Best series of Confed fighters

[frostytheplebe]

Which game do you believe had the best fighters? For me it was WC1. Those old fighters had a lot of character. The Scimitar had the coolest looking cockpit in the game, the old Raptor could kill anything in a matter of seconds. The Hornet actually took skill to fly. The rapier... well it was fast and heavily shielded, weapons were a tad weak for my taste though.

I loved the WC2 fighters as well, but no where near as much... the Epee and the Saber earned my scorn very quickly, both had paper then armor. The ferret has always been a fan favorite in my eyes, as was the broadsword!

Wing Commander 3... WAY too many options, and... minus the longbow, the weaponry was WAY too overpowered.

Wing Commander 4... pretty much the same as WC3... though I did like the BW fighters a bit more.

WCP. Somewhat back to basics, but the weapons didnt seem to have the same punch and the fighters seemed control sensitive.

 

[QuailPilot]

I liked the Epee, and the Ferret.

The Epee, once you get the hang of how to fly it, is one of the best fighters you can have in WC2...so I voted WC2

 

[Mekt-Hakkikt]

Tough choice but in the end, I voted for WC 1. Every ship in there was at least ok, even the Scim. That one was only terrible if you had to chase Salthis (Bhurak!), every other ship was ok. And since shields were not so strong, the Hornets Laser only were not too much of a hinderance.

Every other game had at least one ship where I said to myself "Crap, not this one." Granted, WC had the smallest fighter selection so it had less risk of giving bad ships.

 

[Vinman]

I agree with Mekt-Hakkikt, the original fighters were all good, and incrementally better than the ones you flew before. As much as people hate the scimitar, it was fun to be assigned to the Blue Devils. The original fighters had character that few of the fighters in the other games had.

 

[Quarto]

Two questions - one, why are the WC4 Border Worlds fighters included in this poll, since it's supposed to be Confed? If by "Confed" you really just mean "playable", then Armada's Kilrathi fighters should be included too.

Second question, what is this poll all about? Are you actually asking, as the poll states, which game had the best fighters (i.e., most powerful/superior compared to the enemy fighters in that particular game), or which game had our favourite combination of fighters. The second option is definitely a hugely more interesting question to answer - but in that case, everyone so far is answering the question wrong . I mean, the most interesting group of fighters has to contain some ships that you personally dislike, even if (especially if) there is someone out there that loves exactly the ships you hate. Good game design means (amongst other things) imposing limitations on the player, where at some point during the game, he finds himself frustrated in a mission, saying "Oh, if only I didn't have to fly this piece of junk..."

 

[Iceblade]

That is how I answered. (though my opinions of the WC2 ships are based on their versions from the Vision mods (UE and of course primarily Standoff).

 

[frostytheplebe]

Two questions - one, why are the WC4 Border Worlds fighters included in this poll, since it's supposed to be Confed? If by "Confed" you really just mean "playable", then Armada's Kilrathi fighters should be included too.

... Ok well played. The BW fighters were an oversight on my part. PLEASE DISREGARD all but the Lance and the Bearcat since technically they were confed fighters. But its actually a little of both as you'll notice I didn't include the Excalibur, TBolt or Arrow, as you don't get to fly them in WC4

Second question, what is this poll all about?

I was going the favorites, not which fighters, but which group of fighters. In other words, if you liked all the WC2 fighter save, THAT ONE HAS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE LIST, or is that fighter the deal breaker? I thought that this would be more interesting as one or two fighters could push someone past the limit.

 

[Tigerhawk]

This was a tough one, because I liked the WC2 wing and the Prophecy wing about the same. The Wasp was the one that did it for me, though...you absolutely cannot go wrong with the Swarmer packs, and that booster engine is fantastic for long-range intercepts. Great maneuverability, guns that make quick work of anything it hits (at least if you have the full guns combo set) and it takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'.

That outweighed my hatred of the Tigershark, anyway.

 

[Dundradal]

This was a tough one, because I liked the WC2 wing and the Prophecy wing about the same. The Wasp was the one that did it for me, though...you absolutely cannot go wrong with the Swarmer packs, and that booster engine is fantastic for long-range intercepts. Great maneuverability, guns that make quick work of anything it hits (at least if you have the full guns combo set) and it takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'.

It's also pretty much the best fighter in WCP MP. Swarmers are killer and there's nothing like hitting the booster pack and doing circles around your opponent.

 

[Quarto]

I was going the favorites, not which fighters, but which group of fighters. In other words, if you liked all the WC2 fighter save, THAT ONE HAS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE LIST, or is that fighter the deal breaker? I thought that this would be more interesting as one or two fighters could push someone past the limit.

Well, I think it's the exact opposite - those hated fighters are not the exception that might break a favourite group, they make the favourite group.

When you're designing a group of planes/spaceships for a game, you don't just try to put together the best of everything. You don't want to have the best light fighter, the best heavy, the best bomber, and so on. These things work by contrast. Imagine WC1 without the Scimitar - what's so great about the Rapier then? I mean, there's no point comparing it to the Hornet, the Scimitar's not there to compare it to, so you wind up comparing it to the Raptor. Well, the Raptor's manoeuvrability isn't that bad, its speed is just 50 kps less (compared to the Scimitar's difference of 90 kps), and in every other aspect, it's just plain better.

Similarly, in WCP - the whole point of having the Tigershark in there was to make the players rejoice at getting the Panther. They even went so far as to say on the website (and in the manual, IIRC) that the Tigershark's a throwback to the Hellcat. Without the Tigershark, everyone would have hated the Panther (since the Vampire is so much better) - instead, everyone ended up loving the Panther, because it's so much better than the Tigershark.

 

[Catnip]

It's worth mentioning that while the Raptor's cream of the crop in PC WC1, a couple of the changes made to game mechanics for the SNES port (laser refire, speed damage) make the Rapier come out on top there.

Anyway, I voted for WC2. Lots of fighters, lots of personality.

 

[ELTEE]

I always wanted more opportunities to fly the Banshee - that's one of my favorite fighters of the series.

In the end, I opted for the WC2 fighters. I think the game did a good job of offering several mission types and providing fighters with unique characteristics and 'feel' to them - I never get bored during a play-through.

 

[frostytheplebe]

Similarly, in WCP - the whole point of having the Tigershark in there was to make the players rejoice at getting the Panther. They even went so far as to say on the website (and in the manual, IIRC) that the Tigershark's a throwback to the Hellcat. Without the Tigershark, everyone would have hated the Panther (since the Vampire is so much better) - instead, everyone ended up loving the Panther, because it's so much better than the Tigershark.

Heh no way, I'dve taken the Panther over the Vamp any day! Mare stable, solid, and i liked the loadout better

 

[-danr-]

For me there's no contest, the WC1 set, especially the Rapier.. it really is the business, nimble handling, strong shields, decent firepower (although the refire rate could be better)

What I've always found strange though, when the Rapier is announced in WC1, the Tiger's Claw pilots are talking about how it's the 'almost invulnerable fighter' and how some of them wish they were in Black Lion Squadron (e.g. Knight when Lightning dies)...

But by the time WC2 comes around, the Rapier II is almost obsolete, used for the occasional patrol mission and certainly not as special to the confederation. Guess those ten years saw some pretty good ships released.

 

[frostytheplebe]

For me there's no contest, the WC1 set, especially the Rapier.. it really is the business, nimble handling, strong shields, decent firepower (although the refire rate could be better)

What I've always found strange though, when the Rapier is announced in WC1, the Tiger's Claw pilots are talking about how it's the 'almost invulnerable fighter' and how some of them wish they were in Black Lion Squadron (e.g. Knight when Lightning dies)...

But by the time WC2 comes around, the Rapier II is almost obsolete, used for the occasional patrol mission and certainly not as special to the confederation. Guess those ten years saw some pretty good ships released.

Thats what happens with the passage of time sadly... plus lets not forget though, it isn't the same fighter. its a variant design...

 

[-danr-]

That's true, about the inevitability of time, just like the Excalibur looking aged in WC4.

 

[Mace]

Sure, putting in a super-duper ship makes all te fun and games?

I'd propose to use the replay value;
WC1's Scimitar is slow, but when you get the gripes she is fun to fly, and she has afterburners.

WC2's Rapier is a nice ship, not a killer, but unless you need torpedoes it gets the job done.

WC3's arrow would be my choice ship, it is lightningfast, small and it's missile salvo makes it punch harder then the hellcat, while not as tough.

WC4 i'd take out a dragon or a banshee, the banshee is balanced and very fast

WCP i'd fly the Panther or the Piranha, while useless in taking down large ships, Piranha flies like a dream.

 

[Mekt-Hakkikt]

Well, I think it's the exact opposite - those hated fighters are not the exception that might break a favourite group, they make the favourite group.

When you're designing a group of planes/spaceships for a game, you don't just try to put together the best of everything. You don't want to have the best light fighter, the best heavy, the best bomber, and so on. These things work by contrast. Imagine WC1 without the Scimitar - what's so great about the Rapier then? I mean, there's no point comparing it to the Hornet, the Scimitar's not there to compare it to, so you wind up comparing it to the Raptor. Well, the Raptor's manoeuvrability isn't that bad, its speed is just 50 kps less (compared to the Scimitar's difference of 90 kps), and in every other aspect, it's just plain better.

Similarly, in WCP - the whole point of having the Tigershark in there was to make the players rejoice at getting the Panther. They even went so far as to say on the website (and in the manual, IIRC) that the Tigershark's a throwback to the Hellcat. Without the Tigershark, everyone would have hated the Panther (since the Vampire is so much better) - instead, everyone ended up loving the Panther, because it's so much better than the Tigershark.

I disagree somewhat. While yes, I see there are design reasons to put in a fighter or two that are not top notch but I prefer it when each fighter given the possibility to fly can hold its own ground well because it has strong points.

Of course the Scimitar is worse in almost every aspect to the Raptor or Rapier but it still has good guns, a good missile loadout, enough manoeuvrability and decent protection.

The Tigershark had ok guns, even good when using the charging MD correctly and the RP made it fun too. It still had good speed and agility.

Now, the Hellcat in WC3 had no good gun loadout, no good missile loadout, no good protection and no good agillity.

When there is a fighter in a series that offers nothing to me in any regard, I have no fun flying it, then I consider it a worthless addition. It does not enhance the other fighters for me. Just like the Chain Ion in SOPS did not make me appreciate the Dust Cannon or Pulse Particle more. Those guns were good on their own not because they were better than the Chain Ion.

 

[frostytheplebe]

When there is a fighter in a series that offers nothing to me in any regard, I have no fun flying it, then I consider it a worthless addition. It does not enhance the other fighters for me. Just like the Chain Ion in SOPS did not make me appreciate the Dust Cannon or Pulse Particle more. Those guns were good on their own not because they were better than the Chain Ion.

Yeah... I don't think I've met anyone who likes the hellcat.

 

[Dundradal]

Yeah... I don't think I've met anyone who likes the hellcat.

You should have been around 15 years ago then. The Hellcat had quite the devote following and I'm sure still does.