[TrashMan]

Are we operating on the assumption that the (Odin + Warlock) costs  <=  Colossus cost?

[Snail]

FORGET INFERNO.

[mr.WHO]

Why??

[Snail]

Because Inferno is not important to this discussion.

[mr.WHO]

do you think that the GTVA would design a new class of supercapital learning from the strengths of the Sathanis or do you think they would shift toward greater firepower in a smaller package.

Sounds like Inferno GTVA design philosophy

Personally I think that tacticians would learn not to put all their eggs in one basket and R&D would shift toward making more efficient and higher powered beam cannons, or other powerful weaponry, that could be mounted on a greater number of smaller ships (Corvette or Destroyer class) that could out maneuver the primary field of fire of a supercapital and strike at the weaknesses in it's defense.

That REALLY sounds like Inferno corvettes (Phobos) and Destroyers (Oberon?)


Because author this topic ask about GTVA future design philosophy, and INF SCP is about it, I think that it is important to that topic.

[TrashMan]

Well technicly the two ships are just used as examples of two new focused sip classes the GTVA might build in the future. We could use any two theoretical ships.

The question is - is the cost of two such ships (battleship + supercarrier) the same as the Collie. It all depends. Given that we have no cost estimate for the Collie nor for ANY ship in FS, such a thing is left largely to a campaign maker.

If you start with the assumption that Colossus Mk2 is cheaper than the flying gun and carrier, then it makes sense to build collies.

[Snail]

The question is - is the cost of two such ships (battleship + supercarrier) the same as the Collie. It all depends. Given that we have no cost estimate for the Collie nor for ANY ship in FS, such a thing is left largely to a campaign maker.

Well the Orion costs more to construct than paying the crew for 3 years in FS1, so the cost probably went down by FS2. Same with the Colossus. So making an Odin or a Warlock probably costs about the same as building an Orion I guess (especially since in INFSCP the Warlock doesn't have such heavy weaponry).

[mr.WHO]

I agree that cost would matter.
But  splitting battleships from carriers would be more cost effective, coz carrier can stay behind, and battleship can make ship-to-ship battles without bothering about it's fighter don't have anywher to land if it's destroyed.

While Collosus, even if it's cheaper theoretical mk.2 can't perform those two task separately.

for example you have two tasks (carrier operation and ship combat) that each need to take one hour.

within one hour, BS and carrier can perform two tasks, while cheaper (cheaper from BS+Ca) colossus mk.2 could perform only one.
Also as I mentioned if you lost one ship in BS+Ca scenario, it's not such disaster as in Col mk.2 case.
Not to mention two ships can be in two diffrend places, an art that single ship would never be able.

What I wan't to say is that even if BS+Ca might be a bit more expensive, it much more flexible.

....when you have an 80 Jugernauts, you would want to perform as much tasks as possible or you will be overun by shivan swarm.

[Snail]

The GTVA doesn't have 80 jugs, even in Inferno.

[mr.WHO]

I ment 80 jugs at the opposing side of your gun

[karajorma]

What I wan't to say is that even if BS+Ca might be a bit more expensive, it much more flexible.

Are you sure about that?

The carrier + Battleship combo is also limited. Sending one into another system on its own makes it horribly limited as neither can survive long if a clever enemy exploits its weaknesses without the other one present.

[TrashMan]

Not to mention that a Collie Mk2 would probably have more armor than any of the two (being bigger).
A specialized carrier would theoreticly have weak armor and can be destroyed rather easily by a surprise attack, even if the battleship is present.

Imagine a BB+Carrier cruise along together and a Collie Mk2 (or another BB) jump in and focus all fire on the carrier. Carrier goes down before the escorts can take out the enemy. The enemy can probably even jump out, even if heavily damaged.

Congratulations, you just lost the majority of your fighter support.

Now take a Collie in it's place. It's has enough armor and HP to withstand powerful attacks longer than a carrier can and enough firepower to take out the attacking BB.


F'course there is no perfect answer. Both a Colli-like ship and specialized Carriers and battleships have their roles. their good sides and bad sides.
It depends on a lot of factors, such as the composition of enemy forces, are you attacking or defending, positioning and X other factors.

Just saying a Jugg like Collie is better or a BB+Carrier combo is better doesn't really have much sense.

[Mobius]

May I know why you keep thinking that a carrier shouldn't have a great anti-warship capability? They may or may not be ships close to destroyer or superdestroyer specifications with the ability to house MANY spacecraft. Try to imagine an Orion with a larger fighterbay, for example...is that modification going to affect  anti-warship and anti-spacecraft capabilities in a so bad way?

[Koth]

Mobius, I have only a slight problem with you writing coloured and in italics but that small font is JUST ****ING ANNOYING!

[Mobius]

Is it better now?

It fits perfectly with my title.

EDIT: Umpf...

[Koth]

It isn't as eyehurting as before but I would still prefer that you used the standard HLP font.

[Hades]

Is it better now?

It fits perfectly with my title.

EDIT: Umpf...

How does it go with your title?
Your title is in bold.

[FreeSpaceFreak]

May I know why you keep thinking that a carrier shouldn't have a great anti-warship capability? They may or may not be ships close to destroyer or superdestroyer specifications with the ability to house MANY spacecraft. Try to imagine an Orion with a larger fighterbay, for example...is that modification going to affect  anti-warship and anti-spacecraft capabilities in a so bad way?

Larger fighterbay = larger area to defend against fighters/bombers (and the Orion is véry poorly defended already) = more reactors are needed = even larger area to defend...
Seriously now:
Carrier + Anti-capship capability = Colossus
Battleship + large fighterbay = Colossus

As TMan said:

Both a Colli-like ship and specialized Carriers and battleships have their roles. their good sides and bad sides.
It depends on a lot of factors, such as the composition of enemy forces, are you attacking or defending, positioning and X other factors.

Just saying a Jugg like Collie is better or a BB+Carrier combo is better doesn't really have much sense.

A very wise remark IMHO. But I don't think the GTVA should go above the 3-km limit again.

BTW, stop ***ing about fonts. It's way off-topic.

[Mobius]

How does it go with your title?
Your title is in bold.

It fits...

It isn't as eyehurting as before but I would still prefer that you used the standard HLP font.

Eyehurting? Lightblue?

Larger fighterbay = larger area to defend against fighters/bombers (and the Orion is véry poorly defended already) = more reactors are needed = even larger area to defend...
Seriously now:
Carrier + Anti-capship capability = Colossus
Battleship + large fighterbay = Colossus

As TMan said:

Both a Colli-like ship and specialized Carriers and battleships have their roles. their good sides and bad sides.
It depends on a lot of factors, such as the composition of enemy forces, are you attacking or defending, positioning and X other factors.

Just saying a Jugg like Collie is better or a BB+Carrier combo is better doesn't really have much sense.

A very wise remark IMHO. But I don't think the GTVA should go above the 3-km limit again.

Ok, more reactors are needed...but please consider the space left to spacecraft. It means less space for internal systems which require energy. Look at the main halls...

Ok but the GTVA will most likely build up a polyvalent warship able to do basically everything. The Colossus could have an even larger fighterbay...as stated before, it would require less energy.

[Snail]

The Warlcock should be able to defend itself, but it shouldn't me some asshatting assault carrier like it is used in INFR1. In INFSCP the Warlcock is basically a mobile installation.