[Mars]

The GTVA doesn't have long range weapons, even though they clearly have the same technology available to the UEF.

The UEF doesn't have weapons like pulse cannons.

The GTVA has the Maxim, which has a much longer range than the UEF equivalent, the Gattler, even though the UEF has shown the ability to produce longer ranged weapons in general.

[Droid803]

And your post has a bit of weirdness too.
You complain about the GTVA lacking long range weapons, then complain about the maxim being a long range weapon.

wut?

[Mars]

It wasn't complaining, I was just musing on it.

[-Sara-]

The GTVA doesn't have long range weapons, even though they clearly have the same technology available to the UEF.

Beams. Trebuchets. Maxims. Subspace strikes.

The UEF doesn't have weapons like pulse cannons.

They do have pulse weaponry of many kinds.

The GTVA has the Maxim, which has a much longer range than the UEF equivalent, the Gattler, even though the UEF has shown the ability to produce longer ranged weapons in general.

The gattler spits more fire per minute. UEF ships seem to be faster, so they get closer faster as well to use their Gattlers. Also, they use paveways and what not.

[Qent]

The GTVA doesn't have long range weapons, even though they clearly have the same technology available to the UEF.

UEF guns are a bit expensive, often using antimatter. The new blue beams are also longer-ranged than the green ones, so they're not always stuck with a 4km range.

The UEF doesn't have weapons like pulse cannons.

They have that rapid-fire plasma gun... thingy.

The GTVA has the Maxim, which has a much longer range than the UEF equivalent, the Gattler, even though the UEF has shown the ability to produce longer ranged weapons in general.

Isn't the gatler more effective against shields though? And it's not like the UEF was trying to copy the GTVA.

[Droid803]

Beams -had- 30km range with the proper target vectoring until someone introduced something that removed that tactical possibility for questionable graphical improvements.
Donno why though. :/

[MatthTheGeek]

* MatthTheGeek slaps Droid808 for showing questionable taste and trying to start a troll *

[Mars]

Wow, there's no delete post now O_O

[NGTM-1R]

* MatthTheGeek slaps Droid808 for showing questionable taste and trying to start a troll *

You're the only person on the forums who thinks that.

[Flak]

Those autocannons on UEF capital ships are not something to laugh at. 

[-Norbert-]

The GTVA doesn't have long range weapons,

The Raynor and Titan have long range torpedo launchers.

[Snail]

Isn't the gatler more effective against shields though? And it's not like the UEF was trying to copy the GTVA.

I'm pretty sure the Gattler is useless against shields.

[Pred the Penguin]

Still better than the Maxim, which is pretty much non-effective.

[Rodo]

Those autocannons on UEF capital ships are not something to laugh at.

says so Flak 

And indeed, UEF guns are dangerous ****.

Though the Balor is still something to be afraid of when facing an Ezechiel.

[Mars]

The Narayana Mass driver outranges the BBlue by 6 kilometers, and does 240 damage / second, the Narayana has two of them.

 Gauss cannons are similar, but do damage mostly to subsystems 60 damage to hull / second.

Narayana Apocalypse torpedos do considerable damage. Three turrets fire them in bursts of 4 (12 torpedos) every twenty seconds; that's 12,000 potential damage right there, over twenty seconds, so . . . 600 damage / second.

So the main guns of a Narayana output about 900 damage / second total. At a range of 14,400 meters

A Chimera's 3 MBlues come out to 1,698. At a range of 6,750 meters.


The Supernova launchers on the Titan alone count for  around 1,333 damage / second. At a range of 7,200 meters



I'm wondering what the explanation is for the Narayana's vast range (in a way where I suppose that there is one, I am not complaining about this awesome mod), and I'm wondering why the UEF doesn't have more damage output in general, since torpedos and guns are shown to do pretty well.

Less research?

[-Norbert-]

They simply didn't need them.
That they build destroyers and super-bombers in their isolation from any potential enemy, except the Gaian effort, was highly controversal and citicized a lot, so the same is probably true for dedicated weapon research.
I wouldn't be surprised if the weapon technologies of the UEF were either done shortly after the node collapse or were byproducts of civilian research projects rather than dedicated weapon research (like dynamite being invented for mining and "abused" for war).

[Dragon]

UEF Destroyers are more like carriers, they could have been like that even more during peacetime, being outfitted with the heavier weapons when GTVA attacked.
Superbombers also might have not been created from something not really intended to use in that particular role and designed based on some kind of shuttle or other utility vechicle design. Alternatively, they could have been build just in case, maybe even as "anti-Lucifer bombers". Yet another option are missile boats, which, being quite effective against fighters, would be usefull against GEFs. converting them to bombers won't be difficult, just to modify pylons layout and add heavy torpedo mounts.
UEF technology weapon might have advanced very quickly during the war, especially that they had a GTVA logistics ship defect to their side.
Of course, BP FREDers will know better than me, I'm just doing the normal maps here.

[-Norbert-]

I doubt an anti-GEF missile boat needs several dedicated anti-capship railguns.

[ION3]

The gattler has the half the shield damage of the rapier. And twice the hull  and subsystem damage.

And I thik I still prefer the prometheus over the balor.

[crizza]

Well, the UEF has this nasty fleetbomber...anything up to a Ravana loses 1percent hull integrity by its primary...
And 1 Solaris and two Nayarnas make short work with any opposing warship^^