idea for battleships...

[bluntpencil2001]

To be fair, Starlancer was originally World War 2 in space (albeit with different sides), and Freelancer continued the tradition.

---

[Treewyrm]

Naming conversions, traditions, overall militaristic style. But that's just common, regardless of the actual media. However, comparing actual combat unit from one era to imaginary combat unit from distant future isn't practical in terms of gameplay mechanics, since the purpose of the whole thing is to make things there balanced, not to make them very realistic, especially considering when there is no realism possible with sci-fi. Plasma cannons? Give me a break. Style is a one thing, balance is a completely different, don't mix the two. Equations, rocks, papers, scissors, chaos, tables of stats, numbers and values.

Bluntpencil2001, Starlancer is a play on cold war period put on sci-fi theme, the difference is mainly that in Starlancer it resulted in actual war.

[RingoW]

@ blunt: No. It was the Cold War after WWII, they have turned into a Hot War in Starlancer.

Respectful
AoM

[bluntpencil2001]

Bluntpencil2001, Starlancer is a play on cold war period put on sci-fi theme, the difference is mainly that in Starlancer it resulted in actual war.

They also had a lot of WW2 references (and Top Gun...:dry:), such as the 45th Volunteer wing which the player joins as well as the Battleship Yamato.:)

---

[Treewyrm]

They also had a lot of WW2 references (and Top Gun...:dry:), such as the 45th Volunteer wing which the player joins as well as the Battleship Yamato.:)

In which case call it a mix of all stereotype cherries put on top of the cold war theme cake. But that's not the point of discussion.

[X-Lancer]

let's not talk about the reference....this changes is because.Battlecruiser..the Battlecruisers we have now..is a loophole for battleship....can kill any cap ship except battleship easyly......if Battlecruisers can do it..why not battleship can do it? and..the fun part of fighting between battleship and battleship is not your fire 100% hitting your enemy..is some shell missed.some shell hit...that is very very fun..and require much more skill that we have now..that's why i come up the battleship main guns and AA guns idea....

[Jinx]

the only problem i have with battleships now is - that they go down too fast - not cause they are too weak, sort of - but cause the weapondamage was increased on most capship weapons in x.84. and i only don t like them go down that fast is, cause it was quite funny to have two behemoth ships firing lightningbolts at each other for like minutes:laugh:- slowly draining each others hull strengh.

now its all quite quick. i think a BB vs. BB - it goes down in something more than a minute. short fun for the cash.

i liked it how battleship hulls would seemingly take NO damage from fighters or a few salvos of capship weapons - but were sloooooowly chewed away. gave more an impression of a really really tough hull. - now it sometimes feels like you are flying an eggshell.

ps.: i am a bit against calling everything someone doesn t like a "loophole" - loophole refers to abusing a rule which means skimming VERY close to a violation of the rule. - the use of battlecruisers is not at all and in any way abusing a rule. the rule is crystal clear - and people flying battlecruisers are not at all making use of a loophole. ( that does not mean that battlecruisers are strong, cheap and whatever else - but they are not a loophole ) .. and no, i don t fly one

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[X-Lancer]

ps.: i am a bit against calling everything someone doesn t like a "loophole" - loophole refers to abusing a rule which means skimming VERY close to a violation of the rule. - the use of battlecruisers is not at all and in any way abusing a rule. the rule is crystal clear - and people flying battlecruisers are not at all making use of a loophole. ( that does not mean that battlecruisers are strong, cheap and whatever else - but they are not a loophole ) .. and no, i don t fly one

is not about the rules loophole....is about the fire power loophole....

[Panzer]

Battleships...

Pretty much fine at the moment as for balance, but they lack durability. The fact, that they are vulnerable to fighters is quite ridiculous... I understand, that it's a requirement for smooth gameplay, but those warships gradually became too weak.

Agreed with lanzer on that weapon division - I'd throw in 12 high-refire/high-speed turrets around the large ship, give these a firing range only slightly exceeding the range of fighter guns(abt 700 let it be) and as the main weapons- the current primary turrets. 7k range, maybe even slower speed, but dramatically increased firepower.

There is a way of making battleships invulnerable to fighters actually - shields are the key. If primary capital ship weapons became shield busters practically - the battleship's shield could become so powerful (high regen), that only these kind of weapons could wack them down. Defenseless fighters? of course not! Upgraded paralyzers, mini razors, torps and antimatter weapons - that, fighter guns would be the weapon, used for blasting away capships.

2 much work... nvm

---

[RingoW]

Have you ever tried to take down a BS shield with a fighter, sticking to your faction weapons?
You may bring them down, but very, very slow, as long as the BS doesn't shoot back.
When you have to dodge and manoeuver, the regen rate is faster as you can shoot them down.

I will try to test it in-game.

Chimaera fighter with 2 Imp. Debbies, 2 Sunfrenzy (9), 2 Disinfector (9) and a Mini Razor.
Can't wait to see, if i can bring down the shields, without the BS is shooting back.

Respectful
AoM