|
|
|
View Poll Results: Are smaller Non cap-killer fighters a good idea?
|
Good idea it will make things more interesting
|
|
3 |
11.11% |
I like small fighters but keep at least capital ship disabling weapons
|
|
3 |
11.11% |
I like 20 gun fighters but no capital ship targeting
|
|
0 |
0% |
I want small fighters for fighter killing and big fighters for capital killing
|
|
10 |
37.04% |
Fighters should be able to target capital ships but have weak guns
|
|
8 |
29.63% |
WHAAAA are you mad keep it the way it is
|
|
3 |
11.11% |
|
|
October 24th, 2004, 12:22 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Yes, that's come up once before. Either SciFi is "WWII fighter pilots in space" - example, Star Wars deathstar destroyed by one well placed shot, or it's "ships of the line faceing off" a la Honor Harrington books or Star Trek's "yes space is 3 dimensional, but let's line up and shoot each other in the same plane anyway"
The great thing about SE4 is you don't have to pick just one. The standard game has some balance in this regard. A few ships with high level PDC can pretty much defeat any size carrier fleet. But earlier in the game, fighters can take out medium sized ships.
'Course with a mod, you can make either of the two sets of conditions outlined above apply, as you like it.
|
October 24th, 2004, 03:35 PM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,389
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Well for races like the Terrenesi for example (reason I keep using them as an example is because they are going to one of "3" races in the Alpha release of the game) use light fighters as their main source of point defense against fighters while their PDTs are used mainly for missile intercept duty.
See what I was going for was so that (some races) Capital ship fleets would still need at least a squadron of intercept fighters to guard them from enemy bombers and fighters.
THEN you've got races like the swarmers (later release) who will have huge carriers and large numbers of (cheap but effective) fighters but their largest combat warship is a destroyer.
So you would have a large number of tactical doctrines available to you.
Oh and the "ship of the wall facing off" makes sense for the HH universe
__________________
When life gives you lemons take them and squeeze them in life's eye until it gives you the oranges you asked for!
"If men build things to look like our penis such as towers and ships does that mean female achitects represent women having penis envy?"
A line that made me chuckle, I can't remember where I heard it I just know it made me laugh.
"I'm not really a slapper....I mainly punch and gouge."
Tammy Lee my kung fu instructor/sifu's daughter when asked if she ever slapped a boy for saying something nasty to her.
|
October 25th, 2004, 07:53 AM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: CHEESE!
Posts: 10,009
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Actually, DW did base Honerverse ship combat on wooden cannon ships.
__________________
If I only could remember half the things I'd forgot, that would be a lot of stuff, I think - I don't know; I forgot!
A* E* Se! Gd! $-- C-^- Ai** M-- S? Ss---- RA Pw? Fq Bb++@ Tcp? L++++
Some of my webcomics. I've got 400+ webcomics at Last count, some dead.
Sig updated to remove non-working links.
|
October 25th, 2004, 06:26 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
I like the idea of something like:
Ship-based PDCs are ineffective (1-5% accuracy) to nonexistent.
Ships can perhaps use some small anti-fighter missiles, but as missiles they tend to all fire at one stack, making for a lot of overkill and not much stopping power.
Fighters can target other fighters fine.
Bomber designs could carry limited anti-ship missiles at the expense of engines and defenses. Vulnerable to regular fighters.
__________________
Things you want:
|
October 26th, 2004, 09:24 AM
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Solomon Islands
Posts: 1,180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Quote:
Suicide Junkie said:
Fighters can target other fighters fine.
Bomber designs could carry limited anti-ship missiles at the expense of engines and defenses. Vulnerable to regular fighters.
|
Didn't AIC have this stuff? Dedicated anti-fighter fighters or dedicated anti-ship fighters but no all rounder fighter. Whatever happened to it? It was a Version of Proportions optimized for SP.
|
October 26th, 2004, 01:41 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,547
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
SJ, your quote reminds me of something right out of the MOO2 manual that had me confused for years before I figured it out:
"Ships can bomb planets directly, but other ships only indirectly, via bombers."
OK, I was wondering, what KIND of ships can bomb planets directly, given that some other (unspecified and nonexistent as far as I could tell from playing the game) kind of ships can bomb planets only indirectly via bombers... then after SO long I finally figured out that "other ships" was part of the OBJECT of the sentence, not the SUBJECT...
__________________
The Ed draws near! What dost thou deaux?
|
October 26th, 2004, 05:58 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Quote:
Ed Kolis said:"Ships can bomb planets directly, but other ships only indirectly, via bombers."
OK, I was wondering, what KIND of ships can bomb planets directly, given that some other (unspecified and nonexistent as far as I could tell from playing the game) kind of ships can bomb planets only indirectly via bombers... then after SO long I finally figured out that "other ships" was part of the OBJECT of the sentence, not the SUBJECT...
|
So; Ships can bomb planets...
Fighters can bomb ships...
But ships can't bomb other ships?
__________________
Things you want:
|
October 26th, 2004, 09:55 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Quote:
Suicide Junkie said:
So; Ships can bomb planets...
Fighters can bomb ships...
But ships can't bomb other ships?
|
They can shoot torpedoes, missiles, and beams at them. Bombs would be redundant.
|
October 26th, 2004, 10:34 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: CHEESE!
Posts: 10,009
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 1 Post
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Nope. Torpedoes are self-propelled, missiles are self-propelled and self-guided and beams are focused energy. Bombs are in free-fall. Clearly not redundant, they just don't make sense for ships.
__________________
If I only could remember half the things I'd forgot, that would be a lot of stuff, I think - I don't know; I forgot!
A* E* Se! Gd! $-- C-^- Ai** M-- S? Ss---- RA Pw? Fq Bb++@ Tcp? L++++
Some of my webcomics. I've got 400+ webcomics at Last count, some dead.
Sig updated to remove non-working links.
|
October 27th, 2004, 01:31 AM
|
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Taganrog, Russia
Posts: 1,087
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: An important question to hardcore SEIV strateg
Launch bombs using the catapults. They are pretty effective in vacuum thus make sense.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|