[Hellstryker]

When Byrne started arguing for the Solaris class, his main argument was that while the Frigate Navy was very good at policing the solar system, in the event of a shivan incursion into Sol heavily concentrated firepower and distributed command were a necessity. As the UEF economy had recovered enough to absorb the cost of designing, building and maintaining these beasts, he was able to acquire the funding necessary.

I know this is off topic and I might not get a straight answer at all, but how well would a Solaris honestly fare against a Lucifer? Would those Hwacha launchers penetrate the shields or what, seeing as how the Solaris, while powerful, doesn't exactly make use of beams or anything else I could think of to crack shields.

[Damage]

One of my hobbies is running capital ship simulations on various "duels" and exchanging weapons systems, etc... I've run this one a few times and on a straight run, with no scripting and no outside interference (in other words, planned maneuvers or support ships).  The thing to keep in mind with the Lucy is that it is supposed to be "invulnerable" except in subspace (where shields don't work) and it's apparently possible that beam weapons would penetrate those shields as well, and that this invulnerability is setup in FRED.

However, without that, the Solaris owns the Lucifer every time--usually without Lucifer's beams coming into firing range.

[MatthTheGeek]

With what, SReds ? Switch the beam loadout to the one in AoA and try again.

[Mars]

Were those BFReds or just LReds. . . I can't remember

[MatthTheGeek]

HReds on the front, LReds on the sides.

[Damage]

I'm probably going to regret this, so here goes....

They are HReds, and they will do the job on a Solaris in short order.  BUT--in BP2 the range of the Solaris' Apocalypse torpedoes is greater than that of the Lucifer's HReds.  And those turrets can get knocked out very rapidly by the torpedoes--and the Lucifer can't close the distance fast enough to fire more than one volley with those two beams.

Note that I said "without scripting" above.  If you just let the two ships go at it they'll eventually run into each other and the Solaris will get destroyed by its own torpedoes as they impact both ships.

I've also run this as a lightly scripted encounter, getting both ships to fire at max-range, allowing them to target each other in critical areas (like targetting the Lucifer's arm turrets, for example).  The Lucifer still loses, but not by much.  The important factor is those "arm turrets" and how quickly they get knocked out.  If the Solaris doesn't nail them in the first volley, it's going to suffer.  But if even one of the turrets is destroyed before it can fire (which is what usually happens) then the Solaris is usually only heavily damaged by the end of the fight--yet it survives.

(Changing the beams to LRSReds doesn't help the situation, even though they have longer range, they're underpowered.)

I just think it's too bad Blue Planet didn't use the SSL beams for the Lucifer, but that might've defeated the purpose of having the Lucifer missions in AoA in the first place.

[CaptJosh]

I would note that I figured that the "invulnerability" of the Lucifer in FS1 was just a way to show that they simply did not have anything powerful enough to break its shields. By the time FS2 comes, and especially the time that BP occurs, I should think that they long since would have figured out how to break those shields, so an invulnerable Lucifer doesn't make much sense in BP from a technological standpoint as well as a story telling one.

[Mars]

Sure it does. . . did you see how long it took the a Raynor, a Bellerophon, a Chimera and a Hyperion to take out that Lucifer? A long time. Though its not invulnerable, its still remarkably tough.

[MatthTheGeek]

No kidding. It's got 80% of the healthpoints of the Sath while being 3-4 times smaller.

[CaptJosh]

A long time to kill does not equal invulnerable. The fact that they CAN do it means a lot when in the FS1 era it's entirely impossible except in hyperspace.

[Mars]

A long time to kill does not equal invulnerable. The fact that they CAN do it means a lot when in the FS1 era it's entirely impossible except in hyperspace.

Not necessarily for the UEF. Your argument was that since "the "invulnerability" of the Lucifer in FS1 was . . . a way to show that they . . . did not have anything powerful enough to break its shields. . . they. . .would have figured out how to break those shields, so an invulnerable Lucifer doesn't make much sense in BP from a technological standpoint"

The UEF tends to do less concentrated damage than the GTVA. . . I think its possible the Lucifer is still "invulnerable" to them, to a certain extent.

EDIT:

I'm seeing it as shields on a fighter. It could be that in order to break through them a certain amount of damage / second needs to be dealt. The GTVA is better at raw DPS

[Scotty]

Sure it does. . . did you see how long it took the a Raynor, a Bellerophon, a Chimera and a Hyperion to take out that Lucifer? A long time. Though its not invulnerable, its still remarkably tough.

In this case, the Lucifer stopped putting power towards its shields to put it into weapons and charging the jump drive.  The shields are still there, and impenetrable to anything but beams for all intents and purposes.

[JerichoDeath]

stuff here

Guess it's time to start shoring up my ability to suspend disbelief for the next time 

Look, I gave you a perfectly reasonable, in-universe reasoning as to why the UEF does not use and does not intend to use Great War era craft. You can take it or leave it, but please, don't just say "I don't buy it" and at me. That's more than a bit disrespectful.

-repairs like on just such a hulk?
Keep in mind just how amazing WiH paints ships like the Agincourt as being. Just three terran ships for all of the GTVA fleet?
Unless we're just supposed to forget all that now~

Disregards several important factors.
One, Anemoi-class ships, while very useful, need a trained crew to operate at peak capacity. Which is something the UEF just doesn't have, given their lack of Anemois or GTVA equipment in general. While they can make them work for their purposes (the Tech base hasn't drifted that much between the two), that's something else than the high turnaround a trained GTVA crew could manage. Also, there are no Orion hulks left to be refurbished in Sol, as I believe to have stated previously.
Two, Byrne's secret project, which he believes to be enough of a gamechanger to win this war, is a massive engineering project being rushed to completion using the ressources of (Post-Aristeia) two Anemois.
Three, the Solaris IS a very very capable class. It can take on two or three GTVA Destroyers at once and come out on top (Provided there's adequate fighter support, if there isn't, a Solaris can still go toe-to-toe with at least one Destroyer, more if none of its opponents are Titans or Raynors).

-Well, sure. I can accept what you said before, to a certain extent. It was only when you hit that "hulks, there are none" bombshell that I lost the ability to suspend disbelief. Of course they would be there. I'm sure that there are plenty of reasons why they don't want to, or can't, use them. Several possible explanations (more plausible) were thrown out (destroyed in war, too far away, completely stripped, too costly, I could go on).
In other words, it isn't the result that is the problem; It is the reason behind it.
I rolled my eyes because I thought that you were too stuck on what you already decided was the case, despite much better explanations being out there. Like an argument that one side can't win because the other side will never budge from their preconceived notions of the truth. If that isn't the case, then I'm sorry that I did that.

-I guess I can believe that. Although, there were a bunch of trained GTVA defectors a while back...
Unless they required very SPECIAL training? Training that they didn't have?

[Mars]

Buddy. . .

Why is it so hard to believe that a new government of idealistic pacifists threw away a bunch of old warships?

How is that hard to believe?

[Klaustrophobia]

because throwing them away would be more expensive than just leaving them to drift?

[The E]

-I guess I can believe that. Although, there were a bunch of trained GTVA defectors a while back...
Unless they required very SPECIAL training? Training that they didn't have?

Problem is, you don't want an entire crew that defected to your side working on a highly secret project right after they defected. After all, their loyalty isn't exactly assured. And yes, the training required to operate an Anemoi at peak efficiency is rather special (although mostly identical to the training GTVA shipyard workers get). It's one thing to get the machinery onboard these ships to work, it's another to know all the little quirks and shortcuts that can be taken.

[-Norbert-]

because throwing them away would be more expensive than just leaving them to drift?

How is pointing it toward the sun, giving it a little shove and letting sir isaac newton do the rest expensive?

[The E]

Or, you know, dismantling them to reuse the materials.

[yomi]

How is pointing it toward the sun, giving it a little shove and letting sir isaac newton do the rest expensive?

physics in FS universe is different than physics is our universe.
For exmple ships in FS will stop when you destroy their engines. And antimatery warheads are doing smaller explosions than exploding ships. Even if this was possible i would say that's not good idea, cuz anyone could steal  it before it would reach the sun(for example gefs).

because throwing them away would be more expensive than just leaving them to drift?

Well there would be danger that someone would take that warship, (gefs for example).
We don't see US army leaving obsolete on roads, farms etc. I don't think that leaving few bombs inside of warship, and than  detonating it would be very expensive.

[The E]

Yes, because stealing a huge hulk of old metal is sooo easy in FS (Given that you can just fit it with single-use jump drives and jump it into close solar orbit).