Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Higher Game on July 11, 2009, 11:31:27 am

Title: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Higher Game on July 11, 2009, 11:31:27 am: The area effect damage is almost purely negligible unless it's a direct hit, in which ordinary missiles are just as good. For an "anti-bomber" weapon their shockwaves wouldn't scratch the paint off a Loki.

Has anyone come up with a use for these things?
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Colonol Dekker on July 11, 2009, 11:43:11 am: Intended use as described in the techroom, when used properly is fine for me... Also taking out bombs.... and turrets. Sure its no Trebuchet but variety is the spice of life. :yes:

I give Infyrnos a 7 out of ten.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: CP5670 on July 11, 2009, 12:08:09 pm: I actually think of them as a bomb that can be mounted on fighters. They do good damage against cruisers and freighters.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Titan on July 11, 2009, 12:27:37 pm: Quote from: CP5670 on July 11, 2009, 12:08:09 pm
I actually think of them as a bomb that can be mounted on fighters. They do good damage against cruisers and freighters.

Thus the epic table hack in PI. That scared the crap out of me in the second mission. I wound up between the Artemises and one of the cruisers, all of the sudden, I have a wall of those things coming at me.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Mongoose on July 11, 2009, 12:33:16 pm: Quote from: CP5670 on July 11, 2009, 12:08:09 pm
I actually think of them as a bomb that can be mounted on fighters. They do good damage against cruisers and freighters.
The fifth mission in PI was the first time I think I'd seriously tried to use them, and I was amazed at how brutally effective they were at demolishing those freighter groups. They're just the thing for a convoy assault mission.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: CP5670 on July 11, 2009, 12:41:54 pm: The PI ones were tweaked to be a little more powerful, but even the original kind are pretty effective as light bombs. I have used them like that in multiplayer missions many times.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 11, 2009, 02:53:54 pm: Aren't Infyrnos the multi-bombs? Those things are pretty nasty when more than one at a time go off.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Sushi on July 11, 2009, 02:56:14 pm: IMO they're very effective in extremely specific situations. I almost never use them, though, unless I know EXACTLY what I'm going against in a given mission.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Kie99 on July 11, 2009, 07:09:47 pm: I thought the same about Inyrno, I once modified the table slightly to make them to fire off Helios' instead of Cluster Bomb Babies when they detonate. It actually made it worse for bomber defence as the Helios' detonated on the ship I was supposed to be covering and absolutely wasted it.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Kolgena on July 11, 2009, 09:17:14 pm: Its use is very limited, I find, and that in almost all cases, regular dogfighting missiles are a better usage of secondary space. However, for those very specific roles like cruiser and transport killing, it's more than decent.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Droid803 on July 11, 2009, 09:36:48 pm: Infyrnos are pretty useful in the gauntlet missions to wipe out the majority of a shivan wing before they break formation after warping in :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 12, 2009, 04:54:29 am: Quote from: Droid803 on July 11, 2009, 09:36:48 pm
Infyrnos are pretty useful in the gauntlet missions to wipe out the majority of a shivan wing before they break formation after warping in :P

Indeed. I once tried using them in Mystery of the Trinity. The events list for that mission looked like this:

(http://jwmwcw.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pFqtbjqafx_QM5OI3WBWZRu21iWmOj0i6_H2oJ1pess1jGocmJS5bbvPQr2LWA_Y0jsaNBkmJn77N94gh6CbD7g/MD.png)

Cheating aside, I did try using Infyrnos in Clash of the Titans II once. I actually managed to peg a Dragon by exploding one in my face. Of course, my hull dropped by 50% as well, leaving 50% to go... :lol:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 12, 2009, 04:38:02 pm: Wow, way to peg the poor stupid wingmen.

Second, :eek2:

That's a lot of dragon kills. Did you actually manage to keep it alive for 15 minutes? That would be awesome, even if it doesn't jump out anyway.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 13, 2009, 05:41:25 am: Quote from: Scotty on July 12, 2009, 04:38:02 pm
Did you actually manage to keep it alive for 15 minutes? That would be awesome, even if it doesn't jump out anyway.

Read this (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Mystery_of_the_Trinity#Notes).

If you must know what happened in the end for that cheat run...

Spoiler:
I disabled ~ + SHIFT + I on the Trinity and used ~ + K.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 13, 2009, 12:52:58 pm: Oh, I know it won't jump out even after 15 minutes. I read that article :). I was just curious to see if you had managed.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Tantalus53 on July 18, 2009, 06:58:26 pm: Easiest kills in the world are a dual-fired Infirno at the point of an attacking wing formation. Before they break up, you can either destroy or severly damage 'em all and mop them all up with ease. Infernos have their uses...
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: eliex on July 18, 2009, 07:25:17 pm: Infyrnos are excellent for getting kill awards as if they don't destroy enemy fighters outright, it usually deals >50% hull damage. :D
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 18, 2009, 07:27:49 pm: Yeah, but kill awards are easy enough to get anyway. The nature of the missions means you get a ****-load of kills over the course of the campaign. After less than two playthroughs, it's not hard to get triple ace at all.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: eliex on July 18, 2009, 09:14:28 pm: Still, you can't deny the sense of achievement when looking at a record of kills on your pilot profile. :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 18, 2009, 09:23:51 pm: Sure I can. Once the recorded Herc, Loki, and <any shivan fighter you care to name. Except the Dragon> go above 100, it's just ridiculous.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 18, 2009, 09:39:11 pm: You'll have about 500 Basilisk or Mara kills before you get 100 Herc and Loki kills :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Aardwolf on July 18, 2009, 09:51:40 pm: Quote from: eliex on July 18, 2009, 09:14:28 pm
Still, you can't deny the sense of achievement when looking at a record of kills on your pilot profile. :P

Did you consider this?

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/Aardwolf001/FSOpen%20Bugs/KillBug.png)
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 18, 2009, 09:54:31 pm: :wtf: :jaw: :eek2:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Aardwolf on July 18, 2009, 09:57:13 pm: I think it was the FreeSpace 1 mission with the 3 jump nodes, after the attack on Vasuda Prime. I don't think I was ever able to repeat it, although I have been able to repeat a >100% bug I caused using my Lua script to replace each primary with a secondary.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Krelus on July 19, 2009, 11:37:18 pm: Haha, the number of times I've killed myself with those stupid things...

Infyrnos are fun as all get-out to use, in Derelict, the "oh crap" mission (you know what I'm talking about), I sat by the fighterbay with a bank of Infyrnos taking out entire bomber wings in an instant.

I'm thinking of making an Infyrno II missile that has a slow lock-on, fairly crappy (but present) maneuvering, and it detonates about 200m short of the target, spraying explosives forward in a cone. Kind of like a claymore with rabies, mostly intended as a delicious anti-bomber tool.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 20, 2009, 12:00:17 am: :drevil:

Make sure you can fire it from a Perseus.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Colonol Dekker on July 20, 2009, 03:06:47 am: And the Myrmidon. . Just to keep the Cyclops happy.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 20, 2009, 05:29:39 am: Speaking of which, wouldn't the Infyrno be the perfect counter to a Cyclops/Helios spam attack?
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 20, 2009, 07:47:21 pm: Has anyone tried fixing the tables to make Cyclops take up as much space and fire as fast as Tempests? That would be a truly epic spam attack.

EDIT: Fast meaning firing rate, not speed. Speed would suck :ick:.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 20, 2009, 08:15:44 pm: No, but I've made the Helios fire 24 warhead salvos. :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Scotty on July 20, 2009, 08:16:17 pm: :eek:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 20, 2009, 08:30:57 pm: What would be even worse is a torpedo that fires like the Hurricane from Inferno. :D
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Snail on July 20, 2009, 09:09:30 pm: And while we're at it, bomber-deployed Meson Bombs would be nice.

Hell, **** that, Meson Bombs with the speed and fire rate of the Hurricane would be absolutely wonderful. Sanity notwithstanding. :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Droid803 on July 20, 2009, 11:48:03 pm: Won't you kinda...kill everything including your wingmen, yourself, and everything on your escort list that way?
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 21, 2009, 12:00:04 am: Not if you give yourself 800 000 hitpoints... :drevil:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: eliex on July 21, 2009, 12:48:48 am: Quote from: Droid803 on July 20, 2009, 11:48:03 pm
Won't you kinda...kill everything including your wingmen, yourself, and everything on your escort list that way?

Let's go with a bang, not a whimper.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Kie99 on July 21, 2009, 05:46:25 am: OMFG what if you editted the tables so that you could fire 100 meson-filled Sathanases at your opponent in every salvo :drevil: :nervous: :eek2:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 21, 2009, 05:59:17 am: Game crash. :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Colonol Dekker on July 21, 2009, 07:02:31 am: Why not scale back everything so that capships have fighter health and fighters have cargo health?

To save the universe from the meson fallout, . . .
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Aardwolf on July 21, 2009, 07:26:04 am: Someone made a MIRV-type weapon once. Appearance-wise I mean.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Dragon on July 21, 2009, 07:32:00 am: I remember MRIVs form Cardinal's Spear (they were pretty useless anyway).
If you're talking about swarm bombs there's a Hellstorm X from Inferno.
And there will soon be another one... :)
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 21, 2009, 07:43:57 am: Quote from: Aardwolf on July 21, 2009, 07:26:04 am
Someone made a MIRV-type weapon once. Appearance-wise I mean.

Capship torpedo or fighter-mounted?
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: TrashMan on July 21, 2009, 07:51:35 am: Quote from: Droid803 on July 20, 2009, 11:48:03 pm
Won't you kinda...kill everything including your wingmen, yourself, and everything on your escort list that way?

Indeed. After judicious testing even the 25000 damage Judgment Day bomb was practicely too powerful to be a bomber-weapon. The shockwave alone can kill an Armageddon uber-bomber!
You could downgrade the shockwave, but that makes it look visually less impressing.
You could make it faster and more durable so you can fire it from longer range, but that might end up making it a rather cheesy weapon. And the AI would still suck at employing it.

So there's definately a functional and asthetic limit to bomb firepower.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 21, 2009, 07:53:20 am: Honestly, any of the anti-capital ship warheads should be capable of immediately wiping out anything smaller than a Cruiser. :doubt:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Dragon on July 21, 2009, 08:19:10 am: In fact, anti-capital torpedoes should take a destroyer in one or two shots, just like they do in Wing Commander. (FS destroyers are equivalents of WC cruisers)
For comparison: Yamato took 10 torpedoes and 7 bombs to sink and it was the largest battleship in WWII.
Eva, which wasn't the largest nor most heavily armored ship in FS1 was estimated to take 20 Tsunamis before going down.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 21, 2009, 08:22:42 am: For some reason I think:
Quote from: Dragon on July 21, 2009, 08:19:10 am
In fact, anti capital torpedoes should take a destroyer in one or two shots, just like they do in Wing Commander.
Is trying to be a joke to what I was saying, but I didn't mean make the Tsunami / Cyclops / Harbinger / Helios instagib weapons.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: c914 on July 23, 2009, 05:43:48 am: Quote from: Dragon on July 21, 2009, 08:19:10 am
For comparison: Yamato took 10 torpedoes and 7 bombs to sink and it was the largest battleship in WWII.
Eva, which wasn't the largest nor most heavily armored ship in FS1 was estimated to take 20 Tsunamis before going down.

Actually you had to add three hits (two bombs, one torpedo), soo it take 20 hits. Except Lucifer (which had god mode tun on :P) Eve was largest and most heavily armoured ship in FS1. I think that fair. Of coure because lack of AA guns on that Demon it was very boring job.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 23, 2009, 07:29:16 am: So it was crap anti-bomber defences versus crap firepower. :drevil:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: xXGrifterXx on July 25, 2009, 11:05:11 am: These things are a friendly fire nightmare if you equip computer wingmen with it. :mad:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: qazwsx on July 29, 2009, 02:22:41 pm: You think that's bad?
Some idiot on multi equipped every single AI fighter with full banks of EMPs
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Snail on July 29, 2009, 02:24:06 pm: Quote from: qazwsx on July 29, 2009, 02:22:41 pm
You think that's bad?
Some idiot on multi equipped every single AI fighter with full banks of EMPs
:blah:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: ssmit132 on July 30, 2009, 03:42:24 am: Somehow I think that "that would be horrible" would be an understatement.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: headdie on July 30, 2009, 06:41:10 am: i think this thread has highlighted a change in attitude towards capships between FS1 and 2.

In FS1 the attitude of the story and mission design was that the loss of a cruiser was a humbling blow and a destroyer was a day to be mourned for the rest of eternity.

FS2 even before the entry of Col and Sath, cruisers are being taken out merrily and the loss shrugged off like a fighter. and most command briefs mention the loss of a destroyer somewhere with no special note.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 30, 2009, 08:23:26 am: Quote from: qazwsx on July 29, 2009, 02:22:41 pm
Some idiot on multi equipped every single AI fighter with full banks of EMPs

:ha::ha::ha::ha::ha::ha::ha::ha::ha::ha:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Kolgena on July 30, 2009, 11:46:01 am: Quote from: headdie on July 30, 2009, 06:41:10 am
i think this thread has highlighted a change in attitude towards capships between FS1 and 2.

In FS1 the attitude of the story and mission design was that the loss of a cruiser was a humbling blow and a destroyer was a day to be mourned for the rest of eternity.

FS2 even before the entry of Col and Sath, cruisers are being taken out merrily and the loss shrugged off like a fighter. and most command briefs mention the loss of a destroyer somewhere with no special note.

In FS2, I do recall corvettes and cruisers being knocked off like flies, but destroyers weren't that easy to wave off. I mean, the first time you kill a Ravana, it was treated as a pretty significant event (just ignore the fact that they sent in a handful of fighters/bombers against an Orion equivalent), as was the death of the Repulse. Similarly, in at least one mission, you go to great lengths to keep the Aquitaine alive. Yes, Shivan destroyers do go down at a rate that's bordering on ridiculous when considering the losses of equivalent ships from the GTVA, but that's just to emphasize the GTVA's hubris prior to the Saths showing up. Furthermore, quite a few of the destroyers were lost after the Saths started raping everything, but that's understandable. If you were command, you wouldn't be thinking "Crap, we just lost the Psamtik and Phoenicia. That's a big deal." You'd be thinking "Crap, we're on the verge of extinction. Who cares about chucking about destroyers like meat shields?"

Again, my memory isn't the greatest and it's been a while since I've played the retail campaigns, so this might be wrong.

Also, has anyone tried giving AI infyrnos, but table hacking them so that they can carry a decent amount? When spammed, they're pretty deadly, although they wouldn't come close to the chaos that EMP spamming would cause.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: xXGrifterXx on July 30, 2009, 12:01:20 pm: Quote from: headdie on July 30, 2009, 06:41:10 am
i think this thread has highlighted a change in attitude towards capships between FS1 and 2.

In FS1 the attitude of the story and mission design was that the loss of a cruiser was a humbling blow and a destroyer was a day to be mourned for the rest of eternity.

FS2 even before the entry of Col and Sath, cruisers are being taken out merrily and the loss shrugged off like a fighter. and most command briefs mention the loss of a destroyer somewhere with no special note.

Really it's just was the Fenris cruiser. That thing has practically no armor and attracts every hornet missile available. It's even more dead if you use the maxim cannon. The Leviathan on the other hand is pretty good. The Fenris really needs to be thrown in a junk pile.

EDIT: They are probably good when grouped with other ships and fighters, but by itself its dead meat.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: General Battuta on July 30, 2009, 12:32:25 pm: The Leviathan is an excellent anti-fighter platform at least.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: headdie on July 30, 2009, 01:17:34 pm: with the anti fighter beams the Leviathan becomes one of the kings of fighter defense just needs a couple of fighters to protect its front end, OK there are some better cruisers but not many in my book
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 30, 2009, 05:36:19 pm: Maybe the Lilith and Rakshasa. :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Droid803 on July 30, 2009, 06:51:45 pm: Those two are very afraid of fighters though.
An assault wing will rip apart a Rakshasa, and the Lilith will find itself a floating hunk of armor (minus its beam cannon).
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on July 30, 2009, 06:58:52 pm: At full strength they're better than the Leviathan regardless; sure, anything will find itself a floating bucket of bolts after nomming a few Trebs. :P
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Droid803 on July 30, 2009, 07:05:36 pm: No, I don't fear approaching Lilith cruisers. I know that they can't hurt me too much. Same with Rakshasas. The only thing they can do is make my escort list shrink (rapidly, I would admit). In fact, charging them is probably the best option as you want them dead ASAP.

I stay clear of hostile Aeolus cruisers and Leviathans however, unless I have enough wingmen to tell to go suicide and draw fire for me.

EDIT: well damn, this has surely gone off topic.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: headdie on July 31, 2009, 02:43:03 am: I know but personally i find it entertaining to see where these things go, i mean i think we exausted the inferno debate lol

back on topic though as some one that usually steers clear of the cluster munitions how do they do against the corvettes
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: TrashMan on July 31, 2009, 04:16:53 am: Quote from: Droid803 on July 30, 2009, 07:05:36 pm
I stay clear of hostile Aeolus cruisers and Leviathans however, unless I have enough wingmen to tell to go suicide and draw fire for me.

You know the perfect weapon for disarming Levi's is? Rockeyes.
Just load a bunch of them, target the AAAF turret and let me rip! That and Stilletos. Without AAAf's, the Levi is a pushover. Lilith is a pushover deluxe.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Androgeos Exeunt on July 31, 2009, 07:45:01 am: How strong are the Lilith's turrets? There was one time I needed to use four Trebs to take out its main gun. Granted, I was probably doing it from the wrong angle... :nervous:
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: da1edwin on July 31, 2009, 01:29:15 pm: Quote from: Androgeos Exeunt on July 31, 2009, 07:45:01 am
How strong are the Lilith's turrets? There was one time I needed to use four Trebs to take out its main gun. Granted, I was probably doing it from the wrong angle... :nervous:

It's the strongest of the FS2 cruisers, about four times as many hitpoints as a Cain and twice as many as a Leviathan or Aeolus. I personally hate the thing because no matter how easy it is to attack with a fighter or bomber the LRed tears through escort targets like no other.

As for the Infyrno, I'm not a fan. Too much cargo space.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Droid803 on July 31, 2009, 02:46:21 pm: Three Trebuchets to disable the Lilith's main beam from below, IIRC.
Donno how many Infyrnos it takes XD.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Krelus on August 01, 2009, 12:48:58 am: Quote from: Droid803 on July 31, 2009, 02:46:21 pm
Three Trebuchets to disable the Lilith's main beam from below, IIRC.
Donno how many Infyrnos it takes XD.

I found that the two best non-bomb secondaries against subsystems are the tempest and the trebuchet. Infyrnos have pretty miserable subsystem damage.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Aardwolf on August 01, 2009, 09:38:06 pm: The Cain/Lilith is annoyingly hard to tell which side is the bottom, though, because of its shape.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Droid803 on August 03, 2009, 12:21:01 am: Really? The bottom has the red diamond shape. The sides don't. That's basically the best way to tell IMO.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: eliex on August 03, 2009, 12:41:45 am: Yeah, that's my way of identifying sides from long range while close up the bottom is flat.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Mongoose on August 03, 2009, 12:35:46 pm: The missile launchers make easily-identifiable landmarks on the sides, too.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Kolgena on August 03, 2009, 01:29:01 pm: I just target it, and it says so on my HUD >.>
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Aardwolf on August 03, 2009, 03:13:53 pm: Quote from: Droid803 on August 03, 2009, 12:21:01 am
Really? The bottom has the red diamond shape. The sides don't. That's basically the best way to tell IMO.

I meant when approaching from the front.
Title: Re: Infyrno missiles = lose
Post by: Commander Zane on August 03, 2009, 05:24:33 pm: Quote from: Kolgena on August 03, 2009, 01:29:01 pm
I just target it, and it says so on my HUD >.>

Best way put evah.