Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Snail on July 21, 2008, 09:35:22 am
-
Which do you prefer, the Chronos or the Triton? I ask this because the Triton is a piece of ****. Seriously. Look at the stats:
Chronos
Top Speed: 40m/s
Hitpoints: 10,000
Turrets: 1 (Avenger)
Triton
Top Speed: 30m/s
Hitpoints: 5,000
Turrets: 2 (Subach HL-7, Standard Flak)
Sure, the Triton has more firepower, but it's big, slow and easy to kill with a few tempests. The Chronos has twice the armor AND goes faster. In Post-Capella campaigns, would you like to see kickass Chronos freighters, or Triton freighters? Sure, the Chronos is old but it is better (in wartime) than the Triton.
-
Triton has vasty greater cargo capacity - TC TRIs are huge buggers
-
I'm pretty sure the Chronos only has 8,000 hit points.
-
Well the Wiki says otherwise. I'll check the table.
EDIT - Checked the table, it is indeed 10,000
-
Either way, I'd have to agree with you. Plus the TAC 1 is vastly tougher than the TC-TRI
-
Maybe the Chronos is more expensive to build? I mean, the Ursa is very expensive, so that would explain why they stopped building Ursas. So maybe that's the case in the Chronos too?
-
If anything it's implied its comparatively cheap
-
You know, these stats aren't everything. Escpecially considering this isn't a combat vessel. :rolleyes:
The Triton is a better freighter because it carries bigger containers, and thus can ship more. Speed doesn't really matter because of subspace, and neither does armor because if on the off chance the freighter is anywhere near combat areas it will have an escort. Same goes for armament and pretty much everything else that is measured in the tables.
-
I'd much prefer to escort a chronos though.
-
You know, these stats aren't everything. Escpecially considering this isn't a combat vessel. :rolleyes:
So what does matter? What paint job it has? Whether it's pink and furry?
-
The size of its cargo container matters XD.
-
Les freighter pilots sont doomed.
-
Well, neither lasts very long against Hercs with hornets...
I'd say if it has between 3000 and 20000 armor, the survivability is essentially the same - virtually none.
-
That's true, most cruisers die immediately when a few Hercs or Basilisks armed with Hornets jump in.
-
A wing of pegasi can take out a Triton in no time though
-
I'd pick a Chronos, simply cos i could live in one, retrofit it millenium falcon style and live in it without paying stupid crew fees.
-
This is why it's good to be used to living in tiny little apartments. I could live in a ****ing Hermes with ease.
-
The little floats (well i always assumed they were floats) on a Hermes would make it convenient to go fishing in one. . . Like Starbug. :nod:
-
I'd pick a Chronos, simply cos i could live in one, retrofit it millenium falcon style and live in it without paying stupid crew fees.
Then why not use a Poseidon?
-
Then why not use a Poseidon?
2000 hitpoints is why.
-
You know, these stats aren't everything. Especially considering this isn't a combat vessel. :rolleyes:
So what does matter? What paint job it has? Whether it's pink and furry?
Let's make a list:
Subspace drive capabilities (How quick engines recharge)
Crew size (How many extra salaries you have to pay)
Internal cargo bay size (How much you can ship without a container)
External carrying capacity (How much you ship with a container)
Cost (How much you need to pay for it)
Efficiency with fuel (How much fuel you need to buy to use it)
Unless I'm mistaken, none of these are actually measured in the tables. Just taking into account speed, armor, and armament when measuring quality of a freighter is like saying the more times the letter "z" appears in a book, the better the book.
-
I'd say Triton, it has a big-ass cargo pod, looks cooler, and I could hide fighters in the cargo, and it has 2 guns.
-
Unless I'm mistaken, none of these are actually measured in the tables. Just taking into account speed, armor, and armament when measuring quality of a freighter is like saying the more times the letter "z" appears in a book, the better the book.
Interesting comparison.
-
Unless I'm mistaken, none of these are actually measured in the tables. Just taking into account speed, armor, and armament when measuring quality of a freighter is like saying the more times the letter "z" appears in a book, the better the book.
Except it's not, because we're talking about vessels in military use, and survivablity (best represented by speed, armor, and armament) is at a premium. Hell, even for a civilian ship your analogy is totally invalid depending upon the environment it operates in. And since that environment is FS, survivablity is once again at a premium. Sure, it might carry more cargo or be cheaper to operate, but crew doesn't come cheap (and high losses make them yet more expensive since you need to pay them more just to get them to stay on) and neither does shipyard capacity.
-
Except it's not, because we're talking about vessels in military use, and survivablity (best represented by speed, armor, and armament) is at a premium. Hell, even for a civilian ship your analogy is totally invalid depending upon the environment it operates in. And since that environment is FS, survivablity is once again at a premium. Sure, it might carry more cargo or be cheaper to operate, but crew doesn't come cheap (and high losses make them yet more expensive since you need to pay them more just to get them to stay on) and neither does shipyard capacity.
Just what the hell are we doing with these freighters? Sending them on assault missions? Jesus Christ, Most convoys in Freespace don't get attacked. Not even every convoy at the front lines get attacked, I'm willing to bet. Normal speed doesn't matter in Freespace (unless it's fighters) because the ships don't actually go anywhere with them, and the freighters are large enough that you're not going to have trouble hitting them unless they're going at 500 m/s. Armor matters, but to a lesser extent. Sure the Chronos doubles the Triton's HP, but doubling 5,000 still sucks. If you get a wing of determined people in fighters, that freighter's going down. I could understand why armament could be useful for deterring fighter attacks, but the Chronos' armament is so pitiful that it's practically not there. The Triton is a fair amount better because of the addition of a flak turret, but people can still easily find gaps in the firing solutions. The only thing these turrets can do easily is intercept bombs, which they wouldn't need to because it's generally not worth wasting bombs on ships that could be taken down easily by a wing of fighters.
-
Speed is needed for freighters and transports. Remember the 2 Vasudan transports in "Surrender, Belisarius!" ? In the briefing it says that they don't have jump drives, and have fled from planet Cygnus Prime. 3 of them were lost. So in this case, the Chronos is a better thing to be on-board.
-
If you're in a convoy near a jump node speed most certainly does matter.
-
If you're in a convoy near a jump node speed most certainly does matter.
Yes, because all convoys definitely jump in ~10km from the node. No way they would just jump into the node and camp until their drives charged. No way they would jump in at an appropriate distance to the node so the exact moment they arrived, their drives would be charged with no time lost.
Speed is needed for freighters and transports. Remember the 2 Vasudan transports in "Surrender, Belisarius!" ? In the briefing it says that they don't have jump drives, and have fled from planet Cygnus Prime. 3 of them were lost. So in this case, the Chronos is a better thing to be on-board.
Speed is not necessary for them because they're ****ed no matter what they do without a jump drive. Even if they flew at 2000 m/s they wouldn't be getting anywhere quickly.
-
Yes, because all convoys definitely jump in ~10km from the node. No way they would just jump into the node and camp until their drives charged. No way they would jump in at an appropriate distance to the node so the exact moment they arrived, their drives would be charged with no time lost.
Yeah, and they didn't do that in all the escort missions why? :rolleyes:
-
Mainly for safety, they don't want to jump onto a ship.
-
Mainly for safety, they don't want to jump onto a ship.
Doesn't stop them from getting hit by ships coming out from the node, though (like in Transcend wit the Gas Miner).
-
There was nothing coming IN during Exodus, Hammer and the Anvil or Paving the Way.
-
Mainly for safety, they don't want to jump onto a ship.
Doesn't stop them from getting hit by ships coming out from the node, though (like in Transcend wit the Gas Miner).
Yes, but when they recharge as they're flying in, they are more out of the way of node traffic, they're only vulnerable for a few seconds when near the node.
-
This argument is about as irrelevant as is comparing Hercules C-130 to an Airbus A-380 cargo plane and deciding which is "better" only based on some of their stats.
Chronos was and is supposed to be a frontline freighter, designed and used during war time. Triton is newer, was designed, built and used by civvies after the Great War had ended, and Chronos freighters were most likely being phased out and replaced in military use by the Argo, which is pretty big, offers more protection for cargo - you can't blow out the container when the cargo is inside the ship. Bigger cargo still requires containers and stuff, but I would think big and expensive stuff like entire Ursas would be transported by destroyers anyway...
For civilian use, Triton wins. For frontline use, the Chronos is better as long as you require exposed cargo containers, but for most military purposes, a transport ship like Argo is better than any freighter, so... :nervous: I'd say as a freighter, Triton wins because "freight" is inherently civilian term. For transporting payload or military cargo in a hostile environment, Chronos is better.
-
Yes, because all convoys definitely jump in ~10km from the node. No way they would just jump into the node and camp until their drives charged. No way they would jump in at an appropriate distance to the node so the exact moment they arrived, their drives would be charged with no time lost.
Yeah, and they didn't do that in all the escort missions why? :rolleyes:
Good question. Do you have an answer (gameplay aside) as to why they did? They could have easily bypassed those sentry guns and stuff. And if they, did, they would've had that deimos to help protect them while their drives charged.
-
Good question. Do you have an answer (gameplay aside) as to why they did? They could have easily bypassed those sentry guns and stuff. And if they, did, they would've had that deimos to help protect them while their drives charged.
The common theory that Jump Nodes disrupt the subspace around them, really.
Chronos was and is supposed to be a frontline freighter, designed and used during war time.
Nope, the Chronos is a civilian freighter:
The Chronos is a freighter of civilian design. As the Terran Vasudan war dragged on, more and more of these vessels were commissioned by the GTA for use in military operations. These vessels are slow but strong.
-
Interesting, though not all the tech descriptions make much sense (like Artemis DH having better performance than standard Artemis) but I guess they are the best source for information anyway...
I'd like to pose a question though - was the Chronos designed prior to TV-war or during the early years of it? Also, entering the realm of speculation it's entirely probable that the GTA fitted it with additional armour for military ops.
Rest of my message is still valid, if not quite as strong for my initial point about the relevance of the debate. :blah:
-
Well it appears in TVWP, while it's not canon, it's semi-canon. Also, the Chronos has been in service for "20 years" according to the tech description. (I think)
The freighter in TVWP is not the Chronos, rather the previous version.
-
Well it appears in TVWP, while it's not canon, it's semi-canon. Also, the Chronos has been in service for "20 years" according to the tech description. (I think)
How the **** is TVWP semi-canon?
-
Semi, as it is well done, is true to the style of :v:, is the only well done pre-FS mod...
-
:doubt:
Quality has nothing to do with canonicity, nor does style.
-
That's why I referred to it as semi-canon.
Whatever. Go back to sleep now, Snail.
-
That's why I referred to it as semi-canon.
Semi canon suggests it's at least partly canon, which it is not. It's non-canon just like every other fan-made campaign out there.
-
Semi, as it is well done, is true to the style of :v:, is the only well done pre-FS mod...
There is no such thing as semi-canon. That's like saying 1+1=3 is half right because 3 is still a number.
-
TVWP is not at all canon
Derelict is not at all canon
Inferno is not at all canon
-
Silent Threat is not ca... oh.
:(
-
Whatever. Let's go find some :v: devs, and get them in here. They can point at the various campaigns, and be like "That's canon".
-
Whatever. Let's go find some :v: devs, and get them in here. They can point at the various campaigns, and be like "That's canon".
That's not how it works.
-
This is related enough not to start a new topic:
Why is it that when freighters drop thier cargo it explodes? Shouldn't it just float there waiting for something to pick it up?
-
Uh, it doesn't, unless it's a shivan boobie trap
-
I guess I should have clarified, when they are under attack they will drop thier cargo and it will explode.
-
They stay attached to their cargo.
If you're asking why the cargo explodes with the freighter I couldn't tell you
-
Its because the shockwave from the frieghter exploding damages the cargo to the extent that it explodes.
-
*sigh* remember on the third mission of the main campaign. Try just shooting the freighters and not the cargo. When the freighter gets a certian ammount of damage it will drop it's cargo and the cargo will explode.
-
Its to prevent people from capturing their cargo.
The transport remote-detonates it.
-
Maybe because the cargo gets damaged and explodes anyway? They also 'drop' the cargo when the freighter is destroyed.
Or maybe the collision damage destroys the container?
-
Whatever. Let's go find some :v: devs, and get them in here. They can point at the various campaigns, and be like "That's canon".
When did you become stupid?
-
-Founder of the Colonol Dekker Fanclub- In randomness and hilarity we trust.
Not stupid, misunderstood :nod:
-
Hmm... He must have become stupid after he created your fanclub. :P
-
Can't you get into contact with Volition?
-
Hmm... He must have become stupid after he created your fanclub. :P
Neh Neh Neh, you havent got one...
Can't you get into contact with Volition?
I don't think it's the same volition that we all know (at least us older gits) and loved (ish).....
-
Judging by the numerous stories and rumours I've read here, it does seem that Volition just doesn't care about FreeSpace anymore.
-
I kinda hope so, in a way. As they're making something un-anounced for PS3 and XBox...
Anyway, why don't someone just contact them and get some info, wheter there are ANY survivors of the Old Volition.
-
Anyway, why don't someone just contact them and get some info, wheter there are ANY survivors of the Old Volition.
There are a few. Compare their Staff Bios section on their website to the FS2 credits.
-
So this is what I don't understand- why didn't anyone try to contact them? You know, there's a big button on their site with a label saying 'CONTACT'.
We could just get some of the FS2 Volition fellas here to close us down explain stuff, and etc.
-
So this is what I don't understand- why didn't anyone try to contact them? You know, there's a big button on their site with a label saying 'CONTACT'.
Oh, lots of people have tried. Even I did.
-
I nominate ShadowGorrath and Snail... :nod:
-
I nominate ShadowGorrath and Snail... :nod:
:nervous:
That doesn't sound good...
I kinda hope so, in a way. As they're making something un-anounced for PS3 and XBox...
:shaking:
Oh noes!!
-
God no.
-
To kind of stop the fight:
If Semi-canon is something based on canon story, but not on canon mission scripts, than the TVWP, which describes canon events but isn't made by :V: could be considered Semi-canon.
So now you can fight more.
Also- I'd vote Triton because a group can cover each other with flak guns and Subachs, making a convoy of Tri's a rather safe place to be.
P.S.
Behold The TC-TRI:
(http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part1/images/ttnu9985673.jpg)
-
To kind of stop the fight:
If Semi-canon is something based on canon story, but not on canon mission scripts, than the TVWP, which describes canon events but isn't made by :V: could be considered Semi-canon.
So now you can fight more.
[rant]There is no such thing as semi-canon. Only canon and non-canon. TVWP is non-canon. The UNE is non-canon. The Reliant is non-canon. The Chronos being pre-FS1 is non-canon. I absolutely hate it when people elevate things over others, like Derelict and Inferno to name a few. It just, I dunno, pisses me off when people say that stuff that is non-canon is canon.[/rant]
-
Rant
I think he meant things that are mentioned or iluded to in canon. we all know that some form of the TVW happened.
-
To join the fight for good:
Inferno and most other mods aren't based on canon, so I agree with them being non-canon.
But a mod that tells something that's considered canon shouldn't be in the same category as one that creates is own storyline IMHO.
-
Except TVWP creates it's own storyline... just because it's based upon events that are refered to ingame doesn't mean it magically gains canon status. I have to agree with Snail on this one.
-
just because it's based upon events that are refered to ingame doesn't mean it magically gains canon status
SEMI- canon. ()=full, )=semi, =none.
-
Then every campaign out there even remotely linked with the FreeSpace storyline (read, every non-TC campaign and then some...) is "semi-canon" according to that logic.
To put it mildly, Inferno of all things would be considered "semi-canon".
-
Okay, that makes sense ... Why did I get into this agian?
-
There is no semi-canon. There is only canon and non-canon.
-
All this has happened before, and it will happen again...
-
There is no semi-canon. There is only canon and non-canon.
You're wrong! IMO the following campaigns are canon:
Inferno
Derelict
my campaign
Because they all rock!
Also the Lilith can't be canon because it's overpowered, so the Lilith can be semi-canon or non-canon.
-
Under that silly logic I'd consider Flames of War the most canon because it follows events mentioned in FS2 main campaign briefings but not shown to the player. Though of course, Flames of War is completely and totally not-canon. There's no semi-canon.
There's Volition.
And then there's everyone else.
Welcome to everyone else.
-
Then we run into the Terran Vasudan war, a totally canon event shown in the TVWP. Where does that go?
It has Volition story, and everybody else's missions, so it doesn't belong to either canon (everyone else's missions) or not canon (:v: storyline).
-
:yes2: at that.
-
Then we run into the Terran Vasudan war, a totally canon event shown in the TVWP. Where does that go?
It has Volition story, and everybody else's missions, so it doesn't belong to either canon (everyone else's missions) or not canon (:v: storyline).
The campaign is non-canon. Why? It has non-canon missions and non-canon ships in it. The event itself is canon, because it is mentioned in FS.
Seriously, this is exactly like saying Flames of War or Rebel Intercept are 100% canon because they talk of canon events. They're not. :rolleyes:
-
Either 0% or 100%....
What if I say that 15 or 20% of the TVWP's content is canon, and can be read about on the FS wiki?
-
What if I say that 15 or 20% of the TVWP's content is canon, and can be read about on the FS wiki?
Then you'd be wrong.
TVWP is an entirely non-canon campaign based on/inspired by events mentioned in the FS canon.
-
Saying that a campaign is semi-canon is like saying a two-state light switch can be semi-on. There is no such thing as a canon gradient. Either all original material in the campaign is completely canon, or all original material in a campaign is not true. A light is either on or not on. Plz stop over-complicating things kaithx.
-
Something is either canon or non-canon. Simple as black and white.
-
I voted for the Bast.
-
The thing without guns?
-
I voted for the Bast.
I was messing around with INFA once, and I was blowing up a waved wing of Basts with the Ripper cannon. Was funneh.
-
I miss the chronos in FS2. It really had that trucker style.
-
I miss the chronos in FS2. It really had that trucker style.
Someone really needs to make a "We Brake for Nobody" bumper sticker for the Colossus.
-
Or simply a gigantic model of Spaceball 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTAZgjelNbA&feature=related)
-
I voted the Chronos.
-
Rebel intercept is/was 100% canon. It was made by :v: with :v: voice acting. Same as the TSM series. :p
-
Rebel intercept is/was 100% canon. It was made by :v: with :v: voice acting. Same as the TSM series. :p
Wos? Really? Uhh, must be thinking of the wrong mission... Damn I need to brush up on my terms.
Anyway, I was talking about the one CP5670 made where you have to bomb like 20 cruisers which have 120 fighters as escort, and there's a planet with a crappy stretched nebula "ring" around it in the background. I dunno.
-
Only one i ever played was the :v: mission back in squadwar. :) although the Roughnecks had a bloody hacked version that gave then admiral rank after two or three plays :hopping:
Anyhoo freighters . . . I always liked the Zod Ma'at (as much as a hume can like Zod stuff :p)
-
Only one i ever played was the :v: mission back in squadwar. :) although the Roughnecks had a bloody hacked version that gave then admiral rank after two or three plays :hopping:
I think it's safe to say the FS community has changed since then.
Anyhoo freighters . . . I always liked the Zod Ma'at (as much as a hume can like Zod stuff :p)
I liked the Satis better. Because in the FS1 mission "Darkness and the Light" they were in a wing called "Turtle".
-
I get that "space trucker" feel from the Ma'at.
<sorrow>
I'm pretty sure that in the half-decade+ since squadwar fell that we've all moved on. . . . :( </sorrow>
Don't you ever sleep :lol:
(You're stateside right)
-
No, Snail is a Londoner.
-
Woot, i should start a London Club...
Hmmm, Snail... You're north of the river, and a bit west too. Based on e-accent?
-
Actually, he just moved from Singapore six or seven years ago.
-
Actually, he just moved from Singapore six or seven years ago.
Yeah, and I'm back in Singapore for a few months...
-
Let me know if you're in Singapore December period...we should host a Singapore HLP meet-up while I'm there :P
-
Let me know if you're in Singapore December period...we should host a Singapore HLP meet-up while I'm there :P
I might be, but I exist only on the internet.
-
Let me know if you're in Singapore December period...we should host a Singapore HLP meet-up while I'm there :P
I might be, but I exist only on the internet.
#
It's true http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0st5KWJKRs&feature=related
:nod:
-
Back to Topic:
I believe the Triton is the better freighter. Although the Chronos has double the armor, 10'000 is still too weak to buy enough time except when the Subdrive is almost recharged or so. Furthermore, the Chronos is armed with but one Avenger turret (whis isn't all too bad anyway though) whilst the Triton has one HL-7 and one Flak turret, quite impressive for a Freighter (well, looking at the Poseidon, it has 4 HL-7s, but now that thing has piss weak armor)! And although this is not enough to fend off even a wing of Pegasi (which suck IMO), Freighters tend to fly in convoys. Multiple Tritons together provide a surprisingly good defence screen.
-
Pegasi, when used right, are the best fighter for certain situations.
The Triton actually has 2 flaks, and they're well positioned.
Like Dekker said, the Chronos has that "Trucker feeling", but I like the Poseidon because the 4 lasers are a very real threat on medium.
-
:wtf: No, the Triton has only one flak turret.
-
I think the Avenger's better than the HL-7.
-
I think the Avenger's better than the HL-7.
May be that the Avenger has better DPS in pretty much everything, but in theory it is obsolete and weaker than the HL-7, has a crappy sound & effect and an unparalleled tech description. Even then it's only one turret, though IDK where it is located, I guess on a ventral mount, whilst the Trition has a much larger FOF.
-
The Avenger and the Subach are actually pretty much even.
The Avenger does significantly more hull damage per second, but I find the Subach's higher rate of fire makes it more useful against maneuverable fighters.
-
I don't like the Avenger, it sounds weak, like rain hitting a shield, and while it may be good on paper, it doesn't seem to be that useful, takes too long to kill a Basilisk.
-
All the FS1 weapons were more or less the same thing just with different statistics and colors.
-
Not really. The Banshee sounded cool, as well as the ML-16.
-
Not really. The Banshee sounded cool, as well as the ML-16.
But they were all just fast-moving blobs. The only one that wasn't a blob was the Banshee. In FS2, the Subach was shaped like a spear, the Maxim was a bit spikey and the Lamprey looked like (useless) great balls of fire.
-
All the FS1 weapons were more or less the same thing just with different statistics and colors.
Eh, so? All FS2 beams are more or less the same thing just with different stastics and colours too. What's yer point?
-
Eh, so? All FS2 beams are more or less the same thing just with different stastics and colours too. What's yer point?
I didn't have a point. I never have a point.