I may be making a mistake here, but why arn't the cap ships (like destroyers) armed with Pt Defense weapons to shoot down incoming missiles and torps?
|
|
|
I may be making a mistake here, but why arn't the cap ships (like destroyers) armed with Pt Defense weapons to shoot down incoming missiles and torps?
#2
Many of the cap ships are. Look at the movie where Hiigaran fighters and a few frigates are attacking a massive Vaygr vessel, you can see waves upon waves of light anti fighter fire tracking the fighters. It looks really nice. Reminescent of tracers at night or bombing raids of WW2.
Well, they never were expecting to see torps, in HW the missle destroyers were the only thing with missles, so they weren't prepared. But anyways, they got minor pt defense for the fighters...
Also if ou notice in the trailer and the rne3hw2 interview that the destroyers and cap ships are actually also shooting the torpedoes/missiles and other incoming things.
I figure the Kinetic burst cannons will act as point defense. Since they are capable of shooting down torpedoes from what i have seen, they will be effective to some degree when acting as point defense.
That could have just been a lucky shot, cos in HW i have taken down a few scouts with my HC's
#7
Here's a two-word answer to the original question.
"Balance issues"
Anyone remember how useful Scouts were for attacking supercapships in Cataclysm after you got Energy Cannons?
-- Retro
Phil, just hope it's not
hiigarans would be pretty stupid if they built cap ships without at least a little piont defence
ever wondered why tanks have machine guns?
in ww2 germans thought machine guns where a waste untill they found russians crawling under their tanks with handgranades
since then there hasn't been a single tank without a machine gun
Remember that fighters can shoot down torpedos as well...
good point wolf, but will the specialised ships of the (other guys) have point defence, as they would only be designed to go nose to nose with other super cap ships.
Game Balance, why even bother having fighters in the game if after you buld the UberCruiserOfDeath it destroyes anything smaller then a friggate in a few shots from its PD guns, and roasts everything else with ions and torpedoes? It's not "realistic" but it's fun and in the long run
*fun > realism*
The game would hardly become ubalanced nor less fun if the capital ships had limited PD capability against torpedoes. Also torpedoes are a lot weaker than a fighter or a corvette. Anyways even if a cap ship could stop 4 or 5 torpedoes, that wouldnt help much if there was 15 coming straight at it. The Hiigaran Battlecruiser doesnt have torpedoes, only kinetic burst cannons and Ion cannons.Originally posted by -V-
Game Balance, why even bother having fighters in the game if after you buld the UberCruiserOfDeath it destroyes anything smaller then a friggate in a few shots from its PD guns, and roasts everything else with ions and torpedoes? It's not "realistic" but it's fun and in the long run
*fun > realism*
Point defense is hardly foolproof and not at all ubercruiserofdeathish. A point defense system would knock a few fighters out but the others would still do severe damage to the warship before it shot down an entire attack force of fighters and bombers.
A point defense system would just increase a warships survivability to a semi-realistic system so it wouldn't be that big a deal.
Well from that perspective you can say that all ships are now already are equiped with PD weapons, sure they may not be all that effective, but they are there. That and I have a feeling they are more geared twords the anti-corvette and up cattegory as well.
Point defence weapons as I see it at least would be very similar to the Mothership and carrier weapons therefore while they do deliver damage it's not enough to save the ship agains't a proper attack but it does insure that you can't come away from said attack with no losses. Agains't torps they'd be pretty effective and I could see a tech race developping from the need to upgrade Torps to evade and PD to hit, these upgrades would probably end up being essential ones if you want to do well with either, and I always like it when you have to maintain your weapons tech advantage to win.
right, the principle of saturating the PD with attacks is entirely valid.
I think light point defense on all of the supercapitalships is absolutly essential. It would be ridiculous to have a few groups of interceptors able to just dancce rings around a battlecruiser and all its heavy weaponry, while i think a battlecruiser should NOT be able to win that fight, as its primary role is to eliminate any enemy capital ships foolhardy enough to try and go toe-to-toe with it, I think the bc should be able to inflict significant damage on those interceptors.
#18
PD turrets won't do much damage to a wing of more than 30 fighters. Plus, the Hiigarans are fighting a war, war involves losses. Modern naval captains wouldn't expect to send 20 Tomcats against an Aegis cruiser and expect 20 to come back.
*cough* dreadnought *cough*
Great example of an overpowered ship. After the dreadnought, you didnt need anything else in catacysm. It had every type of weapon, Ion beams, Kinetic Burst/Energy Cannons, Missiles, and a Repulse thing to push everthing away and deal a little damage to the things it pushes.
Another thing to note is it seems that in HW2 a flight of interceptors might be able to take out subsystems on a capital ship, they won't be able to destroy it, while a cap ship, given enough time will destroy the interceptors (Honstly don't tell me you expect to blow up an M1 Tank by shooting it 10e3000 times with a gimpy .22)
um, unless im mistaken, pulsars can target fighters & ordance, i thought they were a form of PD
I'm with Retro and the gang - it's all about gameplay.
While the *realism* point and *gameplay* points are valid you also have to think of the poor designers and our poor computers. While I would immensely enjoy having BC's bristling with PD turrets, I would also enjoy HW2 coming out this decade and for my cpu to handle it.
Flak cannons and anti-torpedo turrets would be nice on every capship but it would lead to a.) capship domination with no real hard counters b.) low FPS in heated battles c.) lots of developer hours. I think that's why the Assault Frigate is the way it is: it's KB Cannons fulfill the role of PD turret, except it's an entire ship. That's why they'll be vitally important to have, even if they don't do loads of damage.
FooF, your conclusion is there are 3 pionts
that means the awnser is in the middle
In hw, if you send 20 scouts against a battlecruiser, I bet you can manage to take it down. that's absurd
the battlecruiser should be able to survive 10, and have trouble with 50, inflicting losses on the scouts
the line is for relic to draw, and I'm pretty confident they can find it
IF it is too easy for a few groups of scouts to handle capital ships then that will lead to a fighter dominated game where the cheap
fighters come en masse and overwhelm all capital ships which have limited PD capability. I think that its quite silly that scouts could even scratch the armor on a Battlecruiser. The smartest
way to proceed with the fighters vs. cap ships would be that
bombers are the most effective and interceptors cover the
bombers while they hammer the capital ship.
I simply don`t understand people who ceep crying " stronger fighers, much weaker caps" even now. It has been said that strike craft will be already able to butcher caps.
For Gods sake Relic even placed control towers to portrude out of caps and to be easy to hit. So even now, if you are luckey if you slip one scout unnoticed and it getas a succesive run at a Bcs control tower , bang, one dead or didabeled BC.
Do some of you know were central command post is on almos all modern ships and subs. Deep within ship. In reinforced armored shells. The last thing one should destroy on modern ship are the bridge and reactor (SSN, SSBN, CVN, CGN...). And in HW2 Relic engeniousley placed towers outside of ships, portruding and calling strike craft to kill them. The balance is already in great favor of SC and yet people cep crying for more and more stronger strikecraft. Go and play Comanche4 or X-wing alliance. Leave HW2 alone and mode what you dont like yourself.
Example of forumers influenciung devs in bad way. A bunch of gues fascinated with 16th-17th century sea battles kept begging for broadsides. Voila. We have them. And what i liked in HW wasits unual placemanet of guns and treating ships only as pletforms for huge guns.
Yes , one can not let realism take away the fun from a game, but you cant make gameplay make way to insanity in design.
Last edited by grdja; 25th May 03 at 9:00 AM.
No, the reason relic did that is because fighters and corvettes can now target subsystmes, and what would be more interesting seeing a flight of interceptors start pounding the control tower, or a flight of interceptors start pounding some random peace of the hull that looks the same as any other peace? It's not about realism, it's about GAMEPLAY. What is fun > What is realistic. HW2 is built all around that.
Honestly, I think it is rediculous to have caps without point defense guns, but when it comes down to it, to remove them, or relegate them to anly anti-torp duty makes the game more fun because it would demand a battle fleet instead of say, the three dreadnauts I beat cataclysm with.
I doubt that it would be fun to have 20 fighters ripping up Battlecruisers without them being able to do squat to the little bastards. Its silly, and a line needs to be drawn. IMO a Battlecruiser should be able to take on 20 Interceptors without much trouble with 35-40 giving it trouble. Considering that the Battlecruiser is the meanest and leanest ship on the block, thatNo, the reason relic did that is because fighters and corvettes can now target subsystmes, and what would be more interesting seeing a flight of interceptors start pounding the control tower, or a flight of interceptors start pounding some random peace of the hull that looks the same as any other peace? It's not about realism, it's about GAMEPLAY. What is fun > What is realistic. HW2 is built all around that.
would be only proper way to make it.
RMN Marine, Quote from Arioch's Shipyards on the BC:
"A compliment of four pulsar turrets and four kinetic burst cannons enable the Battlecruiser to engage strike craft intent on disabling key command, propulsion, or weapons subsystems."
The burst cannons are also supposed to be area effect, making them even more effective.
As for why ships don't have dedicated point defense batteries, there are two reasons:
1)Balance. No more Archangel Dreadnoughts
2)Would you prefer to have Battlecruisers with their weaponry halved to make room for PD guns? In fleets, dedicated point defense ships and escorting strike craft would take care of dedicated heavy assault ships. The question is to the HW universe, how big are these PD guns? Would it be more effecient to have balanced cruisers or Assault cruisers with escorts?
#31
Maybe point defense can become a subsystem upgrade. Enemy can disable it or build it but sacrifice some other ability.
Or Point Def is built in already...
A Battle Cruiser doesn't need PD Systems.. Keep in mind, Fighter/Corvette build abilities could be added to a BC, so you already have a built in defense force.
I think that scouts and interceptors should do virtually no damage to larger capital ships, while bombers are able to do extremely high amounts of damage. For example, an aircraft strafeing a battleship with its automatic weapons would do almost nothing to it, whereas it would take only a few (1-3) torpedos to sink it. By using this method, you would use interceptors to protect the bombers from harm, which is the way it should work. Furthermore, the interceptors would "clog up" the PD of the larger ships, perhaps damaging the individual turrets (which would make sense.) From a both a military and gameplay standpoint, having no PD on the larger ships would be problematic. You do not seem to take into account the fact that strike craft can also get from point A to point B much faster, giving them other advantages. Removing PD from the larger cap. ships would give them yet another major advantage.
I gotta get some sleep.... that was barely intelligable.
Last edited by ArchonXVI; 26th May 03 at 1:13 AM.
Actually, no, you can't make a BC build fighters. It can, however, repair them.
Even if base HW2 dosn't make use of the PD paradime, I intend on using it as the foundation of the Fallen Dreams mod.
Don't forget the defense field frigate. We don't know what it will do, but it's a good bet that it will slow down kinetic weapons. For all we know, defense field generators will be an optional subsystem as well..
#36
I would save the "Point defense" mechanisms for carriers, shipyards and MS...it would suck for fighters to have every single vessel with PD.
collector
fighter pilots are not expected to have a long live, do they?
they are usefull and expendable
#38
As far as I can tell, the pulsar beams on the battlecruiser are point-defense systems.
#39
Yeah, from what I've seen... watching the game at E3... you can definately see the Pt Defense weapons on the Battlecruiser at work.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
