Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Temstar]

I've always had this feeling that the Valkyrie-class troop transport would make a fantastic carrier conversion. It's somewhere between destroyer and cruiser size, extremely fast for a ship of that size (faster than even Aurora, only a hair slower than Hammerhead), lightly armed, and best of all pretty much already looks like a carrier. The ship is a trans-atmospheric amphibious assault ship and if you look closely at the center of the ship you can clearly see a runway down the middle with three elevators/catapults for troop shuttles.

Even the lore strongly support this as a potential target for carrier conversion. Valkyrie is a true Hegemony military ship that's also produced by private firms. Hegemony tried to ban sale of this ship because its ability to land two full companies of marines directly to a planet's surface is considered politically destabilizing. Word of the ban got out before the ban was actually in place causing a massive speculation of the ship's price and so a huge amount of the ship was produced before the ban, enough that if someone really wanted one he could buy one second hand without too much trouble even with the ban now in place.

I could easily see Hegemony buying up surplus Valkyries from the market and retrofitting them to be space carriers should then ever need a rapid boost in fleet carrier strength. The result will be something very much like the Independence class light aircraft carrier of WW2. Independence were small carriers converted from cruiser hulls, unlike the slow merchant ship converted escort carriers their cruiser origin means they are as fast as fleet carriers and are more robustly built, thus allowing them to work in carrier battle groups with their bigger fleet carrier cousins.

[Thana]

Venture class is a true carrier.  It has no other purpose but to refit and rearm fighters while throwing out some missiles.  The 2 medium and 2 small missile hard points working with fighters create amazing synergy, as fighters will take shields down and lock down enemy ships, while venture can launch harpoon/pilums for killing blow.

From the game's codex:
"Condor-class light carrier"
"Astral-class carrier"
"Venture-class cruiser"

Spot the discrepancy there?

[Gaizokubanou]

From the game's codex:
"Condor-class light carrier"
"Astral-class carrier"
"Venture-class cruiser"

Spot the discrepancy there?

Are you really going to dictate a ship's function by name?  So if the only thing that changed was that venture was called "Venture-class carrier", would that satisfy you?

[Thana]

Are you really going to dictate a ship's function by name?  So if the only thing that changed was that venture was called "Venture-class carrier", would that satisfy you?

I'm dictating the ship's function by name? Not really. Mostly I'm just going by what the devs figured it would best be described as. Which is a cruiser. And given it has no more flight decks than the Condor despite being a whole category size larger, I can't really say I disagree either.

Though you do raise an interesting point - are the Condor and the Venture similar designs? Since I wanted to give your view a fair shake, I went Codex-diving to see if I'd missed something. Here's what I found. If you compare the Condor and the Venture side by side, I think you'll find that as carriers, they are neck to neck, but that the Venture has 150% more armour, 100% more hit points and approximately three to four times the firepower. This, to me, suggests they're not exactly made to fill the same kind of niche in the fleet doctrine if you know what I mean. In fact, arguably the Venture is worse as a carrier than the Condor is, given it requires 33% more fleet points to deploy despite having no greater fighter support capability.

(As an all-around ship it is, of course, superior in about 90% of all cases, but that's beside the point here.)

[Gaizokubanou]

Though you do raise an interesting point - are the Condor and the Venture similar designs? Since I wanted to give your view a fair shake, I went Codex-diving to see if I'd missed something. Here's what I found. If you compare the Condor and the Venture side by side, I think you'll find that as carriers, they are neck to neck, but that the Venture has 150% more armour, 100% more hit points and approximately three to four times the firepower. This, to me, suggests they're not exactly made to fill the same kind of niche in the fleet doctrine if you know what I mean. In fact, arguably the Venture is worse as a carrier than the Condor is, given it requires 33% more fleet points to deploy despite having no greater fighter support capability.

(As an all-around ship it is, of course, superior in about 90% of all cases, but that's beside the point here.)

Being a larger class ship contribute a lot to the extra armor and firepower.  Not only that, but the most of extra firepower is located in missiles.  The only other role that venture can perform is long range support, which in this game carriers are expected to perform to a degree (look at both carriers you mentioned how they come defaulted with LRMs) so yeah, that performs like any other carriers in this game.  With 3 more points your carrier becomes lot more sturdy and comes with more missiles.  Venture's performance improvement over condor helps it act as a carrier/firesupport (which again, is something that all carriers are expected to do in this game).

Really, don't just read the codex and try to use venture in any other fashion.  It has no other purpose but to refit/rearm squadrons while firing missiles, but it does that very well.

[factotum]

I'd disagree there. A dedicated carrier should really be relying on its fighter wings for defence, whereas a Venture is actually a pretty powerful warship in its own right--it might not be able to stand toe-to-toe with a Dominator without fighter assistance, but it certainly isn't a Condor that could easily be taken out by a single ship of a smaller class!

[Gaizokubanou]

I'd disagree there. A dedicated carrier should really be relying on its fighter wings for defence, whereas a Venture is actually a pretty powerful warship in its own right--it might not be able to stand toe-to-toe with a Dominator without fighter assistance, but it certainly isn't a Condor that could easily be taken out by a single ship of a smaller class!

What other role besides lobbing missiles while refit/rearming fighter wings can the venture do?  Astral isn't so helpless against smaller class ships either if you arm it right (hint, three heavy blasters and two hurricane MIRV is serious firepower).

[icepick37]

Really, don't just read the codex and try to use venture in any other fashion.  It has no other purpose but to refit/rearm squadrons while firing missiles, but it does that very well.

Check. It's a pretty dang good cruiser. It's incredibly hard to take down, even with a conquest just because of it's ridiculous armor and hull ratings and it's really nice shields. It's great as a strike variant if you put med reapers and small sabots on it, and that mining blaster (though inefficient) kicks like a mule.

2 medium missile slots is a LOT of ordinance and is flexible enough to be used in any role.

[Nanostrike]

Really, don't just read the codex and try to use venture in any other fashion.  It has no other purpose but to refit/rearm squadrons while firing missiles, but it does that very well.

Check. It's a pretty dang good cruiser. It's incredibly hard to take down, even with a conquest just because of it's ridiculous armor and hull ratings and it's really nice shields. It's great as a strike variant if you put med reapers and small sabots on it, and that mining blaster (though inefficient) kicks like a mule.

2 medium missile slots is a LOT of ordinance and is flexible enough to be used in any role.

Bingo.  I don't build my Venture as a carrier at all.  I build it as an Assault Cruiser.

Then you have a heavily-armored frontliner that just happens to have a convenient flight deck instead of a giant box floating in the background lobbing missiles.

Because, really, if your Venture is just gonna sit around in the back, you might as well just use a Condor or Gemini.

[Thaago]

... Really, don't just read the codex and try to use venture in any other fashion.  It has no other purpose but to refit/rearm squadrons while firing missiles, but it does that very well. ...

As a Venture fan boy I am offended! The Venture makes an excellent cruiser that can tank damage like you wouldn't believe. Something like 1250 armor, 10000 hull, ~7000+ shield.... and it has the flux capacity to mount a heavy blaster on that medium slot. In my experience the side slots really do need to be flak (singles) for protection from missiles. I put the large harpoon pods on the medium slots and sabots on the small - 40 Harpoons can take down a hell of a lot! (extended missiles)

I believe the real combat purpose of the Venture is as a front line combat carrier. When carriers are in the back it takes fighters out of action for far longer - they must disengage from combat and fly home, often getting destroyed along the way. When they are fighting and the Venture is also fighting they just land straight away. Nothing more annoying than fighting a Venture and fighters and the fighters keep respawning . (Talons repair in like 5 seconds... its a shield nightmare)

If you look at the out of combat stats, the Venture is a great base of operations (125 base crew 350 capacity, 500 cargo, 300 fuel).