Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: TheCelestialOne on May 02, 2002, 09:47:43 am
-
I've just begun to play the FS2 campaign (:D). And I have a choise in that campaign. The dangerous covert assignment or that tech testing squad.
Which is better?
-
Take the covert mission, and once you're done them, you'll end up with the testing squad anyway. Time waits patiently for you.
-
:D
-
There's another loop later on and again the SOC missions are basically optional.
If you play the SOC missions the game does give you some extra ships to fly in later missions. Apart from that there isn`t any real difference if you don`t play them.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Apart from that there isn`t any real difference if you don`t play them.
:nod: But you have to play them. They're fun. ;)
-
Dangerous mission? Who cares? I'm Alpha 1 and I have unlimited lives!
(Choose SOC mission)
-
Originally posted by FSW
I'm Alpha 1 and I have unlimited lives!
Unlimited lives? You can try that (fly in to some big beam). ;)
-
Originally posted by Redfang
:nod: But you have to play them. They're fun. ;)
Of course you do :) You`ll miss all of snipes dialogue otherwise. (I won`t repeat any cause of the spoiler factor!) . He probably gets the best lines in the entire game :)
-
And if you don't play them, you won't have access to the Ares or Artemis D.H. in the last few missions.
-
Ok ,I will choose the SOC missions. But since i'm playing 3 games at once ,ST:BC (very good game BTW) ,B&W and FS2 it might take a while before I finish this campaign! :D And i'm not stopping with those games to play 1 game at a time. (Gets boring if I do!)
-
Originally posted by TheCelestialOne
Ok ,I will choose the SOC missions. But since i'm playing 3 games at once ,ST:BC (very good game BTW) ,B&W and FS2 it might take a while before I finish this campaign! :D And i'm not stopping with those games to play 1 game at a time. (Gets boring if I do!)
bah. I finished the campaign in 5 hours (strait). SOC Missions and all...
-
Besides, if the SOC missions are just too much for you, you can choose "exit loop" at any time.
-
you won't have access to the Ares or Artemis D.H. in the last few missions.
The D.H is basically a reskin of the standard Artemis despite what the tech description says, and the Ares is not all that good, I always prefer the Herc MkII for those last missions. But each to their own.
-
The Ares is one of my favorite fighters actually. ;) But as you said, to each his own. ;)
-
Actually i thought the D.H. Artemis had better manuverability or something.
The Ares is one of the coolest ships in the Terran Fleet and i think its pretty good if u handle it right. It's alittle too slow for some missions, but it has a great payload and weapons, not to mention aromor.
-
The Artemis DH isn't any different from the normal artemis with the exception of its slight model alteration and textures. It's stats are exactly the same.
The Ares one of the best fighters in game. Equip it right and you own almost any other ship. Personally I'm a sucker for the Kayser/Maxim combo. Maxim is great if you can learn to aim it right, especially at long ranges. A nice selection of what ever missiles are most effective at the time is also useful. Trebs are good, but I still prefer my harpoons.
How about Hornets versus Tornadoes. For the extra 300 metre range and half second less lock time are tornados worth the extra cargo space over the hornet swarmers? I know some people still prefer hornets over tornadoes, but I'm curious as to see who.
-
Elloran: Actually, I think the DH is supposed to be a tad faster. But I never could be bothered to go check on what the table file said, so that might have gotten left out.
-
never liked the Artimes or the DH version, both are too limited payloadwise and neither is that great anyway. The Ares on the other hand is great for those slug-it-out missions where you have a ton of decent sized targets. I prefer the smaller faster ships, but if you handle the Ares like a bomber carewise, it can be very potent (hint: keep her rolling and dont stop firing).
-
Originally posted by elorran
How about Hornets versus Tornadoes. For the extra 300 metre range and half second less lock time are tornados worth the extra cargo space over the hornet swarmers? I know some people still prefer hornets over tornadoes, but I'm curious as to see who.
I think tornadoes win out easily, especially if you play multiplayer. Tornadoes are not only harder to dodge, but longer range, well worth the sacrifice of having less missiles.
Oh and I don't really about the DH bomber, but the Ares rocks if you arm it something to the effect of MS/Kayser + Trebs/Harpoons (for coop, in TvT exchange the Trebs for Rocks).
-
Definitely Tornados in my opinion; the Hornet is more persistent but is too slow to hit most of the faster fighters before it runs out of fuel.
When using the Ares, I tend to loadout with Maxim/Kayser/Tempest/Harpoon ; makes a good fighter-killing machine. :D
-
You are all wrong :D
The only two fighters that rule in Freespace 2 are Ptah and Perseus. Once you learn to handle the Perseus, you won't need a better fighter.
-
Originally posted by elorran
How about Hornets versus Tornadoes. For the extra 300 metre range and half second less lock time are tornados worth the extra cargo space over the hornet swarmers? I know some people still prefer hornets over tornadoes, but I'm curious as to see who.
Tornadoes. Much better. ;)
Originally posted by LtNarol
never liked the Artimes or the DH version, both are too limited payloadwise and neither is that great anyway.
Same here; I prefer heavy bombers. ;)
-
Artemis: good for ammo dumps but thats about it.
Tornados are better because they do more damage, almost a gauranteed kill if all 8 hit.
Perseus is definitely not the best fighter around, the Loki is so much better.
-
Originally posted by LtNarol
the Loki
:snipe:
:p
The worst fighter ever made is the Loki... ;)
Though I guess it was just a sarcastic comment...
-
My favorite fighters are kind of tied between the Ares, Tauret and Sekhmet (which performs surprisingly well as a fighter), depending on the mission. ;)
And I also think the Loki is among the worst fighters in either game (:p); the only one that is worse than it is the crappy Anubis. :p
-
The best bombers in the game are without a doubt Vasudan ones, if you ask me. They're faster and more maneuvrable, so they work as fighters in a pinch, which is important given that :v: totally ignored bomber turrets in FS2. :rolleyes:
They also have huge payloads, with great compatibility. IMO, the Bakha is the best bomber, bar none. It's fast but it can carry the Helios. Sorted.
-
Yeah, the Bakha has great secondary capacity and armor/shielding considering its small size. (it is about the same size as the Ptah :p)
-
My favorite ships are the Erinyes and the Ares (although the perseus is becoming one of them too)
I don't neccasirly like the Erinyes because its really as much as it looks sweet. Its only a good ship if u can learn to manage the weapons. It makes me sad because its hard to bring it in a battle w/ kayser and maxim loadout and not run outta power.
The ares doesn't usually run outta power for me so i can have my maxim and kayser. Note to mention its the scariest terran fighter out there :D
Also the perseus is pretty good if u load it out with double kaysers harpoons/tornados and Trebuchets
-
Worst fighters in the game:
Loki=major ****head
Anubis: Wins award for ****tiest fighter!
-
Originally posted by nuclear1
Worst fighters in the game:
Loki=major ****head
Care to test that?
-
More manuverable?
Perseus or Serapis?
I say Serapis :D
-
Originally posted by nuclear1
Worst fighters in the game:
Loki=major ****head
Anubis: Wins award for ****tiest fighter!
hey, no dissing my ship. As for the Erinyes, its rather good, if you run out of power, its because you cant aim; it is a bit slow for me though, and thus the reason why i stick with my LOKI.
-
Well not being able to aim would be me. I know its sad but its hard for me to hit anything over 5oo meters away. It might be for the last 3 years, ive been using a Microsoft Sidewinder Game Pad to play.
You are right though, the Erinyes rulz
:lol: everytime i hear loki i think of the over 15 squadrons i wasted if not more playing Derelict. Man did that get old
-
they're ai lokis, would it have made a difference if they were Erinyii? Besides, no one has been able to shoot down my Loki in under 5 minutes.
-
I wasn't refering to "your" loki, just sayin that. Besides IMHO, lokis arent that great, im sure if u are skilled u can kick ass but a loki as a fighter over all, kinda sucks.
I mean, 1 missle bank, small missle bank at that.
Limited selection of primaries. Really bad armor, not as fast as some fighters....
I personally don't like them
-
Yeah, I don't like the Loki much either. Its only plus point is that it can carry the Maxim, but that pales in comparison to the deficiencies. :p A good pilot can perform well in any ship, so that isn't a really a good indicator of a good/bad ship.
-
Bad ships are ones you die in
-
okay, I die in a Loki. :p :D
-
Bad CP, bad, no cookie for you, it's fast and turns on a dime, who needs missles?
-
exactly, missiles are for pussies. Lokis kick arse. and like i says, no dissing my LOKI! :D
-
Hehe, with the speeds the Loki can obtain, you don't need cms to dodge missiles. God you can waste so much ammo trying to kill a person who knows how to use a Loki (like me, NOT). :D:D:D
-
thats so true, just roll and hit your after burners, i usually go in without power to my primaries and spend a few minutes dodging missiles, then go for the kill when they're empty :D
-
Well if you want speed, the Horus is the way to go- the Loki is a bit slower than that and carries much less weaponry. The biggest problem with the Loki is its armor in my opinion; it cannot withstand flak bursts for nearly as long as some other fighters can (most light fighters, even), and so you have to avoid capital ships at all costs. Also, it can't carry enough tempests, which is one of my favorite anti-fighter weapons. :p :D You can certainly perform well in that fighter, but not as well as you could in another fighter. Also, remember that the Loki was essentially a failed project; it was supposed to be a stealth fighter like the Pegasus or Ptah, but some flaws in its design rendered that capability useless, so it did not turn out as good as it should have been.
-
Originally posted by killadonuts
More manuverable?
Perseus or Serapis?
I say Serapis :D
Yeah, but the armor on the Serapis is paper-thin. Whenever I fly it I always seem to have my engines and/or weapons and/or sensors blasted by a single rockeye. :doh:
Perseus can take more punishment and is faster to boot.
-
the loki is more rounded overall though when compared to the interceptors
-
Fast and maneuverable fighters are great for dog fights, though tend to lack the firepower capabilities of the heavier ships. The major flaw with fly fast ships is collisions and missile damage.
Collisions at faster speeds dish out more damage to both parties, though less to the ship that is flying slower. Missile damage is also a pain in a fast ship if you take a missile head as they do more damage like that. So despite it's lower speed, a herc 2 can actually be more sound in such a situation... but for the sake of that one situation you're probably better sticking to the ship you prefer.
-
ya, herc2s are great until you get someone in an interceptor or recon ship tucked in neatly inside your enginewash, pumping a continuous stream of Kaysers into your rear end. Lokis can fly circles around Hercs, thats the reason why i stopped flying assault fighters.