[ZeroCooL]

Name    GTF Apollo                                                   
Type    Space Superiority    
Manufacturer    Han-Ronald Corp.    
Maneuverability    High (Fair)    
Max Velocity    60 - 82 ms-1    
Max Afterburner Velocity    140 ms-1    
Armor    Light (Medium)    
Hitpoints    240 pts    
Shields    350 pts    
Length    21 m    
Weaponry    
Primary weapons    
1st bank    2 guns    
2nd bank    2 guns    
Secondary weapons    
1st bank capacity    40 missiles    
2nd bank capacity    40 missiles    
Countermeasures    
Countermeasure capacity    25 countermeasures



Name    GTF Perseus
Type    Interceptor    
Manufacturer    Nankam Aeronautical    
Maneuverability    High    
Max Velocity    80 - 100 ms-1    
Max Afterburner Velocity    140 ms-1    
Armor    Average    
Hitpoints    265 pts    
Shields    350 pts    
Length    17 m    
Weaponry    
Primary weapons    
1st bank    2 guns    
2nd bank    2 guns    
Secondary weapons    
1st bank capacity    40 missiles    
2nd bank capacity    40 missiles    
Countermeasures    
Countermeasure capacity    40 countermeasures


The diferences are minimal!!, only the Speed,  the perseus is more faster than an apollo! and the gun points are very similar too! 

the perseus is an interceptor? or a Space superiority fighter??

[Snail]

It's been said before the Perseus is a lot more of a space superiority fighter than an interceptor.

[TopAce]

You forgot weapons compatibility and maneuverability, two major attributes.

[Flaser]

....though frankly the Valkyrie had the best damn gun points ever. Close to the center of the ship's body, very tight spread of fire. With the other ships parallax always make hitting a lot harder.

[Hades]

You forgot weapons compatibility and maneuverability, two major attributes.

The Apollo has slightly better maneuverability than the Valkyrie. Not sure the exact numbers for both the Apollo or Perseus off the top of my head.

[Commander Zane]

....though frankly the Valkyrie had the best damn gun points ever. Close to the center of the ship's body, very tight spread of fire. With the other ships parallax always make hitting a lot harder.

It could be better if the second bank wasn't on the wings, nothing has a tighter shot group than the Athena, but its limited compatability offsets it.

[TopAce]

You forgot weapons compatibility and maneuverability, two major attributes.

The Apollo has slightly better maneuverability than the Valkyrie. Not sure the exact numbers for both the Apollo or Perseus off the top of my head.

Apollo: 3.2, 3.2, 6.0
Valkyrie: 3.5, 3.5, 3.5
Perseus: 3.3, 3.3, 3.3

Well, that 6.0 for the Apollo is pretty bad, so I give a better grade on the Valk for maneuverability, despite the first two values being a bit better. And if you consider top and afterburner speed, you'll conclude that the Apollo is the absolute loser of this comparison.

[MatthTheGeek]

The 6.0 is roll. It isn't very important during dogfights, especially since the Apollo doesn't really have any thin profile to present its foes.

It's never been a secret for anyone that the Perseus is basically the Apollo MkII. Stats-wise, it has never been anywhere near an interceptor.

[Snail]

The Apollo has quite a thin profile actually. Quite. Not very, but less than the blocky Herc or the noobis.

[Spoon]

Thats something I never liked about Freespace 2. There's close to zero technological advancement in fighters between fs1 and 2
It isn't until the Ares and Erinyes that you actually start to see a big difference.

[TopAce]

The 6.0 is roll. It isn't very important during dogfights, especially since the Apollo doesn't really have any thin profile to present its foes.

I use roll.

[Snail]

Thats something I never liked about Freespace 2. There's close to zero technological advancement in fighters between fs1 and 2
It isn't until the Ares and Erinyes that you actually start to see a big difference.

Yeah. There were some minor improvements between FS1 and FS2, but nothing like the huge technological strides we see during either campaign.

[mjn.mixael]

It always seemed implied that the FS2 ships are better than the FS1 ships. When I got to looking at the stats.. I figure that was just being lazy.

For example, the could either use the stats (or stats similar) to what they already worked on and balanced for FS1.. or try to make a totally new set of stats and spend the time to rebalanced it. (Who knows, perhaps they did the latter and ended up back near FS1 stats..)

[QuantumDelta]

The Valk out turns the Apollo by a light year.

The Persie is like the Apollo except that it turns more like the Valk.

[Deadly in a Shadow]

The Valk out turns the Apollo by a light year.

The Persie is like the Apollo except that it turns more like the Valk.

And the Persie is more durable than a Valk....

[Hades]

The Valk out turns the Apollo by a light year.

The Persie is like the Apollo except that it turns more like the Valk.

Like I said, the Apollo technically turns faster than the Valk but I think there's some sort of turning acceleration thing, which the Valk has the Apollo beat in. But the Apollo DOES turn faster and you can't argue with the tables.

[MatthTheGeek]

Well, it depends how you define "turns faster".

If I understand correctly, the Apollo has a better max turn rate, but Valk has a better turn acceleration. Which means than in some/most occasions, the Valk will indeed turn faster than the Apollo.

[Trivial Psychic]

Thats something I never liked about Freespace 2. There's close to zero technological advancement in fighters between fs1 and 2
It isn't until the Ares and Erinyes that you actually start to see a big difference.

One could argue that you'd expect to see more drive for improvement during a time of conflict than times of peace, and that the economic downturn after FS1 also played a factor.  That said, warships seem to have improved significantly (except the Hecate) during that time with the addition of beams to a ship's firepower, so there was considerable improvement on that front.

[Kolgena]

Remember that the GTVA was not at all about to slack on improving technology while the Shivans were gone. Why else did they go through the trouble to build the Colossus as an anti-lucifer measure?

[MatthTheGeek]

Why else did they go through the trouble to build the Colossus as an anti-lucifer measure?

Well, mainly for propaganda, really.