Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: IronBeer on April 17, 2010, 02:49:55 pm
-
Surprisingly enough, this is not about problems I have with any particular aspect of FS.
Rather, inspired by a side conversation from the "Atmospheric Fighters" thread, I decided to start thinking about the grievances people had with any of the ships in FS1 and 2. I recall reading an opinion that the Valkyrie was actually not that effective of an interceptor owing to its low durability and secondary payload.
Personally, I have an intense dislike for the Myrmidon- the gun firepower is nice, but the secondary banks (generally speaking) I find lacking, and the mobility is not sufficient to counter for the Mymidon's rather low durability and large target profile. Plus, it doesn't look very Terran.
Also, I really don't like the Boanerges. Given a choice between that and an Ursa, I'll take an Ursa every time. The capability to carry a couple more bombs and a somewhat higher top speed does not excuse the other weaknesses of the design, namely the pathetic gun banks and Mayflower-esque handling. [Edit]: How could I forget the lack of a turret!?
Anybody else want to chime in? Seriously, don't hold back- say what you hate about a given ship, and perhaps offer ideas to improve a design. This doesn't even need to be limited to strike craft, and complaints about all classes are welcome.
-
Artemis gunpoints.
Taurus primary energy reserves.
Losing plot dialogue after running into anything with a Valkyrie
Boanerges. Inferior to the Ursa in every way. (btw, why does the ursa have a kayser turret in Slaying Ravanna? It shouldn't have been released to opeval yet)
As for the myrmidon, it's actually a really decent fighter IMO. dual gunbanks in 4/2 arrangement mean that you can have a damage dealer on the 4 and a specialized weapon on the 2 without sacrificing DPS. This allows for primary fire flexibility that isn't offered on most of anything else. Secondary capacity is pretty horrible though. Tempests are the only real usable missiles on it. Target profile isn't too bad, since I'm not skilled enough to exploit vasudan/pegasus thinness anyways, and it's fast enough to fly intercept (95/130). Oh, and it carries Helios, though that's probably not intentional.
The main problem with the myrmidon is that it's so capable at doing everything that it fails to excel at doing anything. It's like that fighter jet the US commissioned in the Cold War that was multifunctional but sucked a lot for any specific task.
-
Taurus primary energy reserves.
You mean Tauret.
btw, why does the ursa have a kayser turret in Slaying Ravana?
Fixed typo. And to answer your question: because it's awesome. It also has a Banshee turret in FS1 :D
-
Woohoo, typoes. >.<
The Banshee makes sense though. Both that and the bomber were released to op eval at the same time. Kayser just... doesn't.
-
The Banshee makes sense though. Both that and the bomber were released to op eval at the same time. Kayser just... doesn't.
Upgrade, perhaps? (Realistically, I think we all know the Banshee was simply removed from the tables, but whatever)
-
The Orion's lack of point-defense.
Myrmidon's lack of agility.
The Ravana's vulnerable beam turrets.
-
The Kayser was released on OpEval for fighters.
The tech description says that doctrine stated it was only for use on bomber (turrets) beforehand or something.
-
the "superior" vasudan engines don't increase speed with increased power
-
The Perseus being slower than the Valkyrie.
-
I've done alright in the Boanerges suprisingly, though some of the things noted here, like the Perseus being slower than the Valkyrie, I think it suits her for having the second missile bank and tougher hull, think about how unbalanced it would be if it had the acceleration, top speed, and afterburner capability of the Valkyrie, with all the other upgrades, I've personally thought the Perseus started off unbalanced to begin with.
The issue with several Vasudan ships not overclocking is solved on a table fix posted a few months back, it also gives the Artemis overclock and makes the D.H. perform better as advertised.
-
The issue with several Vasudan ships not overclocking is solved on a table fix posted a few months back, it also gives the Artemis overclock and makes the D.H. perform better as advertised.
"Perform as advertised", you mean :P
-
What I don't get is why the Ursa has a Kayser turret but cannot have Kayser's in it's primary banks.
I personally have a fierce hatred for the Horus, it's made of paper, has ****ty gunpoints and aside from its speed has nothing going for it.
-
Horus was a kick ass interceptor in FS1 hence why it is a mediocre to marginal fighter in fs2
as for the kayser debate i tend to run with the designed for bombers explanation along with the fact that if memory serves you only get it when in the elite 70th so have access to special weapons not available to the rest of the fleet (just behind spec ops like the skulls)
for some of the tabling/stats issues especially related to ship speed and over clocking it might be worth looking at the table fix link in my sig for some i have attempted to address. if you have any suggestions afterwards i will happily look into them i think some other members of the community have done similar work as well
-
The issue with several Vasudan ships not overclocking is solved on a table fix posted a few months back, it also gives the Artemis overclock and makes the D.H. perform better as advertised.
"Perform as advertised", you mean :P
What's the difference? It's advertised as performing better.
-
You be missing a comma:
"...and makes the D.H. perform better, as advertised".
Then it makes more sense :P
-
Stealth fighters should be harder to hit than they are currently. If I suck at shooting without a lead indicator at targets beyond 1km, so should enemy AI.
AI needs to use trebs properly without sexp hacks.
AI needs to learn how to spamshoot tempests.
-
Stealth fighters should be harder to hit than they are currently. If I suck at shooting without a lead indicator at targets beyond 1km, so should enemy AI.
AI needs to use trebs properly without sexp hacks.
AI needs to learn how to spamshoot tempests.
Fury AI.
Play Blue Planet, steal the AI.
It can do all that, plus equalize shields believably.
-
I was under the impression that Fury AI would make the game significantly harder?
I can just barely play vanilla campaign on insane, so...
-
I was under the impression that Fury AI would make the game significantly harder?
I can just barely play vanilla campaign on insane, so...
Not tremendously harder, just smarter. Especially if you put it on Very Easy or Easy.
If you can barely play the Vanilla campaign on Insane you'll probably do fine on Fury Medium.
-
The Orion's lack of point-defense.
Myrmidon's lack of agility.
The Ravana's vulnerable beam turrets.
That's all there for balance.
I personally have a fierce hatred for the Horus, it's made of paper, has ****ty gunpoints and aside from its speed has nothing going for it.
Not totally, those wide gun points are very well suited for large bombers like the Ursa or the Nephilim, just that it has more trouble with smaller stuff. On the flipside in FS2 it is the only fighter that can easily keep up with the Nahema without having to put more power into your engines or hit your burners.
AI needs to use trebs properly without sexp hacks.
IIRC way back in the day the SCP team did this, but took it out because it made several. The reason is because Basilisks come with Trebuchets (or Pheonix V's if you're playing the FS Port) by default, so they would jump in a few KM away from the transports you were escorting, suddenly launch their trebs and waste your escorts before you even got within range of them.
-
Gripes...?
Erinyes' small weapons-energy reserves
AI not being affected by such things as humans are (e.g., stealth) (...does the Fury AI fix this? :confused:)
AWOL message of DOOM!!! (i.e., more enemies jumping in right after I leave)
Pegasi's lack of more usage
Myrmadons' weird secondaries
For that matter, Herc IIs' weird secondaries (32/40 Harpoons?)
Serapi's paper hull
GTVA's lack of tactics + Collie's futile death
On a related note, command pulled the blockade, and the coordinates they gave us were bogus!
And from FS1, one really big thing comes to mind: even though I can save the Rameses, the mission will not progress if I do so.
-
You must not use the Erinyes properly then, I rarely have a problem with energy even with the Kayser / Maxim loadout on Medium.
Or you're just a crazy bastard playing on Insane, :P which then I'm jealous.
-
Let's see...
Prometheus R
Boanerge's single primary slot
Ursa's worthless-for-shooting-fighters second primary slot
Are's sluggishness
Herc II's only having four primaries. Why even bother making a mkII?
And finally: Dragons *shakes fist*
-
Fury AI is definitely awesome.
Even under Fury AI, I still think the Myrm's a good deal, not that it certainly couldn't be better. I like the ability to carry a small pack of three Trebs or Stilletos(or even a five-pack of Rockeyes, which should be enough to kill or maim a single cruiser beam turret), yet still have 75% of my Tornado capacity, and it has enough hull strength to take collisions with Shivan fighters(and if you up the slide/reverse speeds on Shivan fighters along with Fury AI, there will be high-speed collisions in serious(gauntlet-style) furballs). Six tightly-packed Prom-S cannons give you a pretty good chance of shredding one or two head-on approaching Shivan fighters in a wave, especially backed up by Tornadoes.
I'm with the 'four guns is not enough for the Herc II' crowd. If you want to bring Maxims, you're stuck with only two of whatever else to defend yourself against shielded fighters, and that's not just enough for something that slow.
The Perseus has maneuverability over the Myrmidon. That's pretty much it; gun compatibility, missile compatibility(trade TAGs for Infyrno and Helios), missile capacity(and due to rounding, the Myrm gets an extra Treb or Stiletto), speed and afterburner performance/endurance is almost identical. If you're only chasing bombers, the Perseus doesn't give you any real advantage over the Myrm, which is why the Perseus needs to be faster(on top of all the in-game evidence(Tech Room/Command Brief) suggesting it should be); admittedly, not as fast as the Valk/Horus, but better than it is.
Boanerges is only worthwhile if well-defended and Helios are available(2/4/4 capacity). The Ursa can carry a second primary bank of Maxims for turret/subsystem work, and the Kayser turret can definitely help hurt light fighters/interceptors, especially Manticores(which I've seen it kill all by itself on occasion).
Erinyes is fine, IMO, even on Hard(you just have to be accurate), though I wouldn't be opposed to resplitting the gun banks to 6/2. 8 Prom-S sniping is too much fun to waste half your guns on Maxims(unless you're attacking a full-on cruiser fleet), and Prom-S still outranges nearly all non-beam turret guns.
The Ares is surprisingly good in handling, IMO; frankly, it handles better than the Athena(again, IMO). The difference, I think, is the Rotdamp factor. The Ares may not turn fast, but for something so supposedly heavy, it can change direction and keep a tracking shot on evading Shivan fighters pretty well(.35, whereas the Athena had the same .55 Rotdamp as all the other bombers).
My biggest problem with FS2(the main campaign, anyway) is the squadron system. Hate x ship? Too bad. Yes, it's more realistic, but hurts replayability(as opposed to FS1, where you could choose to continue to fly Apollos or Valks pretty much anywhere, if you wanted).
That, and the fact that you only get the Subach as a viable offensive primary for nearly half the game.
-
AWOL message of DOOM!!! (i.e., more enemies jumping in right after I leave)
*shakes fist at Bearbaiting*
-
Pegasi's lack of more usage
Well, what are you expecting from a stealth fighter?
-
AI needs to use trebs properly without sexp hacks.
There is an easy fix for that:
Remove the "huge" flag from the .tbl.
I did that in TotT, and it works awesome with only the "bomber+" flag remaining (for those who didn't take time to notice, or simply removed Trebs from team loadout, be sure to play mission 3 and there's an Arcadia firing missiles at targets 4-5 km away when you arrive- one turret has Trebs; and if your wingmen also have Trebs you can see them firing well out of range of any other missiles in the game, thus proving they use them).
I think the cause of this is that "huge" blocks the AI from attacking fighters and bombers, and "bomber+" blocks shooting bigger ships, which makes the missile blocked for all types of targets, and the AI doesn't use it in it's vanilla form.
Erinyes' small weapons-energy reserves
If you aim properly, and kill enemies with 3 salvoes of 8 Kaysers, you might even be able to divert some power to engines and enjoy 68 m/s cruising and longer AB duration.
If you want to see what it's like to have low energy, fly a Tauret.
-
AI needs to use trebs properly without sexp hacks.
There is an easy fix for that:
Remove the "huge" flag from the .tbl.
I did that in TotT, and it works awesome with only the "bomber+" flag remaining (for those who didn't take time to notice, or simply removed Trebs from team loadout, be sure to play mission 3 and there's an Arcadia firing missiles at targets 4-5 km away when you arrive- one turret has Trebs; and if your wingmen also have Trebs you can see them firing well out of range of any other missiles in the game, thus proving they use them).
I think the cause of this is that "huge" blocks the AI from attacking fighters and bombers, and "bomber+" blocks shooting bigger ships, which makes the missile blocked for all types of targets, and the AI doesn't use it in it's vanilla form.
This is a bit of a clumsy hack, because it's just a workaround of the fact that the bomber+ flag is broken, and it nerfs the Treb a bit (which you may or may not like). It's not a bad solution, but a better idea is probably just to enable $smart secondary weapon selection in your mod's AI profile.
If you don't have one I strongly suggest grabbing the BP Fury AI as it makes modding and balancing significantly easier (it'll fix a lot of other non-transparent behaviors too).
-
This is a bit of a clumsy hack, because it's just a workaround of the fact that the bomber+ flag is broken, and it nerfs the Treb a bit (which you may or may not like). It's not a bad solution, but a better idea is probably just to enable $smart secondary weapon selection in your mod's AI profile.
If you don't have one I strongly suggest grabbing the BP Fury AI as it makes modding and balancing significantly easier (it'll fix a lot of other non-transparent behaviors too).
Guess I'll have to in that case, thanks for the info.
BTW- do I keep the "bomber+" flag if it's broken, or should I further edit the Treb to make it 'just another missile'?
-
Y'know, I'm an amateur at this compared to Fury`, but I think you should keep both bomber+ and huge both on there. Bomber+ may not be as broken as I thought.
If there's any trouble we can probably work it out further.
-
I used to hate the Perseus because it turned too fast. I've since learned to deal with it, so it's no longer an issue.
The tri-gun mount of the Ursa isn't too bad once you know how to use it. I've managed to kill smaller vessels with it before.
The one thing I can't get over is the Ptah's size. It's huge for a stealth fighter.
-
I used to hate the Perseus because it turned too fast. I've since learned to deal with it, so it's no longer an issue.
The tri-gun mount of the Ursa isn't too bad once you know how to use it. I've managed to kill smaller vessels with it before.
The one thing I can't get over is the Ptah's size. It's huge for a stealth fighter.
for my money the best ursa loadout in to stick maxim in the tri mount for cruiser bashing and kayser or subach in the other mount on trhe off chance something gets in your way
-
depends on the role. i agree for heavy cruiser hunting, but if you're attacking corvettes or larger, i find maxim on the center mount makes turret killing a LOT easier. then i just stick some general heavy-hitter on the tri-mount and likely don't use it. back in FS1 when caps could actually be killed by primaries, the tri-mount was intended for blasting away at capships and the center for defense.
-
I actually got pretty good at using that sidearm tri-mount for my own defense in Black Omega. The Ursa can't chase anything worth a damn, but if you sit relatively still and act like a mobile turret, you can coax the AI into your line of fire and deal out some significant damage. A triple Prometheus on there gets the job done fast.
-
I actually got pretty good at using that sidearm tri-mount for my own defense in Black Omega. The Ursa can't chase anything worth a damn, but if you sit relatively still and act like a mobile turret
You will get raped by a wing of Horuses. :D :lol:
-
Not really. The Prometheus slices through them like buttuh. :p
-
Against normal AI in an FS1-era setting, I actually have a bit of a knack for dogfighting in an Ursa. There are a couple tricks that can help, but a determined and intelligent interceptor pilot will eat your lunch every time. Thankfully, standard AI is neither determined nor intelligent, so the following tactics are applicable:
*Make use of your considerable gun banks- Adapting to the offset triple bank takes a little bit of practice, but is not an insurmountable difficulty. A very valid tactic is to just saturate your target with laser bolts, since at least some shots have to hit if you're on target.
*Don't be stingy with missiles. Really should be self-explanatory, but an Ursa with at least one bank of Interceptors or Harpoons should be able to rack up a considerable body count. Also, in the same vein, keep your support ship close- missiles really will be your best offensive option, due to the Ursa's sluggish handling.
*You will not be dodging much incoming fire. The sooner this fact can be absorbed, the better. With a generous amount of power diverted to shields, the Ursa can actually absorb an impressive amount of abuse on its shields- if you're good with managing individual quadrants, the durability can be upped even more.
*Use your turret! Though best for swatting those hard-to-scratch fighters, you can also use the turret as a nasty supplement to your frontal firepower. The Ursa's turret is really the main reason I prefer that old boat over the newfangled Boanerges, or any other heavy bomber (Sekhmet included).
*This bears repeating: these tactics are valid against standard AI only. I have not really played against Fury AI or any other humans, but I can say with all confidence that an interceptor pilot with even a modicum of skill will dominate an Ursa pilot. Be warned!
-
On the other hand, a steady hand and 5 Prometheus S cannons backed with heavy shields and armor means that if a fighter and an Ursa both start at long range, the Ursa has a very good chance of coming away the winner.
-
The enemy AI's incredible knack for spreading fire so that no matter where you turn, you will be pounded and thus be unable to see worth crap nor turn fast enough to escape unless you mash your afterburners for at least 4 seconds, which however will not give you enough distance to turn and face your foe - he will resume pounding within a half second of you letting off the burners.
-
How I can watch 12 Interceptors attacking a single Herc II for eight minutes and never hit the stupid thing.
-
that brings up another gripe for me. missles in FS are just generally poor IMO. tiny range, slow, and bad accuracy. i don't think the fighters should EVER be able to outrun a missle. dodging is a bit too easy when every human pilot can do it with 100% effectiveness.
-
Cluster 1: Abandoning perfectly good craft.
The Hercules MkII is a good functional replacement despite different classifications, but I prefer the Athena. Faster, even better gun placements, copious afterburner reserves.
The Valkyrie embodied speed and precision like no other craft and was a joy to fly. To put it in perspective, the speed advantage over a Perseus is considerable bigger than the speed advantage of the Perseus over an Erinyes.
Terrans spend a lot of time and effort to build a Harbinger-compatible heavy bomber with a Banshee turret. Vasudans... had a Harbinger-compatible heavy bomber with 2 Banshee turrets all along... and they retire it.
Cluster 2: Abandoning perfectly good weapons.
The Avenger was an excellent general purpose weapon. A slight bias towards hull damage but still better against shields than the Subach, accurate, efficient.
The Flail and Shield Breaker were excellent complements to the Avenger (which took care of the hull damage), being far more efficient than their successors. 4 Avengers + 2 Flails is an excellent combination, and one that I'd often prefer to anything available in Freespace 2.
The Prometheus R is a useless piece of junk, which is especially annoying when it's forced on you. Retaining the Avenger turret in the Medusa would have been nice. The Osiris, while never a good bomber, would at least remain a respectable gunship with 2 Prometheus turrets.
Helios bombs may be more destructive, but in most anti-destroyer engagements I'd rather have Harbingers because of the performance against subsystems.
Cluster 3: Introducing the strangest new designs
The Myrmidon is a flexible if a little awkward craft... it can fill any fighter role except the one it's built for (too clumsy for a space superiority fighter). The weapons placement is unforgivable on the Artemis, and the Boanerges
The Vasudans are badly in need of a light craft that isn't unreasonably fragile. The Ulysses was supposed to be a joined project and would have been a very useful addition to them. Calling the Serapis an 'Advanced Interceptor' is a joke: it's too slow and can't carry Trebuchets. I like the nimble little thing but again, not suited to its supposed role.
-
I'm guessing that FS1 tables and FS2 tables aren't directly comparable.
I guess [V] could have created FS2 tables based off FS1 tables with continuitiy and scale in mind, but why would they?
In other words, FS2 craft and weapons are supposed to have higher stats than FS1 ones...
Hmm...anyone compare the Herc from FS2 and Herc from FS1? Are the stats the same?
-
Cluster 1: Abandoning perfectly good craft.
The Hercules MkII is a good functional replacement despite different classifications, but I prefer the Athena. Faster, even better gun placements, copious afterburner reserves.
the herc II officialy replaces the origial in the same role ingame and the cut in primary firepower reduces survivability in my oppinion, in a ship which relies on quickly nailiing its target before it esscapes an missiles being unreliable the drop in primarys is inexcusable.
The Valkyrie embodied speed and precision like no other craft and was a joy to fly. To put it in perspective, the speed advantage over a Perseus is considerable bigger than the speed advantage of the Perseus over an Erinyes.
but the Valkyrie was also alot more fragile, dont get me wrong i lioved the valk but in a heated battle the Perseus is more likely to survive against its piers than the valk against fs1 opposition
Terrans spend a lot of time and effort to build a Harbinger-compatible heavy bomber with a Banshee turret. Vasudans... had a Harbinger-compatible heavy bomber with 2 Banshee turrets all along... and they retire it.
yep there were a lot of plot and balance decisions between 1 and 2 that didnt make sence in plot terms but then we were never told plot wise why certain things were dropped or changed and others wernt.
Cluster 2: Abandoning perfectly good weapons.
The Avenger was an excellent general purpose weapon. A slight bias towards hull damage but still better against shields than the Subach, accurate, efficient.
The Flail and Shield Breaker were excellent complements to the Avenger (which took care of the hull damage), being far more efficient than their successors. 4 Avengers + 2 Flails is an excellent combination, and one that I'd often prefer to anything available in Freespace 2.
The Prometheus R is a useless piece of junk, which is especially annoying when it's forced on you. Retaining the Avenger turret in the Medusa would have been nice. The Osiris, while never a good bomber, would at least remain a respectable gunship with 2 Prometheus turrets.
see my previous comment
Helios bombs may be more destructive, but in most anti-destroyer engagements I'd rather have Harbingers because of the performance against subsystems.
I never noticed tbh
Cluster 3: Introducing the strangest new designs
The Myrmidon is a flexible if a little awkward craft... it can fill any fighter role except the one it's built for (too clumsy for a space superiority fighter). The weapons placement is unforgivable on the Artemis, and the Boanerges
yes the myrm is a strange craft, and as for bomber weapon placment every playerble bomber in either game baring the athena and zeuse sufferes from iffy weapons placment
The Vasudans are badly in need of a light craft that isn't unreasonably fragile. The Ulysses was supposed to be a joined project and would have been a very useful addition to them. Calling the Serapis an 'Advanced Interceptor' is a joke: it's too slow and can't carry Trebuchets. I like the nimble little thing but again, not suited to its supposed role.
Serapis is balanced along Perseus imho
-
The enemy AI's incredible knack for spreading fire so that no matter where you turn, you will be pounded and thus be unable to see worth crap nor turn fast enough to escape unless you mash your afterburners for at least 4 seconds, which however will not give you enough distance to turn and face your foe - he will resume pounding within a half second of you letting off the burners.
You will die, then, if you attempt to even try Fury's AI. :p
-
that brings up another gripe for me. missles in FS are just generally poor IMO. tiny range, slow, and bad accuracy. i don't think the fighters should EVER be able to outrun a missle. dodging is a bit too easy when every human pilot can do it with 100% effectiveness.
I was talking about Interceptor fighter classes rather than missiles, but at seeing this I have to call bull****, I can launch ten countermeasures and weave and turn like a druken maniac at full burn and STILL not dodge a ****ing missile, when all the AI does is drop a single countermeasure and barely banks to the left, like five ****ing degrees. :doubt:
-
that brings up another gripe for me. missles in FS are just generally poor IMO. tiny range, slow, and bad accuracy. i don't think the fighters should EVER be able to outrun a missle. dodging is a bit too easy when every human pilot can do it with 100% effectiveness.
I was talking about Interceptor fighter classes rather than missiles, but at seeing this I have to call bull****, I can launch ten countermeasures and weave and turn like a druken maniac at full burn and STILL not dodge a ****ing missile, when all the AI does is drop a single countermeasure and barely banks to the left, like five ****ing degrees. :doubt:
Your timing's probably off. Just drop one and break hard right before impact.
-
Surely it can't be off for over 500 missile strikes, I do pay attention to the icons and warning tones.
-
Surely it can't be off for over 500 missile strikes, I do pay attention to the icons and warning tones.
Man, the weirdest stuff happens with your install.
-
Question to Commander Zane, does this happen on 3.6.10? :drevil:
-
3.6.12 RC2, though it felt like it was the same on 3.6.11 builds and 3.6.10.
-
Well, here's news for you. There was a years old bug in countermeasures that made them 100% effective, was fixed in .11 nightlies. If you had same difficulties in .10 though, then I would start looking into the mirror and ask "wtf I'm doing wrong".
-
CM didn't seem 100% effective for the player ever. higher than it should have been yes, but i've had to launch multiples to get rid of incoming missles. the AI on the other hand.... launch a CM anywhere, it doesn't fking matter, and the missle goes ballistic. THAT is the single greatest missle thing that bugs me.
-
Pretty sure player and AI CMs work the same way.
-
Note that 100% effective does NOT mean "Will distract all incoming missiles". It means that, if the missile's seeker cone intersects with the CM's area of effect, the missile will get distracted. Obviously, it's possible for players to dodge the wrong way and thus get no benefit from a CM whatsoever.
In other words, CMs work as designed, you're just using them wrong.
-
Quote from: Klaustrophobia on April 20, 2010, 01:48:13 pm
that brings up another gripe for me. missles in FS are just generally poor IMO. tiny range, slow, and bad accuracy. i don't think the fighters should EVER be able to outrun a missle. dodging is a bit too easy when every human pilot can do it with 100% effectiveness.
I was talking about Interceptor fighter classes rather than missiles, but at seeing this I have to call bull****, I can launch ten countermeasures and weave and turn like a druken maniac at full burn and STILL not dodge a ****ing missile, when all the AI does is drop a single countermeasure and barely banks to the left, like five ****ing degrees
he's listing lazily to the left! left left!
anyway, i like the tauret, its a good ship and find that its primaries are decently placed and i never noticed its energy reserves getting depleted too fast,, and the cavernous missile banks that can hold 26 trebs total are handy when dealing with bigger ships, it turns a bit slow, yes, but otherwise, its a good ship
-
the tauret is a good missle spamming platform, but i don't like getting into a furball with one.
-
I wouldn't get into a furball with any vasudan fighter.
They're made of paper.
-
I just got killed for being 250 meters behind a firing beam cannon, so it was pointing in the complete opposite direction of where I was, and I die.
At least this code's being changed back so this stupidity stops.
Oh, here's another gem, ships like the Colossus firing their beam cannons at FIGHTERS and BOMBERS instead of that capital ship sitting just next to it pounding it away. :doubt:
Also forgot this one, drives me off the ****ing wall every time, when bombers like the Seraphim are intercepting ALL THE FIGHTERS in the entire ****ing sector.
-
Beam radius and the corresponding surprise kills have indeed been fixed, at least on Blue Planet and presumably in the MediaVPs as well. I don't know if it was a code issue or a table issue.
However, warships really shouldn't fire their beam cannons at fighters and bombers under almost any circumstance, unless something's wrong.
Your bombers probably have dynamic goals enabled.
-
Well I didn't get beam ganked on Blue Planet at all so I can't say for myself, though as you're part of the Blue Planet team itself, but I don't think it was yet done for MediaVPs.
I've seen it happen on every build since I started playing FSO, the earliest one I don't remember.
Probably, I am playing Second Great War Part II after all.
-
The issue had to do (as I understand it) with the expanded size of many of the MediaVPs beams effect, including a sometimes-invisible 'fringe' that could still damage.
A new table entry sets the beam's radius, preventing this.
-
I wouldn't get into a furball with any vasudan fighter.
They're made of paper.
No, no, I won't hear it!
The Tauret (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Tauret) has more armour than the Herc II. (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Herc_II)
As to its other qualities, The Herc II has superior shields but the Tauret is faster, has more guns, and has a slightly superior missile capacity.
-
The Herc II has better maneuverability in the X and Z axis and has vastly greater energy reserves.
Not to mention Maxim compatability, which better gives the Herc II its assault edge.
-
But leaves it incapable of pulling its weight against fighters without relying on secondaries. Admittedly, you need to divert some power to guns to do any sustained firing of 6 Prom-S, but the Tauret's still probably better for "Terran" tastes than any other Vasudan fighter(other than maybe the Seth).
Really, for me, anything that can carry the Prom-S can still outrange all relevant non-beam turret guns, and the Tauret can carry up to 26 Trebs to do nearly all of what you would want to do with Maxims. I'd still generally prefer a Myrm, Erinyes or Ares, but it's certainly quite serviceable.
-
Tempests with a Kayser or Prometheus bank goes a long way, I don't need to worry about sacrificing primary combat capability (Actually a playthrough of the FreeSpace 2 campaign using a bank of Tempests on every mission minus bombing missions reusulted in getting an additional 166 kills).
Plus the Maxim compliments the Trebuchet very well actually, rather than waste them all on one target's subsystem I can whittle it down to enough integrity that I only need one or two missiles to finally destroy the weapon or subsystem.
-
Sacrificing half your sizable secondary payload just to cover fighters, and considering they only reach out to 650m? Certainly not optimal, IMO; with half your missiles dedicated there, you're only got about as much 'mission' payload left as a Myrm, Erinyes or Perseus(and you're slower, to boot).
If you have no other choice, sure, but personally, I'd take almost anything else first(I'd also note the Loki's there if one needs a really fast pair of Maxims on a moderately durable frame, and still with the energy output to back it up).
-
Sacrificing half your sizable secondary payload just to cover fighters, and considering they only reach out to 650m?
Are we talking Tempests here? Because they're pretty much the best secondary out there.
-
Sacrificing half your sizable secondary payload just to cover fighters, and considering they only reach out to 650m? Certainly not optimal, IMO; with half your missiles dedicated there, you're only got about as much 'mission' payload left as a Myrm, Erinyes or Perseus(and you're slower, to boot).
If you have no other choice, sure, but personally, I'd take almost anything else first(I'd also note the Loki's there if one needs a really fast pair of Maxims on a moderately durable frame, and still with the energy output to back it up).
You must not be all that good at flying then, since I obliterated Fighters, Bombers, and Cruisers alike regardless of what I flew with a bank of Tempests with my other slot fitting whatever else I deemed would be most necessary for specalized combat occurances. I'm not exactly the greatest either, but I've never got little more than 500 kills on Very Easy, then I play Medium, slap Fury's AI on the game, toss Tempests on my ship and suddenly I have 662 kills at the end of a single playthrough.
All in all, I blame Inferno and those blasted Hurricanes. :D So much spammy awesomeness.
**** I think that espresso is taking full effect... :nervous:
-
If you think tempests are bad, you don't know how to aim :P
They have a higher DPS and damage per unit size against armor of any secondary Helios save the Helios (yes, a bank of Tempests deals more damage than a bank of Cyclops, and does it faster!), and a higher DPS and damage per unit size against shields of all secondaries.
-
For a light or mid fighter? Yes. But not what I'd put on something as slow as a Herc-series craft.
For my money, a heavy fighter had better be prepared to fight at long/long-ish range, or be ready to give a serious beatdown at point blank, but the latter can certainly be avoided if your more-mobile opponent doesn't want to go there.
My point, though, is that you're basically undermining one of the main reasons to pick a heavy assault fighter(huge missile capacity), by compensating for the primary firepower lackings of that heavy assault fighter.
-
For a light or mid fighter? Yes. But not what I'd put on something as slow as a Herc-series craft.
For my money, a heavy fighter had better be prepared to fight at long/long-ish range, or be ready to give a serious beatdown at point blank, but the latter can certainly be avoided if your more-mobile opponent doesn't want to go there.
My point, though, is that you're basically undermining one of the main reasons to pick a heavy assault fighter(huge missile capacity), by compensating for the primary firepower lackings of that heavy assault fighter.
Yeah, but if you put Tempests on a heavy assault, you get more Tempests, which means more ass-kicking.
There are times for Trebs or Tornadoes or Harpoons, but the Tempest is never a bad choice and is arguably better than all of them in most situations.
-
Unless you're playing Forced Entry... ;)
-
i believe one of their points is that the tempest CAN fill the heavy assault role in that it lays waste to cruisers.
personally i rarely use them. i find that if i'm in the range where they would be useful, i don't need them. i can usually kill fighters faster with guns only than try to do the aiming balance between the guns and missiles. for some reason i start aiming like a retard when i use tempest. maybe it's the extra button press making stick motion more awkward. anyway, i prefer extra of the longer range harpoons or tornados so i can still get them when they are out of guns range. or i want a fast OHK with a double shot in say a head-on swarm.
-
Tempests are excellent. I use them in almost every mission. They are like a primary weapon and can be used alongside a primary, but without the fire rate penalty you get by linking two primaries.
-
And don't forget that, because they're small, they can be refilled very quickly.
Ever since I learned how useful the Tempest is, I've taken a liking to short-range dumbfire missiles in any mod.
-
If you think tempests are bad, you don't know how to aim :P
Which is exactly why I never use them. :p
-
They are pretty much essential to the Pegasus(and the firing points are probably the best of any canon ship for them). I tend to use them to boost the firepower of quick four-gun fighters, though I find it a little annoying when the missile firing ports are A. all on one side for a single bank(Erinyes, Herc I, Seth, Horus, etc), or B. otherwise not set up to fire from both sides at once in double-fire mode(Perseus being a notable example; Loki, too, but it has only six ports, so it'll cycle through quickly enough).
That is at least one thing the Herc II and Ares do have right for Tempest usage.
-
...or i want a fast OHK with a double shot in say a head-on swarm.
But...that's a Two-Hit Kill. ;)
-
Also, I really don't like the Boanerges. Given a choice between that and an Ursa, I'll take an Ursa every time. The capability to carry a couple more bombs and a somewhat higher top speed does not excuse the other weaknesses of the design, namely the pathetic gun banks and Mayflower-esque handling. [Edit]: How could I forget the lack of a turret!?
Hey, you reminded me, for some reason I was allowed to use an URSA in the "Slaying Ravana" mission.
Don't know why, but this time I feel it's extremely hard to destroy the Ravana with all those Shivan fighters pestering you while you try to target one of the Ravana's turrets just to fire a friggin' Cyclops (hey, why not just fire it DIRECTLY where you want it, instead of wasting time trying to target?), and I just realized that flying an Ursa can rid those pests with the TURRET :p
Well, as for the complaints, one would be: Why no Hull-repairs, at least like the one in Procyon Insurgency? I could handle the campaign, but I can get very frustrated whenever I die!!! Second, the Shivan Basilisk fighter seems to slow and unmanuverable....they are the easiest fighters to destroy in the whole FreeSpace universe. Third, the Dragon is too badass....one time it took me like 10 minutes of dogfighting (until I actually CHEATED) just to rid a Dragon. Fourth, and finally (at least for this comment), the targetting problems. I wish you could choose an option to fire "Tempest syle" or "Helios style". LIke I said, I wasted too much time just trying to target a capital's turrets just to fire a missile.
-
You're supposed to be able to fly the Ursa.
As for the turret issue, try disabling subsystem targeting for a bit? I forget the keypress to do so.
-
...hey, why not just fire it DIRECTLY where you want it, instead of wasting time trying to target?....
Because that would make bombing runs too easy.
-
Because that would make bombing runs too easy.
Yes, it could, well...if not bombers could be too uber for capships then. Maybe Volition should've decreased Secondary damage, and eliminate the targetting problem?
Basically I always just sat my bomber there, 500 meters front of the Ravana, while I switched from Cyclops loadout 1 to Cyclops loadout 2, while there's already a Manticore that has been biting me at the back...
-
Yes, it could, well...if not bombers could be too uber for capships then. Maybe Volition should've decreased Secondary damage, and eliminate the targetting problem?
Basically I always just sat my bomber there, 500 meters front of the Ravana, while I switched from Cyclops loadout 1 to Cyclops loadout 2, while there's already a Manticore that has been biting me at the back...
Well, when you get around to making your own mod sooner or later, you can try to make them work that way.
-
If you're complaining about targeting issues in FS, you obviously have never played StarLancer. :p
-
The Serapis.... It just can't take a hit, and without adjusting my stick's sensitivity, it's too nimble. I like nimble fighters, and I like the don't-get-hit design philosophy of interceptors, but the Serapis takes it all to too great an extreme. The loadout options are great, but if you don't survive long enough to deliver your ordinance, it doesn't really make a lick of difference.
Next to that, I've a minor gripe with the Myrmidon. I just don't get the two half-sized secondary banks. I know it allows for more variety, but I can't think of the last time I actually put three different secondary weapon systems onto the ship. I also tend to get frustrated shooting down Myrmidons (and Taurvis for that matter) due to the design of the back end. I've a bad habit of slightly under-leading my target, so once a Myrmidon's shields drop, most of my shots pass around/between the prongs protruding from the ship's stern.
Still, I'll fly a Myrmidon, even when given other options. The Serapis? Nope. I'll fly intercept in a bomber, before selecting a Serapis.
-
You're supposed to be able to fly the Ursa.
As for the turret issue, try disabling subsystem targeting for a bit? I forget the keypress to do so.
Alt + S, but I'd recommend using V to target whichever turret you want to hit, you have the best chance of actually aquiring that turret, just having the ship itself targeted in my experience tends to end with my aspect reticle going back and forth, spinning wildly in circles trying to decide what it wants to lock on to.
-
Next to that, I've a minor gripe with the Myrmidon. I just don't get the two half-sized secondary banks.
As far as I'm concerned, there's only one reason the two half-sized banks are nice: an extra Trebuchet missile.
-
Next to that, I've a minor gripe with the Myrmidon. I just don't get the two half-sized secondary banks.
As far as I'm concerned, there's only one reason the two half-sized banks are nice: an extra Trebuchet missile.
I like being able to carry a tiny pack of Trebs(or Stiletto IIs, or even Rockeyes, in a pinch), instead of spending half of a fighter's payload on them, in cases when there might only be a couple of turrets to remove, but would agree that one could achieve that just fine with a 25/75% split instead of 25/25/50%. The only time I could see all three banks being used with different weapons might be with the Helios; maybe Tempest/Treb/Helios? Seems like a waste to not put the Helios in the large bank, yet without Harpoons, Tempests are the only thing space-efficient enough to feel worthwhile as a combat secondary in one of the tiny banks.
-
Maybe the idea was to be able to choose between a 25/75 and a 50/50 configuration ?
-
Just in case I'd like to point out what I meant was that the Myrmidon can carry an extra trebuchet because of the split bank. The other bank can hold your tornadoes or tempests of course =)
-
Myrms.....*Spits*
-
Myrms.....*Spits*
Wouldn't go that far, but I've always felt that the Myrm's just been, kinda... awkward.
-
Just in case I'd like to point out what I meant was that the Myrmidon can carry an extra trebuchet because of the split bank. The other bank can hold your tornadoes or tempests of course =)
Yup, makes it equal in capacity to the Erinyes, and still has the same number of double-fire salvos as the Perseus.
The Myrm, I think, relies on using its extra gunpower to cut down the number of enemy fighters quickly, so your wing can achieve local superiority. As long as you outnumber the enemy, lack of turning speed isn't a huge liability.
A couple of blasts of 6 Prom-S and a single-fire Tornado shot can kill(or maim) a Mara in a long-range head-on, even if it equalizes its shields, and all before it can get in range to fire back. If you're relatively quick(and perhaps lucky), you can eliminate half a wing in one pass with little chance of taking fire in return.
-
linking cannons of the same type when one is a quad slot does LESS damage per second than just using the quad slot alone.
-
Problems with the myrm;
No Maxim, yet useless second primary bank (the top one, why would you ever use it?)
Crappy missile loadout/positioning, the only useful bank in a dogfight is the top one, and the only real 'reason' to deploy this 'fighter' is for 'helios' in bank 3.
It's HUGE.
It's got horrible manoeuvrability for the job it's SUPPOSED to do.
It's got ordinance problems up the wazoo.
And did I mention it's HUGE?
The only *fighter* in the FS2 GTVA Arsenal it will beat in a 1on1 reliably is the Ares.
Even the MK1 flies better than this pile (not that I'm suggesting the MK1 is any good in FS2, even though I still love it because of how awesome it is in FS1).
It is by far the worst FS2 era fighter.
-
Problems with the myrm;
No Maxim, yet useless second primary bank (the top one, why would you ever use it?)
Crappy missile loadout/positioning, the only useful bank in a dogfight is the top one, and the only real 'reason' to deploy this 'fighter' is for 'helios' in bank 3.
It's HUGE.
It's got horrible manoeuvrability for the job it's SUPPOSED to do.
It's got ordinance problems up the wazoo.
And did I mention it's HUGE?
The only *fighter* in the FS2 GTVA Arsenal it will beat in a 1on1 reliably is the Ares.
Even the MK1 flies better than this pile (not that I'm suggesting the MK1 is any good in FS2, even though I still love it because of how awesome it is in FS1).
It is by far the worst FS2 era fighter.
Single player campaign kthnx.
-
...it's too nimble.
Too nimble? Pfft, I'm surprised that you don't like the Perseus more. In the Serapis, I can intercept everything.
I just don't get the two half-sized secondary banks.
Variety? Think functionality. Think Tempest.
Wouldn't go that far, but I've always felt that the Myrm's just been, kinda... awkward.
Funny, I've always liked the Myrmidon more than any other light fighter. Six Subachs and three racks of Tempests have always been my loadout on a Myrmidon, and it allows me to obliterate a lot of things. I'm never concerned about how awkward it is; if it works for me, it works. Simple as that.
-
I'd say the opposite and that the Myrmidon would be capable of reliably defeating most fighters head to head and that Multi would have reflected this if they didn't purposely nerf the Myrmidon's greatest weapon: the long ranged Prometheus S. The Mekhu has a DPS advantage and range advantage in Multi which instantly made it the primary of choice to the point where I'd pick a Vasudan fighter to use (despite only doing that if forced to in Single).
Likewise, the Myrmidon can take advantage of huge range advantage of the Prometheus S by using the capability to fire six blasts at once. This is sufficient to instantly obliterate the forward shields and bring the hull down to 65% for a Perseus. Very few players won't blink at that much damage especially when you're doing less damage in return. If we go by the quad bank versus a dual bank, then the quad bank will still penetrate the shields and do unavoidable hull damage whereas a Myrmidon has enough shields to absorb the return fire and push more shield energy to forward and avoid hull damage altogether.
The real weakness is in a tight furball. Maneuverability is a huge issue (the Myrmidon turns like a pig) but flying in order to adjust for lower maneuverability isn't impossible and the 6-bank allows for extremely devastating snap shots.
-
Problems with the myrm;
No Maxim, yet useless second primary bank (the top one, why would you ever use it?)
Crappy missile loadout/positioning, the only useful bank in a dogfight is the top one, and the only real 'reason' to deploy this 'fighter' is for 'helios' in bank 3.
It's HUGE.
It's got horrible manoeuvrability for the job it's SUPPOSED to do.
It's got ordinance problems up the wazoo.
And did I mention it's HUGE?
The only *fighter* in the FS2 GTVA Arsenal it will beat in a 1on1 reliably is the Ares.
Even the MK1 flies better than this pile (not that I'm suggesting the MK1 is any good in FS2, even though I still love it because of how awesome it is in FS1).
It is by far the worst FS2 era fighter.
Single player campaign kthnx.
In almost any mission in almost every campaign I've played, there are better alternatives.
In fact the only exception I can think of that forces you to use that PoS is FS2 itself.
-
linking cannons of the same type when one is a quad slot does LESS damage per second than just using the quad slot alone.
There's no way the fire-rate penalty is half; that would mean there's no difference between an Erinyes firing one bank of the same primary or two, and there's no way I'll buy that. I did some of my own "stare at a watch and listen-count the shots" and it was closer to a 1/3 reduction.
It's not that huge, IMO. The Erinyes' incredible "limo-ness" is a bigger liability than the Myrm's general chunkiness. If you catch an Erinyes by the side, top or bottom, it takes almost no deflection shooting skill to hit that thing(I suspect that's part of the art of using it in MP).
The lack of Maxim is a point against it, yes. I'd rather take it over most four gun ships when Akhetons are necessary(disabling fighters). I also find complaints about primary placement interesting when the Erinyes has a pretty similar offset, but biased below the reticle rather than above it(a trait it also shares with the Mara, and yet no one seems to comment on that).
Could it better? Certainly, but for me, Derelict became so much simpler once I started using the Myrmidon almost exclusively(when it was available). I also think harder difficulty levels make the ability to quickly take down enemy fighters(and especially their shields) even more valuable.
-
i'm basing that claim off of seeing more than one person who know their way around the tables say it. if it's wrong, sorry. i wouldn't have thought so either, but i've been wrong about plenty of stuff in FS.
-
Interestingly enough, if you have a 2+4 bank like in the Myrmidon, your DPS is the same between linked fire and just the quad fire IF and only if linked fire rate is precisely 2/3.
Does anyone know for certain what the linked fire rate is?
-
linking cannons of the same type when one is a quad slot does LESS damage per second than just using the quad slot alone.
There's no way the fire-rate penalty is half; that would mean there's no difference between an Erinyes firing one bank of the same primary or two, and there's no way I'll buy that. I did some of my own "stare at a watch and listen-count the shots" and it was closer to a 1/3 reduction.
It's not that huge, IMO. The Erinyes' incredible "limo-ness" is a bigger liability than the Myrm's general chunkiness. If you catch an Erinyes by the side, top or bottom, it takes almost no deflection shooting skill to hit that thing(I suspect that's part of the art of using it in MP).
The lack of Maxim is a point against it, yes. I'd rather take it over most four gun ships when Akhetons are necessary(disabling fighters). I also find complaints about primary placement interesting when the Erinyes has a pretty similar offset, but biased below the reticle rather than above it(a trait it also shares with the Mara, and yet no one seems to comment on that).
Could it better? Certainly, but for me, Derelict became so much simpler once I started using the Myrmidon almost exclusively(when it was available). I also think harder difficulty levels make the ability to quickly take down enemy fighters(and especially their shields) even more valuable.
(http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b177/QuantumDelta/FightProfiles.jpg)
The ship, is huge.
No idea on linked fire, I always assumed it was half (*which, in any other ship than the myrm would STILL be an advantage).
I have no problem with the primary placement, I don't even mind the URSAs primary placement, primaries are not a problem.
Primary placement combined with HORRIBLE missile placement, however, I have a major problem with.
And the myrms is *terrible*
-
Not as terrible as the Apollo's if you ask me.
-
(http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b177/QuantumDelta/FightProfiles.jpg)
The ship, is huge.
No idea on linked fire, I always assumed it was half (*which, in any other ship than the myrm would STILL be an advantage).
I have no problem with the primary placement, I don't even mind the URSAs primary placement, primaries are not a problem.
Primary placement combined with HORRIBLE missile placement, however, I have a major problem with.
And the myrms is *terrible*
If by huge, you mean the same size as two thirds of the ships on that picture, width wise. It's significantly thinner than half of the ones the same size as it too.
Anyone ever try to switch primary banks to time it so that you have both banks firing opposite each other? With Subachs, it gets pretty easy to hit anything you're aiming at, just by sheer volume of fire. With the Myrm, it gets a 1-2 hit that's a little more effective at punching through shields because you're more likely to hit the same shield quadrant more often in the reticle.
-
Does anyone know for certain what the linked fire rate is?
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Ai_profiles.tbl#.24disable_linked_fire_penalty:
Normally, the rate of fire is divided by the number of linked guns.
-
I'll point out that those two spines on the back of the Myrm are actually pretty skinny until they reach the back of the engines(about where the back of the center 'fuselage' reaches), so to the scale there, it's "really" barely over one square long. It's chunky, but still not too bad in profile.
I find when shooting at them, the high hull rating combined with decent speed just seems to make them not want to die quickly. It's not a hard kill per se, but not a stupidly easy one, either.
Primary placement combined with HORRIBLE missile placement, however, I have a major problem with.
And the myrms is *terrible*
Yeah, I admit the only really good missile firing points are the large bank(meaning if you bring paired Helios, you choose less optimal missile points for whatever else), whereas the Mara's are excellently aligned with the guns.
Normally, the rate of fire is divided by the number of linked guns.
With all due respect, linked banks/gun systems, maybe? I played with esarai's stock Kvasir with three banks of Prom-S(2/2/2), and there's no way that's the same fire rate as the Myrm(2/4). Triple-linked banks are absolutely painful in terms of RoF, and I'd buy half-rate(or worse) for those.
EDIT: removed redundant 'just'.
-
Well, in terms of up-close dogfighting, turn-rate is too important and the Myrmidon will definitely get owned there.
As for linked banks, I just did some empirical testing and linked fire is definitely not 1/2 the firing rate:
With a single dual bank of Prom S I took down about 21% damage in 20 seconds whereas linking 2+2 did 30% damage in 20 seconds.
With a single dual bank of Subach I took down about 38% damage in 40 seconds whereas linking 2+2 did 50% damage in 40 seconds.
With true quad bank of Subach I took down 67% in 40 seconds (hmm, not quite 2x of a dual bank but more than a 2+2) while a 2+4 bank did 78% damage in 40 seconds.
-
hmm... how about using that hold-fire down whilst switching linked fire mode? :lol: although that's probably in the class of retail bug, not design feature. :ick:
-
I'm sure that it's 2/3 as fast for two linked banks and 1/2 as fast for three linked banks (in unmodded FS2 found only on the Seraphim), because that's important when tabling fighter-mounted beams.
Now I just have to find the poster who said that. :P
EDIT: Or multiply the refire delay by 1 + (NumberOfLinkedBanks - 1) * 0.5 according to a very very old code snippet (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=7197.msg155070#msg155070), although I doubt it's changed since.
-
I used to like the Myrmidon until I started playing on Insane difficulty.
This ship just can't hack it. Those punk lokis can fly circles around me.
-
Pack some tempests and blow them away. Literally takes only a second each and makes those early missions where you have to use the Myrmidon a breeze =)
-
the myrm would be soooooooooooooo much better if it could use the harpoon, the premiere mid-range dogfight missile, but no, it cant. wtf?
-
the myrm would be soooooooooooooo much better if it could use the harpoon, the premiere mid-range dogfight missile, but no, it cant. wtf?
try http://www.mediafire.com/?2ajznzm2mdw
also here are a few other alterations i cooked up a while ago http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=67235.msg1334702#msg1334702
-
(http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b177/QuantumDelta/FightProfiles.jpg)
The ship, is huge.
I was about to point out that the Myrmidon is smaller than the Serapis, when I remembered that the Serapis is also much thinner and more agile.
I've never remembered seeing this picture before, but now that I am, I'm pretty surprised that the entire Herc family is smaller than the Myrmidon.
I also wonder how the Shivans are able to fit into a Dragon. :wtf:
-
I was about to point out that the Myrmidon is smaller than the Serapis, when I remembered that the Serapis is also much thinner and more agile.
It also has half the shielding. :P
I'd also say the Hercs are all so chunky as to be nearly round. The Myrm would be perceived as vaguely flat(well, sort of awkwardly arched; there are still the humps on all the weapon 'pods', making it look big for no apparent reason), if not for the cockpit pod and the backwards-facing hook hanging down in the front. Just look (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/File:Myrmidon320x240.jpg) at how much ship there isn't(in the middle) when viewed from slightly below.
Second the comment on the Dragon. Either they curl into a little ball, or they somehow stretch out their arms into the wings, or some combination thereof.
Lack of Harpoon, while not a dealbreaker, IMO, does hurt its ability to make use of the small missile banks somewhat. It is odd/amusing that it can carry the Harpoon D.
One benefit of the tiny banks that I did forget about, is the relatively quick reload with the Hornet/Tornado. Since all banks fill simultaneously, it would take about half as long to reload the tiny banks with Tornadoes on a Myrm(assuming the large bank has Tempests, Helios, Trebs, Stiletto IIs, or hasn't been emptied yet) as on a Perseus(or other 40-Hornet missile bay).
The main FS2 campaign really doesn't help the Myrm at all, denying you the Tornado(and thus any usable/compatible anti-fighter aspect seekers) and the Prom-S until you're with the 64th Raptors, then you get shipped out to the Psamtik a few missions later, and when you finally get back to the Aquitaine, you've got the nice, shiny, 8-gun Erinyes, that largely outclasses the Myrm in just about every way(and most likely, the sickeningly durable, destruction-spewing Ares), waiting for you.
-
I also wonder how the Shivans are able to fit into a Dragon. :wtf:
Relative lengths:
F-16: 15m
SF Dragon: 12.6m
Colonial Raptor: 8.53m
Colonial Viper mkVII: 9.8m
GTF Hercules: 20m
In other words, the Dragon isn't THAT small. Most FS fighters are just quite large.
If I ever make a new version of the Velocity Mod, it will work by shrinking all of the fighters so that they seem faster and combat moves more quickly, while minimizing the effect on mission balance.
-
In other words, the Dragon isn't THAT small. Most FS fighters are just quite large.
Which is refreshing. Most science fiction (eg. Star Wars, BSG) makes their fighters much too small. FS at least has larger craft which are thus much more believeable in terms of size. Unfortunately, the engine-to-center-of-mass relationship is often sorely lacking...
:(
-
The question, though, is does a Shivan fit comfortably in there? If the below render is supposed to be to scale, then the Shivan's leg is the about the length of the Vasudan, which I'd guess is around 3m?(clearly taller than the Marine, even if he/she's not standing up straight). That Shivan looks fairly hunched over as it is, and still reaches over the Vasudan's head with its upper claws.
It looks possible, I guess(depending on how exactly a Shivan would sit/lie down/? in its cockpit), but pretty tight, considering engines, reactor, and other electronics have to fit in there, too.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
If that human is anywhere near average size, the Vasudan should be just about 2 meters even.
If the ~5m (rough guess) Shivan were to be at the center of a Dragon, There would still be ample room for everything. Moving the cockpit forward is just a matter of rearranging things.
-
Qent is correct about dual banks and refire rate, this means firing 4+2 equal guns have the same dps as firing just from the larger bank. As such, I like to carry something like the Maxim or Morning Star in the smaller bank. Shame that the Myrmidon can't mount the former.
I think the Myrmidon struggles a little with classification... being labeled a space superiority fighter isn't flattering when it would lose a dogfight against its granddad.
It has a lot of secondaries for a space superiority fighter (but is too sluggish), it would have a lot of primary firepower for an interceptor (but be a little slow) and it would be very speedy for an assault fighter (but also very frail).
On the other hand, 3 secondary banks have their uses. A large bank of Tornados, enough Tempests to finish knife fights and enough Trebuchets to declaw a Lilith is a rather sweet combination. Even if you just use 2 kinds of missiles, you get to choose between a 40/40 or a 60/20 split... not bad at all.
It has a great combination of speed and firepower but suffers in terms of survivability (handling, durability and profile are all mediocre... scoring well in none of these is rather exceptional).
In my opinion this makes it a great escort fighter/heavy interceptor when you worry less about your own survival than you worry about protecting your charges from assault fighters/bombers. In a furball, I'd rather fly almost anything else... including some bombers.
-
Qent is correct about dual banks and refire rate, this means firing 4+2 equal guns have the same dps as firing just from the larger bank.
This can't be true because in actual testing the empirical evidence isn't.
With true quad bank of Subach I took down 67% in 40 seconds (hmm, not quite 2x of a dual bank but more than a 2+2) while a 2+4 bank did 78% damage in 40 seconds.
-
The empirical evidence from my actual testing says that one quad bank of Subachs kills a Cain in 1 minute and 17 seconds on medium, and linked dual/quad banks kill it in 1 minute and 18 seconds. Could you maybe clarify how you performed the test?
-
My empirical data matches that just fine.
Firing from one bank of Prometheus R, I count 128 shots per minute, firing from two banks I count 85.
The ratio works out as expected, what doesn't is the total volume (expected 133 from a single bank, and my counting/timing shouldn't be that far off).
-
I was shooting Argo transports with subachs in a Myrmidon. I probably just made a mistake somewhere let me test again.
Huh, looks like I just made a mistake the first time around =/
-
If that human is anywhere near average size, the Vasudan should be just about 2 meters even.
That vasudan is easily 220cm
Then again, the average male height can vary quite a bit. According to wikipedia, the average male is between 1.612m and 1.645m in India whereas the avg in the Netherlands is 1.808m-1.843m
-
Qent is correct about dual banks and refire rate, this means firing 4+2 equal guns have the same dps as firing just from the larger bank. As such, I like to carry something like the Maxim or Morning Star in the smaller bank. Shame that the Myrmidon can't mount the former.
While Maxim capability would be good, the extra pair of guns are far from dead weight. For me, the boost in momentary, snap-shot, firepower is, or at least can be, worth the investment.
If you're under fire yourself, the last thing you want to do is fly a in a predictable, steady pattern, which you must to maintain a tracking shot over time, and it's an even bigger deal when you're dealing with less-agile fighters. Better to unload your primary firepower 'up front' than count on drawing a semi-continuous bead on a maneuvering fighter until it dies.
It is nice to know that if you need to carry something else(like Akhetons in that one mission in Derelict where you need to disable the pirate Persei rather than kill them), you aren't 'really' reducing your offensive primary power, the way you would in a standard four-gun fighter.
-
The question, though, is does a Shivan fit comfortably in there? If the below render is supposed to be to scale, then the Shivan's leg is the about the length of the Vasudan, which I'd guess is around 3m?(clearly taller than the Marine, even if he/she's not standing up straight). That Shivan looks fairly hunched over as it is, and still reaches over the Vasudan's head with its upper claws.
It looks possible, I guess(depending on how exactly a Shivan would sit/lie down/? in its cockpit), but pretty tight, considering engines, reactor, and other electronics have to fit in there, too.
We know from a Command Briefing from FS2, that not all Shivans are the same... in fact the briefing states "the Shivans vary greatly as a species", which means that the traditional Shivan we think of, from the FS1 Hallfight cutscene and a few others, is probably some kind of equivalent to the Marines sent to fight them. Also, since the Shivans that we have seen appear to have mechanical parts included in them, we may conclude that they are some kind of genetically engineered life form. If one references BSG, they have Cylon brains running their fighters, as specialized Cylons designed for that purpose. Its quite likely that the Shivans have specifically engineered creatures to fly their fighters in a similar way, perhaps even engineered down to specific fighter types. With this progression of logical deduction, we can conclude that the Dragons have a downsized Shivan intelligence or pilot to control the fighter, not one of the 5-limb creatures previously seen, and that's how it fits into the "cockpit".
Later!
-
Eh? Care to cite yourself? That's a fairly bold assertion.
-
Trivial Psychic, sorry but you're wrong. Nowhere in FS1 or FS2 is that stated as a fact, I can't remember any at the very least. You need to cite your souce.
Also, those who have original Silent Threat expansion disc, can open the disc contents and find several videos made by Volition. In one of those videos, a shivan jumps from a beaten up shivan fighter onto a vasudan fighter and effectively blows a hole onto the fighter, possibly killing the vasudan pilot.
From that video we have proof that shivan pilots are identical to those seen in the hall fight scene. Only their size may be different.
-
...possibly killing the vasudan pilot...
I'd like to see a Vasudan survive slamming his Thoth into a Typhon at full speed. :wtf:
About the Myrmidon, if it's not a Space Superiority fighter, what should it have been called? Medium Fighter? Space Superiority bomber?
-
The Myrmidon is a more stereotypical space superiority fighter than the Ulysses. I have always treated the latter as an interceptor. I don't know how a fighter of its size and statistics could be called anything else.
-
From that video we have proof...
Then is it canonical that first contact with the vasudans actually occurred in 1999, when one of them unpacked a box of headz in the Volition break room? Point being, if the video didn't get used in-game, it's not really canon. That's not to say I disagree with the point you're trying to make, but citing an invalid source doesn't help your case any more than an uncited source.
The line to which Trivial Psychic refers is the second stage of the command briefing in Mystery of the Trinity (http://"http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Briefing_texts_(FS2)#Mystery_of_the_Trinity"), though it says that the shivans "show considerable diversity as a species." Given the context, Dr. Hargrove seems to be talking about the technology of the shivans, more than the shivans themselves.
About the Myrmidon, if it's not a Space Superiority fighter, what should it have been called? Medium Fighter? Space Superiority bomber?
Given the larger-than-average size, I can't help but wonder if it started life as a replacement for the Zeus that was rendered redundant by the Artemis. The Helios/Harpoon typo makes a lot more sense as an oversight when they were revising the tables to hack the Myrmidon into a new role.
On the topic of size, though, it's really not all that much larger than it's counterparts. The tails give it the illusion of taking up a lot of space but in the rear "half" of the ship, there's not a lot of anything to hit. It might be easier to take the shields down, though, since they're roughly a sphere encompassing the ship.
-
About the Myrmidon, if it's not a Space Superiority fighter, what should it have been called? Medium Fighter? Space Superiority bomber?
I believe the word you're looking for is fighter-bomber. :ick: ... Like the F-111 (that may not be an apt comparison but the FB-111 was a fighter-bomber).
-
Multirole. :D
-
I have a mildly crazy in-universe
theoryexcuse, that the Myrm was designed to be a sort of stop-gap anti-Lucifer measure, combined with a space superiority fighter project. Instead of relying on expensive, slow, vulnerable assault bombers to take out a Lucifer's reactors in subspace, make a new model of moderately-quick fighter capable of delivering a Harbinger/Helios class bomb or two, in a pinch. Combine/justify its funding with your new space superiority fighter project, so you can have these fighters already waiting wherever the next Lucifer shows up.
Note the oddly high hull rating(290), beyond most assault fighters. Hint that it's meant to operate in subspace without shields? In subspace, its six guns would give it the ability to brutally swat down almost any (shieldless)Shivan fighter, much as the old Herc Is did back in the day.
Do I think a Myrm really should be able to use Helios bombs, just like any other secondary, in the way it does? No (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v379/Timerlane/myrmodoom400.jpg), but perhaps it's relatively easy to add some kind of extended hull or bay, and/or perhaps they have cut-down bombs of Helios-class(perhaps with no propulsion system; inertia-only), and/or perhaps it's possible to mount them externally.
As far as being a space superiority fighter the rest of the time? I'd figure numerical superiority, the Myrm's heavy firepower, and superior GTVA training would let them crush most pirate and minor rebel groups with ease. After the HoL's demise, it probably wasn't until the NTF rebellion that the GTVA had to put down a fighting force of truly comparable strength.
-
About the Myrmidon, if it's not a Space Superiority fighter, what should it have been called? Medium Fighter? Space Superiority bomber?
I believe the word you're looking for is fighter-bomber. :ick: ... Like the F-111 (that may not be an apt comparison but the FB-111 was a fighter-bomber).
This is another one of those wired designations. Now, I love the '111, but just because it could carry an M61 pod in its weapons bay and tote a few AIM-9s if necessary by no means made it a fighter plane. The F-111 was an out-and-out attack bomber/intredictor. You'd be crazy if you wanted to do actual fighter-like stuff with the plane, but I suppose you could... Now, in the defene of the "F" designation, the plane did/does fly a rather agressive attack profile if necessary.
And the FB-111 was further from a fighter than the normal '111s! It was put into service to replace the B-58 Hustler in the nuclear strike role, actually...
Given all of this information, yes, the Myrm is more of a fighter-bomber (kind of like the Herc 2, in a way...) than a superiority craft. However, Myrms loaded to the teeth with Hornets/Tornadoes with fast guns (the Balor in BP is best on the Myrm ;7 ) make for some of the best "heavy superiority" fighters you've ever seen...
-
One thing to note about the Myrmidon is that it is NOT a plane for an elite pilot. In the hands of the average, it's more than sufficient because they're not able to bring out the full maneuverability of their rides anyway. The greater firepower provided as well as versatility of payload (minus the Harpoon although the Tornado is just about as competent in single fire) makes it nearly as useful compared to stuff like the cutting edge Perseus and bleeding edge Erinyes. That is to say, wingmen flying Perseus and Erinyes drop like flies just as easily.
Perhaps it's just a mass production craft that simply works "good enough" with a few perks of its own.
-
The line to which Trivial Psychic refers is the second stage of the command briefing in Mystery of the Trinity (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Briefing_texts_(FS2)#Mystery_of_the_Trinity), though it says that the shivans "show considerable diversity as a species." Given the context, Dr. Hargrove seems to be talking about the technology of the shivans, more than the shivans themselves.
Full Quote:
"The subspace portal is unlike any Shivan construction we have yet encountered. Though Shivans demonstrate considerable diversity as a species, all Shivan technology possesses certain distinctive properties. None is present in the subspace device, which means we must look elsewhere for the portal's origin. We do know that the device is very, very old, on the order of several thousand years."
Somehow, I think that when someone uses the word "species", they're talking about the life forms as opposed to their technology, and the second part of that phrase specifically mentions that the "technology" all have things in common. So, quick summary of this statement: Shivan life forms... not all the same, Shivan technology... all the same. Based on the stated life form differences, and the visual indications of mechanical components integrated into the Shivans themselves, (which obviously isn't something that found its way into the species naturally), I conclude that the Shivans are genetically engineered, and since the only aspect of Shivan vessels we've been seeing is warships (and support craft), its natural to assume that these Shivans are soldiers of a sort. Designing a single Shivan soldier for all combat roles might seem a good idea in terms of flexibility and mass production, but many traits that you might want to have in a close-quarters combat soldier, aren't necessarily the same ones you'd want for a fighter pilot. Its only only natural to assume type specialization.
-
Maybe they can just pop off their legs and stick their torsos into a fighter.
-
Somehow, I think that when someone uses the word "species", they're talking about the life forms as opposed to their technology, and the second part of that phrase specifically mentions that the "technology" all have things in common. So, quick summary of this statement: Shivan life forms... not all the same, Shivan technology... all the same. Based on the stated life form differences, and the visual indications of mechanical components integrated into the Shivans themselves, (which obviously isn't something that found its way into the species naturally), I conclude that the Shivans are genetically engineered, and since the only aspect of Shivan vessels we've been seeing is warships (and support craft), its natural to assume that these Shivans are soldiers of a sort. Designing a single Shivan soldier for all combat roles might seem a good idea in terms of flexibility and mass production, but many traits that you might want to have in a close-quarters combat soldier, aren't necessarily the same ones you'd want for a fighter pilot. Its only only natural to assume type specialization.
Certainly possible, but there's a decided lack of supporting evidence elsewhere(nothing in the Tech Room suggests different 'castes' or 'phenotypes' were ever encountered). There must have been a body in the cockpit of the Dragon that Alpha 1 helped capture(presumably, back at base, the cockpit was pried open, with a squad of marines standing at the ready), and one would figure a significantly altered 'pilot Shivan' would have been worth noting.
Maybe they can just pop off their legs and stick their torsos into a fighter.
Just was reminded of this... (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Shivans#Technology)
Shivan technology has proved baffling for both Terran and Vasudan scientists. Although their weapons and technology by necessity obey the same physical laws, the systems of Shivan craft seem to be fully integrated with the pilot's biology, making it difficult, but still possible, to use their spacecraft for espionage and spying.
If we take 'fully integrated with the pilot's biology' as something like a direct neural interface, then the Shivan could either curl up in a little ball(not needing its handsclaws for anything), or indeed take other, more...extreme measures to fit themselves in.
Enter the Dragon's command brief (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Briefing_texts_(FS1)#Command_Briefing_10) does suggest it takes more than a traceable button or lever to operate many aspects of the ship, or else the 'Terran Dragon' wouldn't have been so difficult to retrofit. Of course, by FS2, SOC/GTVI knew enough to turn Maras into fully functional(and even improved-performance) fighters.
-
That settles it. The Cylons went back in time, fully integrated themselves with both their pseudo-organic and non-organic selves, and came back as the Shivans.
It's a small universe after all!
:lol:
-
The Myrmidon is a more stereotypical space superiority fighter than the Ulysses. I have always treated the latter as an interceptor. I don't know how a fighter of its size and statistics could be called anything else.
The distinction between air superiority fighters and interceptors did not really have anything to do with size. One was agile and optimised for dogfights, the other for beyond visual range engagements with an emphasis on missile armament and raw speed. The Ulysses is definitely high on agility and, while fast eough (faster average speed than a Perseus on full power to the engines), doesn't carry an impressive missile load. Definitely a space superiority fighter.
About the Myrmidon, if it's not a Space Superiority fighter, what should it have been called? Medium Fighter? Space Superiority bomber?
Thematically, Freespace ships are a mishmash of cold-war-era aviation garnished with ww2-era dogfighting. I'm not sure whether this is intentional, but more than any given type the Myrmidon feels very American. Large, complex, fast, well-armed and expected to ensure space superiority against less powerful but more nimble foes.
Space Superiority Fighter? Maybe, see above.
Interceptor? Speed is barely adequate and there's more emphasis on gun firepower, but this could work.
Assault Fighter? Very flimsy for this role, firepower isn't entirely convincing either but it's faster. Strike fighter?
I think it's a true multi-role craft... usually an awkward one but it has its moments.
Also, in the Freespace universe 'advanced' seems to mean something strange because anything with that word in the description is deeply flawed for what it's supposed to do.
The 'advanced space superiority fighter' Myrmidon is sluggish and can't mount the iconic missile (Harpoon).
The 'advanced interceptor' Serapis is slow and can't mount the iconic missile (Trebuchet).
The 'advanced bomber' Bakha is just not very good compared to the Sekhmet and can't mount the iconic missile (Helios).
-
anyone considered that the myrm is more of the apollo's spiritual lineage that the uly.
missile capacity is the same (though critically the myrm is denied the principle dogfighter missile) uly is half the capacity
the hull:shield ratio is more comparable than the uly
if memory of the apollo is correct it is also sluggish like the myrm
they take up about the same volume of space the myrm is shorter but taller (this does make it easier to hit)
-
I have no idea why you guys think the harpoon is so great or so 'signature dogfight', when compared to tempests it's almost useless.
-
Because the standard AI is so very not good at dodging them, I suppose.
-
And because some of us aren't very good with Tempests at all. :p The Harpoon is usually my go-to missile.
-
I found that, of all weapons, the Rockeye was great for spamming at Dragons when at close ranges. Unfortunately, the missile is huge, non-maneuverable, and generally a great pain. So that's a volumetric fire solution and grievance all in one!
Dear Lord... If we had a heat-seeking light rocket (like the Tempest)... It would be all over! :lol:
-
My favorite would be the Tornado, but gets depleted rather quickly.
But somehow, the swirling of a Rockeye is pretty awesome :)
-
Yeah, heaven forbid :v: copy the excellent dogfight missile known as the Sidewinder, instead we get an AMRAAM with short range.
-
The nice thing about Tornadoes is that they have better range than the Harpoon and almost the same damage when single fired (which incidentally gives you the same number of shots).
-
Yeah, heaven forbid :v: copy the excellent dogfight missile known as the Sidewinder, instead we get an AMRAAM with short range.
I thought the Sidewinder equivlanet was the Harpoon.
-
The Hornet has too long a range and much too high a lock time. If something like the Sidewinder were to be implemented in FS it would pretty much be a bigger heat-seeking Tempest with high maneuverability, basically a nice snapshot missile that gives your target no time to react.
Of course, the Phoenix is already in as the Trebuchet, leaving a gap in the 1.5-3km engagement range that would be filled by something like the AMRAAM, a weaker, smaller, longer-ranged Phoenix V basically.
-
Sorry, I mistyped.
The big reason a missile like that doesn't exist in Freespace is balance. No time to react? Dumbfires are fast because you're less likely to hit. Lock-ons take time, but are more likely to hit. A snapshot missile that also locks? Breaks balance. No one would ever take anything else.
-
I found that, of all weapons, the Rockeye was great for spamming at Dragons when at close ranges.
I used to think exactly the same. But it no longer works in Insane difficulty. :(
Sorry, I mistyped.
The big reason a missile like that doesn't exist in Freespace is balance. No time to react? Dumbfires are fast because you're less likely to hit. Lock-ons take time, but are more likely to hit. A snapshot missile that also locks? Breaks balance. No one would ever take anything else.
If the missile is too big, ineffective for subsystems, or has very limited compatibility/availability, then yes, people would take other missiles.
Think about it, the Rockeye is actually quite good, but it's just too big for the amount of damage it delivers.
-
Well, to be honest Scotty I wasn't thinking it would be near-instant, I got Freespace confused with more fast-paced combat somehow. A highly maneuverable missile with 800 range, 275-300 speed, 60-75 damage, heat seeking, and a small blast radius is what I was thinking. So basically something used to help un-maneuverable assault fighters take out stuff normally capable of flying rings around them.
-
Drop all your Harpoons for Tempests and check out what happens. ;7
-
/me uses Tempests more than he does Harpoons. on Very Easy. :p
Harpoons don't scare me. Tempests do because they make me see red if they keep hitting. Tempests reload so fast, expending them quickly is never an issue for me. On the other hand, well-placed dual Harpoons can 1HKO anything up to a Hercules.
The Hornet is not a beginner's missile. It requires some dexterity to use. It's one of the most ideal secondary weapons if you're behind a slow target, such as bombers, or if your target is a warship. I've attempted to hit stuff with the Hornet on a head-on pass before, and I've never succeeded.
-
anyone considered that the myrm is more of the apollo's spiritual lineage that the uly.
missile capacity is the same (though critically the myrm is denied the principle dogfighter missile) uly is half the capacity
the hull:shield ratio is more comparable than the uly
if memory of the apollo is correct it is also sluggish like the myrm
they take up about the same volume of space the myrm is shorter but taller (this does make it easier to hit)
Discounting the very slow roll rate, the Apollo handles exactly like a Loki, which is rather good and imo makes it a better dogfighter than the Myrmidon. There would be little reason to fly the Apollo in FS2, but not because of later craft with the same designation: it carries twice the missile load of the Ulyyses and is a lot more agile than the Myrmidon. It is, however, rendered obsolete by the Perseus which is very close in terms of manoeverability, durability, armament and afterburners and markedly superior in top speed and weapon energy. Interestingly, the Perseus is closer in overal top speed to the Apollo than it is to the Valkyrie because FS2-era afterburners generally aren't very good.
*
Regarding the missile debate: Sorry for kicking this off. I just found it worth noting that any craft with an 'advanced' in its type isn't very good at the defining aspect of its type AND can't carry the missile most associated with the role.
-
As this thread's creator, I am going to kindly ask that the difficulty argument be taken elsewhere. While I do think the discussion is indeed interesting, I would like to not see this thread further derailed.
On a semi-on-topic note: has anyone ever noticed that a Hatshepsut is actually quite well-protected from a point defense standpoint? (Treb sniping notwithstanding)
-
The Vacuum cleaners are the best defended destroyers in terms of PD in the game, they're really the only one that commands any respect, there are still some weakpoints obviously but compared to ravana/hecate/orion/demon/hades, the hattie is awesome.