Author Topic: The Hades-class destroyer  (Read 13341 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
How many more? ;7

 

Offline Mars

  • I have no originality
  • 211
  • Attempting unreasonable levels of reasonable
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Mad Bomber's 66 turret hades wasn't too feeble. Neither was the Hera. But they're non canon (go away, Mars).

Actually I find the Hades ridiculously underpowered by any standard... the subsystems on that ship are among the weakest in the game... while upgraded versions of the Hades are non canon, they are far more believable.

 

Offline Desert Tyrant

  • 27
  • Meh.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Am I the only person who thought the Hades should have appered more in Silent Threat?

 

Offline Mars

  • I have no originality
  • 211
  • Attempting unreasonable levels of reasonable
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Not apeared... but they should have built up to it... instead your just suddenly put up against it.

 

Offline Desert Tyrant

  • 27
  • Meh.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
For a ship so though, the Hades had really ****ing crappy subsystem armor.
Also, it either needed one or two more beam cannons, or Mjinir esque Beams. Escially on the Broadsides
Hmm <Might use fred when I can actually use it>

And yes, that silent threat mission sucked ass. Honestly, Silent threat needed better missions

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
The Hades is not, simply put, feeble at all. The subsystem armor thing gives people a false belief that it's not very good in a fight.

However it is uniquely suited to engaging Shivan targets, because Shivans use direct-fire beams, not slash types, and as such are much less likely to knock its subsystems out. I once pitted a Hades against three Molochs and two Demons, and the Hades came out on top.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Desert Tyrant

  • 27
  • Meh.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Good point, Mr ngtm1r
Is the Hades in any Muti missions? Aside from the dogfight one?
 :confused:
« Last Edit: January 25, 2007, 08:04:58 pm by Desert Tyrant »

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
The Hades is not, simply put, feeble at all. The subsystem armor thing gives people a false belief that it's not very good in a fight.

However it is uniquely suited to engaging Shivan targets, because Shivans use direct-fire beams, not slash types, and as such are much less likely to knock its subsystems out. I once pitted a Hades against three Molochs and two Demons, and the Hades came out on top.

This is most likely because it has so much armor.

 

Offline AlphaOne

  • !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • 210
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
That and the fact that as far as i can remember the hades had shivan tech implemented into its weapons sistems. And had the lucifer class shields?? I,m not sure about this tough! Scratch the shiled stuff shields are useless against beams.
Die shivan die!!
Then jumps into his apple stealth pie and goes of to war.What a brave lad....what a brave lad say the ladies in red.
 

(\_/)
(O.o)
(> < ) 

This is Bunny . Copy  Bunny  into your signature to help him on his way to world domination!

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Lol, with a destroyer that has good firepower and armor with weak ass subsystems pitted against an enemy that uses direct fire beams, hell even versus slasher beams that's a problem. A weak subsystem versus a direct fire beam is just deadly. What do you think most direct fire beams target? Probably the really powerful turrets on other capships, or the meatier and tastier subsystems.
Perhaps a new hades being developed could make a balance on stronger subsystems and less armor. But the hades itself is already extremely unique and even sought after in the community. If integrating shivan technology, it's reasonable to assume gti was looking into reproducing energy shielding for their destroyer. In the least at perhaps they were trying something cool like using energy shields on subsystems in place of hardening subsystems with depleted uranium (force field isolation happens all the time in star trek, i don't see why you couldn't do something like using something as crude as a fighters shield generator around a subsystem). If you did use a shield generator around a subsystem, it'd probably offer no more protection than depleted uranium does since disruptors do cause shield damage (a move like this would replace something clunky and old with some just as usable, bot more efficient...sort of like getting rid of IDE interfaces in favor of new and smaller SATA, in the beginning SATA was no faster than IDE, but it was something that could be improved upon, and as time goes on shielding gets more advanced and more resistant). The final mission of silent threat when you take down the hades was when the hades was being brought online.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
The Hades in the last mission, IMO, was only 50% operational.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Lol, with a destroyer that has good firepower and armor with weak ass subsystems pitted against an enemy that uses direct fire beams, hell even versus slasher beams that's a problem. A weak subsystem versus a direct fire beam is just deadly. What do you think most direct fire beams target? Probably the really powerful turrets on other capships, or the meatier and tastier subsystems.

Sorry, that ain't how it works. They pick a vertice and let 'er rip. Learn what you're talking about before you start trying to discuss the FSO engine.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Huh? I've always seen my ships shoot at turrets? Or was it coincidence?

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Well then the AI could do a much nastier job by targetting subsystems.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Mars

  • I have no originality
  • 211
  • Attempting unreasonable levels of reasonable
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
I've always seen beams hitting turrets and subsystems as well.

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
I've always seen beams hitting turrets and subsystems as well.

Yeah. And it comes from Mars, so :ha:

 

Offline Desert Tyrant

  • 27
  • Meh.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
I am now maintaining the fact that the Hades might benifit from torpedos mounted in turrets.
I mean, the Hadeses 2 Beam cannons arent all that well er... placed
So, one or two more beam cannons on the broadsides and 1 to 3 Tsunami/Cyclops torpedo launchers would benifit the Hades and the bombers that it launcher, as the capships defenses, possibly the main beams, have to be diverted in a point defense mode, giving the fighters and bombers a chance to slip through.
(as a side note, the main beams of capships CAN shoot down bombs. Lets just say I had a bad experiance in the sixth wonder, thanks to that trick :mad2: :mad2: ****in Hawkwood and Siltilettos IIs)
« Last Edit: January 27, 2007, 06:37:13 pm by Desert Tyrant »

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
Lovely in principle, but think about this.

Adding additional beams requires boosting reactor output.  That'd require a complete overhaul of the ship's internals, either to upgrade to a larger reactor or install Vasudan models.  (Hey, does the power generation field in ships.tbl have anything to do with beam weapons?  Always wondered that.) 

You know why torpedoes and missiles aren't used on capital ships?  Because said ships are going to be hit by big, angry, shield-and-armor penetrating beams.  Do you know what happened to the Hood when a penetrating shell hit her magazines?

I mean, hell, if support ships tend to blow up larger than normal...imagine what a capital ship magazine would do if a beam cored it! 

(Makes me wonder if destroyers are ever lost that way.)

  

Offline Desert Tyrant

  • 27
  • Meh.
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
I'm afraid I am not familiar with the Hood, what happened there?
And besides, on the beam issue: I wasn't going to make them destroyer sized. Nah, I was just thinking about using either Terslashes or SGreens
Come to think of that, it probably would suck with the sides. If I were to add more beams to the Hades, I would at the very least TRY to make it mostly credible
Oh, and thanks for the constructive Criticism
EDIT: oh and yes, the beams going through the weapon storage would suck, but wouldent that be a problem with flak too, no?
« Last Edit: January 27, 2007, 07:48:09 pm by Desert Tyrant »

 

Offline Nuclear1

  • 211
Re: The Hades-class destroyer
I'm afraid I am not familiar with the Hood, what happened there?

The Hood was a WWI-era British warship that was sunk by the German battleship Bismark in WWII.  The Bismark blew open the Hood's magazines (where everything on a ship that goes boom is stored), and subsequently made it go boom. 

Similar situation with the Arizona.
Spoon - I stand in awe by your flawless fredding. Truely, never before have I witnessed such magnificant display of beamz.
Axem -  I don't know what I'll do with my life now. Maybe I'll become a Nun, or take up Macrame. But where ever I go... I will remember you!
Axem - Sorry to post again when I said I was leaving for good, but something was nagging me. I don't want to say it in a way that shames the campaign but I think we can all agree it is actually.. incomplete. It is missing... Voice Acting.
Quanto - I for one would love to lend my beautiful singing voice into this wholesome project.
Nuclear1 - I want a duet.
AndrewofDoom - Make it a trio!