Print

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

[RomanHouse]

I have a suggestion concerning a new class of capital ships. Said class would be the opposite of the Paragon class battleships you introduced. It would be a versatile mid to high tech fast battleship. Where as the Paragon would be a "a mobile battlestation", with high crew demands, and low range, this fast battleship would have been designed as a carrier escort, with an emphasis on range, speed, maneuverability, point defense, and simplicity, capable of going as far as (if not farther) a carrier. With less crew and fuel demands as a Paragon, it would also have more fuel and supply storage capacity as well (not considerable, just more). This fast battleship would have more armor (it would be more reliant on armor), about the same hull integrity, but have less efficient shields than a paragon (comparatively). While this fast battleship would have an emphasis on point defense, it could be easily refitted for commerce raiding, close support, of frontline service. To give an idea of what it would look like... these fast battleships would look like the battleships of world war two (but with spaceship engines and sides). for example:   
    The Scharnhorst class battleship - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Scharnhorst1943.png
    The Bismarck class battleship - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bb_bismarck.png
    The Iowa Class Battleships - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Missouri_panama_canal.jpg
The weapons would be arranged in a similar manner to above three battleships classes. Why mess with  proven gun arrangements?
By the way, this is my first post here, and i would like to thank you for taking the time and looking over my suggestion.

[CommComms]

I have a suggestion concerning a new class of capital ships. Said class would be the opposite of the Paragon class battleships you introduced. It would be a versatile mid to high tech fast battleship. Where as the Paragon would be a "a mobile battlestation", with high crew demands, and low range, this fast battleship would have been designed as a carrier escort, with an emphasis on range, speed, maneuverability, point defense, and simplicity, capable of going as far as (if not farther) a carrier. With less crew and fuel demands as a Paragon, it would also have more fuel and supply storage capacity as well (not considerable, just more). This fast battleship would have more armor (it would be more reliant on armor), about the same hull integrity, but have less efficient shields than a paragon (comparatively). While this fast battleship would have an emphasis on point defense, it could be easily refitted for commerce raiding, close support, of frontline service.

It sounds like you're describing the Odyssey.


And a good reason to use new and unusual designs is because they provide more unique gameplay interactions than symmetrical ships with a few wide-arc turrets.  Sure, something that looks fairly similar to a WW2 era battleship wouldn't be out of place in Starfarer, but the Astral and Apogee are certainly more interesting to pilot because of their asymmetry.

That said, I'm all for more ships.  I don't think it's possible to have too many ships, so long as they're all relatively balanced.  And I'd like to see more that fall into the battlecruiser role somewhere between cruiser and battleship.  It sounds like the Odyssey is supposed to be one, but more couldn't hurt.

And while it's on my mind, I think I'll mention that the Falcon and the Eagle seem awfully lackluster compared to the other cruisers (Venture aside, since it's supposed to be under gunned I think?)  It feels like they're so horribly slow and just don't have the defenses to survive much beating or enough kick to go toe-to-toe with much anything else.  Maybe this is intentional, or they're just poorly represented in the missions they appear, or I'm just bad at them,  maybe the Falcon could be massaged into a spot midway between destroyer and cruiser while the Eagle could fit into a heavier cruiser or battlecruiser role with some buffs?

[RomanHouse]

The ship I'm describing would be a Fast Battleship. It would be slower than a battlecruiser, but with more firepower and armor. It would be faster and have longer jump ranges than a battleship, but have less firepower and armor. Basically it would be a capital ship that would be an excellent carrier escort, as well as being a versatile warship in the mid to high tech era, capable of doing several different mission types, if outfitted with the right weapons for it. It would also have to be symetric, so that it could bring its main batteries to bare on the sides. This fast battleship would have been designed to get into a turning fight, and capable of putting all or most of it's firepower on target wile in a turning engagement. Thus it would have to be symmetric.

P.S: I'm pretty happy with where the falcon and eagle cruisers are now. Alex did say he would be improving them somehow. look at the top post here ( http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=323.0 ), as (if i remember correctly) he does mention changing the falcon and the eagle cruisers somehow.
If it's not there, then it is somewhere in that thread.

[Alex]

In theory, a battlecruiser has the armament of a battleship while sacrificing defenses for speed. A "fast battleship" sounds like too fine-grained of a distinction, to be honest.

If you look at the Conquest-class battlecruiser, it actually plays very similar to what you're describing, down to what you term "turning engagements". The Odyssey is the same way, despite being an asymmetrical design - a few large turrets are focused on one side.


As far as the Eagle and the Falcon, they could probably use a slight boost to speed & maneuverability, especially now that their turrets have been downsized. Just haven't had a chance to play around with them yet.

[RomanHouse]

In theory, a battlecruiser has the armament of a battleship while sacrificing defenses for speed. A "fast battleship" sounds like too fine-grained of a distinction, to be honest.

Ok. That just shows you what I know. I just thought that a fast battleship concept would be something you would have seen developed in contrast to the Paragon, as a versatile front line capital ship. Thanks for your honest opinion about the idea, Alex.

P.s: You are doing a great job with the game! Even though I'm not a big RPG/shooter game player, I love the game you already have made and are proposing to make. Keep up the good work.

[Alex]

Ok. That just shows you what I know. I just thought that a fast battleship concept would be something you would have seen developed in contrast to the Paragon, as a versatile front line capital ship. Thanks for your honest opinion about the idea, Alex.

What I meant by "too fine grained" is that you could get to it from a battlecruiser (by adding a some defensive hull mods, such as "Heavy Armor") or from a battleship (by adding some movement-improving mods, such as "Augmented Engines"). So I'm just not sure it makes sense as a separate *class*, but I think the idea is fine. We'll see how a midline battleship ends up, when David deigns to draw one

P.s: You are doing a great job with the game! Even though I'm not a big RPG/shooter game player, I love the game you already have made and are proposing to make. Keep up the good work.

Thank you, I'm happy you're enjoying it!

[Zarcon]

We'll see how a midline battleship ends up, when David deigns to draw one

This I like.    Can't wait to see it.