Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Fang_Taichou on September 04, 2007, 06:55:46 pm

Title: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 04, 2007, 06:55:46 pm
Let's assume the GTVA decides to build more Colossus-class juggernauts after Capella.  What kind of names could you think up for them? (must be realistic)

I've got:

Hyperion
Olympus
Spartacus
Atlantis
Brutus
Caesar
Terra
Vasuda
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Excalibur on September 04, 2007, 10:38:18 pm
Greek Giants:

Agrius
Alcyoneus
Aloadae
Otus
Orion (Ωρίων)
Ephialtes (Εφιάλτης)
Antaeus (Ανταίος)
Argus (Άργος)
Enceladus (Εγκέλαδος)
Tityas


Massive list of Greek mythical Gods, etc..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Greek_mythological_figures

Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: ssmit132 on September 05, 2007, 01:55:34 am
Statue of Liberty  ;)

If you don't get it, the Statue of Liberty is a Colossus (as in the statue, not the giant watergun)
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Oddgrim on September 05, 2007, 04:03:23 am
Squirtle! ( go go pokemon harr harr .. yes I know I'm lame :p )
Phallus Obnoxious
Pax Galaxy

Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: 0rph3u5 on September 05, 2007, 08:05:38 am
Excalibur
Victory
(names of the two prototypes of the ISA super-destroyers in B5: ACTA)

Watergun
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 05, 2007, 12:44:19 pm
Humongus

Largissimus

Massivus

Expensivus

PwnzorU

Dud
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Kie99 on September 05, 2007, 02:27:35 pm
GTVA Invincible
GTVA Indomitable
GTVA Indefatigable
GTVA Excession
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Excalibur on September 05, 2007, 05:40:27 pm
If it was GTVA Excalibur, it'd better be good looking and well armed!!! ;)

Is Enterprise allready taken?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: AlexG on September 05, 2007, 05:48:29 pm
Galatea-A (Addicted to Trek. I know.)
Titanic (That's actually a better nickname for the first one!)
Thor
Warhammer
Warspite
Challenger
Mighty

And, no, Excalibur. Enterprise is NOT taken, but is, in fact, the best name for a ship ever. (Yeah, yeah, I know. Again, addicted to Trek. Shush.)
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: 0rph3u5 on September 05, 2007, 05:53:24 pm
If it was [...] Excalibur, it'd better be good looking and well armed!!! ;)

and going power down after every shot with its main cannon/one of its main cannons  :P
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 05, 2007, 06:09:39 pm
Galatea-A (Addicted to Trek. I know.)
Titanic (That's actually a better nickname for the first one!)
Thor
Warhammer
Warspite
Challenger
Mighty

And, no, Excalibur. Enterprise is NOT taken, but is, in fact, the best name for a ship ever. (Yeah, yeah, I know. Again, addicted to Trek. Shush.)

'Warspite' was already taken by a Deimos corvette in the FS2 campaign, remember the two missions involving the TAG missiles?

Adding more to my list:

GTVA Odin
GTVA Peacekeeper
GTVA Khonsu
GTVA Unity
GTVA Tiger
GTVA Mammoth
GTVA Guardian
GTVA Starskipper
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Hades on September 05, 2007, 06:14:31 pm
GTVA Bastion in hounr of the Bastion?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Thor on September 05, 2007, 08:56:48 pm
I'd stick with variations of Colossus.  that or name them after the 7 wonders of the ancient world.  that could be cool.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Excalibur on September 05, 2007, 09:08:36 pm
My Juggernaut design would have 2 massive beam cannons at the front somewhere. :nod:

And I think Enterprise would be the best name for a flagship too, AlexG (even though I'm not addicted to Trek)
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: nvsblmnc on September 06, 2007, 01:45:27 am
How about:

GTVA Ama-Terasu (Japanese sun god, I think)

or

GTVA Eumenides (commonly used greek name for the Erinyes when people didn't want to risk attracting their attention)

EDIT - Actually, forget the second one, it'd be far better used as some kind of new/modified Erinyes fighter.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: nubbles526 on September 06, 2007, 02:29:27 am
Good question, because I am quite sure command would not just say GTVA Colossus 1, GTVA Colossus 2...

My suggestion:
GTVA Saphon
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Wobble73 on September 06, 2007, 04:08:44 am
GTVA Imhotep

*EDIT* GTVA Posiedon
GTVA Neptune
GTVA Kraken
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 06, 2007, 04:58:46 am
GTVA Titan

GTVA Gigantic

GTVA Goliath
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: 0rph3u5 on September 06, 2007, 05:05:37 am
that or name them after the 7 wonders of the ancient world.  that could be cool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Wonders_of_the_Ancient_World
- a bit unhandy names - like that Orion in DEM
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: AlexG on September 06, 2007, 09:01:48 am
Alright, when I begin to FRED, I have to do that now. That is, unless you're going to do the idea yourself. I've had this lovely idea floating around my head for a while concerning the end of the Universe. A 7-ship fleet ought to fit nicely with the romantic tradition...

The Giza
The Babylon
The Zeus
The Artemis
The Maussollos
The Lighthouse
and, of course, The Colossus - MK II

Sounds almost metaphysical, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: nvsblmnc on September 06, 2007, 11:36:42 am
Most of those are okay, but I'm not sure that the GTVA Lighthouse is really colossus-y.

Perhaps the GTVA Alexandria instead?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Jeff Vader on September 06, 2007, 11:40:36 am
How 'bout GTVA Titan, plain and simple? Or I dunno, just came to my mind.

Then a bit off-topic. Something has been bothering me for some time. When we talk about the Colossus, the whole title is GTVA Colossus. What on Earth does the A stand for in that particula case?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: nvsblmnc on September 06, 2007, 11:45:29 am
Alliance.

The Colossus was meant to be a one-off and represented the full GTVA (in my opinion).  No class name, no copies, no way of stopping it.

shame about the last part eh?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Jeff Vader on September 06, 2007, 11:53:13 am
Oh... Makes sense... I guess. Well, now that it has been proven that even the Colossus can be stopped, could we assume that in the future they'd just switch it to GTVJ, as in Galactic Terran-Vasudan Juggernaut (well duh)?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Kazan on September 06, 2007, 01:54:57 pm
the colossus design isn't very good.. takes too long to build, doesn't pack enough firepower for it's size, and requires too much crew for a single warship.   I would design a new ship faster to build with more firepower.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 06, 2007, 02:34:23 pm
the colossus design isn't very good.. takes too long to build, doesn't pack enough firepower for it's size, and requires too much crew for a single warship.   I would design a new ship faster to build with more firepower.

The Colossus in FS2 was something of an original, and all originals take longer to build.  Considering that 3 Hecates/Orions total the number of crew of the Colossus, I would say the ship needs to many crew.  Firepower you have something of a point, but considering they were 1st Generation GTVA beams, that really couldn't be helped.  With several upgrades the Colossus can beat down a Sathanas one-on-one (will take heavy dmg though).

Heck, I've designed 3 'specialist' Colossus-class warships, each with their own function:

-Vasudan 'sniper' photon beams, 24k range, moderate dmg and somewhat slower recharge time (a max. range broadside cuts down a Sathanas by the time it closes range to 19-20km)
-Terran 'shotgun' plasma beams, 8km range, extremely high dmg but slow recharge (a good broadside using these from a Colossus vapourizes the Sathanas in 10 seconds)
-Shivan 'machinegun' laser beams, 15km range, moderate dmg but very fast recharge (use it for wiping out warship swarms)

-add the plot device of better heatsinks, reactors, beam calibrations and you can have it make sense  ;7

Back on topic:

You could use names besides the 7 Ancient Wonders, try something that would sound cool:

-GTVA Democracy
-GTVA Divinity
-GTVA Tremendous
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fozzy on September 06, 2007, 04:23:16 pm
How 'bout GTVA Titan, plain and simple? Or I dunno, just came to my mind.

Then a bit off-topic. Something has been bothering me for some time. When we talk about the Colossus, the whole title is GTVA Colossus. What on Earth does the A stand for in that particula case?

GTVA = Galactic Terran Vasudan Aliance

anyway, back to topic, there was only one Colossus, and it proved to be a falure in battle, the GTVA wouldnt build one again they would simulate other ways to beat a "sathanis" (excuse my spelling) like smaller craft
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Hades on September 06, 2007, 04:26:58 pm
The Colossus was not a failure, it excelled at what it was built to do,
#1 Defeat the NTF.
#2 Defeat tons of destroyers and ships.
#3 Defeat a Sathanas.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 06, 2007, 04:37:04 pm
The Colossus was not a failure, it excelled at what it was built to do,
#1 Defeat the NTF.
#2 Defeat tons of destroyers and ships.
#3 Defeat a Sathanas.

:yes:

Add:

#4 Prevented the Shivans from concentrating their forces on the Bastion.

the colossus design isn't very good.. takes too long to build, doesn't pack enough firepower for it's size, and requires too much crew for a single warship.   I would design a new ship faster to build with more firepower.

30,000 crewmen for something 12 times bigger than a Superdestroyer like the Lucifer isn't that much. I expect much, much more from it. An average 50,000.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: wdarkk on September 06, 2007, 05:49:19 pm
Yeah, it did fairly well considering how badly most GTVA ships bigger than a bomber stack up against their shivan counterparts (Hecate vs Ravana? OWWWW!)
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 06, 2007, 05:56:18 pm
The Colossus was not a failure, it excelled at what it was built to do,
#1 Defeat the NTF.
#2 Defeat tons of destroyers and ships.

This would be the corrected version, since the Sathanas was not known at the time the Colossus was built. The Colossus seems designed to hunt and kill destroyers, something it does very well in practice; having actually tested this a couple of times with the Colossus versus a Fleet/Battlegroup the Colossus will without fail lay waste once it gets within range. If it happens to emerge from subspace close-by or in the midst of such a formation...well "You will find its firepower most impressive, for the short time you are still alive."
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 06, 2007, 09:23:32 pm
The Colossus was not a failure, it excelled at what it was built to do,
#1 Defeat the NTF.
#2 Defeat tons of destroyers and ships.

This would be the corrected version, since the Sathanas was not known at the time the Colossus was built. The Colossus seems designed to hunt and kill destroyers, something it does very well in practice; having actually tested this a couple of times with the Colossus versus a Fleet/Battlegroup the Colossus will without fail lay waste once it gets within range. If it happens to emerge from subspace close-by or in the midst of such a formation...well "You will find its firepower most impressive, for the short time you are still alive."

You could actually leave out the NTF part since the NTF rebellion began by the time Colossus neared completion.  However, it is indeed a fearsome warship to encounter, even without Vasudan beams or escorts.  If the Colossus had Vasudan beams, and if Command had deployed several destroyers and corvettes with it during 'High Noon', it is very likely that there wouldn't be any need to overdrive its beams to win.

As I've said before, make some adjustments to the Colossus (better armor, better reactors, heatsinks, AAA coverage, more fighterbay exits, and especially stronger beams) and it'll be good to handle node blockades against even juggernauts.

In the meantime, more names:

GTVA Cosmos
GTVA Protector
GTVA Defender
GTVA Salvation
GTVA Cronus
GTVA Odysseus
GTVA Sphinx
GTVA Obelisk
GTVA Heliopolis
GTVA Abydos
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Polpolion on September 06, 2007, 09:50:29 pm
IIRC the Collie was built to destroy Lucifers.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Excalibur on September 06, 2007, 10:40:38 pm
That ship attacks with full broad side - pop it between some destroyers.

Has anyone noted the way it turns?
Once I was in High Noon, and I saw the front end of the Collie really moving away from me fast. It took a while to realise its centre of gravity was near the back somewhere. Then it decided to turn the other way, and I got scared. :nervous:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: nvsblmnc on September 07, 2007, 01:42:39 am
Yep, it's the Baseball Bat of DoomTM.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 07, 2007, 05:30:57 am
It's a homerun!!!!! :lol:


*Sathanas 17 spirals towards the Capella sun*
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Oddgrim on September 07, 2007, 05:33:39 am
It's a homerun!!!!! :lol:


*Sathanas 17 spirals towards the Capella sun*

now thats a thing I would pay good money to see.  :lol:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 07, 2007, 05:44:32 am
It does happen sometimes if you un-disable the Colosuss ;7
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 07, 2007, 08:09:56 am

Expensivus



MAde me laugh orange juice out my nose.......
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 07, 2007, 01:08:35 pm
That ship attacks with full broad side - pop it between some destroyers.

Has anyone noted the way it turns?
Once I was in High Noon, and I saw the front end of the Collie really moving away from me fast. It took a while to realise its centre of gravity was near the back somewhere. Then it decided to turn the other way, and I got scared. :nervous:

That's why you don't give it orders to directly attack something, you need to plot out the proper waypoints for it to follow so it doesn't try to dogfight (which though funny, isn't realistic).

One more name for a new Colossus:

GTVA Fortress
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 07, 2007, 03:56:08 pm
Speaking of which, I hope hte HTL Colossus will have the proper center of mass (axis) :lol:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Hades on September 07, 2007, 03:56:46 pm
Yea that was annoying when I was messing with it a while ago. :D
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: ssmit132 on September 08, 2007, 02:15:04 am
Speaking of which, I hope hte HTL Colossus will have the proper center of mass (axis) :lol:

That will break missions with the Colossus in it, since the placement point is also at the back.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 08, 2007, 04:36:26 am
Shouldn't do that...it's beamz have enough range to pulverize whatever it was supposed to....

And if it DOES end up having a problem, just move it a bit forward in hte mission.

Heck, If I make a HTL Collie (maby later :p ) I sure as hell wouldn't leave it like it was in retail...
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on September 08, 2007, 05:02:40 am
Shouldn't do that...it's beamz have enough range to pulverize whatever it was supposed to....

And if it DOES end up having a problem, just move it a bit forward in hte mission.

Heck, If I make a HTL Collie (maby later :p ) I sure as hell wouldn't leave it like it was in retail...

This is why I don't use some of your HTL models.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Slime on September 08, 2007, 05:23:56 am
Most of those are okay, but I'm not sure that the GTVA Lighthouse is really colossus-y.

That's true, but when taking into consideration something the original poster missed, its original untranslated name, it gets a little better..

GTVA Pharos, anyone?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 08, 2007, 08:34:05 am
Shouldn't do that...it's beamz have enough range to pulverize whatever it was supposed to....

And if it DOES end up having a problem, just move it a bit forward in hte mission.

Heck, If I make a HTL Collie (maby later :p ) I sure as hell wouldn't leave it like it was in retail...

This is why I don't use some of your HTL models.


Heresy! My models are more true to retailin shape and design than 99% of others.. Alltough I do sometimes adda extra turret or two, where it makes sense...aand even then it's a different release.

I mena I wouldn't leave the center axis where it is..not on your life.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Turey on September 08, 2007, 10:17:23 am
Most of those are okay, but I'm not sure that the GTVA Lighthouse is really colossus-y.

That's true, but when taking into consideration something the original poster missed, its original untranslated name, it gets a little better..

GTVA Pharos, anyone?

AWACS, not Collie.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: SF-Junky on September 08, 2007, 10:26:51 am
Magna Mentula Minax would be a nice name. ;7
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 08, 2007, 10:52:42 am
Isn't the Pharos the class name of those nav. buoys?


Anyways:

GTVA Colombus
GTVA Voyager
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: lenard27 on September 08, 2007, 02:37:54 pm
Isn't the Pharos the class name of those nav. buoys?


Anyways:

GTVA Colombus
GTVA Voyager

Yup, the Nav Buoys are Pharos class, which may be kinda appropriate for a Collie, considering it does about as much damage as one of them.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on September 08, 2007, 02:39:30 pm
Yup, the Nav Buoys are Pharos class, which may be kinda appropriate for a Collie, considering it does about as much damage as one of them.

Wow, I never knew Pharos beacons could destroy 6 Orions! :eek:

I need to try that!! :eek2:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: lenard27 on September 08, 2007, 02:42:05 pm
Yup, the Nav Buoys are Pharos class, which may be kinda appropriate for a Collie, considering it does about as much damage as one of them.

Wow, I never knew Pharos beacons could destroy 6 Orions! :eek:

I need to try that!! :eek2:
Well, my original quote may have been a tad bit of an exaggeration. Just a lil bit. But I still think the Collie was very poorly designed
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Roanoke on September 08, 2007, 03:18:36 pm
The Colossus was not a failure, it excelled at what it was built to do,
#1 Defeat the NTF.
#2 Defeat tons of destroyers and ships.

This would be the corrected version, since the Sathanas was not known at the time the Colossus was built. The Colossus seems designed to hunt and kill destroyers, something it does very well in practice; having actually tested this a couple of times with the Colossus versus a Fleet/Battlegroup the Colossus will without fail lay waste once it gets within range. If it happens to emerge from subspace close-by or in the midst of such a formation...well "You will find its firepower most impressive, for the short time you are still alive."

ngtm1r is correct. I keep saying this but the whole crux of FS2 was give the impression that the GTVA had matched the Shivans only for the Alliance to see what they were really up-against.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on September 08, 2007, 03:26:28 pm
Well, my original quote may have been a tad bit of an exaggeration. Just a lil bit. But I still think the Collie was very poorly designed

Despite the fact it defeated 6 Orion destroyers?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: lenard27 on September 08, 2007, 03:41:55 pm
Well, my original quote may have been a tad bit of an exaggeration. Just a lil bit. But I still think the Collie was very poorly designed

Despite the fact it defeated 6 Orion destroyers?

Ok, I guess I'll have to concede this one to you. The Collie did do what it was intended to do. I'm just not a fan, and think it could have been designed much better. Of course, I'm no ship designer.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: MercFox1 on September 08, 2007, 07:36:32 pm
Well, my original quote may have been a tad bit of an exaggeration. Just a lil bit. But I still think the Collie was very poorly designed

Despite the fact it defeated 6 Orion destroyers?

Ok, I guess I'll have to concede this one to you. The Collie did do what it was intended to do. I'm just not a fan, and think it could have been designed much better. Of course, I'm no ship designer.

If I've said this once, I've said this a thousand times. The Colossus, as a first-edition prototype, far outperformed itself in terms of design and abilty. It may have been poorly designed because it's the first ship of it's kind. You can't just look at a destroyer and say: "That worked well," or "We need to change that." With a Juggernaut, everything else goes out the window.

Also, didn't someone mention that if the Colossus went broadside and slightly below it's target, it would render mostly anything up to and including a Sathanas toast, provided the Sathanas wasn't approaching head on?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Gamma_Draconis on September 08, 2007, 08:23:25 pm
The Colossus was not a bad design and neither is the Sathanas. The Colossus is designed to take on multiple destroyers from multiple directions while the Sathanas is designed to devastate a single ship within seconds. Both were designed for different roles and both are fearsome opponents.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 08, 2007, 08:26:07 pm

If I've said this once, I've said this a thousand times. The Colossus, as a first-edition prototype, far outperformed itself in terms of design and abilty. It may have been poorly designed because it's the first ship of it's kind. You can't just look at a destroyer and say: "That worked well," or "We need to change that." With a Juggernaut, everything else goes out the window.

Also, didn't someone mention that if the Colossus went broadside and slightly below it's target, it would render mostly anything up to and including a Sathanas toast, provided the Sathanas wasn't approaching head on?

That someone was me, I tested it out myself  :nod:  Given overdrived beams (i.e. LRBGreens), it can bring up 8 of its main guns on a target when positioned as mentioned.  The damage per barrage is 33% of a Sathanas' hull integrity, and with recharge of 35 seconds it will waste an enemy juggernaut in 1.5 minutes or less.

More designations:

GTVA Eden
GTVA Lawbringer
GTVA Honor
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: lenard27 on September 09, 2007, 12:36:26 am
OK well after reading the responses and stuff to my original post, I'll say the Sathanas did it's job fairly well. And I did forget the fact that it was just a prototype so there were bound to be some bugs to work out of its design.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Gamma_Draconis on September 09, 2007, 09:58:45 am
I don't think the Colossus can bring up to 8 of its cannon in overdrive mode. Chances are, the 4 beam cannons they were using in overdrive mode might have been just below the reactor's maximum capacity. If the Colossus were to fire all 8 beams in overdrive mode, chances are, it'll reactors will blow up and the Colossus will become easy picking for the Sathanas. Of course, there is no solid canon evidence supporting this, but there is no solid canon opposing it either.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: MercFox1 on September 09, 2007, 12:05:47 pm
Well, Gamma, I think you're probably right with the current generation of Colossus. The cannons were overheating and the reactors weren't holding up with all the pressure and overcharging; so chances are 8 are completely out of the question. The real question is how much of a performance boost would a next-generation Colossus have over the first?


Say an additional reactor, improved heatsinks, improved Fire Control Systems, efficiency increases on the part of the cannon arrays and coolant systems...all of that could free up another 2 at the least. I think even on the 2nd Generation, a 100% increase in output is out of the question, but 50% isn't, and that's still enough to end any serious engagement in a couple of minutes.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: BloodEagle on September 09, 2007, 12:10:08 pm
Why not just make bombers equipped with Bgreens, or something?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on September 09, 2007, 12:18:01 pm
Why not just make bombers equipped with Bgreens, or something?

Maybe because it's not possible? :doubt:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: GenericCorvette on September 09, 2007, 01:05:52 pm
Why not just make bombers equipped with Bgreens, or something?

Attach an engine to a Mjolnir.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 09, 2007, 01:15:09 pm
1) Mjolnirs' beams look like BGreens, but are weaker;

2) They would cost a lot of money, and they would be poor defended/fragile;
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 09, 2007, 09:55:18 pm
IIRC all the Colossus main guns were switched to LRBGreens in High Noon, but its positioning was so that only 5 of them had line of sight at anytime (I consider the overdriven reactors similar to the Naruto's Kyuubi powers, Sasuke's curse seal and Rock Lee's Gate openings:  all grant major power boosts but causes a lot of damage to self afterwards).

Like I said elsewhere, the Colossus, being a joint Terran-Vasudan project, should've had Vasudan photon beams rather than Terran plasma types.  Reactor strain for them is less + the overall damage is higher.

One more designation for the Colossus-class:

GTVA Yamato
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Rico on September 12, 2007, 12:39:27 pm
A 2nd Generation Colossus would likley be upgraded with Vasudan reactors (which are more powerful and can take an overload better) and Vasudan weaponry. I would assume that GTVA command would have learnt the lessons from the Colossus and adjusted as neccessary.
The Colossus wasnt a failure, it was designed to take out destroyers upto Lusifer size, at that it excells (especially since it can take multiples of them on at once from different angles), but against a Shivan jugernaught its amazing it could take even 1 out, let alone being able to give a 2nd one a run for its money  :nervous:.

With a few upgrades the Colossus would be GTVA's perfect flagship, a few beam upgrades etc and they have all they want. Add that with some new destroyers also armed to the teeth and you have yourself a fearsom battlefleet  :drevil:.
Simple fact is that the colossus was badly deployed in the campaign, it should have been deployed with escorts (corvette size minimal, some destroyers as well preferable). It wasnt done that way in the campaign due to:
#1: Storywise, the campaign would have been more capital vs capital, thus giving the player less to do.
#2: Computer power, PC's on the market when FS2 came out in general couldnt take more then 2-3 cap ships firing beams at any one time without issues  ;7
#3: It shows how good GTVA commands inteligence is  :P

Ontopic: hmm, first off its GTVJ. So:
GTVJ Galatea (in honor of the Galatea's action in the first great war)
GTVJ Eclipse
GTVJ Executor
GTVJ Imperial
GTVJ Sydney (i can be proud of my nation  :P)
GTVJ Mallard
GTVJ Escalation
GTVJ Galaxy
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 12, 2007, 02:02:25 pm
Ontopic: hmm, first off its GTVJ. So:
GTVJ Galatea (in honor of the Galatea's action in the first great war)
GTVJ Eclipse
GTVJ Executor
GTVJ Imperial
GTVJ Sydney (i can be proud of my nation  :P)
GTVJ Mallard
GTVJ Escalation
GTVJ Galaxy

First of all it's not GTVJ. Furthermore, have you ever heard of Greek And Latin MythologyTM?

Galatea is ok, the others not. Expecially Sydney. Roma and/or Athenae are better :P
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Hades on September 12, 2007, 04:02:44 pm
GTVA Sparta.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Kie99 on September 12, 2007, 04:07:53 pm
GTVA Sparta.

Rebel Commander:"This is blasphemy!  This is Madness!"
"THIS IS VEGAAAA!!"
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 12, 2007, 04:10:16 pm
GTVA Londinium. It will make you English barb...ehm, guys happier :P
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 12, 2007, 04:26:29 pm
GTVA Londinium. It will make you English barb...ehm, guys happier :P

GTVA Wallace
GTVA Unicorn
GTVA Highlander
GTVA Bagpiper

How cool would a Scottish captain be for a Colossus?   :lol:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: BengalTiger on September 12, 2007, 07:31:12 pm
KRAKATOA :cool:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Rico on September 13, 2007, 01:09:22 am

First of all it's not GTVJ. Furthermore, have you ever heard of Greek And Latin MythologyTM?

Galatea is ok, the others not. Expecially Sydney. Roma and/or Athenae are better :P
Actually it is technically GTVJ, FS2 didnt call it that however the Colossus is a Jugernaught, thus as its GTD for Destroyers, GTCv for Corvettes etc, GTVJ is appropriate for Jugernaughts

I'm not a n00b, I know how most FS names are done, however it is Galactic Terran Allience and not Galactic Greek/Latin Allience, thus using names that aren't from Greece/Latin language is appropriate.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 13, 2007, 05:28:13 am

GTVA Wallace
GTVA Unicorn
GTVA Highlander
GTVA Bagpiper

How cool would a Scottish captain be for a Colossus?   :lol:


"I canne hold er Command!"
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Rico on September 13, 2007, 08:51:54 am
lol  :lol:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: ssmit132 on September 14, 2007, 02:58:22 am
"I canne hold er Command!"

Permission to put that in my ideas bucket, sir! :lol:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Excalibur on September 25, 2007, 08:25:29 pm
Computer operated kamikaze bombers filled with Helios' would be excellent for destroyers!! ;7

DO you think it would be nicer if the Collie's centre of gravity could be shifted? It looks a bit.....wierd.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 26, 2007, 02:27:29 pm
How cool would a Scottish captain be for a Colossus?   :lol:

Why not Italian, then? :P

If the CO of the Aquitaine was Admiral Petrarch, the CO of a Colossus would be Admiral Alighieri. :lol:


First of all it's not GTVJ. Furthermore, have you ever heard of Greek And Latin MythologyTM?

Galatea is ok, the others not. Expecially Sydney. Roma and/or Athenae are better :P
Actually it is technically GTVJ, FS2 didnt call it that however the Colossus is a Jugernaught, thus as its GTD for Destroyers, GTCv for Corvettes etc, GTVJ is appropriate for Jugernaughts

I'm not a n00b, I know how most FS names are done, however it is Galactic Terran Allience and not Galactic Greek/Latin Allience, thus using names that aren't from Greece/Latin language is appropriate.

Juggernaut is a rude word, I think the GTVA would use something like "Dreadnought" to designate 6 kms long ships. Juggernaut is simply bad for a Terran/Vasudan warship.

Nobody called you "n00b" so there's no need to prove that you're not a n00b.

And other sci-fi games use a range of "modern" names. The FreeSpace's name convention is mythology centered and "more conventional" names aren't that common. FreeSpace, under some points of view, looks like a pure Fantasy rather than a Sci-Fi...thanks to the names(Demons, Gods, Heroes, Old Cities...).
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on September 26, 2007, 04:21:13 pm
An Italian captain would be like:  "Mama mia!"  When a Sathanas jumps into firing range  :lol:

Designations for his ship could be these:

GTVA Brutus
GTVA Caesar
GTVA Piza

 
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 26, 2007, 04:31:58 pm
Mamma mia*
Pizza*


:doubt:

Super Mario says "Mamma mia!". The others say "Oh Ca**o!!!" :P

I think we could use GTVDn. Galactic Terran Vasudan Dreadnought. The original Colossus was more the symbol of the Alliance/Reconstruction Era rather than a pure warship. That's why it's "GTVA" and not "GTVDn" or something similar.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Wobble73 on September 27, 2007, 03:34:14 am


Super Mario says "Mamma mia!".

:wakka:

I just got the picture in my head of playing FS2 and then hearing Mario say "Mamma mia" when the Sathanas jumps in!  :lol:

Priceless!  :lol:

"This is Admiral Mario of the Galatea!"  ;)
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: MarsNeedsWomen on September 27, 2007, 12:39:34 pm
GTVA Wastieus of Tax Payerous Moneyous
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 27, 2007, 01:11:43 pm
This thread turned into a FreeSpam ZoneTM.

Comments about my "GTVDn" designation? Is it acceptable?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on September 27, 2007, 03:29:18 pm
Why wouldn't it be acceptable?

Alltough you can INVENT a tpye name....why stick wuth what's there...Why dreadnought? Why not Obliderator? Why not Massacrator? Why  not Dingy?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: lenard27 on September 27, 2007, 03:33:28 pm
Dreadnought sounds acceptable. But that's probably because I'm used to hearing the term from the Star Wars universe.  Maybe it should just be referred to as a superdestroyer.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on September 27, 2007, 03:41:41 pm
I say Dreadnought because it IS a kind of ship. That name is much more "real" than Juggernaut, Obliterator, Massacrator etc. etc.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: MarsNeedsWomen on September 27, 2007, 05:24:25 pm
This thread turned into a FreeSpam ZoneTM.

Comments about my "GTVDn" designation? Is it acceptable?

Well considering that everyone else was making jokes I thought I'd join in. In anycase, why fix what's not broken? GTVA Colossus is fine for me.  :pimp:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Dark RevenantX on September 27, 2007, 11:59:22 pm
GTVDn Flower
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TomasCTT on October 02, 2007, 12:32:55 am
This thread turned into a FreeSpam ZoneTM.

Comments about my "GTVDn" designation? Is it acceptable?

GTVB sounds better IMO, with B for Battleship.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Jeff Vader on October 02, 2007, 03:40:11 am
GTVB sounds better IMO, with B for Battleship.
Maybe, but B already stands for Bomber.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on October 02, 2007, 04:44:12 am
BB...or BS then
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on October 02, 2007, 06:24:59 am
Battleship's not a good name for a 6 kms long ship, and Dreadnought seems more appropriate in a sci-fi context.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: darkdaej on October 02, 2007, 07:55:10 am
"the lighthouse" is kinda gay though. 
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on October 02, 2007, 10:28:32 am
If the light is blue, well, it would be :lol:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Locutus of Borg on October 04, 2007, 03:12:14 pm
PunyLittleShipThatWillTakeForeverToBuildButWillBeDestroyedByAK idThorwingABeerBottleIntoTheTurbines

that's my name for all of them!
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on October 04, 2007, 03:21:38 pm
Battleship's not a good name for a 6 kms long ship, and Dreadnought seems more appropriate in a sci-fi context.

 :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on October 04, 2007, 03:31:01 pm
Where's the problem? Are you really going to give a so conventional name to a massive warship? :wtf:

Battleship should work well for something between the corvette and the destroyer...something armed to the teeth.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on October 05, 2007, 10:59:44 am
Just so you know, Trashman, when I used your Archangel I didn't want the name "Galactic Terran Vasudan Bull****" in my mod. :P

*only a joke god damn it
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: RedBaron on October 05, 2007, 05:40:46 pm
Just so you know, Trashman, when I used your Archangel I didn't want the name "Galactic Terran Vasudan Bull****" in my mod. :P

*only a joke god damn it

How about GTVA Leonidas?

or GTVA Galatea in honour of the orion class destroyer vapourized in the great war by the shivans
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TomasCTT on October 06, 2007, 01:04:53 am
GTVA AYNTFBTU*

*All Your NTF Belong To Us

;)
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on October 06, 2007, 05:18:10 am
GTVA Tax Collector
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: BengalTiger on October 06, 2007, 07:40:49 am
Where's the problem? Are you really going to give a so conventional name to a massive warship? :wtf:

Battleship should work well for something between the corvette and the destroyer...something armed to the teeth.

That's where the Frigate class is.
The battleship (Bb, not Bs) should be bigger than the destroyer, let's say in the 3-5km range.

And back to topic:
GTVA Vulcanus
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Elvendark on October 10, 2007, 11:00:54 am
We should stay in mythology and ancients, that's part of what makes the game and it's atmosphere what it is IMHO

GTVDn Sparta (in memoriam slave rebellions) ;)
GTVDn Titan(ia)
GTVDn Gaia (Greek and Celtic myth, I guess, my favorit: gaia=mother earth) ;)  ;7    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_%28mythology%29]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_%28mythology%29 (http://)
GTVDn Thor
GTVDn Valhalla (OMG, it killed Shiva.....U BASTARDS!!!)  :lol:
GTVDn Siren (destroys every MoFu thats comes in range...)  :drevil:

Thanatos, Aether, Cyclops, ....

so check this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_tree_of_the_Greek_gods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_tree_of_the_Greek_gods)

GTVDn Ivanhoe (not really mythology, jeah, but still cool)

not GTVDn Odysseus = Ulyssis (as far as I know) already used...

there are so many options, let's find something unique for a unique ship....
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on October 11, 2007, 07:08:19 pm
GTVA Morpheus
GTVA Tacitus
GTVA Proteus
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Grogs on October 17, 2007, 06:23:05 pm
GTVA Tax Collector
\
nice, if there was a free space 3, i don't think it would have a Colossus class, mavbe a superdestroyer like the hades
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: admiral_wolf on October 17, 2007, 06:43:01 pm
The way I see it, the Collosus took 20 years to build one.  Given that the GTVA would be dedicating all their resources into relocating to a habitable world to replace Capella and needing to rebuild their fleet quickly after the damage the SJ armada caused, I doubt the GTVA would have the financial, manpower or time to be able to rebuild one or design a SD or a Juggernaut class.

I would either prefer a new fleet of Hecates seeing as the design is on the board, but look into making it with Sheath shielding or increasing firepower or armour.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on October 19, 2007, 07:42:57 am
The way I see it, the Collosus took 20 years to build one.  Given that the GTVA would be dedicating all their resources into relocating to a habitable world to replace Capella and needing to rebuild their fleet quickly after the damage the SJ armada caused, I doubt the GTVA would have the financial, manpower or time to be able to rebuild one or design a SD or a Juggernaut class.

I would either prefer a new fleet of Hecates seeing as the design is on the board, but look into making it with Sheath shielding or increasing firepower or armour.

Exactly! Thank you. The funny thing about some of the people in this community is that they don't understand that the Shivans are not the GTVA's biggest worry at that time. If anything, it would be welfare and health etc, not building another Colossus to fight pirates with.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: admiral_wolf on October 19, 2007, 09:35:06 am
If the GTVA had the resources, I'd design three new ships, 1 Destroyer, and 2 Corvettes

the GTVD Freedom
the GTCv Atreus
the GTCv Cerberus
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on October 19, 2007, 09:39:18 am
Names don't go do well to display statistics. :P

But cool names, especially 'Freedom.'
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: admiral_wolf on October 19, 2007, 09:49:51 am
Cheers, I was thinking of Armeggedon at the time.  I was going to say Independace, but I think the Vasudans wouldn't like that.
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: TrashMan on October 19, 2007, 01:32:35 pm
GTDN MeanMotehr****a!
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Fang_Taichou on October 19, 2007, 01:45:38 pm
We've already discussed plenty on whether or not the GTVA would build a Colossus post-Capella.  This thread is ONLY for sharing possible names for potential future constructs.

Bringing my thread back on topic:

GTVA Raynus
GTVA Arthus
GTVA Tritanus
GTVA Quadranus
GTVA Pentagus
GTVA Hexagus
GTVA Septus
GTVA Daemus
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on October 19, 2007, 02:53:18 pm
We've already discussed plenty on whether or not the GTVA would build a Colossus post-Capella.  This thread is ONLY for sharing possible names for potential future constructs.

Despite being your topic, we can discuss anything we want here unless you have the authoritay to stop us. :P

Authoritay!
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Jeff Vader on October 19, 2007, 02:57:26 pm
'Off-topic': ...Indeed. It reminds me of escorting Lampreys in the Vega gas giant.

'On-topic': GTVA Galactica
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on October 19, 2007, 04:18:09 pm
This thread has turned into Spamming...

What about...GTVA Colossus II?
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Snail on October 19, 2007, 04:29:40 pm
The most obvious name ever imagined? Why not. :P
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Jeff Vader on October 19, 2007, 04:34:41 pm
At this point I'm sure that Fang_Taichou has more than enough names for the brand new spankin' Colossus (this thread has lasted for six pages already), so I'm gonna irreversibely move to the humour section.

GTVA Daffodil
GTVA Knuttin' Atoll
GTVA GTVA
GTVA Vista
GTVA Betamax
Title: Re: Colossus designations?
Post by: Mobius on October 19, 2007, 04:56:46 pm
The most obvious name ever imagined? Why not. :P

Yes. The most obvious name is Colossus II. The other names aren't fine for a Juggernaut/Dreadnought. Colossus II rules.