some decent evidence for the supposition that the Shivans use a degree of proportionate force, whether by design or constraint (i.e. the bulk of their forces travelling from far away).
-
80 Sathanas doesn't really scan as "proportional force" to me. They could probably have induced the GTVA to take the course it did with as few as 10.
-
80 Sathanas doesn't really scan as "proportional force" to me. They could probably have induced the GTVA to take the course it did with as few as 10.
Well, a degree. Perhaps proportionate was the wrong word to use. What I mean is, they only up the ante to a relatively limited degree; imagine if FS1 had been against the Sathani fleet, or even a beam-equipped set of Ravanas.
-
As few as 2... the GTVA had nothing to contest with the Sathanas--not even the Big C could face one head-on. If the GTVA threw EVERY destroyer at a Sath, theyd probably lose a quarter of them for the first assult. Not to mention the GTVA's piss-poor tactices (like positioning the Big C in front of the Sathanas)...
-
When Sath were reaching position by Capella assault on them would be suicide, when they were charging up their anti-star subspace rifts they were probably spending their whole energy on it making them vulnerable to attacks so Shivans surely gave them serious protection (else they'd be total idiots which is non-canon :p ).
-
Funny thing bout the Sath, its the same thing as the German Tiger tank. one weak point, it is a$$
-
Hecate. Deimos.
Herc. Ares. Percious (sp? [the interseptor, not stealth]).
Ursa. Medusa? What was that bomber with the A.. that no one used?
-
I'd just give the Mentu a small anti-cap beam right on the nose (above the small chunk that's taken out of it), so it's armed similarly to the Leviathan. It just needs a little bit of balancing anti-capital ship wise, apart from that it's a perfectly capable cruiser.
-
Well the fact is that by the time we get to capella and the subsequent evacuation of capella command actualy tells you that due to the heavy losses of the GTVA they can not provide too much help for you as you engage the shivans in order to protect the transports.
The GTVA could not made a dent on those sathany even if they wanted. Also I do believe it is said in one of the briefings that a ravana class destroyer managed to disable the collies fighterbay.
Also the GTVA does indeed have the mjolnir beam cannon but that thing is the size of a cruiser. It is indeed a very powerfull cannon perhaps more powerfull then its shivan counerparts but to mount it on a destroyer at least at current timeline would prove to be imposible.
Also let us not forget that the sathany has in its 4 forward beam cannons the same amount of power that the collie has on ist entire breadside beam cannon array.
Also remember that when you firts hear about the task force sent to take out the Ravana in fact the entire 3rd fleet you then hear how badly is was crippled by a single shivan destroyer. Now if the Ravana had not had a fighterbay comparable to that of a Hecate for example that blasted thing would of been taken out without loosing as much as a corvette.
Also when you enter the nebula the pilots talk about the fact that the only way those shivan fighters could of been in the nebula and survive is if they had a destroyer to operate from.
Also nice one about the Mentu! It's a capable cruiser but just needs some ac balancing or more aaaf weapons on it in order to produce something similar to the Aeoulus!
-
As few as 2... the GTVA had nothing to contest with the Sathanas--not even the Big C could face one head-on. If the GTVA threw EVERY destroyer at a Sath, theyd probably lose a quarter of them for the first assult. Not to mention the GTVA's piss-poor tactices (like positioning the Big C in front of the Sathanas)...
Apparently 3 destroyers will do quite nicely.
-
*sigh* Here we go again.
-
There will always be something available.
Look at the US Navy, it is rare to never that a Destroyer travels alone, it almost always has a number of other vessels along with it, as well as plane cover.
Well, in the present-day navies.... destroyers are small.
I think the "Destroyer" is really more of a Battleship/Carrier combo.
-
Goddamn... *smacks self* I knew that pardon the mental lapse.
Although, honestly, it's rare to see a single warship at all... when it does happen, you get things like the USS Cole.
-
Here's a snippet on Destroyers:
In naval terminology, a destroyer is a fast and maneuverable yet long-endurance warship intended to escort larger vessels in a fleet or battle group and defend them against smaller, short-range attackers (originally torpedo boats, later submarines and aircraft).
As far as I can tell, Destroyers in the U.S. Navy are much like Corvettes in FS2. They're defense against short-range vessels like other Corvettes or are useful against fighters. FS2 Destroyers are meant to take out larger vessels such as Destroyers or a group of Corvettes.
Here's a snippet on Corvettes:
A corvette is a small, maneuverable, lightly armed warship, smaller than a frigate but larger than a coastal patrol craft. During the Age of Sail, corvettes were smaller than frigates and larger than sloops-of-war, usually with a single gun deck. Almost all modern navies use ships smaller than frigates for coastal duty, but not all of them use the term corvette (from the French corvair).
-
Ship classes change all the time... don't try too hard to classify.
-
They do, but a little bit on the basis of the classes is required.
-
As I've said before giving Mentu beam cannon is bad move, if you REALLY want to let it defend itself against capships, give it Stiletto II launcher, not crappy SVas that limits its abilities seriously and can't deal too much damage. Stilettos takes less place&energy than beam cannon and has got bigger range (not to mention low fire wait). It's AF cruiser, not capship-killer. :doubt: Also giving it more AF would make it more expensive and limit its use like Aeolus (unless you low its armor).
AlphaOne - AFAIK first mission with Alpha 1 in Capella is just after Shivans have broken through blockade. It was said in briefing that Shivans damaged Col's fighterbay but nothing was mentioned about Ravana. ;) Mjolnir is two times smaller than Fenris so Mjolnir-scale beams could be fitted on large AC desings (also weaker versions on Corvettes and Frigates). About taskforce remember that Ravana could have support of smaller ships (maybe even one Lilith = additional LRed). Taskforce could've failed because of this suprise - reinforcements which throws everything into chaos and makes GTVA to lose Delacroix, several fighter wings and few smaller capships. :drevil:
-
GTVA has better fighters and fighter weapons. And they OWN shivans..that's why shivans throw so many fighters on your sorry ass.
So weven if the GTVA was far weaker regarding capships, strike squads of fighters and bombers (capship-killing squads) would even the odds a bit.
Especially given the fact that node blockades are like a trench war, where the node is the narrow point where the defender has a BIG advantage.
-
Well not unless you are a shivan and have a sathanas at your disposal which can take out the entire fleet in less time then it takes to boil an egg!
Also qwer you managed to meke me play fs2 campaign again. this time i will pay more atention to the briefings and debriefings.
Also at the time of the criplyng of the 3-rd fleet there is no mention of the ravana beeing helped by any other warship. so unless you can bring evidence for your asumption it a pointless asmption.
Also the GTVA does indeed engage later on cruisers and corvettes posibly part of the ravana battlegroup but not at the time they sent the 3-rd fleet.
Also they knew very well what they were facing since they already lost a corvette to that thing.
-
GTVA has better fighters and fighter weapons. And they OWN shivans..that's why shivans throw so many fighters on your sorry ass.
So weven if the GTVA was far weaker regarding capships, strike squads of fighters and bombers (capship-killing squads) would even the odds a bit.
Especially given the fact that node blockades are like a trench war, where the node is the narrow point where the defender has a BIG advantage.
Problem is, the Sath easily punched through some of the biggest blockades in history.....I'm pretty sure the GTVA does use strike-squads of bombers; isn't that what the player does, after all? Of course, fighter cover (even if relatively inferior) and AAAf adds a bit more trouble for said small-ship strike forces than you seem to be considering.
To be honest, I think it's very likely the Shivans actual abilities were toned down for balance; going by the actual stuff said in game, they should be nearly invincible. but that isn't much fun :)
-
AlphaOne - first Sathanas can't take out entire fleet in no time. Why? Because wise enemy won't concentrate its fleet to let Sath take it out. :p Also remember Sath has got concentrated firepower in front, beside this it's got only one LRed in back, if you take it out, Sath can be slowly beaten by large group of smaller ships (like Sobeks which in number of 3 can take it out in about 4 minutes). Altough there was no mention that Ravana was protected by cruisers, my "common" sense and logic says so. :p You also don't have evidence for your theory that Ravana defended itself alone. :D
EDIT: looks like our discussion is slowly finishing, our posts are getting shorter. :p
-
You just do not get it do you?
I have evidence the game itself ! If the Ravana would of been aided by other capships then they would of been mentioned in either briefings or debriefings. WE have battles that ocurred that we do not see yet they are mentioned in the game as well as the ships and the casulaties and outcome and you can tell me that such a major battle with so much friendly losses would not be mentioned? If that is the case then you have a very twisted "common sense" !
As for the Sathanas forward facing beams firt of all you have to be able to get behind it. or even beside it. And you seem to forget that GTVA warships could not make a decent enough jump to save theyr lives what makes you think they can during a fully blown slaughter with damages apearing everywhere and no doubht inclueding theyr jump drives or whatever.
All mi asumptions and theories are based in one way or another on the game and what we see and hear happenes in the game. I do not go around saing that shivans had some 200 destroyers in GTVA space or near GTVA space without any sort of proof whatsoever. Sure its comon sense to believe that but since you can not prove it or even have a hint on them beeing anywhere near GTVA space you just dont say that it is true and can not be questioned.
The same goes for the Ravana in the nebula.
Sure the post are getting shorter simply beacause you just bring up the same old things in the same old manner even though I requested the samllest amount of evidence, and i dont meen you "common" sence since to me that equals zero. No ofence but im just stating the obvious. I want game proof hints in the game of those number anithing which could sugest something like that!
Oh and on a side note I alsobelieve that the shivans have some 200 destroyers out ther hell even more but i just can not back that up with anithing in the game so i do not claim it to be a verified fact.
-
Now that you mention the Mentu. My car looks like it. The hood is dented in the right spot, as well as a few other areas. I actually named my 2nd care (the one i have now) Mentu. It does remind me of one. Lol..
-
I'd just give the Mentu a small anti-cap beam right on the nose (above the small chunk that's taken out of it), so it's armed similarly to the Leviathan. It just needs a little bit of balancing anti-capital ship wise, apart from that it's a perfectly capable cruiser.
The Mentu dont have a forward firing turret... but if you take a look in my GTVA Fleet weapons upgrate, the Mentu nows have a svas on both sides and work very well... look to all GTVA cruisers (Leviathan, Fenris, Aeolus, in my pack the Aten too), all have forward anti cap beam, and none of then have a side one... that why i decided for side anti cap beams on the Metu...
-
AlphaOne - why would Command mention about every lose in both Shivan, NTF and GTVA side? They don't because pilots have to know only basics and they tell exact things only to boost morale (like Col blowing up NTD Andronicus and NTC Camisard) or tell about causalities, but only few (like GVC Andromeda and GTC Trafalgar, I doubt that'd be all if it comes to causalities, they've probably lost also destroyer else they wouldn't send so big replacement but didn't mention it to not low morale too much). Why would they mention exact number of forces defending Ravana? Important thing was fact that Ravana is alone and it's now easy target for bombing raid.
For the rest I'm saying what I think about that whole situation = THEORY, not "this is fact and you must agree with it blah blah blah". :p This is my point of view on things we've seen in FreeSpace so it doesn't need evidences, it only needs to be compatible with things that we are sure of. I've repealed all your objections (or at least I think so, I could've missed something :p ) so my theory can be true. Yours has got larger probability than mine (you're basing only on what you've seen ingame so it should be way more probable, but has few small holes like tech abyss). So I think we should end this discussion (unless you've got something else to point against my theory ;) ).
BTW you've used more exclamation marks in this topic than me for one year. :p
-
Well GTVA command does inform you of losses far oten that you remember. For example they inform you of the loss of the 3-rd battle group or rather its cripeling losses . In fact you get much intel on what ships have been lost as destroyers corvettes etc. Also by the time you get involved with the SOC and the GTVI you get much more intel then any other pilot lower in rank then you or higher in rank thenyou but which does not operate on SOC missions. In fact i can pretty much bet that you know more about some missions and force projection etc then some warship captains.
Of course there are tech gaps in mi theories but that is only because of the very limited amount of intel about one thing ore another. For example the Ancients were decades if not centuries ahead of the GTVA in terms of subspace tech.
Remember that the only way the GTVA managed to advance its subspace tech was by studiing ancient ruins in Altair. And the come along the shivans a much more advanced race in every way to the ancients hell even in terms of subspace tech they were decades if not centuries ahead of the ancients. So that add up to hom many decades or centuries ahead of the GTVA?
So mi point is this since we know that the shivans are owning GTVA in temrs of subspace the best we can do is guess and hope we are even partialy right. Because to me the whole sathani beeing developed so big especialy for the pourpose of generating that subspace field seems rather unrealistic and sounds like something GTVA would do because of lack of suficiently advanced tech.
-
Offhand, GTVA informs you of key victories or losses rather than every specific ship being lost or destroyed.
-
Yes agreed maibe you onli get key victories or defeats info but then again if the ravana would of been aided in any way i have no doubt that we would of known. Also if the GTVA would of had some 200 destroyers on its back yard I believe we would of known about them since well you were kinda flying SOC missions at the time.
-
Yes agreed maibe you onli get key victories or defeats info but then again if the ravana would of been aided in any way i have no doubt that we would of known. Also if the GTVA would of had some 200 destroyers on its back yard I believe we would of known about them since well you were kinda flying SOC missions at the time.
Well, why would you? You're not planning missions or running C & C, you're a fighter jock. So really they only need to give you information needed for your missions and a broad overview - 'we're losing in x and y but counterattacking in z'. It's convenient, really, for Volition because the vagueness allows them to draw a far broader war than the game can show; you might only see one destroyer, but there can be tens of them out there (or even hundreds; the Sathanas being the largest shivan warship - if we apply admittedly anthrocentric logic - implies it's also the least numerous).
That said, I don't believe the Ravana was assisted; I think the very point of the nebula missions up to that point were setting it up as the Shivans fiercest weapon (to be gazzumped later by the Sathanas), and that'd be diluted by having it supported by other Shivan capships. IMO it's always worth remember that the what the Shivans are has to be diluted to make the game playable; just compare the Maras' actual abilities versus the comments of the pilots when you first encounter them.
-
Upgrade the Orion in the following fashion:
1) Rip out it's reactor, replace it with a Vasudan one. Maybe the ones that go on the Hetasphut or something.
2) Change all beam cannons to their Vasudan counter parts. (Bvas, Vslash)
3) replace the "Terran Turrets" with more flak and perhaps some M-S, Maxims, or even subachs
4) Add some more anti-fighter beams.
Depending on the cost, I would also use that handy collapsed core molybdenum (which would be an increase in HP)
For the Hecate, simply again replace ll beam cannons to their Vasudan counterparts, and replace the forward slasher with an Bvas.
Deploy the Hecates with Orions. The Hecates provide fighter cover, Orions punch holes. add a liberal amount of Deimoses for escort, and perhaps if you can get production up and running again, Aeoluses.
Deimos: Perhaps replace the slashers with small Vasudan beams? Also, considering the larger borders the GTVA has, perhaps add a small hangar bay on it, decrease the speed, and call in a "patrol Corvette" designed to work far from GTVA battlegroups.
-
1. I bet all GTVA desings have already got their reactors replaced with Vasudan counterparts. How else would you explain fact that Orion is almost the same as Hatshepsut (it only has weaker AF weaponary)?
3,4. No flaks/AAAs, they take too much place which is already fully spent on that destroyer. However MSes and Maxims would be very useful.
5. Replacing weaponary on warship isn't too hard, but if you replace armor to newer one then your Orion is completly new desing (not to mention it costs a lot, better spend money on more Hatshepsuts).
6. You won't be able to set pernamently another BVas on Hecate, it's carrier not destroyer and would suffer serious reactor overloads. :doubt:
7. Oryginal Aeoluses aren't good idea, they're very expensive, however if you'd rearm it with for example 2XAAA, 4XStandardFlak and 6XMaxim they'd be very good and not so expensive AF coverage. Also sending Hecate to battle isn't good idea IMHO, better keep it outside it and only deploy fighters to help Orion.
8. Idea of fighterbay is interesting, but take a note that it'll decrease Deimos' armor seriously. Look at Deimos and Hecate. Both of them are warships of similar age. There are only two differences: size and fighterbay (the same goes to Hecate and Hatshepsut). IMHO better would be pair Deimos+small carrier with weak weaponary but two hangarbays with two fighter squadrons. Deimos goes to battle and carrier sends fighters to cover him. ;)
-
7. Oryginal Aeoluses aren't good idea, they're very expensive, however if you'd rearm it with for example 2XAAA, 4XStandardFlak and 6XMaxim they'd be very good and not so expensive AF coverage. Also sending Hecate to battle isn't good idea IMHO, better keep it outside it and only deploy fighters to help Orion.
I always hear the Aeolus is expensive. What acks this up? I've never read about it being expensive anywhere.
1. I bet all GTVA desings have already got their reactors replaced with Vasudan counterparts. How else would you explain fact that Orion is almost the same as Hatshepsut (it only has weaker AF weaponary)?
Hetasphut is longer and has more hit points. Ergo, it must have a higher tonnage then the Orion. So, it needs a Vasudan reactor to fire the guns and move it's considerable bulk around.
I'll take that excuse simply becuase there is nothing to back up your statement about Vasudan reactors. A simple "If so, they would have overloaded by now" doesn't work.
8. Idea of fighterbay is interesting, but take a note that it'll decrease Deimos' armor seriously. Look at Deimos and Hecate. Both of them are warships of similar age. There are only two differences: size and fighterbay (the same goes to Hecate and Hatshepsut). IMHO better would be pair Deimos+small carrier with weak weaponary but two hangarbays with two fighter squadrons. Deimos goes to battle and carrier sends fighters to cover him.
I'm thinking of a Deimos in an area far from any carrier of any sort. cut the size down to one sqaudron, maybe to wings.
More interesting, just add a small bay for repairing/ reconfiguring maybe two fighters, and attach the rest to the outside with docking points.
-
The Orion's armor has probably been replaced already... during the Great War the Lucifer's beam cannons could chew an Orion in seconds, during the Second Great War however, Orions have taken multiple hits from heavy beam cannons without going down... I think it makes more sense that the Orion now has beam-resistant armor than the Shivans toning the beam cannons down.
-
That would be very dangerous ! Atached fighters would only prove to be a danger to both pilots and the ship itself since when exploding if hit mi a bomb or something they would not only blow up because they are vitualy unproteceted but they would cause significat damage to the mother ship.
The Hatshepsut actualy has 50% more hp then any other terran warship. It has 150.000 hp compared to the Hecates and Orion 100.000!
Also by upgrading the orion in such a drastic manner would only produce a newer version of the same ship so basicly an Orion MK II ! While that would be a good idea in mi opinion it would not be the best course of action. If you really want to have a MK II Orion the you have to redesign some of its key aspects. So basicly make the new ship perform better then the Original at its original pourpose but reduce its weaknesses. In this case it would be its lack of aaaf weaponry. Keep in mind that producing a ship that has both excelent aaaf defences such as the Deimos or the Hecate and the overwhealming ac firepower of the Orion would be problematic at best and undesirable from a game balance point of view.
A newer version of the Orion would have to be able to fend for itself agains fighters and bommbers a lot better then the first one ut still need fighter support in order to really make it out alive from a fighter/bommber assault. This is something that the firts Orion can not do that is survive long enough on its own against fighter bommber attack's.
Hell even medical frigates can do a better job of covering they large behinds then the Orion.
-
I'm thinking of a Deimos in an area far from any carrier of any sort. cut the size down to one sqaudron, maybe to wings.
More interesting, just add a small bay for repairing/ reconfiguring maybe two fighters, and attach the rest to the outside with docking points.
Meh, just leave the corvette alone. Corvettes are designed to be in either blockades or "combat groups", typically assigned to escort (a) Destroyer(s).
-
The Orion's armor has probably been replaced already... during the Great War the Lucifer's beam cannons could chew an Orion in seconds, during the Second Great War however, Orions have taken multiple hits from heavy beam cannons without going down... I think it makes more sense that the Orion now has beam-resistant armor than the Shivans toning the beam cannons down.
To be fair, the Galatea did withstand 4 or 5 Lucifer hits before it finally went down, and the Lucifer's beams weren't exactly your standard SReds. I don't think an Orion fares any better against a Ravana bringing two LReds to bear. (Note that I don't know how the SSL compares to the LRed, but the FSPort would be the most convenient place to look for that information.)
-
The fact that it does all that damage in that single shot rather than in accumulated time?
-
Huh... I was wrong... the Orion can take 5 hits from the LRed, and 7 hits from the SSL, and they fire at the same rates.
On the other hand the Ravana can only take 4 hits from a BGreen... so that may be why I was confused.... the Terrans aren't better armored, they're better armed by far.
-
You know, refitting ships is really no easy matter. It's not like there's a bunch of wiggle room built into the hulls.
If you tried to take a modern aircraft carrier and do the equivalent of swapping some Terran Turrets for flaks - say, replacing the Phalanx guns with Standard missile launchers - it'd be a nightmare. You'd need to make all that room for ammunition, reengineer the hull...just impossible.
Same with trying to slap some battleship turrets on a destroyer.
So all this 'swap the beams for Vasudan versions' is even more unlikely. We're talking about reworking the power network (who's to say they operate on the same 'wattage'?), the software, the targeting systems, the heat sinks...you might as well build a whole new ship.
-
Problem is, the Sath easily punched through some of the biggest blockades in history.....I'm pretty sure the GTVA does use strike-squads of bombers; isn't that what the player does, after all? Of course, fighter cover (even if relatively inferior) and AAAf adds a bit more trouble for said small-ship strike forces than you seem to be considering.
And emerged with 100% hull integrity... Which is impossible really, even if you FRED the "huge" blockade wiht just one Orion. Story and "reality" are at odds here, but story wins :D
To be honest, I think it's very likely the Shivans actual abilities were toned down for balance; going by the actual stuff said in game, they should be nearly invincible. but that isn't much fun :)
Given what I wrote above, I have to agree.
-
Geez... I don't know why I'm uploading this mission. My bro made me make it. Well, the Sath actually loses.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Actualy that is rather stange about the fact that the sath leaves the blocade in ruins yet it comes out virtualy unharmed. maibe they have the same fast repair abilaty that we see in some of the other ships in game. Or maibe they managed to jump close enogh to the blocade and with a full compliment of fighters from the jugg some 300 of them enough to overwhealm the defenders with the sath sheer firepower. I mean that thing fires its beam cannon once and you lose one destroyer fire twice you lose another two rovettes. Add that to the number of shivan fighters and bommbers and well....you know the rest.
But then again it does apear that they were made rather weak in order to make the game more fun since like aldo said above it would be a very borring game.
As for reworking a ship powergrid etc to handle vasudan beams..i do not believe it to be that hard since well....they already have beams just not vasudan beams. So the effort put into this should be minimal but then again why would you want that since teran beams are capable of beeing overloaded and increasing theyr damage and range something which would compensate in part for theyr huge refire rate.
Vasudan beams work best in cooperation with some long range beams that the terrans have. i mean you have standard range engagement and you have your long range beams to inflict al least modeate damage to the enemy before it comes into ange of the vasudan beams whcih should help speed the death of the ship faster due to theyr increased refire rate.
-
Geez... I don't know why I'm uploading this mission. My bro made me make it. Well, the Sath actually loses.
I don't know how your run of that mission went, but during mine, the Sath came away from the battle with 38% (I believe) hull integrity. The Colossus started off in such a poor position, it never got to bring its beams to bear; I think the ship that did the most damage to it was one of the Orions that managed to get into a broadside position before it was obliterated.
(Also, that supernova was mean. :p)