[The E]

Good points bear repetition.

[headdie]

end of the day the raynor is so powerful because it is more specialised, the titan continues the Orion/Hecate line of general purpose warship where as the raynor sacrificed fighter complement for mounted firepower.

[The E]

Actually, no. The Titan is just as specialized as the Raynor, it's just specialized in a different direction. And as a general purpose combatant, the Hecate (being the carrier that she is) is an utter failure.

The Raynor is what's called a main-line combatant. A ship that can duke it out with other ships over prolonged engagements. To do that, it sacrifices some fighter capability.
The Titan is basically the GTVA's version of the Ravana. Its main job is to sit around and launch fighter wings, but its secondary role is to act as an ambusher, jumping into an enemies' flank to rip it apart with its beams.
As centerpieces of a Battlegroup, this is the basic doctrine: The Raynor engages targets up close and personally, luring them into position so that the Titan can jump in to obliterate them.

[General Battuta]

All that said, headdie's analysis is a good one, and I don't want him walking out of here feeling like a moron. So props for headdie. 

[Dilmah G]

...basic doctrine: The Raynor engages targets up close and personally, luring them into position so that the Titan can jump in to obliterate them.

But we all know basic doctrine gets you nowhere (when the lead starts flying).

The trick to effective military tactics, in a nutshell, is to do something your enemy hasn't seen before. Exploit their weak-points, catch them off guard, confuse them.

Sure, a Titan 'beams-blazing' makes things disappear, but an effective enemy learns from their mistakes, and it won't be long before you see your Raynor being outflanked by a prepared UEF force with a cool-headed commander. Oops, there goes the plan.

Hell, if I was feeling really un-creative, I'd jump my Titan in four k's directly underneath the enemy force, and show them we're not fighting in the sea anymore. But tactics/FRED-wise, there are plenty of interesting things a good Commander can do with these babies.

[The E]

Sure, but then we're into Subspace speed chess territory, where you need information about your opponents' deployments. As we've said time and time again, the most valuable asset is a ship not yet committed.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

I find it a little annoying that battles in WiH may be crudely translated into a classic board game.

[General Battuta]

I find it a little annoying that battles in WiH may be crudely translated into a classic board game.

First off, it's a description of battles in FreeSpace 2, no matter the mod.

Second, 'subspace speed chess' is a description of a situation where the two sides rapidly deploy assets via subspace jump to counter each other's deployments, whether by direct attack or by engaging in areas the enemy has left week.

Third, chess is a game of such incredible complexity and depth (rivaled only by go) that you should be impressed anything can be compared to it. There's nothing crude about the comparison.

Fourth, that post made you sound like a total buffoon.

Hopefully your response will prove you're not a moron.  

[Dilmah G]

Sure, but then we're into Subspace speed chess territory, where you need information about your opponents' deployments. As we've said time and time again, the most valuable asset is a ship not yet committed.

Wha? I don't believe I entered that territory at all. I was getting at the fact there are a million different ways to play a hand in space.

Anyone who's read the history books knows the brilliant commanders always utilise something the enemy hasn't seen before. Everyone, has seen your 2 by 1 flanking maneuver, and subsequently, everyone knows how to counter it. But tell me, how many Officers have seen a Titan attack from directly above, a Raynor attack from directly underneath (forcing the enemy force to separate in two), to have a Deimos or two jump in the centre of the two groups and utilise their broadside firepower to absolutely obliterate the enemy?

[-Norbert-]

Considering that Humanity in FS2 has been waging war in space for centuries they won't be surprised by an enemy who uses all three dimensions. If there is any reason to twodimensional mission design, then it's due to the mission creator, not because of any background story.

Unless it is a very broad and flat formation it really doesn't matter if an enemy is coming from above or from the sides in space.
Actually I would think it would be smarter to hit the enemy not form two directly opposit directions, but rather have one group attack from left or right and the other from above or below to minimize the chance of the two groups hitting each other with the shots that miss the enemy formation between them.
It also leaves you the tactical option of uniting the two groups if the situation calls for it. If you have the enemy directly between your groups that's not an option.

Jumping in Deimos in the middle of the enemy formation also doesn't sound all that smart to me, considering that the mainline battleship of the UEF, the Karuna, has quite powerfull broadsides. Jumping them in behind the enemy formation would make more sense to me. Same goes for Shivans. If you jump the corvettes into the middle of the enemy formation they are bound to be in front of some ships. And a Deimos in front of a Shivan ship has a rather short lifeexpectancy.

[Dilmah G]

Considering that Humanity in FS2 has been waring war in space for centuries they won't be surprised by an enemy who uses all three dimensions. If there is any reason to twodimensional mission design, then it's due to the mission creator, not because of any background story.

Well, seeing as we've barely seen radical use of the Y axis in most campaigns, retail included, I'd daresay it would still effective. The point was, to use something the enemy has never seen before.

Unless it is a very broad and flat formation it really doesn't matter if an enemy is coming from above or from the sides.

Disagree. Look at FS2 ships, their firepower is focused predominantly forward, broadside, and aft (in some cases). If you can hit the enemy hard before he has time to maneuver his gunners into a position where they have a firing solution, you've got the upper hand. And the intention in my poorly thought-out strategy before was to split the formation up.

Actually I would think it would be smarter to hit the enemy not form two directly opposit directions, but rather have one group attack from left or right and the other from above or below to minimize the chance of the two groups hitting each other with the shots that miss the enemy formation between them.
It also leaves you the tactical option of uniting the two groups if the situation calls for it. If you have the enemy directly between your groups that's not an option.

Uniting the two groups in a three dimensional environment is a no-no in my opinion, because you now become very easy to outflank. But if left and above is a formation that works for you, go for it.

Jumping in Deimos in the middle of the enemy formation also doesn't sound all that smart to me, considering that the mainline battleship of the UEF, the Karuna, has quite powerfull broadsides. Jumping them in behind the enemy formation would make more sense to me. Same goes for Shivans. If you jump the corvettes into the middle of the enemy formation they are bound to be in front of some ships. And a Deimos in front of a Shivan ship has a rather short lifeexpectancy.

Of course it's a stupid idea! It was the product of two and a half seconds of thought!

By the way, the Karuna is a frigate, and believe me, far from the most common ship in the Federation.

The idea was, the initial assault has resulted in your enemy commander splitting the force up, to deal with the separate threats, since well, staying as one large group is generally a stupid thing to do, when facing a Titan and a Raynor (and taking into account their firepower and where it is).

This results in your enemy formation now being two formations. Once the gap is large enough (your destroyers are taking it slow, to give the UEF time to move apart to create the gap without opening fire), you jump your corvette pair in here, who then peel off and engage a UEF formation from the rear each.

Here, your destroyers put the foot to the floor, and within about 10-40 seconds, your UEF force is now confused and in disarray. They can't go back, because there's two TSlashes giving them what for. They can't go ahead, or you'll deal with some nasty looking beams.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

First off, it's a description of battles in FreeSpace 2, no matter the mod.

True, but FS2 makes it very subliminal and look ridiculously simple. BP does the opposite.

Third, chess is a game of such incredible complexity and depth (rivaled only by go) that you should be impressed anything can be compared to it. There's nothing crude about the comparison.

Well, I suck at chess, and I've never actually seen a real chess match taking place, so I do not comprehend its complexity and depth. I'm certain there's more to chess than how I see it, but I've never actually seen it, so I'm not entirely convinced, since I play to lose.

Having played and seen chess only at the surface level, I am a little put off that more intelligent people like yourself hold it in such high regard.

Fourth, that post made you sound like a total buffoon.

That's not too bad. Fury and Goober have used far more direct nouns in response to some things I did, and I certainly have far worse posts under my belt.

[General Battuta]

It doesn't matter what regard you hold chess in - personally I rarely play it and I'm no expert.

What's important is its use as a metaphor: a game where pieces (available forces) must be carefully deployed with regard to the enemy's entire position, not just a single slugging match.

You don't need to go any deeper than that.

I'm just going to chalk this post up to the same kind of run-around-obliviously syndrome that made you think Inferno builds were bad.

[-Norbert-]

Disagree. Look at FS2 ships, their firepower is focused predominantly forward, broadside, and aft (in some cases).

We are talking about formations here. I would make a formation with the escorts surrounding the bigger ships on all sides in a way that the most turrets face outwards. Since the setting is space, you don't need every ships "bottom" to face down. Besides rolling is most likely faster than making a trun with a captial ship.

On that account, is it even possible to tell a ship in FRED to roll, without changing course to turn the damaged sides away from the enemy and bring the undamaged turrets to bear?

And chess isn't really that complex. You have a small playing field, few different units and limited movements with each. The difficulty isn't the complexity, but outthinking your opponent. You have to plan your move, anticipate possible moves the opponent will make in response, and then make an accorting counter to it. You have to think far ahead of the actual stage of the game.
I think a spacebattle (or rather battle in general) is far more complex than chess, but it does come down to the same basic principles. Anticipate what the enemy will do, counter that action, anticipate how the enemy will react to the counter and so on. Replan or adapt your strategy if the opponent does something unexpected.

[General Battuta]

On that account, is it even possible to tell a ship in FRED to roll, without changing course to turn the damaged sides away from the enemy and bring the undamaged turrets to bear?

IT IS NOW.

We've got at least one roll-the-ship moment, it's pretty cool.

[The E]

On that account, is it even possible to tell a ship in FRED to roll, without changing course to turn the damaged sides away from the enemy and bring the undamaged turrets to bear?

Yes. There are a few handy little sexps just for that purpose in 3.6.12, ship-maneuver, ship-lat-maneuver and ship-rot-maneuver (Under coordinate manipulation).

[Snail]

...basic doctrine: The Raynor engages targets up close and personally, luring them into position so that the Titan can jump in to obliterate them.

I thought the GTVA and UEF both thought that deploying more than 2 destroyers at a single battle was a bad idea?

[General Battuta]

'Tis. In this case you could use corvette strike teams. The two-destroyers deployment would probably be employed for something like a Sathanas (see 'A Time for Heroes.')

[-Norbert-]

But with the forward firepower of the new GTVA corvettes (especially the Bellerophon) you hardly need destroyers for shock-jump tactics unless the target really is a Lucifer or bigger.

[NGTM-1R]

I thought the GTVA and UEF both thought that deploying more than 2 destroyers at a single battle was a bad idea?

I think it's more a case of the fact they don't have that many destroyers to commit. As noted, the main advantage goes to the guy who commits his ships last, so there is a natural tendancy to hold your big guns back if you can get away with it.

On the other hand, concentration of force offers too many advantages to be arbitrarily dismissed like that, at least for the GTVA. The GTVA, conditioned by fighting the Shivans, might not want to present that sort of a target-rich environment, but on the other hand the UEF is not the Shivans. The UEF however has a legitimate concern there because the GTVA and its beam cannon have the option of engaging in Shivan-esque tactics.