+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Battleship discussion topic (/showthread.php?tid=699)
Battleship discussion topic - f2k - 02-28-2006
Korrd,Feb 28 2006, 07:05 PM Wrote:Dont compare boats with starships. That is like comparing a birds with fishes. They have nothing to do with each other.
Also, we cannot take an example from real life because there are no war-oriented starships in real life. What we can do is take as example starships rom other Sci-Fi shows...
[snapback]13668[/snapback]
I think that its a very valid comparison. Much more valid than any Hollywood junk
Think about it its a simple question of logistic. How many fighters can you build instead of that one big battleship? How many fighters can you crew instead of one big battleship?
You do not, if you can avoid it, use that kind of overkill. If five small fighters manned by five pilots can do the job well, then you certainly dont waste your resources by building a battleship!
Quote:Remember that in space the ship's weight is not important. But the mass. And there is no friction, so a bigger ship with bigger more powerful engines can perfectly go faster than a fighter because of constant acceleration. And because the higher power output of their engines, as they accelerate constantly without friction... So the final speed of a BS will be higher than the final speed of a fighter. But, on the other side, the fighter, which has a much smaller mass, can accelerate much quicker than a BS...
So:
--Fighter has better acceleration, and takes less time to reach final speed.
--BS can go faster, but it takes more time to reach final speed, because of its mass.
[snapback]13668[/snapback]
Hmm, Im a bit rusty on my physics knowledge, but still
A battleship will have a much bigger mass that a fighter, right? And so it will need a proportionally larger engine in order to accelerate as fast as a fighter right?
But wont the bigger mass also mean that it will reach infinity point faster? I mean, the point where the energy needed to accelerate the mass will be nearly infinite?
Hence the slower speed (since FreeLancer does a real lousy job of implementing space-physics)
xit,Feb 28 2006, 07:56 PM Wrote:Then what if the enemy doesn't have anything else than rowboats, and you have to deal with them with your nice big not-able-to-deal-with-small-boats battleship? ;)
[snapback]13669[/snapback]
Simple. You do not, repeat: not, engage rowboats with battleships. You engage them either with your own rowboats, or with your Corvettes and Frigates
Why do you think that a modern carrier requires such a huge support group? Because therere lots of thing that it cannot defend itself against. Low flying missiles and fast moving speedboats amongst them
Ok, to be honest a typical US carrier is actually bristling with point defence weapons. But if it is forced to use them, then something has gone seriously wrong
Battleship discussion topic - xit - 02-28-2006
f2k,Feb 28 2006, 07:41 PM Wrote:You do not, repeat: not, engage rowboats with battleships. You engage them either with your own rowboats, or with your Corvettes and FrigatesMy question were more like what would the battleship do, if it couldn't rely on ANY help at all. :P
Why do you think that a modern carrier requires such a huge support group? Because therere lots of thing that it cannot defend itself against. Low flying missiles and fast moving speedboats amongst them
Ok, to be honest a typical US carrier is actually bristling with point defence weapons. But if it is forced to use them, then something has gone seriously wrong
[snapback]13679[/snapback]
But true enough, battleships, in real life that is, require support groups.
Problem is, that in this game you are quite able to find yourself in situations where you don't have any support groups at all. A battleship shouldn't need it here. The battleship should be enough in it self to tackle anything. Except another battleship, a small group of cruisers, a larger group of gunboats, and so on and so on.
You are, mostly, alone out there. In a battleship you should just have the biggest chance of surviving.
Battleship discussion topic - Korrd - 02-28-2006
Quote:I think that its a very valid comparison. Much more valid than any Hollywood junkI think not. Sea ships and Star Ships are 2 different things. they are meant for 2 different environments, which have nothing to do with each other.
Think about it its a simple question of logistic. How many fighters can you build instead of that one big battleship? How many fighters can you crew instead of one big battleship?
You do not, if you can avoid it, use that kind of overkill. If five small fighters manned by five pilots can do the job well, then you certainly dont waste your resources by building a battleship!
Just because the starships are named after their naval counterparts does not mean that you should compare them to sea ships.
And about fighters vs BS, remember that a fighter has limited range in comparison to a BS. and their weapons are far less powerful that those of BS's.
You cant siege a planet with fighters alone. They will not have the firepower nor the supplies required to do such task.
Quote:A battleship will have a much bigger mass that a fighter, right? And so it will need a proportionally larger engine in order to accelerate as fast as a fighter right?Yes, and see that a FL BS has a HUGE engine. In fact, i consider BS engines oversized. so they should have a far greather push than a fighter engine. Compare them by yourself. A RH BS engine is so big that 2-3 fighters can be placed inside of its exaust (Ask D-o-S if you dont believe me).
But wont the bigger mass also mean that it will reach infinity point faster? I mean, the point where the energy needed to accelerate the mass will be nearly infinite?
Also, the relativistic effect you talk about happen at near light speed. Those ships go far slower than speed of light when using sublight engines.
Battleship discussion topic - The Damned - 02-28-2006
Quote:Cap. ship shield and weapons proposal [ by The Damned - me actually :)]
Cap ship shields recover too slowly. Even using SB u can boost the shield about 3 full recharges. A well equipped fighter (with tizonas , inferno , nova ) can reduce them to 0 in seconds. Maybe the cap ships need better recharge time. The math about now looks like this:
Battleship shield: 800 seconds for full recovery from 0! Cruser/Destroyer : 480 seconds for full recovery Gunboat : 300 seconds for full recovery Train: 240 seconds.
It's because they all have fighter shield regeneration - 250 points/second. By the math again - fighter recovers it's shield for 40 sec. So i suggest that All cap ships might have a regen of lets say 3 mins - 180 seconds. This will make 'em worth their money. The math for the 3 mins regen is like this :
BS shield: About 1100 regen Cruser/Destroyer shields : About 660 regen Gunboat : About 420 regen Train : About 340 regen.
And another thing - the equipment of the Cap ships - Bs turrets and guns are made for BS's , cruser guns for crusers, gunboats for GB - but it's too easy now to equip Cruser forwartd gun on a GB , get it some BS/cruser missle turrets , and marsflyer side turrets , BS shield - u go fight against that! I suggest level requerments - guns will have the proper Lv requierments -
BS guns and BS mounts,equipment - lv 10 Cruser/Destroyer,equipment - lv 9 Gunboat mounts , equipment - lv8 Train mounts, equipment - lv 7
Or Eitherway we need some serious balance there - a RH BS with 21 turrets - bunch of marsflyer , solaris and bret missle is something overpowered (and the energy balance is almoust infinite). No other BS has a good chance opposing a thing like that! Frankly I don't like the Rh BS(just don't like it's looks). But since there is a serious difference my Bretonian hasn't got much of a chance - 0nly 12 turrets and less hull (this goes also for the other classes of cap ships - balance is needed, so they might be tested around or something). This is worth of thinking over... Or we can make all BS have the same amount of turrets - like in other mods I've seen (something like 12-14).
All this I have posted on discovery Wiki. Please read carefully and think about it. The regen of capships I have suggested is far better than the one we have now. Just read before posting.
Battleship discussion topic - daedalus - 02-28-2006
I agree in principle with Korrd, but I think there are only a couple of changes needed - increase the regen rate of bs shields and make the turrets do more damage.
Battleship discussion topic - Fire_Tzunami - 03-01-2006
What about adding a forward gun to the bs?
:rolleyes: Just a suggestion though
Battleship discussion topic - marauder - 03-01-2006
The shields have always been bad on a BS, which is why most people fit an Armour upgrade as soon as they can.
The real problem with BS's is the Nova Torpedo, it does far too much damage.
It's damage rating is the highest I've seen in any mod so far, it's explosion range is the biggest too, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out the Nova was a NUKE where ever Igiss found it (unless it's custom then I'm really confused as to why we've got it).
Another thing I've noticed is that practically every newbie on the server asks "where can I get the Nova?" and then "how much is it?" so right from when they get on the server they start looking for the Nova, because it's the most powerful which seems to mean it's the best.
no-one seems to realise that if the player looting option is turned on and your only left with MOUNTED equipment (like the evovled mod) you lose all Bots/batts and all AMMO too.
Now I don't know about the players who've got millions on they're fighter characters but to me losing over $1 million just because you filled you Nova ammo to full and then got blasted before you got to fire any seems like a really stupid way to lose cash fast.
If that happens 3 or 4 times during one fight/battle/event then someone is gonna end up broke and unable to even get repairs, let alone bots/batts etc.
If you use just sunslayers (using the sidewinder is crazy, because you have to get so close to actually hit the BS you'll stand a good chance of being blasted before you get to shoot the torpedo) the BS hit points are pretty much ok, until the codename weapons start getting used.
Nomad weapons don't need to be altered because they're ALIEN weapons, the nomad have had alot of time to get some decent weapons.
So my suggestions are:-
Lower the codenames to the original stats,
Remove the Nova Torpedo,
Increase the BS shield,
Make it alot harder to get nomad weapons (to count that fact that they're so good).
Battleship discussion topic - Dab - 03-01-2006
Nova torp is getting damage and blast radius reduced, no need to remove it. Anyway you wanna know how many Sunslayers it takes to take a BS with VI armor upgrade? about 45 if the shield is already down. The torp immunity makes the sunslayer obselete.
Also the Sidewinder is a bit too good like the nova. It does 8000 hull damage and can turn faster than a level 9 LF or even a firestalker missile. I've been in a fight were the guy couldn't even see me and yet was firing torp after trop into me. The sidewinder needs to be somewhere in-between a cannonball and a firestalker in terms of turn rate. It is a torpedo, it should turn like one. And unless you are a LF there is almost no ways of dodging it. Either reduce the turn rate or have a VERY large gap in between shots. Like have a 0.25 refire rate.
And Fire Tzunami The BS were meant to be like the originals in the stroyline but a bit stronger. We aren't gonna make forward guns for a BS. Mainly because you couldn't aim it in a BS.
Battleship discussion topic - Korrd - 03-01-2006
The nova explosion range was increased to its actual levels to solve a problem with BS having torpedo inmunity.
When hit by original novas, the BS got no damage at all. So i suggested that if we increase the explosion radius, the vulnerable parts of a BS would be hit even if the torp exploded in the other side of the ship.
It worked. But it added another problem, the BS could be defeated much faster now because of the huge damage caused by novas.
Now, there are 3 possible solution for this problem.
1. We make nova ammo REALLY expensive, say 500k each torp, and turn player loot on. That way, a fighter pilot will be forced to carry less torps because if destroyed with a full load, he will be loosing ~25mill on ammo... Also, we will see less people carring them (and less noobs asking where to get them), as they are really expensive...
2. We decrease nova launcher capacity. Instead of 50 Torps, we make it carry 10. So the player is more saavy when using novas...
3. We decrease the damage caused by novas to 50% - 75%. That will make it less effective.
Decreasing nova blast radius will make it almost obsolete against any ship bigger than a cruiser. In fact, some ships are not fully affected by them (RH BS, Kus BS, etc...)
I go with option 1. Stupidly expensive Novas and player loot on. (With player loot you only loose any stuff not attached to the ship) Also, player loot will add more realism to the FL experience, and maybe, it will help to form better fighter pilots :)
Codename weps are fine the way they are now. The older ones did little damage for the energy they used..
Sidewinder can be dodged. Just use tons of countermeasures and thrusters...
Turn rate of those things is fine. But the fire rate could be between 1.50 and 1.00..
Battleship discussion topic - Igiss - 03-01-2006
Sidewinder will be completely removed from 4.79. Including this weapon was a mistake.
As for Nova, it was my custom invention... to make battleships vulnerable. It wasn't very interesting when everyone was flying capital ships. Now fighters at least have a good chance.