*Stares bleary-eyed @Brimstone and then grunts and rolls back over to sleep. Needs a DS to sleep well.* (HINT HINT)
I am Not keen on SV<HV docking. It smells Lazy to me. You don't have strike fighters drop off tanks. Drop ships should have the same type of weapons that a CV does just scaled down. Slower, less nimble but more durable than SV's with weapons geared more for defense and attacks against Big slow/non-moving targets. I don't care what size the blocks for it are too much, although it makes a whole lot of sense for it to have 1m blocks, But having the equivalent of an F-35 swooping in and dropping off 3 AFV's and then providing super nimble air support is just Bullshit. Sorry you caught me before I finished my coffee. Also, Large SV's are Junk. Operationally. Not gonna say anything about aesthetics, aside from I am Humbled by what the artistic builders design and execute with the meager tools available. But they fly like crap and fight like crap and that is my issue. Leave Small Vessels, Small. Give us Real Drop Ships and Not Strike craft that are bloated Dyspepsic Sloths with a parasitic infection.
Yeah, maybe when Shields make it into the game it'll be a possible legit option to be a brittle low armor pretty boy + Heavy Duty Shields. I'll probably stick to Heavy Armor & not rely on Shields too much, but at the same time it'd be a shame to ignore what benefit some Shielding could be for me... especially if it was possible for me to give my Weapons & Main Cockpit Shields to themselves & rely on Armor for the bulk of my Defense. Honestly I already build sturdy so it'd be more my Playstyle to build sturdy but I love doing damage the most so i'm more interested in protecting my Attack Power then in worrying about my CV's Body. Don't apologize to McDonalds... they never shoulda screwed up their damn Chicken Nuggets. *Interprets "DS" to mean "Deeply-moving Song" & plays this for ya: Sweet dreams. For the Topic: My CV Build isn't done yet, & its HPs has surpassed 100,000,000 HPs... & it's not an Arceus Damned Death Cube.
That's just because SV weaponry and, yeah, thrusters are currently all in line with that whole fighter aspect... but I think that's an artificial limitation and needs to change. If it were up to me, the difference between vehicles would be more about mass and design, with devices configured to support that. A true "capital vessel" should be like a Sulaco, Enterprise, or Galactica. It's designed for massive, long-haul deep space operations and never even intended to touch atmosphere. A small vessel could be anything from a Viper or X-wing, to a shuttlecraft or dropship, on through a Millennium Falcon or Serenity up to a corvette or frigate. An SV is a tender, support, or transport ship in a fleet, or it's a small tramp freighter or miner. Really, anything that isn't core to a wall of battle. I see a CV dropping an SV, which lands and disgorges the HV- exactly like the Sulaco launching the dropship, which lands the APC. It's called a dropship because it drops a payload from orbit- but something else carries the DS to the planet in the first place. I think what kind of devices can be mounted on a vehicle should be dependent partially on mass (max weapon hardpoint count) and limited/configured by a ship's AI system, such as Geostar's CU proposal. I don't think a singleseat fighter should be able to mount a jump drive, but anything larger than a shuttle? Absolutely- with different sizes and ranges available. And there need to be thrusters and RCS units that further blur that line between large shuttle and small starship. In Wayward Son, I had to either make CV RCS units placeable on SV's, or plant 130 SV units. I don't want to have to do the same with CV thrusters, but I'm beginning to fear I will. My take probably comes from the old Traveller days, where you started with a hull size and that told you what kinds of drive/generators/etc you could mount to it. Some things would then rule out others; a larger jump drive could cut down cargo space, or limit weapons, for example. Elite: Dangerous works much the same way.
Ugh. Traveler..... Liked the game and concept, Hated the group I tried to play it with execution. When I think Drop Ship the Cheyenne-Class 'Bugstomper' Does come to mind. However, in my opinion, I feel it would be better served by a small scale 'cv' styled craft rather than the fixed-weapon exclusive SV as it stands now. If it doesn't have at the least Basic autonomous defense capabilities it is going to be pretty Useless to anyone in single player. To whit, You land and unass your hv going off to mine leaving your turretless SV dropship somewhere. Hey Look! Random Drone! or Piñata Patrol Vessel. Well now guess what. You are Stuck. You would really have to land and then MAKE A Base to secure your way back to the CV and that is just kinda not making ANY sense to me at all why people are so jazzed about it when it is going to be of limited utility without Extra work. Sorry not really trying to smack folks on the snout but it has been bugging me a lot. See you all out in the black.
Not at all. But when I say I want HV>SV docking, that should always be read as "I want HV>SV docking AND turrets for SVs"... which then starts to solve all kinds of issues like that..
There is our divergence though. SV's don't Need turrets. Stop. End of Line. They are strike craft. Made for Alpha damage and assaults/raids/screens. They should Stay that way. Give a separate class, even the same size with turrets and docking for Both SV's and HV's and let It dock to the cv. That's mah point. Oh yeah and give That class and HV's access to Combat steel equivalent small blocks. Anyhoo always a pleasure @Brimstone
I'm totally on board with small CS blocks. I'm just not understanding why we would want to have another arbitrary ship type designation when the three we already have cause so many design and implementation issues already. Sure, I don't want to see little singleseat fighter bricks flitting about covered in turrets either. I just think there are better ways to introduce limits than artificial classes. Maybe that's where the divergence is
Yup, I don't think the distinction is arbitrary. I think it is the easiest way to keep aforementioned micro death-balls from existing and keeping the sv and drop vessels distinct and different.
Hopefully- but I was on board from the get-go If we had to go with the classes, then I'd say "SV" is the shuttle/dropship category (with turrets!) and the new class would take over the singleseat "fighter" role with the current options
As long as SV's lose their anti-strike fixed weapons in trade off of that we are Literally speaking semantics with that. Drop ships have a secondary role, a lot of the times, when they are doing their stated job they provide support fire while the disembarking infantry and vehicles organize themselves and move out. I don't see the value in fixed weapons for this, so turrets it is. And turrets and all the fixed SV weapons that exist now would be a bit too much in my estimation. Drop ship fixed weapons should be good for installations and pegging slow cv's during boarding actions *a faint hope that last bit* Beating a horse, gonna stop now.
So only a handful know of a certain project I have been working on for awhile. I call it Project Daedalus. Its a 3 Phase project and I will be linking a video soon showing a earlier version of Phase 1. Due note I have it much further along than what the video shows, but I feel like now would be a good time to show people the scale I am trying to achieve. Here are the 3 Phase overviews: Phase 1 - Large scale battleship/base/mobile shipyards Phase 2 - The new ZeroG Shipyards/with residential areas and promenade decks Phase 3 - Lets just say this one is still Classified I am dubbing this a "Titan" build. The reason, its massive and totally impractical so I am all for it! Simpler terms it a modular style build on a larger scale. But I believe now is a good time to let everyone see what ZeroG has been working on. So for now I'll leave you with that and will link to video soon! Stay Tuned!
Yes and no. The way I'd want to see weaponry isn't the current "up to 6 of this and 6 of that and..." ad nauseaum. I want a hardpoint-type system where you get x hardpoints per, I dunno, 100 tons let's say. You put what you want on that hardpoint, but that's all you get. Top that off with the weapon types dictating other aspects of the vehicle- like more space devoted to AI systems for homing missiles over dumbfires, for example, which means less life support or magazine space or such. There's lots of ways to create a dynamic ship classification system so that form follows function and vice versa OK, 'nuff on that. Here- have a cookie
Yup. Weapon hardpoints + CU system = end of the deathbrick Hardpoints + CU system + block subgrids = totally awesome game
OK with all these things but you will Still end up with turret fighters. I understand the No-Class concept and am willing to discuss it more but this is not the thread for it.
