"Battlecruiser," "Battleship" and "Dreadnought": A Distinction

[Jinx]

lets say, the naming and description just adds to the atmosphere and flavour of the game. and lets not take it too seriously. They are class/names that the factions give their ships, rather than using an "official classification".

so, the zoners name their battleship "juggernaut" - it does sound big, but not like "i-will-kill-you-on-sight". it fits OK, for a non military faction, but doesn t mean that ship is smaller, less armoured or armed than another battleship. dreadnaught implies the biggest, meanest ship in the arsenal. (whatever you call your biggest ship)

in the end, it fits to the ships in the game. there is the outcast dreadnaught and the liberty dreadnaught. both are the biggest, strongest ships in their factions. And thats about it.

introducing a new, stronger class, will only add to the frustration people have with smaller ships. now its allmost impossible to take down a capship allready ( provided you re on your own of course, in a pack it works ) - there are people that claim they soloed a battleship in a bomber - but i have yet to see that. putting even more powerful ships into the game won t help the balance, even if it made sense in a roleplaying way, it ll hurt the balance.

there is no maintanence cost in the game for a battleship, people can still suicide their damage away ( and its sadly still allowed ) and shields prevent expensive ships from most damage. if there was no autorepair for suicide/death, and a higher repair cost, and only minor shields that protect from pebble collisions. since that won t happen, adding stronger ships isn t a good idea. <-- just my opinion.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC