Technology gap between WC 3 and WCP

S

Sonntag

Spaceman
I have just finished the last mission in WCP for the second time and decided today to play a bit WC 3.

When I looked at the stats of the Fighters and their Handling, I was really surprised about the huge gap between the two games.

The Excalibur has a YPR of 70/75/70, the Vampire an YPR of 135/70/180, according to the sources Victory Streak and Official WCP guide. When comparing the handling of a Thunderbolt with that of a Shrike or Wasp, we also can see a huge improvement in maneuverability.

Even bigger is the change in Armor. The Excalibur has 110, the Vampire 320.
In Secret Ops, both the Thunderbolt and Excalibur are still used, so they are not completely obsolete, obviously.

What are the reasons for these great improvements of Technology? I know that the WCP fighters are developed to suit certain roles instead of being Allround Fighters as the War models, but I still think the Improvement is a way too big.
 
I'll take the Vampire issue. The reason why it has such good maneuvering, is because its engines move!! Hence giving you better movement.
 
Well the armor can be attributed to advances in metalurgy, making thiner metal stronger. As for manuverability, its so much better on the Vampire because the engines on the edges of its wings actually rotate providing much better turning ability.
 
If you compare the improvements made between WC2 and WC3 you will see that the gap there is even greater. Between WC2 and WC3 only 4 years passed, yet armour and shield strenghts are about 10 times as high as in WC2.
Between WC3 and WCP there are 12 years and the stats have only doubled approximately. So it is not THAT out of relation.

[Edited by Mekt-Hakkikt on 03-23-2001 at 16:10]
 
Well why invest in new fighters if they arent going to be a serious improvements over what you got now? It wouldnt make sense.
 
You're all correct -- the Vampire (and Panther) are more maneuverable because of the rotating engine pods.

The advance in armor is because of new metals -- WC3 ships are made of isometal, WCP ships of platolum...

Of course, there's also the fact that it's been *12 years* since the Excalibur entered service... (13 for the Thud).
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
You're all correct -- the Vampire (and Panther) are more maneuverable because of the rotating engine pods.

The advance in armor is because of new metals -- WC3 ships are made of isometal, WCP ships of platolum...

Of course, there's also the fact that it's been *12 years* since the Excalibur entered service... (13 for the Thud).
Click to expand...

Ok that all makes a lot of sense, I also regarded the difference between WC2 and 3 to be even greater than that of WC3 and WCP, however is it really right that the Shields of WC 3 are really more than 10 times as strong as those of WC2?

Well when we have delt with the Fighter issue, what about the guns and missiles? Obviously the Heat Seekers and FF's are quite old, but are they still the same as in WC 1? The Tachyon Guns in WCP are obviously equal to WC3 standarts, but what with Lasers and so on?


Still, I think it is surprising that the Fighters change very often, while the missiles remain the same. Just look at the Fighters today:

Germany is still using F4 Phantoms which were built in the 1970's, the first Phantom YF4H flew in 1958 (!!!).

The Missiles, however, are AIM 120 AMRAAM's, which means that the Phantom still is a capable Aircraft, as long as it is not making Dogfights. I know that Wing Commander is based on Dogfights which could explain this, but still it is strange to me that the missiles are old, while the Fighters are new.

[Edited by Sonntag on 03-23-2001 at 16:46]
 
In wartimes I think new fighter designs appear and vanish very quickly.
And, yes it is true that shields in WC3 are about 10 times stronger than in WC2. Sometimes even far more. Here an example:
WC2 Crossbow has the thickest shields for its time: 25cm
Thickest shields in WC3: Longbow: 500cm!
BTW the Candar Space Station from WCA only has 150cm of armour and a Ralatha destroyer has 500cm.
 
Theres probably an upward limit on how advanced things can get. How much more advanced can you make a bullet? Without going way overboard and expensive?
 
The difference between WC2 and WC3 in armor is for similar reasons -- note that the ships *aren't* new (except the Thunderbolt and the Excalibur), but are simply new models of old ships... using new armors (isometal is about 60 times as strong as WC1's durasteel).

The difference in *shields* is also interesting... WC3 fighters use the same type of shields (phase shields!) as WC2 *capships* -- which is why the stats go up so high.

Missiles and guns are upgraded, too -- they do more damage, go faster, evade decoys better and such. I'm working on a missile chart (like the gun chart!) which should show this fairly well...
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
The difference between WC2 and WC3 in armor is for similar reasons -- note that the ships *aren't* new (except the Thunderbolt and the Excalibur), but are simply new models of old ships... using new armors (isometal is about 60 times as strong as WC1's durasteel).

The difference in *shields* is also interesting... WC3 fighters use the same type of shields (phase shields!) as WC2 *capships* -- which is why the stats go up so high.

Missiles and guns are upgraded, too -- they do more damage, go faster, evade decoys better and such. I'm working on a missile chart (like the gun chart!) which should show this fairly well...
Click to expand...

This all makes sense, however I still cannot see why FF still do 280 damage in WCP as they did in WC3, that is not much of an update :)

I also noticed today that the IMREC's of WC3 were able to lock from 20000 (!), they even killed Darkets from that distance. So the WCP ALRIR is worse than the WC3 IMREC (in terms of Range, otherwise it is much better.

Is it really true that the Thunderbolt is that new in WC3? It seems fairly old to me (when considering its "average" maneuverability) compared to the Arrow or later the newly introduced Excalibur.
 
The Thunderbolts a heavy fighter so naturally its manuverability isnt going to be that great especially compared to an Arrow.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
The Thunderbolt entered service in 2668 -- about six months before WCIII.
Click to expand...
Maybe a stupid question, but where do you know all these things from? It's amazing how much you know!
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
The Thunderbolts a heavy fighter so naturally its manuverability isnt going to be that great especially compared to an Arrow.
Click to expand...

That's right, however I still think the Thunderbolt seems a bit outdated during WC3 due to its low speed (I tend to always use the Thunderbolt, however).
 
The Tbolt is just 40kps slower than the Hellcat and only 10dps less nimble than the Hellcat but carries far heavier weapons and protection. I always thought the Hellcat was an uninspiring design which I though was due to its old age.
 
The date for the Thunderbolt, though, comes from the Authorized Combat Guide to Wing Commander III. :)
 
I used it a lot too.:)I used it pretty much whenever i expected to run into a corvette. Everything else i could easily kill without. Love flying into the flight deck of a carrier and trashing it from the inside:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top