Author Topic: GTD Hades post-Capella  (Read 21272 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline aldo_14

  • Gunnery Control
  • 213
A fleet of 3-4 cvs would be vulnerable to fighter & bomber attack, though; somewhere along the line you have to be able to transport, deploy and resupply escort fighters.  If you look at a naval carrier, it's useless ship to ship.  But it's still pretty much the most vital part of any fleet, ever since WW2.

 
I hate to be rude, but my post specifically mentioned provision for AA defence.  I realise I didn't mention an escort carrier for fighter support; but I was comparing vs cap performance.  Even 3 cvs, an escort carrier, and a pile of flakboats would massively outperform an orion for only slightly more volume.  And anyway, its cap v cap that GTVA large ships get pwned (because they suck), and several smaller vessels with escort is better.  Debate! :)

 

Offline aldo_14

  • Gunnery Control
  • 213
Naval carriers also have flak/aaaf defenses (several 'rings' of frigates, destroyers, etc which are also de-facto decoys); but they still rely upon a fighter screen for defense.

Anyways, flak is ineffective against any fighters with trebuchet-style missiles, and there's no way to judge if you can put enough flak turrets (bearing in mind that they appear to be ammo-based) on a standard sized ship to cover an entire convoy...... if you take, for example, a modified Ursa or even an all-flak equipped cruiser, they're still dead meat to any fighter/bomber with the right weapons - and if your AAAf escort, etc, gets disabled, you have a big problem.

(The problem with a fleet of specialised ships is that it leaves you very open to divide-and-conquer tactics)

And, of course, I think the sheer cost of having all those ships would be a problem; as well as duplicated core systems taking up cost (each ship needs its own reactor, arms dumps, life-support, sensors,etc; so no 'bulk value'), you've got a major issue in how you're going to find the docking space to repair or refit 4-6 ships instead of a single destroyer/carrier.  And if your individual ships have less armour than said single ship - as they will do - you'll end up with a naturally higher chance of losing a ship or ships in engagements.

 
Actually, the smaller ships will have MASSIVELY MORE hitpoints than  single large ship, since Deimos has a ridiculously high amount of hp.

However, I at no point suggest a lack of fighters.  I simply point out that destroyers are a total waste of time and are far to easily destroyed.  If you lose a GTD, you lose it all; if you lose a Cv, who cares, you've got more.  Who CARES what the chances of losing a single element of the fleet is; the point is that if you had one ship it'd ALL be gone, but with a diverse fleet, you've still got 80% left.  The current CV + fighters fleet is utterly unrealistic, and you should know that since you're talking about realistic carrier battlegroups.  I guess the USN doesn't know as much about building a single huge ship instead of a fleet as you, eh?

I wasn't aware that flakkers were ammo based, or that trebs don't get intercepted.  I know Stilletos do; are you sure trebs don't?

The 'huge bomb' in FS has done to FS fleets what aircraft did to REAL fleets; they've made single huge warships an enourmous liability.  The USN can afford to defend a supercarrier with a fleet larger than most other countries navies, because that's what they need to protect their investment.  With subspace the carrier can be kept away from the scene of the battle.

Again, however, you've totally ignored the point that I was suggesting an improvement in the GTVAs derisory vs cap abilities.  You can't say an Aoulus near a capital ship doesn't expand its survivability vs bombers and distract the enemy.

 
I wanted to begin a thread like this a while ago....
incredible it was supposed to talk about a possible Hades Built after the Capella Supernova.....
and ended up talking about the future of the GTVA Fleet....what's the best things and stuffs....

i think that the GTVA's will evolve to smaller-tougher-powerful-rapid ships...like the Deimos... ... ... we need to speed for fast evacs...if we are supposed to continue with the 'Evac system-collapse jump nodes' strategy when we are being swarmed by the Shivans...(Like in Capella)
Developing a FS2 Campaign:
Corruptible, everyone has a price

 

Offline aldo_14

  • Gunnery Control
  • 213
Quote
Originally posted by Pnakotus
Actually, the smaller ships will have MASSIVELY MORE hitpoints than  single large ship, since Deimos has a ridiculously high amount of hp.


But individually they will be weaker, so a large capship like a Ravana, or even a Sath, can concentrate its fire on a single one.  Divide & conquer, after all; whilst a group has the advantage of being able to maneuver and flank, they are individually weaker and susciptible to problems if a single ship is disabled, disarmed or simply unable to communicate and co-ordinate.

Quote
Originally posted by Pnakotus
[BHowever, I at no point suggest a lack of fighters.  I simply point out that destroyers are a total waste of time and are far to easily destroyed.  If you lose a GTD, you lose it all; if you lose a Cv, who cares, you've got more.  Who CARES what the chances of losing a single element of the fleet is; the point is that if you had one ship it'd ALL be gone, but with a diverse fleet, you've still got 80% left.  The current CV + fighters fleet is utterly unrealistic, and you should know that since you're talking about realistic carrier battlegroups. [/B]


You can't fight the Shivans in a war of attrition;and you don't have an infinite amount of corvettes, or an infinite amount of repair & resupply depots for them either.

Yes, if you had 1 ship losing it would be a bigger loss than part of a corvette battlegroup; but you'd be operating at a reduced risk of losing that ship, because it is individually stronger (ignoring the relative fighter complements that a destroyer has and a light carrier might have).  

And destroyers don't necesarrily operate at the front lines in FS anyways; they're carriers, they provide fighter coverage for a wide region.  When I'm talking about realistic carrier battlegroups, I'm talking about a carrier relying upon other ships for ship-to-ship combat, and using its fighters and bombers for support of the fleet and its own defense; that's exactly how I think it works in FS2.

Quote
Originally posted by Pnakotus
[B I guess the USN doesn't know as much about building a single huge ship instead of a fleet as you, eh?[/B]


I was thinking of the aircraft carriers' role in the Falklands War, primarily; the Harriers air superiority was key in that operation, and the defense against Argentine exocets was key.

You may note i never suggested removing small ship classes, but simply not removing destroyers.

Quote
Originally posted by Pnakotus
[BI wasn't aware that flakkers were ammo based, or that trebs don't get intercepted.  I know Stilletos do; are you sure trebs don't?
[/B]


I'm assuming[/b] flak is ammo-based because it looks like some form of fired explosive charge; there's a precedent for this in capships use of missiles.

Not all trebs would be intercepted; and you could use maxims to disarm a ship if push came to shove - flak simply isn't that useful.  I think you'd need the less powerful long range flak

Quote
Originally posted by Pnakotus
[BThe 'huge bomb' in FS has done to FS fleets what aircraft did to REAL fleets; they've made single huge warships an enourmous liability.  The USN can afford to defend a supercarrier with a fleet larger than most other countries navies, because that's what they need to protect their investment.  With subspace the carrier can be kept away from the scene of the battle.[/B]


A destroyer is a carrier.  It's just a carrier which is equipped to fight as well, because space is a more mobile battlefield.  IIRC, it's very rare a (Terran) destroyer will voluntarily go into combat in FS2.

Quote
Originally posted by Pnakotus
[BAgain, however, you've totally ignored the point that I was suggesting an improvement in the GTVAs derisory vs cap abilities.  You can't say an Aoulus near a capital ship doesn't expand its survivability vs bombers and distract the enemy. [/B]


No, but that applies to any ship posing a distraction anyways; transports, cruisers, corvettes, fighters, etc.  I don't think that replacing capital ships with small fleets of specialised vessels will offer any actual improvement to the effectiveness of an entire fleet; for all the Hecates physical weaknesses, think of how many ships its fighter & bomber wings took out on the other side, and protected on the GTVA side.

 

Offline Gloriano

  • silver dracon
  • 210
  • Machina terra
I think post-Capella, destroyers classes would be fast enough to Flank, enemy ship and take it out (Hunter killer's). Or Artillery class destroyer with one beam that is powerfull and has insane range.

or just build lots normal destroyers
« Last Edit: December 23, 2004, 09:54:38 am by 153 »
You must have chaos within you to give birth to a dancing star.- Nietzsche

When in despair I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won; there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall.- Mahatma Gandhi

 
Mostly the GTVA's problem during FS2 was it's own arrogance in dealing with the Shivan's I mean they only sent 2 Fleets to deal with the shivans whoever was in command at that time should have been shot after Capella

Aeolus Cruisers while it has weak hull points is a very effective Anti-Fighter Capship they should replace the Fenris and Leviathan.

More Iceni Corvettes should be built as they were probably more effective at their role than Deimos's.

With the Sathanas threat known all existing and future destroyers should be fitted with Mlonjir Beams

 

Offline Kie99

  • 211
and 2 huge fleets should be permanently stationed at the Capella nodes, so If a Sath comes out, it sees a web of BFGreens and blows up!
"You shot me in the bollocks, Tim"
"Like I said, no hard feelings"

 

Offline Janos

  • A *really* weird sheep
  • 28
What Capella nodes? The nonexistant ones?
lol wtf

 

Offline pecenipicek

  • Roast Chicken
  • 211
  • Powered by copious amounts of coffee and nicotine
    • Minecraft
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
    • PeceniPicek's own deviantart page
BFGreens were on the overgrown stupid gun-lookalike garbage disposal ship..
Skype: vrganjko
Ho, ho, ho, to the bottle I go
to heal my heart and drown my woe!
Rain may fall and wind may blow,
and many miles be still to go,
but under a tall tree I will lie!

The Apocalypse Project needs YOU! - recruiting info thread.

 

Offline IceFire

  • GTVI Section 3
  • 212
    • http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/ce
Quote
Originally posted by Janos
What Capella nodes? The nonexistant ones?

There are node connections between Epsilon Pegasi and Capella as well as Vega and Capella.

They have been destrabilized and rendered virtually useless to conventional subspace travel...but my theory is that they still exist.  They just are not traversable.

Its like a road that now has a thousand potholes in it.  Its still there...you just don't want to take a Honda Civic on it :D
- IceFire
BlackWater Ops, Cold Element
"Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..."

 

Offline Kie99

  • 211
Quote
Originally posted by Janos
What Capella nodes? The nonexistant ones?


Ever heard of something called a Knossos, which the Shivans could make and point towards GTVA space.
"You shot me in the bollocks, Tim"
"Like I said, no hard feelings"

 

Offline pyro-manic

  • FlambĂ©
  • 210
Oh dear...

The Knossos portals are not Shivan. They were built by The Ancients, and the Shivans had nothing to do with them - they just use the ones that are there.

Icefire: Interesting argument. I'm not sure I totally agree, but it's an interesting idea...
Any fool can pull a trigger...

 

Offline Janos

  • A *really* weird sheep
  • 28
Quote
Originally posted by kietotheworld


Ever heard of something called a Knossos, which the Shivans could make and point towards GTVA space.


But Knossos was not a Shivan construction (accoding to canon, but I believe they could build something similar) :confused: .

Oh, and IceFire had a point and I had forgot about that: Shivans can use more unstable nodes than GTVA forces.
lol wtf

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Quote
Originally posted by kietotheworld
Ever heard of something called a Knossos, which the Shivans could make and point towards GTVA space.


The fact that Capella is now an expanding cloud of gas at over 10,000 degrees and that it is likely to stay that way for hundreds of years might prevent that though.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 
i agree with that.............and the GTVA knows that.....so they cancelled the destruction of the Nereid...(which was going to collapse the Vega-Capella node)
(i think...)

Everything in Capella was destroyed...and everything that enters there will be burnt in seconds...
Developing a FS2 Campaign:
Corruptible, everyone has a price

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Quote
Originally posted by karajorma


The fact that Capella is now an expanding cloud of gas at over 10,000 degrees and that it is likely to stay that way for hundreds of years might prevent that though.


Or it might not. I doubt the GTVA will take any chances on the subject.

The Shivans have Knossos portals in their territory, which they could presumably copy if they so choose.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Kosh

  • A year behind what's funny
  • 210
Quote
I figure the Hecate was never designed to be the upfront battleship the Orions turned into.


I definatly agree with that. The description said it was replacing the Orion as FLAGSHIP, not replacing them all together. The Orions are just the "dirtywork" destroyers

Quote
Aeolus Cruisers while it has weak hull points is a very effective Anti-Fighter Capship they should replace the Fenris and Leviathan


They were supposed to, but then they were cancelled for some reason.

Quote
They should learn from the Shivans and use BGreens and SGreens more often.


SGreens are one of the most ineffective beams in the game. The problem with it is that it has a rediculously long 45 second recharge time. If they got it down to 7 or 8 then it might be feasible to use them more. They don't even do that much damage per cycle either, which makes the recharge time a major handicap. Even BFGreens have a quicker recharge time.

Quote
More Iceni Corvettes should be built as they were probably more effective at their role than Deimos's.


If it had better AAA coverage, I would agree. Derelict's GTFf Cypher is a good example of just how powerful they can be (although the Cypher had better AAA coverage).

Quote
With the Sathanas threat known all existing and future destroyers should be fitted with Mlonjir Beams


Mjolnir beams are just SGreens. Not much to be excited about really. Those things would barely scratch a Sathanas' hull armor.
"The reason for this is that the original Fortran got so convoluted and extensive (10's of millions of lines of code) that no-one can actually figure out how it works, there's a massive project going on to decode the original Fortran and write a more modern system, but until then, the UK communication network is actually relying heavily on 35 year old Fortran that nobody understands." - Flipside

Brain I/O error
Replace and press any key

 

Offline FireCrack

  • 210
  • meh...
Quote
Originally posted by Kosh

Mjolnir beams are just SGreens. Not much to be excited about really. Those things would barely scratch a Sathanas' hull armor.


actualy mjnor beams are... well mjllnor beams, they are the most effective GTVA beam.

So yeah, mjlnorse arent Sgreens

(and speaking of wich, greenBeam is a great SGreen suplement)


reference:
http://home.att.net/~clay.h/fs2/beamfaq.htm
actualy, mabye not.
"When ink and pen in hands of men Inscribe your form, bipedal P They draw an altar on which God has slaughtered all stability, no eyes could ever soak in all the places you anoint, and yet to see you all at once we only need the point. Flirting with infinity, your geometric progeny that fit inside you oh so tight with triangles that feel so right."
3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944 59230781640628620899862803482534211706...
"Your ever-constant homily says flaw is discipline, the patron saint of imperfection frees us from our sin. And if our transcendental lift shall find a final floor, then Man will know the death of God where wonder was before."