+- 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: about battleship spawming.. (/showthread.php?tid=4350)
about battleship spawming.. - Jinx - 10-28-2007
same here - i got the persephone - and guess what - that char slot become one of the least active ones. having a BS is nice, but i don t do much with it - allright - one reason is that its such a pain to fly around with it - and another reason is - that as a zoner, i just do not have any targets to shoot at.
about battleship spawming.. - bluntpencil2001 - 10-28-2007
Fighters should be able to whip battleships... they're giant targets and fighters can carry nuclear weapons. Boom?
about battleship spawming.. - galaktik - 10-28-2007
BS should have at least 4 times the current armor, and lower shield like cruiser. Becouse if u compare size of GB and BS ratio is like 10 to 1, but now armor ratio is 5 to 1
about battleship spawming.. - Treewyrm - 10-28-2007
' Wrote:Yes... battleships should be a checkmate move. They aren't.Thank you but I'd rather keep my battleship intact and out of any faction completely as it would fit none bar one that is yet to come. BS license, as much as I welcome the idea, has several cornerstone issues depending on exact implementation of which we, let's be honest, know nothing as of this moment. Until the details of that license will be revealed I don't see the point of discussing it.
Their numbers will be restricted greatly - the introduction of a BS license is imo an excellent idea. 3 BSs per faction, no freelancin' juggernauts and we're all good. If only those ships still in service could really make a difference... not being swarmed by a few bombers.
about battleship spawming.. - GlyphStorm - 10-28-2007
' Wrote:BS should have at least 4 times the current armor, and lower shield like cruiser. Becouse if u compare size of GB and BS ratio is like 10 to 1, but now armor ratio is 5 to 1
And why is that? Armor is ok, imo shield capacity must be increased. If you can't get the shield of a BS down with a bomber and 2 novas on it, it's your fault. I managed to get BS shields with a bomber more than once, and it's not so hard. With 2 well flown bombers, you can murder a battleship, quite easy I might add.
What I would suggest is to slightly increase the speed of the turret fire, slightly increase the damage, and increase the details on it. I mean, if you watch 2 BS fighting, you can clearly see them, but not the shots fired of them, the exception is Corsair Turrets. And also, if you slightly increase the damage, and speed of BS weaps, increase the energy requirements too. I would also suggest the slight increase of power regeneration:)
Glyph
about battleship spawming.. - Treewyrm - 10-28-2007
I would say not the damage but range should be increased. I think currently we have all fights between all ships happen in the same range. While it's fine for fighters, for bombers, for gunboats, it's not really enough for larger ships, their weapons should have increased range to accommodate their size. Just a thought.
about battleship spawming.. - Doom - 10-28-2007
well..cap weapon range is increased in new release...we will see what that will bring us
i wonder how far you will need to be now to be called shield runner...
about battleship spawming.. - Jinx - 10-28-2007
it appears that i am the only one that sort of likes the battleships the way they are. - of course, i could think of ways to fit them more into the role of a battleship. but i think they are balanced well right now. - their firepower is awesome, they are a pain to fly around, - well the big ones are.
when it comes to bombers. maybe its just me - but i don t think there are many bomberpilots that would take down a battleships shield. i do not doubt that some pilots are good enough. but even if you are good at dodging - a few lucky hits take the bomber out. ( and you can t allways see all the shots from the battleship ) -
the only thing i d still think is one of the best ideas is to tenfold their armor - and remove their shields. they might be harder to kill, but every bit of damage goes straight to the purse of the battleships captain / crew. and a few fighters can "chew" a battleship down. if a bomber makes its jousting runs right now, but misses a nova or two - the shields regen fast enough. and in the end its quite a boring fight. ( at least when a battleship and a bomber duel, the battleship captain has plenty of time to : get himself a fresh cup of coffee, make some phonecalls and maybe call for fighterbackup - before he even has to start to worry for his life )
edit : range increased - i m not sure if that works out well. range of weapons is pretty far allready - and the program doesn t really notice it. for example, when you have a mission to destroy a spacestation, and that station is 2k away. you can shoot your missiles at it - (2500 range) but they never hit it - cause they vanish once out of sight. same with mortars (3500) - once out of visible sight, the projectiles vanish. - or maybe its just me....
about battleship spawming.. - gezza999 - 10-28-2007
I don't think we should chew out the FL battleships, Some of them actually make sense ( wow, I'm saying this...?).
Battleships are NOT a checkmate move... The commander of the Hood tried that, it was totally obliterated, and taken over by the IMG, Battleships are good when properly supported, a Battleship should not be the answer to a fleet of fighters, a fleet of gunboats or a fleet of light fighters should be the answer.
Battleships need not be "uberised", they're fine as they are, though, Jinx's idea might be cool, a battleship in itself is no entire battle group, its one ship, if it's unsuported, yes, fighters and bombers will "chew off" its hull.
And, maybe your an amazing bomber pilot, or the battleship commander didn't have a clue, but, most people CAN'T take down a battleship shield in an unsupported bomber. You need 2 or 3 bombers to take down a Battleship. And why do the battleships need a range increase...? They're already quite long range...
And, Jinx, you're not... >_> The Battleships are FINE the way they are.
Making the battleships "realistic" is about keeping them bad to a certain degree, the Liberty Navy don't spam battleships in Freelancer, they have LOTS of battlegroups, why? Because they're supposed to be for DEFENCE mainly, losing a battleship is a hideous loss, I reckon a hundred people man a Battleship, losing a fighter, thats one person, losing a gunboat, thats maybe 5 or 10 people, losing a cruiser..? A mere 30-50, losing a battleship...? Now that ****s you up, but, right now, losing a battleship is no less painful than losing a fighter, except the nanobots and shield bats cost more to replace, if we had to have about 5 people in each battleship, maybe taking control of a few turrets each, then, you'd have a much more realistic situation, but, well, FL won't do that basicly, one person controls one battleship...
From what I see, they're supposed to take down other battleships, and they serve as a mobile command centre, you can dock on a battleship in SP, that's their main use, not just pwning everything, its a support ship.
And, sorry for the huge post... >_>
about battleship spawming.. - Magoo! - 10-30-2007
I think the Nova's need to be toned down a tad... Maybe... Sure, its anti-matter. But if we were being realistic, the anti-matter would keep going right through the ship, drain its atmosphere, and everything would die anyways... Not to mention keep going... Probably put a hole in some poor planet way far away.
A Battleship would probably have hundreds of turrets... Little turrets. Rapid firing turrets to tear the fighters into little bits. But here we are, stuck with 14-16 dreadfully slow firing and turning turrets... Firing away and locked in a monotonous and endless battle to the death between over-powered bomber and Battleship. Six generations of a family later, its shield might go down... The Bomber pilot would be dead and dust and the new BS crew would be happily muching away on rations.
Battleships should just be left the way they are, else more controversies arise with improvements. Sure, there is plenty wrong with them... Like asteroids. Super-condensed material so dense you would think it was constantly collapsing in on itself, making a huge field of black holes, shredding the universe in all of its space-time goodness. Or the turret stats. Or the turn speed. This is a bomber's game... *Nova nova* Dead fighter, *Nova nova nova* Dead gunboat, *Nova nova nova nova* Dead cruiser... Oh the joys of Freelancer.
Or we can kill the Cap. Armor upgrades. A Rheinland Battleship with 1.6 million armor is slightly rediculous. You'd need ten bombers to go anywhere with that piece of shizazzle.
As I said, just leave them. If they change, new problems will arise, and we will be here months later having the exact same conversation. Good night, world. Hopefully I'll be less cynical tomorrow.