| Author |
Battle Ship Classes |
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
|  Posted: 2010-02-24 20:52
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-24 16:30, |3lue Winged Angel wrote:
i want more ships to play as a free player, i mean, when your in a ship like a cruiser on ICC, and an uggie comes with a dread, obviously, who going to win most of the time? i want ships that are either usable by 1ra that are between cruisers and dreads, or add a few more ships in cruisers and such that a 1st rear admiral can use
|
|
I'm currently an unsubbed player, and I like your idea.
But looking at it from the Dev's point of view.... why should they?
The fair question here is that: We are free players, and if we want something, why don't we contribute something to the game? i.e. subscribe.
So, yes... it would be good if 1RA players had access to more uber vessels, but I wouldn't bet on it.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo on 2010-02-24 20:53 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Jackal'
Admiral
Joined: January 01, 2009
Posts: 22
From: Connecticut U.S.A.
| Posted: 2010-02-24 21:31
Whatever They do, the can't mess with the current rank requirement layout. you'll have a LOT of admirals that are pretty tweaked to suddenly lose their battle dread to a smaller, weaker ship. If your going to change what people have access to, it needs to be of equal or greater value.
_________________
Life is pleasant
Death is peaceful
It's the transition that's a pain
|
tackfurlo
Captain
Joined: March 10, 2007
Posts: 2
| Posted: 2010-02-24 22:02
As a n00b who has yet to attain a single combat badge here (but in other games, namely FreeAllegiance and Sins of a Solar Empire, is above-average - I am a great BIOS battlecruiser & bomber pilot, though not much else, and I can beat anyone I know personally as Advent) I think what we really need is a carrier.
And by carrier I don't mean a troop transport or a bomber. I mean a ship designed for the primary purpose of transporting other ships. Essentially, it would have very light armament but very, VERY heavy armor and shields, and it would serve as a mobile (somewhat slow, but still...) spawn point for any ship class...hmm...destroyer or lower. More or less like a jump gate with destroyer-class weapons and station-class armor you can park directly adjacent to an enemy planet.
Of course, while not able to spawn a dread, it would be able to repair and rearm ANY class of ship, and possibly both itself and orbital platforms. In this way, a team with 3-4 dreads and one of these carriers would be able to continue an assault indefinitely.
Of course, it would also make scenario games much...better. If someone was able/allowed to park one of these in the jump gate (which I recently learned is against the ToS/rules/manners/whatever despite only having done so with an engineering ship so I wouldn't have to pay the whopping 7k metal for a mining beam. Seriously, that's just dumb, but whatever, I've quit doing it now.) Then it would allow a veteran to park it near a planet and then have a simi-n00b pop out engi ships and miners right there at the planet, saving several jumps when trying to build up a planet to SY. Of course it would also make defending a planet easier, allowing a planet which does not have a SY present to still spawn destroyers or lower in a pinch to defend against an attack.
Anyhow...just a thought. Personally I haven't played very much but if it was me, I'd say what's really missing is this sort of mobile spawn point, and the tactical uses of one are endless, while the weak weaponry is just enough to keep n00bs at bay. This means you wouldn't spam them, you'd just keep 1 sitting around, because it's use is as a support or utility ship, not for bringing any firepower to bear directly.
Of course, this could also be implemented as another model of either dreadnought or station, and doesn't really require its own ship class, but either way it's a good addition to the game.
As for the gap between cruiser/dread/station...idk, but I'll let you know whenever I actually hit rank to pilot one
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-02-24 23:07
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-24 22:02, tackfurlo wrote:
I think what we really need is a carrier.
And by carrier I don't mean a troop transport or a bomber. I mean a ship designed for the primary purpose of transporting other ships. Essentially, it would have very light armament but very, VERY heavy armor and shields, and it would serve as a mobile (somewhat slow, but still...) spawn point for any ship class...hmm...destroyer or lower. More or less like a jump gate with destroyer-class weapons and station-class armor you can park directly adjacent to an enemy planet.
Of course, while not able to spawn a dread, it would be able to repair and rearm ANY class of ship, and possibly both itself and orbital platforms. In this way, a team with 3-4 dreads and one of these carriers would be able to continue an assault indefinitely.
|
|
Transporting other ships?
But the other ships in the game are players too.... barring the few AI transports/supply ships that run around. If I were a player, why would I want to be transported by a large, vulnerable, and potentially slow carrier ship?
My guess is that you could be proposing some super large factory ship.... aka, the Mothership in the Homeworld series of games. But then the topic is about Battleships. And the addition of another large class of ship is what most ppl here are not in favor of right now.
BUT..... just to show that perhaps your idea may have some merit.... instead of creating yet another class of vessel, the Devs can simply make one more class of Station and call it... eg. Factory Station or Starbase, and have it be some kind of spawn point for new/garaged ships, etc etc. bla bla. And yet, it would only be available to those higher ranked players. (Hopefully Marshals and above only)
Sidetrack: Modern naval combat took a diff turn in WW2 with the addition of airpower... aka carrier-borne fighter/bomber aircraft. This is also reflected in space games like FreeSpace, Wing Commander, X-Wing, etc etc. I find that in DS, fighters do not really have any impact in the game as opposed to what it could be in reality. Right now, carrier dreads or cruisers seem to be second rate.
Perhaps, a new class of dreads, or an entirely new class/design of ship could be added to the game with the sole purpose of carrying large number of fighters (user customizable configuration, in the order of 10 to 15 fighter groups), be light on offensive weaps, and high on PD defenses and armor/shields. Call it a "Hyper-carrier" or something. This could be useful if the devs ever implement torpedo carrying anti-capship bombers or planetary assault bombers, into the game.
I dunno. Just making some guesses.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Great Budda
Fleet Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: January 01, 2008
Posts: 157
From: Omaha, NE
| Posted: 2010-02-24 23:39
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-24 23:07, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
Sidetrack: Modern naval combat took a diff turn in WW2 with the addition of airpower... aka carrier-borne fighter/bomber aircraft. This is also reflected in space games like FreeSpace, Wing Commander, X-Wing, etc etc. I find that in DS, fighters do not really have any impact in the game as opposed to what it could be in reality. Right now, carrier dreads or cruisers seem to be second rate.
Perhaps, a new class of dreads, or an entirely new class/design of ship could be added to the game with the sole purpose of carrying large number of fighters (user customizable configuration, in the order of 10 to 15 fighter groups), be light on offensive weaps, and high on PD defenses and armor/shields. Call it a "Hyper-carrier" or something. This could be useful if the devs ever implement torpedo carrying anti-capship bombers or planetary assault bombers, into the game.
I dunno. Just making some guesses.
|
|
The current issue with a fighter carrier like you described is a hardware issue at this point because of the missle/fighter overhead on the servers. Until the Devs can correct it (in process BTW) a true fighter carrier would bring the servers to a screaming halt.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-02-25 00:03
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-24 23:39, FTL great budda wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-24 23:07, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
Sidetrack: Modern naval combat took a diff turn in WW2 with the addition of airpower... aka carrier-borne fighter/bomber aircraft. This is also reflected in space games like FreeSpace, Wing Commander, X-Wing, etc etc. I find that in DS, fighters do not really have any impact in the game as opposed to what it could be in reality. Right now, carrier dreads or cruisers seem to be second rate.
Perhaps, a new class of dreads, or an entirely new class/design of ship could be added to the game with the sole purpose of carrying large number of fighters (user customizable configuration, in the order of 10 to 15 fighter groups), be light on offensive weaps, and high on PD defenses and armor/shields. Call it a "Hyper-carrier" or something. This could be useful if the devs ever implement torpedo carrying anti-capship bombers or planetary assault bombers, into the game.
I dunno. Just making some guesses.
|
|
The current issue with a fighter carrier like you described is a hardware issue at this point because of the missle/fighter overhead on the servers. Until the Devs can correct it (in process BTW) a true fighter carrier would bring the servers to a screaming halt.
|
|
Yeah, I kinda figured that, with the limitations on plats and mines.
Was just an idea, out of point from our current discussion anyway.
But let's stick to the current topic of this new "battleship" thing for now.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2010-02-25 01:19
A Battleship prototype is pretty simple. Make them a bridge between Dreadnaughts and Cruisers.
Which means tweaking roles and ranks a bit.
First, put in the Battleship class, situate them at the VA and AD ranks. This means of course, they you're going to have to bump up the other ships.
Yeah, that means Dreadnaughts will sit right at FA/GA. And Stations right at MA/CM. You said you wanted a reason to go there, now you do.
There has been long an argument that you shouldn't mess with things like that because you shouldn't take away things people have already earned, and my opinion is, you shouldn't have made something so good so easy to get then in the first place. Sure, there will be a few people that will cry and leave because they can't fly them anymore but there will always be new players, and there will always be another side that doesn't care.
Personally I'd be losing Station access in that scenario so its not like I have some vested self interest, and I've pretty much been yelling for Dreadnaughts to be nerfed forever so instead of nerfing them, just make it worth the rank. Honestly being GA would really justify their power.
Anyways.
Battleships would essentially be a cruiser with alot more firepower, whether in missiles or cannons or what have you, without any real appreciable increase in surviability hull or armor wise. So you get a ship that is noticeably different and plays in a vastly different way. By doing this you also give a bit of a free end choice to people. Do you get in a big, slower, more powerful dreadnaught or do you go for a lighter, more manueverable, but more flimsy battleship? And it definitely fits in line with essentially all Cruisers being free.
-Ent
_________________
|
Code Red
Chief Marshal
Non Omnis Moriar
Joined: September 08, 2007
Posts: 184
| Posted: 2010-02-25 02:00
Personally i prefer the idea of any new class sitting in between cruiser and dread , i dont think a new uber ship between dread and station is needed altho you could argue that the krill already kinda sits there anyway as the Siphon is the AD/EAD equivalent.
As it stands the balance is there if you put a skilled pilot in an HC vs an UGTO BD he can use range and agility to cause problems and more. Also enough dreads hitting either same arc or alternate arcs (depending on faction opponent) of a station can again cause problems etc.
Also an uber ship larger then standard dread would have a huge profile and a very low speed (10Gu aprox) so why would you want this when a station is already in place?
_________________
Code Red, For winning in the 1RA Fleet Wars event, here's your coupon for a week.
|
Great Budda
Fleet Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: January 01, 2008
Posts: 157
From: Omaha, NE
| Posted: 2010-02-25 02:31
I know there will be people who are unhappy with any shift in ship availability at a given rank but I see a whole bunch of potential good. Plugging in a battleship class between cruiser and dread would fill a whole bunch of recent issues cropping up on the boards:
- Marshal and Chief Marshal get stations exclusively meaning there is now reason to achieve those ranks
- More ships available to 1st RA and below giving additional freedom to lower level players
- Capital ships (dreads and stations) will now have a more defined niche in the game asside from the biggest gun
- A whole slew of new tactical possibilities
and finally....
- Since the battleship would fall squarely between cruiser and dread it would be easier for Devs to create/implement with no buff/nerf needed on dread or station
So even if it does cause some frontal chafing I think this is a very positive and practical idea that could provide alot of benefits.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-02-25 02:32
With that... I gotta ask. 
Any 3D artists here with their renditions of what such a ship might look like for any of the factions? 
Get your creative juices flowing, as well as generating interest in the class.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Tael
2nd Rear Admiral
Palestar
Joined: July 03, 2002
Posts: 3695
From: San Francisco Bay Area
| Posted: 2010-02-25 04:46
We already have Dreads and Super Dreads...
So you have your battleships and Dreadnoughts
_________________
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2010-02-25 11:05
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-25 04:46, Tael wrote:
We already have Dreads and Super Dreads...
So you have your battleships and Dreadnoughts
|
|
You heard the man.
Topic is useless from now on.
_________________
* Josef hands [PB]Quantium the Golden GothThug award for best melodrama in a miniseries...
[-GTN-]BackSlash: "Azreal is a master of showing me what is horribly broken in the game."
|
The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
| Posted: 2010-02-25 12:57
Quote:
|
On 2010-02-25 04:46, Tael wrote:
Super Dreads...
|
|
More then one?
_________________
|
Gin Ichimaru
Grand Admiral
Joined: March 17, 2006
Posts: 110
From: Undisclosed
| Posted: 2010-02-25 15:58
cool
_________________
Would you like me to save you?... Just kidding...
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2010-02-25 16:56
I am not adding another Class to the game purely for the hell of it, especially since we have no models we could use.
I am not, however, ruling out adding 'elite' ship variants for existing classes that have certain extreme layouts that are balanced withing the current system. This is definitely an option, and something I fully intend to pursue when we are in a position to do so.
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
