[Mefustae]

From what I've seen everything suggest the exit vector is more or less fixed (or very limited).
And I'm talking about a Mljonir with a engine, not the slap Mljonirs on a destroyer idea (not practical really)

Well, you still have technical issues with that approach, particularly cost and structure.  Even if we have viable engines (able to turn quickly), adding them raises the cost and complexity of the RBC.  And then it is getting expensive, so you end up considering how to protect them, so maybe slap in a jumpdrive....and eventually you end up with more or less a single turreted cruiser, and need a new and cheap RBC solution.

Not neccesarily. Why go through the cost of putting the engines on the Mjolnir itself, when you can simply leave it docked with a freighter, a Triton for example. Sure, that's adding a human element to the situation, but should the s*** really hit the fan, the freighter can simply uncouple and jump away in seconds, no harm, no foul.

An idea i've been kicking around is having small fleets of freighters standing in for operational battlegroups. You'd have Tritons docked with RBCs for firepower, and Tritons docked with a Hanger/Carrier pod, as in the one that was designed not to long ago by god-knows-who, for aerospace superiority, and Bob's-your-uncle you've got yourself in essence a destroyer in 20 pieces.

[S-99]

Think of this scenario. Putting engines on a mjolnir would be like putting engines on a sentry gun. Now does the idea sound dumb to more people?

[Herra Tohtori]

Actually I cannot understand why FS ships are designed like they are. Modular design would be so much more useful. You could lierally build any ship imaginable from quite few modules (command, beam weaponry, missile weaponry, anti-fighter weaponry [flaks&turrets], propulsion, navigation, sensors and communications, hangar, power supply). These modules would be attached to a base bulk structure differing by the purpose of the ship - a convoy ship would have good AF-weaponry, whereas a anti-cap ship would have more beam weaponry and so on. Size of the ship is easily modifiable, only thing you need to do is increase the size of the bulk structure and increase the amount of modules attached onto it. Furthermore, different kinds of ships would be much cheaper to assemble with similar modules being mass-produced and bolted onto base structure of a ship. Mjölnir beams could possibly be potential modules, yes.

Further advantages include possibility to have self-propelled, self-powered, individually armoured modules that regain some limited abilities as individual space ships. This would increase the chances of a capital ship surviving the battle more or less intact and what more important, keep it able to fight longer than traditional ships. When for example a beam would cut a ship in half, severing the rear end from the front, both parts would still be able to fight.

Of course it would not give so cool-looking ships. With modular design, the most sensible design would be a hollow ball structure that has different kind of modules attached onto it. Why ball, then? Because a ball would be the form providing the smallest angular momentum in relation to ship's mass, giving the best possible maneuverability - not that it would be very necessary to maneuver a symmetric space ship anyway, if you put two thruster systems on every three axis.

Actually I'll have a Deimos or Sobek in my game any time rather than a modular minuscule Death Star. 

[NGTM-1R]

Modular designs are inherently fragile. Otherwise they get rather less modular then they were originally.

The single-turreted cruiser/monitor design is among the more reasonable methods of defeating a Sathanas I've come up with. The less reasonable ones include 120 Helios bombs in a salvo from a corvette-size craft.

[AlphaOne]

ummm.....the idea about the helios sounds good but then agin you would have to get quite close. also they would what fire the salvo and be left without any ofensive weaponry whatsoever..!
 i beliebe that half that amount would be usefull in cripelling the juggs sistems i mean the fighterbay the engines and rear beam turret as well as weapon sistems and sensors. then just go ahead and pund at it with beams . cuz it cand fire the weapons no more.

[aldo_14]

Aaah, verbose.

[TrashMan]

Well, you still have technical issues with that approach, particularly cost and structure.  Even if we have viable engines (able to turn quickly), adding them raises the cost and complexity of the RBC.  And then it is getting expensive, so you end up considering how to protect them, so maybe slap in a jumpdrive....and eventually you end up with more or less a single turreted cruiser, and need a new and cheap RBC solution.

Considering that EVERY fighter and freighter has engines and jumpdrives I don't think the price would increase by much...

Yes, well you can FRED a Fenris destroying a Sath - it doesn't necessarily make it the likely result.  Storyline trumps gameplay all the time; otherwise how else would the player be able to enjoy fighting in a losing war?

That's my point. The Sath isn't strong enough to break a good blockade (at least not the one composing of the bulk of the GTVA fleet). Even story-wise it could have been handeled better....

[aldo_14]

Well, you still have technical issues with that approach, particularly cost and structure.  Even if we have viable engines (able to turn quickly), adding them raises the cost and complexity of the RBC.  And then it is getting expensive, so you end up considering how to protect them, so maybe slap in a jumpdrive....and eventually you end up with more or less a single turreted cruiser, and need a new and cheap RBC solution.

Considering that EVERY fighter and freighter has engines and jumpdrives I don't think the price would increase by much...

Every fighter and freighter (fighter is irrelevant if we're considering engines bit enough to reliably shift a chunky Mjolnir) is designed to have engines, though.  Their powerplants, internal structure, etc, are all based around that, and I think it's not an unfair presumption that you'd need to add, shield, and properly construct a substantially sized new reactor to maneuver a Mjolnir at adequate speeds, all of which add costs.   And AFAIK they've never been described as disposably 'priced' anyways.

As someone else noted, would you add engines to a sentry gun?

That's my point. The Sath isn't strong enough to break a good blockade (at least not the one composing of the bulk of the GTVA fleet). Even story-wise it could have been handeled better....

"The giant invincible Shivan juggernaut we've spent the last few missions telling you is a horrific, GTVA threatening monstrosity, scraped past our slightly damaged blockade with 1% hull integrity and its weapons missing - you're our last hope!"

[TrashMan]

you allways tend to complicate things... Adding engines should not be hard or pricey.
Didn't terrans re-engineerd fighters to use shields? That would require more work than simply bolting a engine on it.
Don't forget that the engine doesn't have to be integrated into hte Nljonir - it cna be a aprt that can be attached - with it's own powersource - only the AI (targeting) of it would have to be linked/controled with the cannon...

Besides, the cost of a Mljonir far outstrips the cost of a engine module + software update..  so a cost increase of 1-5% really isn't a big deal when it makes hte cannon mroe effective and prone to survive..

"The giant invincible Shivan juggernaut we've spent the last few missions telling you is a horrific, GTVA threatening monstrosity, scraped past our slightly damaged blockade with 1% hull integrity and its weapons missing - you're our last hope!"

They either should have made it less vulnerable / more powerfull or adjusted the storyline....

Like the shivans storming the blockade in numbers...or the Sath taking the defense fleet by surprise

[NGTM-1R]

ummm.....the idea about the helios sounds good but then agin you would have to get quite close. also they would what fire the salvo and be left without any ofensive weaponry whatsoever..!
 i beliebe that half that amount would be usefull in cripelling the juggs sistems i mean the fighterbay the engines and rear beam turret as well as weapon sistems and sensors. then just go ahead and pund at it with beams . cuz it cand fire the weapons no more.

Well, there were several considerations. You have to overwhelm the defensive turrets of the Sathanas, and its fighter screen. Testing it with a hacked Aeolus and swarm-tagged bombs got me the 120 figure for the minimum needed to defeat the turrets and inflict crippling damage with a single strike. Outright destroying a Sathanas in a single salvo would probably take twice that number of bombs, and escorting fighters shooting down some of the bombs make the number even higher, but 120 is really about as far as I'm willing to stretch player credibility. The basic concept is to jump in, launch, and jump out again immediately...the problem is GTVA ships rarely jump that well.

My current ideas about the subject are to have a corvette-sized ship with 120 warheads to each broadside and light flak-type armament for self-defense. The player would tag the Sathanas (or other juggernaut <,< >,>) to enable an accurate jump, then defend the ship while it acquires a lock, fires, and plots another jump out. Ideally the ships would attack in pairs, one from either flank of the juggernaut, to help disperse the defending fighters. It would make for a nice, short, and very intense mission.

However I'm still torn between whether that would work better then my other similar mission concept, which would be defending a specialized AWACs-type ship from a juggernaut's escorting fighter wings while it passes mid-course guidance data to some kind of planet-launched heavy missiles.

[AlphaOne]

wtf? planet side launched missiles?? I liked the corvette idea better. It would be fesable you know. WEll sort of. I give it a thums up !

[aldo_14]

you allways tend to complicate things... Adding engines should not be hard or pricey.

Really?  Do it to your car.

Didn't terrans re-engineerd fighters to use shields? That would require more work than simply bolting a engine on it.
Don't forget that the engine doesn't have to be integrated into hte Nljonir - it cna be a aprt that can be attached - with it's own powersource - only the AI (targeting) of it would have to be linked/controled with the cannon...

So we have to have physical connections between the two, sensory feedback for maintenance, control systems, and a strong superstructure so the engine isn't a weak point whose destruction leads to internal damage on the cannon.   All of these systems will need integration and possibly EMP shielding and you'd need to adjust the base Mjolnir design to facilitate them.

Now, shielding is an interesting point.  You are correct in the sense it was knocked into a fighter without structural changes, but then again we don't know exactly how big a shield generator is, and how much power output you get from an Apollo powerplant (or whether there were 'invisible' side effects like the reduction of operational range, etc).  Also it's not entirely infeasible there was room already allocated for it, given that the GTA at least was working on deflector-type technology at Ross 128.  In any case, I'd imagine adding shielding to be vastly different in impact to adding engines, like the difference between adding a new set of speakers to a car and adding a new, well, engine.

That is, of course, ignoring the ships that came after the introduction of shields in FS1, which could be developed or modified to use shields before deployment.

Besides, the cost of a Mljonir far outstrips the cost of a engine module + software update..  so a cost increase of 1-5% really isn't a big deal when it makes hte cannon mroe effective and prone to survive..

Based on what calculation of cost?  Software alone would be more expensive than you think.

They either should have made it less vulnerable / more powerfull or adjusted the storyline....

And made High Noon 2 hours long?

Like the shivans storming the blockade in numbers...or the Sath taking the defense fleet by surprise

In other words, destroying the entire image of the ship as a thing of terrifying power and reducing it to 'lucky'.

Are we entering into the realm of 'Trashman tells developers how to make their game' again?

[Herra Tohtori]

you allways tend to complicate things... Adding engines should not be hard or pricey.

Really?  Do it to your car.

Now, that's not really fair, is it? 

Bolting a thruster unit or two on the side of a space ship is slightly different than having to install another piston powered engine somewhere onto a car, dealing with power transfer issues, making the two engines work more or less simultaneously, synchronizing things up and finally operating the car. The difference is, in space no one can hear you cursing.

[aldo_14]

you allways tend to complicate things... Adding engines should not be hard or pricey.

Really?  Do it to your car.

Now, that's not really fair, is it? 

To be fair, the car does have the advantage of existing fuel supply & control systems.

[Mefustae]

Just hack off the bloody end of a Triton and use several thousand rolls of duct-tape to lop it on the arse of the Mjolnir. No muss, no fuss, and all you need is a blowtorch to shred the Triton, and a s***-load of tape.

[AlphaOne]

well that might work better then actualy building and engine for the blasted thing. LOl !

[S-99]

Vasudans came to love duct tape as much as humans do. In fact, after the destruction of vasuda after the great war. They're economy jump started with the all new vasudan made duct tape. Since the duct tape empire was sealed off because of the lucifer blowing up halfway in the node. Vasudans have since renamed the earth tape "vasuda tape", which instills pride and morale among the vasudans about their old homeworld. The terrans being pissed off by this nicknamed it "fish tape". Since the terran rename, vasudans found a new purpose for the tape after being pissed off by the terrans by using vasuda tape to re-attatch heads along with the re assuring catch phrase that any terran wouldn't know the difference.

[TrashMan]

Really?  Do it to your car.

A mechanic could do it with relative ease..Alltough a more correct comparison would be bolting a external jet engine to the rear of a car...

So we have to have physical connections between the two, sensory feedback for maintenance, control systems, and a strong superstructure so the engine isn't a weak point whose destruction leads to internal damage on the cannon.   All of these systems will need integration and possibly EMP shielding and you'd need to adjust the base Mjolnir design to facilitate them.

Now, shielding is an interesting point.  You are correct in the sense it was knocked into a fighter without structural changes, but then again we don't know exactly how big a shield generator is, and how much power output you get from an Apollo powerplant (or whether there were 'invisible' side effects like the reduction of operational range, etc).  Also it's not entirely infeasible there was room already allocated for it, given that the GTA at least was working on deflector-type technology at Ross 128.  In any case, I'd imagine adding shielding to be vastly different in impact to adding engines, like the difference between adding a new set of speakers to a car and adding a new, well, engine.

That is, of course, ignoring the ships that came after the introduction of shields in FS1, which could be developed or modified to use shields before deployment.

Just how much power do you think simle manouvreing engines use up? The Mljonir is a beam cannon so it would have energy to spare...and thats IF the engines shared the power supply...

That leaves you with solidly attaching the engine module to the rear of the cannon - which not only can be done but can further increase the integrity of the cannon (just attach it with big, thick beams). EMP shielding is not needed (I don't think the Mljonir has it either) and such a small engine cannot result in the Mljonirs destruction..

Based on what calculation of cost?  Software alone would be more expensive than you think.

And I wander on what do YOU base those calculations...
Jump drives are common, so they sure as hell aren't expensive..
Simple directional thrusters are cheap even now, let alone in the future.

Hmmm...software indeed might be the most expensive thing there
Of course, you only pay for ONE and then copy it to all the cannons.

They either should have made it less vulnerable / more powerfull or adjusted the storyline....

And made High Noon 2 hours long?

I can see your creativity at work here... are you realyl serios? Is that the only way you can think of adjusting the storyline?

How about making the Collie allso stronger?
Or giving it *gasps* help?

Like the shivans storming the blockade in numbers...or the Sath taking the defense fleet by surprise

In other words, destroying the entire image of the ship as a thing of terrifying power and reducing it to 'lucky'.

Are we entering into the realm of 'Trashman tells developers how to make their game' again?

A ship that can destroy a entire fleet is what I what I would call powerfull (even though it had to use surprise). But I guess you consider powerfull = unrealisticly overpowered...

B.t.w. - you might want to check the previos point about making it STRONGER....

Seesh...

[aldo_14]

A mechanic could do it with relative ease..Alltough a more correct comparison would be bolting a external jet engine to the rear of a car...

Oh, well that's just piss easy then.

Just how much power do you think simle manouvreing engines use up? The Mljonir is a beam cannon so it would have energy to spare...and thats IF the engines shared the power supply...

That leaves you with solidly attaching the engine module to the rear of the cannon - which not only can be done but can further increase the integrity of the cannon (just attach it with big, thick beams). EMP shielding is not needed (I don't think the Mljonir has it either) and such a small engine cannot result in the Mljonirs destruction..

This is a rather substantial vessel we're talking about, bigger than most transports.  That alone implies a signficant power requirement (and possibly further structural alterations as it's not clear how FS ships damp their inertia).   What is more critical, IMO, is the structural changes implied by bolting something large onto the arse-end of the Mjolnir, as it provides a heat conduit.  and also, of course, tidal-type forces caused by the rear-end rotating.

And I wander on what do YOU base those calculations...
Jump drives are common, so they sure as hell aren't expensive..
Simple directional thrusters are cheap even now, let alone in the future.

Hmmm...software indeed might be the most expensive thing there
Of course, you only pay for ONE and then copy it to all the cannons.

Structural redesign costs.  Anyways, if it's that cheap and easy, why don't sentry guns have engines and jumpdrives?


[

I can see your creativity at work here... are you realyl serios? Is that the only way you can think of adjusting the storyline?

How about making the Collie allso stronger?
Or giving it *gasps* help?

You do understand the cultural context of the phrase 'High Noon', don't you? 

Also, making the Colussus stronger would be unrealistic; you'd invariably have to strengthen everything else so make the C relatively believeable as a TV construct, and we'd be right back where we started.

A ship that can destroy a entire fleet is what I what I would call powerfull (even though it had to use surprise). But I guess you consider powerfull = unrealisticly overpowered...

B.t.w. - you might want to check the previos point about making it STRONGER....

Seesh...

Ah, we are talking telling the developers how to make their game again!

[Mars]

In my personal opinion the Mjolnir was originally supposed to turn, but the fact that the model was messed up wasn't discovered until it was too late to fix. I could well be wrong, but the Mjolnir turning... just looks right, when it didn't work they used the Mjolnir#home instead. But I have to agree, part of the point of High Noon was that the Collie couldn't compete with the Sathanas.