+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: BS without thrusters (/showthread.php?tid=18079)
BS without thrusters - Kambei - 03-19-2009
that smoke coming out from your engines while thrusting is underburned aditional fuel pumped into jets.... imagine how much extra fuel must BS burn until it reach significant aditional speed + how much space is wasted by aditional tank with that fuel inside ship. Also mass of ship is too high for thruster effect usable in game... realistic thrusting of something masive as BS is, looks like (aditional speed) 1....... (10 seconds)......2..... (after 21 minutes).... 130 = useless.
BS without thrusters - Eppy - 03-19-2009
' Wrote:Battlecruisers don't have afterburn either. They move at 90 top speed. I know, cause I fly one of the IMG ones.
And well, for the sake of e-kill I'd not mind bships having thrusters, if it didn't give them too big a speed advantage..
Not more than 100m
In this game, Battlecruisers don't have Thrusters, which is stupid, because it defeats the point of making a Battlecruiser (a ship with Battleship armaments but lighter armor designed to hunt down smaller warships). That should be rectified, but nooo, people were too busy making Frenchmen to fix other logic issues. The Battlecruiser as a class is underwhelming, imo.
And that's basically what I want. Dual BS thrusters that add 5m/s each to the total speed. Drifting and direction change would become more useful, and would certainly make defensive maneuvers more interesting.
BS without thrusters - Jinx - 03-19-2009
in game - 3 out of 5 Battlecruisers have thrusters
- IMG ( none )
- liberty ( none )
- BHG ( thruster )
- necrosis ( thruster )
- light carrier ( thruster )
BS without thrusters - swift - 03-19-2009
' Wrote:In this game, Battlecruisers don't have Thrusters, which is stupid, because it defeats the point of making a Battlecruiser (a ship with Battleship armaments but lighter armor designed to hunt down smaller warships). That should be rectified, but nooo, people were too busy making Frenchmen to fix other logic issues. The Battlecruiser as a class is underwhelming, imo.
And that's basically what I want. Dual BS thrusters that add 5m/s each to the total speed. Drifting and direction change would become more useful, and would certainly make defensive maneuvers more interesting.
Yeah I agree that not having thrusters defeats the point of a battlecruiser, well hopefully someone'll see that and rectify it.
It wouldn't have to be the same speed as the one of a cruiser, but has to be faster than a battleship.
I mean.. then it'd just be more worth it to get either a cruiser, or a battleship, than a battlecruiser.
BS without thrusters - Jinx - 03-19-2009
no - the IMG and the liberty BC won t get thrusters - they are balanced by other means.
BS without thrusters - Jamez - 03-19-2009
None of the capital ships should have thrusters in my opinion. Have you ever seen an NPC capship hit the burners?
Remember back in SP, fighting those Rheinland Gunboats. Remember how fast they were? That's all you have to do here.
Gunboats should impulse at 120. Cruisers - 90. Battlecruisers - 90, Battleships, 80.
A battleship is the heaviest, and heaviest-hitting, it should be the slowest and therefore easiest to hit. Cruisers are lighter, and therefore faster, but remember there would be no thruster. Battlecruisers have more armor and firepower than a cruiser, and shouldn't be faster than a cruiser. Gunboats would need their fast impulse speed to keep up with the lil' fighters. Fighters can still gain on gunboats in this case at 60m/s, but the gunboat turret range would simply be boosted to around 1100m to fix that.
Transports shouldn't have thrusters either, in my opinion. Don't confuse that with freighters, which should have thrusters.
EDIT: Also, the strafe speeds could be played with to help balance this idea.
BS without thrusters - swift - 03-19-2009
' Wrote:no - the IMG and the liberty BC won t get thrusters - they are balanced by other means.
Ah.. Well I guess the balance team knows why they did it that way. I'll try to figure out the tactics on it a bit more then, find out the little quirks so I can improve my piloting in it. Thanks for sharing the info though
BS without thrusters - El Nino - 03-19-2009
Well you can place a thruster on a battleship, and it will get your speed to 91... that's a 1 m/s gain in top speed... very useless. Then again even thrusters on cruisers don't make much sense to me....
BS without thrusters - Jinx - 03-19-2009
what makes "sense" would be - if ships ALWAYS used permanent E-kill, and the only way to make directional changes were thrusters.
so it would lead to light mass make quick changes - and great mass drifting ( one can download "i have found her, Babylon 5" - thats one of those games that tries newtonian physics paired with arcade ( so its not true newtonian physics ) ... ships can accelerate indefinitely - but also need to initiate full stop manouvers some hundreds of miles before they re even close to where they actually stop
- so in freelancer that means... E-kill for all, thrusters for speed and changing directions...
so - yes.. thrusters on battleships make sense - so does E-kill... only .. freelancer is an arcade shoot-em-up basicly...
BS without thrusters - Zork - 03-20-2009
the mass is too high....
aha
and why we have capital ship thrusters?