[BengalTiger]

Given the choice of capships with Kaysers, Trebuchets and Tornados and fighters with Terran Turrets, MX-52's and Flak guns, or the way the GTVA armed the fleet, which way would you go?

It seems that the Security Council was too busy wasting money on the Big C to make the rest of the fleet armed fully with truly deadly weapons. Hell, they even claimed the Aeolus was too expensive, and saved some cash on the Hecate's and Mentu's anti-capship weaponry...

[Commander Zane]

Doesn't the Aten have a Subach HL-7? (Or some other Vasudan cruiser, not good with Vasudan stuff.) If a fighter can change its primaries prior to launch relatively easily, and cruisers can mount primarys, I don't see why ships can't have Kaysers or Morning Stars.

Something to do with shorter range compared to the other weapons, slower firerate (Somehow), and MASSIVE POWAH DRAINAGE (Again, somehow).

[Droid803]

The slower refire rate comes from the way turrets operate vs. how primary banks operate.
There's some random turret refire delay.

[Charismatic]

Maby power constraints?

[Snail]

Maby power constraints?

I keep saying that! For once someone agrees with me.

[TrashMan]

Trying to find in-universe explanations for something that's clearly a gameplay/mechanic decision is what I find funny.

Capital ships shouldn't have any problem with the power output of light weaponry - ESPECIALLY since some weapons are clearly ammunition based.

[esarai]

AFAIK turret delay is lengthened or shortened based on the difficulty you play at. You can add weapon flags that disable such fire wait alterations.

Besides, each gun turret has its own generator. If a fighter, dealing with shields, lasers, astrionics (trying to come up with a word that conveys the meaning "avionics for space ships"), and engines while being the same size as a turret, the turret should be able to handle fighter-grade weapons.

Just stick a conventional 3-stage thermonuclear warhead on the end of a TTRM and see how everyone down range deals with it. The reason the Helios is so expensive is that it's an antimatter warhead. Just go with a standard nuke. More bang for fewer bucks.

[Droid803]

A standard nuke is a Harbringer.
Its awesome against subsystems, and decent against hulls.

[esarai]

True...

But if the Harbinger does the same damage as a 3-stage thermonuclear bomb, and it's only that size... the size of a TTRM means you could strap (potentially) a 4 or 5 stage weapon on the end of the missile. Much more bang. Much.

Most powerful 3-stage detonation ever: 50 Mt. A four or five stage would be insane.

[Snail]

True...

But if the Harbinger does the same damage as a 3-stage thermonuclear bomb, and it's only that size... the size of a TTRM means you could strap (potentially) a 4 or 5 stage weapon on the end of the missile. Much more bang. Much.

Most powerful 3-stage detonation ever: 50 Mt. A four or five stage would be insane.

The Harbinger has a payload of 5000Mt.

[esarai]

I'm pretty sure in game it was 50 Mt. Oh wait no I just checked the CB animation... damn... but it still only uses 3 salted fission warheads and a fusion accelerator. Add in more of that stuff and inside the game universe you've got one hell of a bang waiting to happen.

[Droid803]

You mean like...antimatter?
Then you get a Helios.
Expensive.

[Lucika]

You mean like...antimatter?
Then you get a Helios.
Expensive.

Comparing to, for instance, nuclear bombs, what are the strengths of FS weapons?
Exact questions:
1) Would a nuclear bomb destroy an Orion?
2) ...a Colly? A Sath?
3) What's the strength of a Harpoon...
4) MX-50...
5) a Meson bomb...
6) 1 shot from a laser compared to today's weaponry?

[General Battuta]

You mean like...antimatter?
Then you get a Helios.
Expensive.

Comparing to, for instance, nuclear bombs, what are the strengths of FS weapons?
Exact questions:
1) Would a nuclear bomb destroy an Orion?
2) ...a Colly? A Sath?
3) What's the strength of a Harpoon...
4) MX-50...
5) a Meson bomb...
6) 1 shot from a laser compared to today's weaponry?

1. No.
2. Hell no.
3. Given it's a significant fraction of the yield of a Harbinger, nuclear-yield.
4. Similar.
5. Apocalyptic, extinction-level (I should think.)
6. Big.

[Lucika]

2. Hell no.

Heaven yes?

[General Battuta]

2. Hell no.

Heaven yes?

Limbo wut?

[Droid803]

The Tsar Bomba is 50 Mt
A Harbringer is 5000 Mt

Today's nukes are nothing. The Harbringer is a nuke, and I'd assume that's the upper limit of it nuke tech, as they started making their antimatter bombs better afterwards.

[TrashMan]

MEh...FS2 numbers are like SW numbers - thrown in there to be there without much thought. Basiecly redicolously overpowered....but I guess still saner than SW...

[Scotty]

That's because SW is a different universe.

[Mura]

Here's my input on blockades:

                                     |( 
 Ships come   <--------   |(  capships, Mjolnirs, Whatever goes here shooting   
 out of here                   |(        that way
                                     |(
                                Knossos

That way you don't have to face the nasty fangs of the saths and ravanas, but I guess the ships would have to be all shooting at the same time to blast them before the shivans have a chance to jump out :b