Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The FRED Workshop => Topic started by: Mobius on March 22, 2009, 07:31:29 am
-
I played another campaign yesterday(I won't reveal its name for anti-spoiling purposes) and found an extremely unoriginal thing. Place your bets on what it is... :rolleyes:
There's a wide tendence nowadays. Every single time a Ravana appears, it starts moving towards allied ships and the player is tasked to destroy its forward beam cannons. Always? Most of the times, at least. I really want to say that it's becoming boring.
I for one believe that there are much more interesting ways to use Ravana destroyers. I wouldn't treat them as incoming, oversized and dumb mobile beam cannons...I'd rather try to find original ideas. I wouldn't forbid the usage of their beam cannons, of course, but I surely wouldn't base a mission on taking down two LReds and possibly 3 SReds, only, and always with the same modus operandi.
Someone might say, "The Ravana IS supposed to use its main beam cannons and friendlies ARE supposed to take them down", but I'd reply by claiming that this philosophy is becoming boring and I guess most of you would agree with me. It makes the Shivans look stupid and helps building the myth of Alpha 1(two idiotic things).
The Great Hunt (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/The_Great_Hunt_(FS2)) featured the Ravana's main beam cannons, but the mission wasn't centered on taking them down and/or watching them taking down allied ships. In Slaying Ravana (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Slaying_Ravana) they weren't used at all and the mission was focused on a bombing run.
-
i eagerly await your self made and fredded mission containing the Ravana, with its new and unused game play ideas........
-
The Ravana launches spacecraft wings from safe distance. This is original.
Happy? :p
-
no :D
original is that it launches lava coated elephants
-
That'd be stupid. Original, but stupid.
-
The Ravana launches spacecraft wings from safe distance. This is original.
Not really...
-
I have a strong feeling I'm very guilty of this.
I'll write it down and redo it even if you weren't referring to it. Ravana's are really just a set-piece you can throw around and get the player to do something about while you cook up something else to surprise him with.
Actually regardless it gives me a better idea for its use. But really, the Ravana is an offensive, capship killer, and using it as a mobile fighter launch platform probably wasn't what it was intended to do.
-
The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.
I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.
It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.
-
The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.
I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.
It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.
I agree with that. But off the top of my head I can only think of
- Having the Ravana stay at some distance and launch fighters at the player or whatever he's protecting
- The Ravana be launched in the middle of a large dogfight and be used in a fighter-suppression role
- Having the Ravana head for a node and have the player tasked to disable it and neutralise it's navigation subsystem so it can't jump out (I'm using this one :) )
-
That sounds boring and against how Ravanas were used in FS2; where they basically jump in close and bombard their target with their primary cannons. If you want to be original, try making a campaign where the main objective is hunting down a souped-up Ravana; throughout the campaign, the destroyer would be destroying ships in your battle group left and right, and jumping out before you can attack it using modified jump engines. The final mission would be an attempt to destroy its flight subsystems before it escapes from the remnants of your battlegroup.
I don't mean just disabling it; you'd have to blow up its nav subsystem to prevent it from jumping out before you can take out its engines. If you want to be even more "original", you could have no heavy ordnance on your bombers, just Stilletos, making you dependent on the battlegroup taking the ship out with their heavy guns. You'd support them by... oh my, taking out beam cannons! Possibly the forward ones!
Sometimes the formula is good.
-
I don't mean just disabling it; you'd have to blow up its nav subsystem to prevent it from jumping out before you can take out its engines. If you want to be even more "original", you could have no heavy ordnance on your bombers, just Stilletos, making you dependent on the battlegroup taking the ship out with their heavy guns. You'd support them by... oh my, taking out beam cannons! Possibly the forward ones!
Sometimes the formula is good.
I was thinking of having the player's fighter wing being worn thin, the Ravana's fighters and bombers making a run on the ship the player is escorting, and then have the player assigned to neutralise it's nav and engines before it gets in range because
"I'm getting some unusual readings...It looks like the armor on it's forward beam cannons has been reinforced (OMG! SHIVANS EXHIBITING PATTERN RECOGNITION! RUN!), we'll have to take out it's engines instead. Then go for the comms so the son-of-a-***** can't call for backup."
-
The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.
I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.
It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.
The way I see it, destroying the Ravana's beam cannons is just the same thing as gunning down a wing of Maras. More of a filler thing to get the action going rather than a real mission point.
I don't really see the harm in using this particular cliche, though I do understand it can be very repetitive since it's used in many user-made campaigns.
The only other way a player can interact with a Ravana or whatever is if he's flying a bomber.
-
The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.
I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.
It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.
The way I see it, destroying the Ravana's beam cannons is just the same thing as gunning down a wing of Maras. More of a filler thing to get the action going rather than a real mission point.
I don't really see the harm in using this particular cliche, though I do understand it can be very repetitive since it's used in many user-made campaigns.
The only other way a player can interact with a Ravana or whatever is if he's flying a bomber.
Covering the inbound wing is also a good idea. Since that IS gunning down another wing of Maras en route for your slow, lumbering Ursas
-
I agree with that. But off the top of my head I can only think of
- Having the Ravana stay at some distance and launch fighters at the player or whatever he's protecting
- The Ravana be launched in the middle of a large dogfight and be used in a fighter-suppression role
- Having the Ravana head for a node and have the player tasked to disable it and neutralise it's navigation subsystem so it can't jump out (I'm using this one :) )
I'd add:
- The Ravana departs if it has sustained too much damage. No one said that the Shivans are supposed to sit and wait until they're destroyed(it happens in certain missions, though);
That sounds boring and against how Ravanas were used in FS2; where they basically jump in close and bombard their target with their primary cannons. If you want to be original, try making a campaign where the main objective is hunting down a souped-up Ravana; throughout the campaign, the destroyer would be destroying ships in your battle group left and right, and jumping out before you can attack it using modified jump engines. The final mission would be an attempt to destroy its flight subsystems before it escapes from the remnants of your battlegroup.
I don't mean just disabling it; you'd have to blow up its nav subsystem to prevent it from jumping out before you can take out its engines. If you want to be even more "original", you could have no heavy ordnance on your bombers, just Stilletos, making you dependent on the battlegroup taking the ship out with their heavy guns. You'd support them by... oh my, taking out beam cannons! Possibly the forward ones!
Sometimes the formula is good.
The point is that custom missions have to be original if designers want to attract some attention. There are so many custom campaigns so original ideas are a must.
Even many missions coming straight from the main FS1 and FS2 campaigns would look poor without voice acting and such.
-
well if only shivans would talk to humans... then you could pretend that those beams horns where antennas?
It's true, the theme on how to use a Ravana is getting old... but for what matters all FS universe is getting old, all you do is shoot down ships, so it's not really something that can be helped.
-
There's stuff like navpoints, scripting and cutscenes which is yet to be widely used. Also, as several members stated, the Ravana might still be used in an original way.
-
I might make a mission in Syrk (cough, cough, Dilmah and the others... still remember what it is? :)) where the Ravana makes a kamikaze run on an Orion. Tho the Terrans have absolutely 0 chance against the Shivans (pre-FS1 but not contradicting canon), so it isn't such a big deal. I'd love to see it in an FS2-era campaign tho.
-
I don't see how a certain objective becoming somewhat of a trope makes it automatically "unoriginal" or invalidates its use by a campaign designer. Mobius, if you'd care to share with us some logical reason as to why the Shivans wouldn't use a powerful weapon like the Ravana to destroy GTVA capital ships, or why the player and his wingmates wouldn't immediately rush a newly-arrived Ravana to prevent it from doing so, I'm all ears.
-
Mobius, by your thinking...
Since most people breathe through their nose:
- Breathing through the nose is unoriginal
- Breathing should not be done through the nose
- People should think of different ways (such as cutting holes into their trachea to breathe) so that they are different.
:wtf:
Nice logic there.
The fact that something is overused shouldn't be an argument for why it shouldn't be used further.
Especially in this case, where the usage is likely the most effective usage, and the common response is the most efficient as well.
If it were something nonsensical, I would understand, but something equating to telling people not to breathe through their nose because everyone else does it and that people should be 'different' is just strange.
I believe that we should promote originality in campaign writing, but should not invalidate the 'overused' usage of certain elements. After all, there can only be so much variation that still makes sense.
-
Someone has misenterpreted my point.
I'm considering the cliché factor. Too many campaigns feature the classic run-to-disable-some-beam-cannons on a Ravana, Blue Planet included.
I don't find your examples valid, Mongoose and Droid803. I'm not criticizing the deployment of Ravana destroyer.
Droid803, for instance, claims that the seen and re-seen usage is the most efficient. Are you sure about that? I don't think so. Why don't you show, for example, the Ravana's anti-fighter capabilities? Why don't you use it to deploy Shivan transports and such?
A classic run to disable its beams would work only if the mission designer is capable of making it epic and different from the others. If you pretend to handle it with a couple of message and a single directive then I'm afraid your concept isn't efficient at all.
Mongoose misenterpreted my point like no one ever before and made my opinion look silly. I never said that I'm against the deployment of Ravanas - I said that it should be, overall, handled in a better way.
We know from in-Universe points of view that destroyers aren't always supposed to join battlefields. Doing so would be a tactical error since allowing the enemy to damage ships of the importance of a destroyer is not good. The Shivans are likely to be an exception, but they're not stupid.
Also, valid or not, the total lack of originality is more than sufficient to change the tendence. Why would a FREDder keep doing something that is becoming much more obvious than Briefings and Command Briefings?
-
I am actually going to agree with Mobius on this one, at least to an extent.
Advising people to avoid cliches does not equate to telling people to avoid breathing through their nose. It's just the same as telling people not to end their epic books with "And then I woke up and it was all a dream lol," which as we all know is perfectly valid advice.
-
I know I'll have at least one instance where you have to destroy a Ravana's LReds in my campaign, but I'm A.) beefing up the subsystems in the table so you can't, y'know, disarm it by sneezing on it and B.) have it make sense. The plot is it shows up mid-mission, screws everything up and fries the Deimos you're trying to capture. Command sends the nearest thing available to deal with it, which is a semi-damaged Raynor, and you're tasked with neutering the destroyer while the cavalry is en route. It stands no chance of winning with the two LReds still operational, but it's more like a coordinated ambush than an escort.
I'm hoping to use this particular FS2 Trope only once, and I hope I'll have done enough to differentiate it. I do agree, though, this is a bit overused.
EDIT: To clarify, the reason the Raynor doesn't just jump out in a broadside position is it's coming from another system and the Ravana is pointed at the node.
-
Mongoose misenterpreted my point like no one ever before and made my opinion look silly. I never said that I'm against the deployment of Ravanas - I said that it should be, overall, handled in a better way.
Funny how me making your opinion look silly works out to my "misinterpreting" it. Methinks that says more about the opinion than about the person criticizing it. :p
We know from in-Universe points of view that destroyers aren't always supposed to join battlefields. Doing so would be a tactical error since allowing the enemy to damage ships of the importance of a destroyer is not good. The Shivans are likely to be an exception, but they're not stupid.
We know from in-universe points of view that the Shivans are exceptionally offensively-minded, and that they have no qualms whatsoever about throwing excessive firepower at a particular obstacle, nor about taking losses in the process of doing so. This is the same species that sacrificed multiple juggernauts at the drop of a hat in order to accomplish some nebulous (hee) objective. I highly doubt they're all that concerned about a Ravana or two biting the dust or being de-fanged.
Also, valid or not, the total lack of originality is more than sufficient to change the tendence. Why would a FREDder keep doing something that is becoming much more obvious than Briefings and Command Briefings?
Maybe because, oh, it makes perfect sense to do so? Or should campaign designers also stop creating "defend the convoy from fighter wings" missions simply because it's been done fifty times before?
-
I might make a mission in Syrk (cough, cough, Dilmah and the others... still remember what it is? :)) where the Ravana makes a kamikaze run on an Orion. Tho the Terrans have absolutely 0 chance against the Shivans (pre-FS1 but not contradicting canon), so it isn't such a big deal. I'd love to see it in an FS2-era campaign tho.
BEWARE!!!! Self-quoting!
No one noticed my idea about a Ravana running kamikaze?
-
Why would it ever do that unless its main beams were disabled first?
Especially against an Orion...
-
Why would it ever do that unless its main beams were disabled first?
Especially against an Orion...
Half-scrapped, for instance?
-
A half-scrapped Ravana?
Uhm...ok...
-
two different FREDders, two different points of view and two different ways of using the same ship.
I think it's better to get an interesting or original mission rather than a common one, but most of the times getting an interesting mission done is quite difficult.
-
And here, I'm thinking that you can have an interesting mission using the right combination of common components.
The idea behind it and the execution just needs to be solid.
/me thinks of 'Forced Entry'
I see a Ravana there. Check.
The way to win is to take out its beam cannons ASAP. Check.
Awesome mission. Check.
If the Ravana just sat there and spat out fighters, I doubt the mission would have been as good, nor as memorable. I don't think it would have presented as much of a threat either.
-
sure thing, common ships will never become boring if used correctly.
but for example... which mission did you love the most from STR??? and I can be completely sure that most of the members will agree in one particular mission.
-
I liked the Last Hurrah (which other people hated) cause I racked up the kills that mission. Killing immobile targets is always fun. (And yes, I finished it on my first go).
I didn't like He Who Rides the Tiger (which other people loved) because I had to sit through the boring, long-winded talking at the beginning like four times before I actually managed to finish the damn thing.
-
And here, I'm thinking that you can have an interesting mission using the right combination of common components.
The idea behind it and the execution just needs to be solid.
/me thinks of 'Forced Entry'
I see a Ravana there. Check.
The way to win is to take out its beam cannons ASAP. Check.
Awesome mission. Check.
If the Ravana just sat there and spat out fighters, I doubt the mission would have been as good, nor as memorable. I don't think it would have presented as much of a threat either.
ahh you got another one there, forced entry is a good example of an interesting mission.... you can actually see the amount of work that went into that one, and even being as hard as hell to beat it (which would discourage most of the players) I found it incredibly fun.
you see.. the ravana was used marvelously in that one, you could almost touch the tension and embrace that sense of defeat when looking at it jumping in, that's what a mission should do with the player, yet as I said before... it's quite difficult to achieve.
-
I didn't like He Who Rides the Tiger (which other people loved) because I had to sit through the boring, long-winded talking at the beginning like four times before I actually managed to finish the damn thing.
that's the one I was talking about :P
well guess not all the players will find my favourite missions as fun as I did.
-
I'm FREDing a mission that I had an idea for a couple days ago. It has a Ravana defending a cargo and comm depot, immediately following the destruction of the first Sath (explanation: they're stretched thin). Good: I'll find out in a bit. Original: I think so.
-
A half-scrapped Ravana?
Uhm...ok...
I used the wrong word, sorry. I meant that its hull is under, for instance, 30%.
-
Why would it ever do that unless its main beams were disabled first?
Especially against an Orion...
Drive the spikes into the hull and then fire for MASSIVE DAMAGE. ;7
-
/me thinks of 'Forced Entry'
I see a Ravana there. Check.
The way to win is to take out its beam cannons ASAP. Check.
Awesome mission. Check.
If the Ravana just sat there and spat out fighters, I doubt the mission would have been as good, nor as memorable. I don't think it would have presented as much of a threat either.
And who said that the only alternate way of using the Ravana is letting it launch spacecraft, and nothing else? I proposed it as an alternate concept, but I didn't say it's the only one.
Memorable? It was cliché.
-
/me thinks of 'Forced Entry'
I see a Ravana there. Check.
The way to win is to take out its beam cannons ASAP. Check.
Awesome mission. Check.
If the Ravana just sat there and spat out fighters, I doubt the mission would have been as good, nor as memorable. I don't think it would have presented as much of a threat either.
And who said that the only alternate way of using the Ravana is letting it launch spacecraft, and nothing else? I proposed it as an alternate concept, but I didn't say it's the only one.
Memorable? It was cliché.
Doesn't make it any less memorable.
I'll admit, the later missions in said campaign were rather monotonous in accordance to the whole beam-destroying element, but blowing up Shivans also gets monotonous. Blowing up wings of fighters also gets monotonous. Even blowing things up gets monotonous. If there's a point where something gets monotonous, that means that you've been doing it to the point where it no longer interests or surprises you. Other people may like it, but you've just gotten tired of it. Maybe you should play another campaign.
Mobius, I respect you, but when you make these statements as if your opinion should be unquestioned law, it really fails to impress me. You should keep a mind open to any view other than your own, because we don't revolve around you. So you've noticed that many custom campaigns make the player disarm Ravana beam cannons. Good for you. However, instead of urinating on this aspect in public and expecting everyone to join in, how about you actually suggest ways to make these parts more original? I think an idea is coming to me right now that will demonstrate my point...
How about, instead of disarming a Ravana's beam cannons, the Ravana starts out already disarmed? As the weaker allied ships, armed with beams, near its location, the Shivans send wings to try and eliminate the allied beams. You've got to intercept their surgical strikes or the friendly capital ships will be no match for the stronger Ravana.
See? An idea that I'm sure hasn't been done before! And with no lashing out at anyone else? Was that so hard?
-
This is a fault, yes, mainly because the Ravana should be doing that classic Shivan thing and jumping in close enough to forcibly sodomize the target with its beams. But this treatment is not really the fault of the mission designers in the end, I'm afraid. It's the fault of the Ravana designers.
I am actually going to agree with Mobius on this one, at least to an extent.
Advising people to avoid cliches does not equate to telling people to avoid breathing through their nose. It's just the same as telling people not to end their epic books with "And then I woke up and it was all a dream lol," which as we all know is perfectly valid advice.
No, this really is telling people not to breath through their nose...or rather, to use your example, it is telling them to end their books with "And then I woke up and it was all a dream lol", because like that using the Ravana in some other fashion defies logic.
Let's be honest now: tactically, the Ravana is an extremely blunt instrument. It's not tough enough to fight defensively and it's not armed for that. It's very clearly designed to act offensively; to jump in and deliever a one or two salvo killing blow from its main battery. That is what it does. It does it very well, too, which is good since it's not much good at anything else.
So don't tell me it should stand off and launch fighters. If it's just going to stand off and launch fightercraft wings, it might as well not be in the mission area.
-
/me arrives late to the thread
I agree with Mobius actually. Killing the Ravana's forward beams has become a bit of a cliché; you find it in many, many post-Capella campaigns. Only I think people are piling on Mobius because he isn't expressing himself clearly. :p
I think the problem is that too often the Ravana problem is presented as a hoop the player must jump through. If he disarms the Ravana in time, the Ravana is rendered harmless and the mission proceeds as if it wasn't even there. If he doesn't disarm it in time, the Ravana kills a mission-critical ship and you instantly lose. It's kind of annoying. And it's made even more annoying by the fact that the Ravana has very little turret armor, so something that should be a big deal really isn't.
I think "Forced Entry" is actually a rare exception to this cliché. Instead of a hoop to jump through, the Ravana is a threat you must heroically respond to. And it's made more urgent by the fact that you might have to dash across half the battlefield to do it.
-
.
-
One good seemingly original idea was in the campaign FoW CoTS when you flew into a Pirate asteroid base. It had a subsystem called "door" and you blew it open. You flew in it and destroyed a generator. Prior to that, that idea has only been used in the Cairo Vasudan installation as far as I know, but without the door subsystem.
Have you played Cardinal Spear?
-
.
-
Uh... :wtf:
Cardinal Spear is that FS1 campaign that had the Karnak installation (Which has doors by the way).
-
You're probably refering to the Karnak. The Cairo is completely different. ;)
-
.
-
You're probably refering to the Karnak. The Cairo is completely different. ;)
Right, dur. I never remember the installation names that well though I would've been able to describe it correctly.
-
The Old Karnak didn't have doors IIRC, but the new, HTL, one does :nod:
Anyhow, after reading some other comments, I think the key to using the Ravana isn't just to not have it use its main beams, but to present it properly. It's the framework surrounding the usage of the Ravana that is cliché - there aren't enough Shivan destroyer models around to really avoid using the Ravana that way (nor can the Ravana be used effectively in any other way, much - I still don't think it's a good idea for a Ravana to play anti-fighter role, as it's going to wind up with its beams disabled, and when it gets attacked by say, a cruiser even, it's pretty ****ed. Stupid idea, if you ask me).
As long as there's more to do than just "Destroy front beams, then proceed to ignore.", or if the atmosphere is right for it, I think it's OK. It's the dryness of the mission design that really hurts it, not the role. The Ravana's role is pretty dead set. It's built for offensive beam strikes, and that's all it can do.
-
It still had door subsystems.
-
IMO you could keep the "ZOMG! RAVANA!!!!!!!! RUUUUUN! Oh and Alpha 1.....we'll leave you with the beam cannons," use of the Ravana, just make it harder than select Trebs and pop the trigger a few times. Have the escort fighters actually do something or assign a wing of Aeshma's (something that won't prevent the player from completing his objectives, but harass him as he tries to complete them) to attack Alpha 1 specifically.
I remember doing something similar in a mission I made. Having the Ravana jumping in from the node as the player's convoy makes its way towards it. The Ravana obliterates the lead ship, so Command deploys another destroyer to take its place and leaves the remainder of the convoy to deal with it in the meantime. The Ravana's far enough away to lob fighters and bombers at the convoy until Alpha 1 gets in range, but the area is so full of Shivan ships I had to give the player an escort to make it possible. And once one of the cannons is down the Ravana deploys a wing of fighters (Astaroths) to intercept the player.
The player still has to destroy the cannons, except it's made considerably harder. And there are no Trebs in the load-out screen.
-
Uhm...are you sure about that? Modifying the concept for the sole purpose of making it harder could have the opposite effect. I don't know if storming the incoming player with escort fighters would be a good idea...
Ordering one or more Shivan cruisers to move near the beam cannons(and provide anti-spacecraft coverage) could be a nice idea, though.
About the Trebuchet missiles - yeah, removing them from the player's loadout would also be a good idea. The removal has to be plausible, anyway...if the player has been using Trebuchets since the first mission of the campaign you can't remove them only when their usage would make things easier. :D
-
Uhm...are you sure about that? Modifying the concept for the sole purpose of making it harder could have the opposite effect. I don't know if storming the incoming player with escort fighters would be a good idea...
Ordering one or more Shivan cruisers to move near the beam cannons(and provide anti-spacecraft coverage) could be a nice idea, though.
About the Trebuchet missiles - yeah, removing them from the player's loadout would also be a good idea. The removal has to be plausible, anyway...if the player has been using Trebuchets since the first mission of the campaign you can't remove them only when their usage would make things easier. :D
As far as I'm concerned, you don't need a reason to remove a weapon from the loadout. I remember the first 70th Blue Lions mission in retail, Petrarch goes on about how you have the best equipment priority of the ship. Then you get to the loudout screen and find that, of all things, there aren't any Harpoons in sight. That's pretty rediculous, but it didn't really bother me.
-
Well I believe there should be a reason or the FREDder would play the role of the b*****d designer. Removing or adding new equipment to the pool without a valid reason/explanation is not a good idea.
If a FREDder doesn't want the player to use Trebuchet missiles against the Ravana's beams, he could:
1) Make sure that the player has to deplete his Trebuchet reserves and prevent him from rearming;
2) Setting the mission as a scramble one and choose carefully the loadout;
3) Force the player to find a good balance between Trebuchets and other weapons to win. If you know you're going to face several Dragons and/or Maras at close range, you're not supposed to arm all of your secondary banks with Trebuchets;
...and many other things, I suppose. :nod:
-
Another idea:
A Ravana fleet as the one was in Hellfire.
-
But...that'd be weird... :eek:
-
But...that'd be weird... :eek:
Yes, but definitely original. :p
-
Original, but far from being plausible. You need a damn good reason to mass such a high number of destroyers.
-
About the Trebuchet missiles - yeah, removing them from the player's loadout would also be a good idea. The removal has to be plausible, anyway...if the player has been using Trebuchets since the first mission of the campaign you can't remove them only when their usage would make things easier. :D
Doesn't it say the Trebuchet is a special issue missile? I wouldn't necessarily give the player access to them every single mission. Plus they might not be in such high stock to where that could be done.
What about the long-ass escort missions where you always seem to end up farther away in front of the entire convoy, and then the Ravana jumps in with its back facing you and its front facing the suddenly defenseless convoy?
Not even the Trebs will do a lick of good. :P
-
Original, but far from being plausible. You need a damn good reason to mass such a high number of destroyers.
For instance, the GTVA has the Independence on the field?
-
Doesn't it say the Trebuchet is a special issue missile? I wouldn't necessarily give the player access to them every single mission. Plus they might not be in such high stock to where that could be done.
What I said is that it's incredibly weird to remove the Trebuchet from the player's loadout in one mission, only. There should be a damn good reason, like "The Shivans destroyed the freighter(s) carrying ammo"...
For instance, the GTVA has the Independence on the field?
Eh?
-
I was making a mission for a now abandoned minicampaign where you fly a wing of Pegasus to coordinate a strike on a Shivan convoy (led by a Ravana) in the nebula. Basically there's a trailing Orion with oriented with all its beams on the convoy, and you must TAG the Shivans so the Orion can hit anything. Of course once the Orion starts firing, the Ravana is aware of the destroyer's presence and begins to turn to engage it. Well despite giving the Orion just about the best advantage possible, the Ravana can still turn and face the Orion and take it out with around 50% hull left.
So I would say, its sort of hard not to require disarming its front turrets if you're going to have other friendly cap ships in the area.
-
For instance, the GTVA has the Independence on the field?
Eh?
Wasn't that the name of the uberbig Terran ship in Inferno?
-
Sometimes you have to do something the way it has always been done, it just doesn't make sense any other way. For example, would you use the Ursa as a high-speed interceptor? The way the Ravana is built sort of limits the ways it can be used. Another example would be trying to use a submarine as a battleship. It wasn't built for that kind of thing. It may not be original, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.
-
Wasn't that the name of the uberbig Terran ship in Inferno?
The GTCa Warlock, a supercarrier apparently the largest class of ship after the construction of the Colossus.
From FS2's Command, it is highly unlikely that a great deal of destroyers would be deployed. Instead, after the negation of the Warlock's beam turrets being very formidable Command would preferably send in a ship up to the Warlock's weight in class - even with the Warlock's beam turrets destroyed, it's vast hangar would house dozens of bombers which even 2 or 3 destroyers might be seriously damaged. That's if the Warlock was at full strength however.
-
Wasn't that the name of the uberbig Terran ship in Inferno?
The GTCa Warlock, a superdestroyer apparently the largest class of ship after the construction of the Colossus.
From FS2's Command, it is highly unlikely that a great deal of destroyers would be deployed. Instead, after the negation of the Warlock's beam turrets being very formidable Command would preferably send in a ship up to the Warlock's weight in class - even with the Warlock's beam turrets destroyed, it's vast hangar would house dozens of bombers which even 2 or 3 destroyers might be seriously damaged. That's if the Warlock was at full strength however.
So, a considerable idea?
-
You could always wave it off with "The Shivans move in mysterious ways." :P
-
The GTCa Warlock is a carrier, not a superdestroyer...and it's not even the largest ship since the construction of the Colossus. Also, I don't get the point in discussing the Warlock here...
-
The GTCa Warlock is a carrier, not a superdestroyer...and it's not even the largest ship since the construction of the Colossus. Also, I don't get the point in discussing the Warlock here...
The main idea is that 4 Ravanas are marchin' upon a BIG GTVA ship. The player flies a fighter and hits the bombers that one Ravana what stayed behind releases constantly.
Here is an original idea for you.
-
You need a good reason to feature four massed Ravana destroyers(there should be different ships, at least) in a single mission - with that idea, you're likely to get the opposite effect.
-
.
-
and The Second Great War Part II
:wtf:
Howsabout a Demon? People seem to forget the fact that that destroyer even exists.
-
There are multiple reasons, actually:
1) The main beams of the Demon are placed on the sides, so the ship is nearly uncapable of firing beams on ships placed in front of it. There's one more beam cannon, but it's weaker and has several blind spots;
2) The Demon's main beams are harder to kill than the Ravana's, so the classic "I can take them down with a few shots!" concept isn't valid anymore(unless you're using Trebuchets, Stilettos and torpedoes);
3) The Ravana was introduced in FS2 and is more alien-looking than the Demon, so using the Ravana may be considered a better option by certain FREDders;
4) The Ravana has better anti-spacecraft capabilties and is more dangerous than the Demon when attempting to get closer;
-
There are multiple reasons, actually:
1) The main beams of the Demon are placed on the sides, so the ship is nearly uncapable of firing beams on ships placed in front of it. There's one more beam cannon, but it's weaker and has several blind spots;
2) The Demon's main beams are harder to kill than the Ravana's, so the classic "I can take them down with a few shots!" concept isn't valid anymore(unless you're using Trebuchets, Stilettos and torpedoes);
3) The Ravana was introduced in FS2 and is more alien-looking than the Demon, so using the Ravana may be considered a better option by certain FREDders;
4) The Ravana has better anti-spacecraft capabilties and is more dangerous than the Demon when attempting to get closer;
None of which are valid reasons for why the Demon shouldn't be used. Perhaps not using the Ravana at all might be a better option.
-
the demon's big defect is it's exposed engine subsystem, you can easily make it usless without it's engines, but I still think it's a really good destroyer, the ravana is just another one, maybe a little more scarier but that's it.
-
SD Demon + SD Demon = SSD Orb.
-
The Demon is much better than the Ravana at anything except going on the Offense.
This makes it contrary to widely recognized Shivan attack patterns and hence, the more (or shall I say, completely) offensively-oriented SD Ravana is used much more often.
I personally think that the Demon's anti-fighter capability is far better than the Ravana's.
Sure, the Ravana has a few more odd flaks, but it's SAAAs have atrocious firing arcs. Both sides are completely devoid of coverage. The Demon's have a fire arc enabling it to hit most fighters except for those attacking it head on (for which it has a blob, a flak, and a missile battery to deal with). The Demon's anti-fighter guns can also take a lot more punishment. The Ravana's spine SAAA is as woefully underarmored as its main cannons.
The Demon can however, be taken on the offensive. It's LReds have very good firing arcs (almost 180 degrees). As long as they jump in slightly to the side of their target, they can at least bring 2 beams (1 LRed, 1 SRed) to bear. However, it is more difficult to position it like that, and in the same situation, the Ravana can muster twice the firepower, making it seem more of a threat.
-
.
-
The Demon is pretty much your Shivan mobile command centre and carrier for fighters and bombers and requires much support if it engages in any sort of skirmish involving an enemy destroyer.
Even a Hecate might be able to take it down from long range.
-
Only from the front or the back.
From the sides, they're going to get shredded by the LRed unless it gets disabled.
-
Of course, the Demon can still LOLWTFPWN even an Orion on the broadside. Dead is dead, regardless of whether or not it takes longer or not.
What with the arches and better AAA cover, the Demon is, in my opinion, a lot more fun to attack, as well. The key is to vary things as much as possible. If the Shivans are on the offensive, Ravana time. If they're barricading a node, a smattering of some Molochs backed up by a Demon is actually a scary combo.
-
:wtf:
Depending on the side the Orion is, it can bring two BGreens and two TerSlashes to the Demon's one LRed and SRed. Even though the Demon has 60,000 more hitpoints the Orion is still pushing out more firepower.
Actually the refire rates come to mind now...
-
The single LRed out-damages the entire Orion, IIRC.
-
The single LRed out-damages the entire Orion, IIRC.
Another reason to admire the Shivan designers of the LRed beam. ;)
-
The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.
I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.
It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.
I agree with that. But off the top of my head I can only think of
- Having the Ravana stay at some distance and launch fighters at the player or whatever he's protecting
- The Ravana be launched in the middle of a large dogfight and be used in a fighter-suppression role
- Having the Ravana head for a node and have the player tasked to disable it and neutralise it's navigation subsystem so it can't jump out (I'm using this one :) )
-Have the GTVA locate and attack the Ravana rather than the other way around, so it doesn't get to choose what to point its cannons at.
Just sayin'.
-
.
-
tl;dr except for the first page.
But in regards to the usage of Ravanas, I have noticed that this is the case. Other than making the GTVA attack the Ravana instead of waiting for the Ravana to attack, making it blink in behind the GTVA ships and start blowing **** up might work, as well as having the Ravana pull back the moment its beam cannons take a certain amount of damage. Making it work as a carrier is a bit of a waste imo, but it certainly makes it more interesting than your regular Ravana-oriented missions.
-
Good idea, actually. I'd also increase the Ravana's hitpoints by 5-10% in FRED to make its turrets(and, overall, the whole ship) harder to kill.
-
Good idea, actually. I'd also increase the Ravana's hitpoints by 5-10% in FRED to make its turrets(and, overall, the whole ship) harder to kill.
Heh, I already did that. I always thought it was odd that such a scary-ass warship had such weak subsystems. I made them about as tough as a Hecate's.
-
.
-
Heh, I already did that. I always thought it was odd that such a scary-ass warship had such weak subsystems. I made them about as tough as a Hecate's.
Last I remembered that isn't much of an improvement.
-
Heh, I already did that. I always thought it was odd that such a scary-ass warship had such weak subsystems. I made them about as tough as a Hecate's.
Last I remembered that isn't much of an improvement.
Hang on, I need to look through my tables again. I seem to recall making a bunch of balance tweaks, and now that I think about it, the Hecate got some serious buffage in this spree.
At the moment, a single Cyclops torpedo brings the Ravana's forward beams down to about 50-60%. I might rebalance that later.
-
Maybe make a mission where there is no possible way to intercept it before some ship you are supposed to be defending blows up. I've noticed that you actually get a lot of red objectives in the Main FS2 campaign, and hardly any in mods.
-
Like having the destroyer jump in to where it's back is facing you so you have to waste time trying to get to its front while it's pounding away at ships like I previously said.
-
Like having the destroyer jump in to where it's back is facing you so you have to waste time trying to get to its front while it's pounding away at ships like I previously said.
But it's still the same 'Destroy the Ravana's forward beams' mission, isn't it? You just have to scramble a bit more.
-
.
-
Like having the destroyer jump in to where it's back is facing you so you have to waste time trying to get to its front while it's pounding away at ships like I previously said.
But it's still the same 'Destroy the Ravana's forward beams' mission, isn't it? You just have to scramble a bit more.
It would be, but it wouldn't be like other missions where it jumps either facing directly towards you or to the side to where you can immediately greet it with Trebuchets. :rolleyes:
-
Pair up the Demon and the Ravana in a mission(s). Use the best features of each one to offset the handicap of the other.
-
All I can say is you may have to use other fan made destroyers, like the Kismat or Yama, though this thread is about using the Ravana in as many ways as possible. But I think ideas with the Ravana have been exhausted.
I doubt they're exhausted.
-
Pair up the Demon and the Ravana in a mission(s). Use the best features of each one to offset the handicap of the other.
2 caps might be a bit too much for the average mission...
-
making it blink in behind the GTVA ships and start blowing **** up might work
That was done in a mission in Blue Planet.
I need to add here that it's still at a point where you can simply turn around and lob Trebuchets at the cannons the moment it jumps in.
Pair up the Demon and the Ravana in a mission(s). Use the best features of each one to offset the handicap of the other.
2 caps might be a bit too much for the average mission...
Not enough for me. :P
-
Not enough for me. :P
Been playing too many of my missions I see :)
-
That I have. I want a campaign. :D
-
That I have. I want a campaign. :D
:lol: I need an idea
-
I need more time to play FS2. >_<
-
And I need to get off my lazy ass cheeks and do something already.
-
Let us never speak of the Ravana, again.
-
Let us never speak of the Ravana, again.
Personally, I have problems with the use of the Lucys... :p
-
Let us never speak of the Ravana, again.
Personally, I have problems with the use of the Lucys... :p
The problem with the Lucifer is it has so much Applied Phlebotinum (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AppliedPhlebotinum) in every nook and cranny of its existence that presenting it as a beatable foe is difficult without mimicking the end of FS1, and presenting it as an unbeatable foe smacks too strongly of the end of FS2.