[Zarax]

*Looking under his seat*
Personally i think that GTVA does not use dedicated carriers because they can always call extra wings from in system Arcadia stations...
Since every system has at least one of them it seems logical that they can be used to house a sizeable force (around 10 wings IIRC) deployable in case of need...

[aldo_14]

Node blockades = trench warfare.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Ghostavo


I'm not saying that a destroyer is better than a carrier either because there is no carrier or destroyer (pure destroyer that is) destroyer sized hull ship in FS. A Orion is both a carrier and a destroyer because there is nothing left for it to do. If you want more fighterbays that's fine. It's probably what the tendency is in the future. But weapons are not being disproved (can find better words) either. Even the Hecate, which is a sucky thing carries beam weaponry. The Ravana, also a carrier possesses massive firepower. They are merely named destroyers because it was a)cool b)better description seeing that it names their own fuction in the battle. Like karajorma said, no matter how much you try to build a carrier, you will always have about the same thing as a FS "Destroyer".

So? Just becoause the [V] dev's probably made a mistake and they can change everything on the ship without impacting it's size/speed/space doesn't mean I have to stick to that like a Holy Grail.
It only makes sense to me that BIG THINGS take up SPACE. Hell..why not have on Orion with 1000000000 fighters?

[Ghostavo]

heretic?

Because if an Orion had 1000000000 fighters you would experience lag beyond this world when the Orion tried to launch all it's fighters.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by TrashMan
So? Just becoause the [V] dev's probably made a mistake and they can change everything on the ship without impacting it's size/speed/space doesn't mean I have to stick to that like a Holy Grail.

No but it does mean that your assumption is non-canon because the Orion, Typhon, Fenris and Leviathan were all retrofitted with beams without it having any effect on the ship (In fact the number of fighters the Orion carries increased between FS1 and FS2).

Personally I'm of the opinion that the number of beams on a ship hits the limit caused by available reactor power before it hits any limit caused by the size of the weapons.

Originally posted by TrashMan
It only makes sense to me that BIG THINGS take up SPACE. Hell..why not have on Orion with 1000000000 fighters?

Where does it say that beam cannons have to be big? That's your assumption.

[Fergus]

I always got the idea that beam cannons are small but the heat sinks are large- again hypothetical.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by karajorma

No but it does mean that your assumption is non-canon because the Orion, Typhon, Fenris and Leviathan were all retrofitted with beams without it having any effect on the ship (In fact the number of fighters the Orion carries increased between FS1 and FS2).

Duh. So what? Every campaign out there is non-canon so I can very well try to put some common sense in one.

[aldo_14]

Colossus cutscene has a good image of a beam cannon turret, IIRC it's about the same size as the blister firing point, but buried somewhat deep(er) into the hull.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by TrashMan
Duh. So what? Every campaign out there is non-canon so I can very well try to put some common sense in one.

I meant non-canon in the sense that you're deliberately making **** up that isn't canon and actually goes against canon.

I personally don't do that. I try to follow canon as much as I can. If you want to do that in your own campaigns that's fine. I've never been the sort to say that you can't reinvent stuff in your own campaigns but don't even think of saying it's common sense cause there is no rule that says beam cannons have to be large.

You want them to be large so you say they are. That's not common sense. That's an assertion you're basing your theory on. You want to do that in your own universe that's fine but if you come and tell me that my logic is incorrect cause I'm not following your complete dismissal of canon then I'll call you on it.

[TrashMan]

I allways follow canon as long as it makes sense.
And it makes sense that if I use less armor and fewer weapons I can clear up more room.
It doesn't make sense that if I add aditional stuff into a destroyer I magicly free up more room for fighters.

And beam cannon according to the Colossus cutscene take up as much space as an Ursa..

[Ghostavo]

You removed stuff also to have those beams... what might have been magically introduced is Flak ammo because I don't know where they get that stuff... maybe flak is really energy based?

EDIT:

How do I convert .MVE into .AVI or any other format?

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by TrashMan
I allways follow canon as long as it makes sense.
And it makes sense that if I use less armor and fewer weapons I can clear up more room.
It doesn't make sense that if I add aditional stuff into a destroyer I magicly free up more room for fighters.

And beam cannon according to the Colossus cutscene take up as much space as an Ursa..

In what sense?  If you're simply scaling them based on the size of the blisters on the Colossus, remember that those are exceptionally large and powerful beams.  I'm talking about relative scaling of the exterior blister vs the internal components, BTW.

[TrashMan]

So am I ...according to what I've seen, AT LEAST 3/4 of the beam cannon is inside the ship...

And the power requirement have to be big - it only makes sense. Seing that it's a energy weapon you do damage by directing energy trough that cannon. And seing that it does LLOT'S more damage than the Terran Huge Turret it stands to reason that it requires more juice..

[Ghostavo]

And it charges how much times slower? And how about the tech room stating problems with the reactors of Typhons? etc... etc... etc...

[TrashMan]

..Which means it does require far more power than any pre-beam weapons.

[Ghostavo]

So why do you still argue about this? It needs more power, it charges slowly... is there some form of hidden logic you are not telling us?

Beams didn't exist... beams were invented... probably more powerful reactors were invented... ships were retrofited... typhons encountered problems... few typhons were retrofited...

[NGTM-1R]

No, lots of Typhons were retrofitted, they just started getting rid of them as quickly as they could build Haptshuets (can't spell, I know) because the retrofitted Typhons had issues.

The thingie says "few remain in service" not "few were retrofitted".

[TrashMan]

The only point is was trying to make is this:

I allways follow canon as long as it makes sense.
And it makes sense that if I use less armor and fewer weapons I can clear up more room.
It doesn't make sense that if I add aditional stuff into a destroyer I magicly free up more room for fighters.

And this is something you can't disprove...

[aldo_14]

Unless you're replacing stuff with more compact & efficient replacements, ala the Orions' beam cannon.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by TrashMan
I allways follow canon as long as it makes sense.
And it makes sense that if I use less armor and fewer weapons I can clear up more room.
It doesn't make sense that if I add aditional stuff into a destroyer I magicly free up more room for fighters.

It's not a case of the beams magically providing space. The increased fighter complement is probably due to other changes but it shows that you don't have to reduce the complement of a ship in order to add beams to it.

 Canon shows that beam cannons don't take up as much space as you claim. The fact that the FS1 era destroyers could be retrofitted with beams without sacrificing fighters proves it. The fact that tiny ships like the Fenris could be retrofitted with them proves it.

You can go on about making sense all you like Trashman but the fact is that your claim that beam cannons are big is an assertion. You like big beam cannons. Their is no rule that says that they do have to be big. It's not simply common sense as you claim it is.

Originally posted by TrashMan
And beam cannon according to the Colossus cutscene take up as much space as an Ursa..

As Aldo says those were big beam cannons. In addition to that you've got no proof that the beam cannons on the smaller capships work the same way. Maybe the Colossus was big enough that each cannon could have its own reactor while smaller ships feed off of the main reactors.