[Axem]

I was making a mission for a now abandoned minicampaign where you fly a wing of Pegasus to coordinate a strike on a Shivan convoy (led by a Ravana) in the nebula. Basically there's a trailing Orion with oriented with all its beams on the convoy, and you must TAG the Shivans so the Orion can hit anything. Of course once the Orion starts firing, the Ravana is aware of the destroyer's presence and begins to turn to engage it. Well despite giving the Orion just about the best advantage possible, the Ravana can still turn and face the Orion and take it out with around 50% hull left.

So I would say, its sort of hard not to require disarming its front turrets if you're going to have other friendly cap ships in the area.

[Lucika]

For instance, the GTVA has the Independence on the field?

Eh?

Wasn't that the name of the uberbig Terran ship in Inferno?

[Scotty]

Sometimes you have to do something the way it has always been done, it just doesn't make sense any other way.  For example, would you use the Ursa as a high-speed interceptor?  The way the Ravana is built sort of limits the ways it can be used.  Another example would be trying to use a submarine as a battleship.  It wasn't built for that kind of thing.  It may not be original, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.

[eliex]

Wasn't that the name of the uberbig Terran ship in Inferno?

The GTCa Warlock, a supercarrier apparently the largest class of ship after the construction of the Colossus.

From FS2's Command, it is highly unlikely that a great deal of destroyers would be deployed. Instead, after the negation of the Warlock's beam turrets being very formidable Command would preferably send in a ship up to the Warlock's weight in class - even with the Warlock's beam turrets destroyed, it's vast hangar would house dozens of bombers which even 2 or 3 destroyers might be seriously damaged. That's if the Warlock was at full strength however.

[Lucika]

Wasn't that the name of the uberbig Terran ship in Inferno?

The GTCa Warlock, a superdestroyer apparently the largest class of ship after the construction of the Colossus.

From FS2's Command, it is highly unlikely that a great deal of destroyers would be deployed. Instead, after the negation of the Warlock's beam turrets being very formidable Command would preferably send in a ship up to the Warlock's weight in class - even with the Warlock's beam turrets destroyed, it's vast hangar would house dozens of bombers which even 2 or 3 destroyers might be seriously damaged. That's if the Warlock was at full strength however.

So, a considerable idea?

[Droid803]

You could always wave it off with "The Shivans move in mysterious ways."

[Mobius]

The GTCa Warlock is a carrier, not a superdestroyer...and it's not even the largest ship since the construction of the Colossus. Also, I don't get the point in discussing the Warlock here...

[Lucika]

The GTCa Warlock is a carrier, not a superdestroyer...and it's not even the largest ship since the construction of the Colossus. Also, I don't get the point in discussing the Warlock here...

The main idea is that 4 Ravanas are marchin' upon a BIG GTVA ship. The player flies a fighter and hits the bombers that one Ravana what stayed behind releases constantly.
Here is an original idea for you.

[Mobius]

You need a good reason to feature four massed Ravana destroyers(there should be different ships, at least) in a single mission - with that idea, you're likely to get the opposite effect.

[High Max]

.

[Krelus]

and The Second Great War Part II

Howsabout a Demon? People seem to forget the fact that that destroyer even exists.

[Mobius]

There are multiple reasons, actually:

1) The main beams of the Demon are placed on the sides, so the ship is nearly uncapable of firing beams on ships placed in front of it. There's one more beam cannon, but it's weaker and has several blind spots;

2) The Demon's main beams are harder to kill than the Ravana's, so the classic "I can take them down with a few shots!" concept isn't valid anymore(unless you're using Trebuchets, Stilettos and torpedoes);

3) The Ravana was introduced in FS2 and is more alien-looking than the Demon, so using the Ravana may be considered a better option by certain FREDders;

4) The Ravana has better anti-spacecraft capabilties and is more dangerous than the Demon when attempting to get closer;

[Snail]

There are multiple reasons, actually:

1) The main beams of the Demon are placed on the sides, so the ship is nearly uncapable of firing beams on ships placed in front of it. There's one more beam cannon, but it's weaker and has several blind spots;

2) The Demon's main beams are harder to kill than the Ravana's, so the classic "I can take them down with a few shots!" concept isn't valid anymore(unless you're using Trebuchets, Stilettos and torpedoes);

3) The Ravana was introduced in FS2 and is more alien-looking than the Demon, so using the Ravana may be considered a better option by certain FREDders;

4) The Ravana has better anti-spacecraft capabilties and is more dangerous than the Demon when attempting to get closer;

None of which are valid reasons for why the Demon shouldn't be used. Perhaps not using the Ravana at all might be a better option.

[Rodo]

the demon's big defect is it's exposed engine subsystem, you can easily make it usless without it's engines, but I still think it's a really good destroyer, the ravana is just another one, maybe a little more scarier but that's it.

[Lucika]

SD Demon + SD Demon = SSD Orb.

[Droid803]

The Demon is much better than the Ravana at anything except going on the Offense.
This makes it contrary to widely recognized Shivan attack patterns and hence, the more (or shall I say, completely) offensively-oriented SD Ravana is used much more often.

I personally think that the Demon's anti-fighter capability is far better than the Ravana's.
Sure, the Ravana has a few more odd flaks, but it's SAAAs have atrocious firing arcs. Both sides are completely devoid of coverage. The Demon's have a fire arc enabling it to hit most fighters except for those attacking it head on (for which it has a blob, a flak, and a missile battery to deal with). The Demon's anti-fighter guns can also take a lot more punishment. The Ravana's spine SAAA is as woefully underarmored as its main cannons.

The Demon can however, be taken on the offensive. It's LReds have very good firing arcs (almost 180 degrees). As long as they jump in slightly to the side of their target, they can at least bring 2 beams (1 LRed, 1 SRed) to bear. However, it is more difficult to position it like that, and in the same situation, the Ravana can muster twice the firepower, making it seem more of a threat.

[High Max]

.

[eliex]

The Demon is pretty much your Shivan mobile command centre and carrier for fighters and bombers and requires much support if it engages in any sort of skirmish involving an enemy destroyer.
Even a Hecate might be able to take it down from long range.

[Droid803]

Only from the front or the back.
From the sides, they're going to get shredded by the LRed unless it gets disabled.

[Krelus]

Of course, the Demon can still LOLWTFPWN even an Orion on the broadside. Dead is dead, regardless of whether or not it takes longer or not.

What with the arches and better AAA cover, the Demon is, in my opinion, a lot more fun to attack, as well. The key is to vary things as much as possible. If the Shivans are on the offensive, Ravana time. If they're barricading a node, a smattering of some Molochs backed up by a Demon is actually a scary combo.