Carrier fight

Plus the Tiger's Claw has no Bombers, none of its fighter compliment is Bombers,
Click to expand...

The Tiger's Claw's complement included at least four Broadsword-class torpedo bombers (attached to Black Lion Squadron and Blue Devil Squadron). They show up on Wing Commander Academy and in the Wing Commander movie.

The Claw has Turreted Lasers, a defensive weapon, you cant beat a full on Battleship with defensive weapons!
Click to expand...

The Tiger's Claw has various larger calibur weapons - antimatter torpedoes and plasma weapons (seen in the 'planetary bombardment' closing of WC1).
 
Even so, the Concordia also had more weapons then met the eyes, i still say its impossible for a strike carrier to take on a full dreadnought even w/ a very skilled commander
 
Which any carrier who allowed his ship to come within sight of an enemy capital ship in the first place most certainly is not.
 
Loaf, remember armor equivalents here. Obviously the Concordia doesn't have 20 times the actual amount of armor plating as the claw, in fact, it probably has less. But since the armor isn't durasteel anymore (I can't remember what it was come WC2), the Tiger's claw still has 24 cm of front armor, but its equivalency in Durasteel would be in the same range as the WC2 cap ships, so I think 700cm Equivalent is proper.

And I also assume the Tiger's Claw would have been upgraded with Phase shields around 2656. Otherwise, why didn't the Strakha just fire some beefed up dumbfires at it. Six dumbfires would of destroyed the ship just as well.

So take it easy Loaf. Maybe you misunderstood me there. I assume that if the Claw was still in service in 2665, it would have been upgraded with comparable armor to capships of that era.
 
F4U Corsair said:
The Claw has Turreted Lasers, a defensive weapon, you cant beat a full on Battleship with defensive weapons!
Click to expand...


On several occasions laser batteries are deciding factors in fleet engagements. During the Battle of Baka Kar the Mjlnonir uses its heavy laser turrets to smash up Vorgath and when they get closer to him they even use the small point defense turrets (low caliber laser, mass driver, etc) and cause quite a bit of damage. Granted the their target is unshielded but its armor is plenty thick to give a good fight.

Also in wc3 and wc4 we see laser batteries engaging enemy capships with a degree of success. Don't discount lasers just because they are lasers.
 
Loaf, remember armor equivalents here. Obviously the Concordia doesn't have 20 times the actual amount of armor plating as the claw, in fact, it probably has less. But since the armor isn't durasteel anymore (I can't remember what it was come WC2), the Tiger's claw still has 24 cm of front armor, but its equivalency in Durasteel would be in the same range as the WC2 cap ships, so I think 700cm Equivalent is proper.
Click to expand...

Calculating armor equivalents and making up numbers you think sound fun are two different things. Neither is necessary in this case, since the Joan's and Claw Marks numbers are both for straight durasteel... but Privateer teaches us how to anyway - multiply by ten for plasteel, by twenty for tungsten and sixty for isometal.

(Of course, since WC1 and WC2 armor values are both 'real' dursasteel, though, you'll have to multiply *both* the Tiger's Claw and the Concordia's armor values...)

Your logic doesn't make sense in the first place, either. In 2665 the Tiger's Claw would be a twenty one year old example of a forty six year old design... one that isn't supposed to be a ship of the line in the first place -- while the Concordia would be the absolute newest, most modern ship that's also designed as a straight up battleship. An aging strike carrier will not be more heavily armored than a modern dreadnought.

And I also assume the Tiger's Claw would have been upgraded with Phase shields around 2656. Otherwise, why didn't the Strakha just fire some beefed up dumbfires at it. Six dumbfires would of destroyed the ship just as well.
Click to expand...

Torpedoes have been around since the start of the war - there's nothing wrong with the Strakha using them to penetrate the Tiger's Claw's meson shields.
 
I'd have to side with LOAF on this one. By changing numbers around, you can prove anything you want.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I don't like the stats that we have, so I made up new ones, and also I disabled the primary weapon on the ship I don't want to win.

Welcome to SpaceBattles, ladies and gentlemen.
Click to expand...

LOL Thank you, My thoughts exactly
 
Dundradal said:
On several occasions laser batteries are deciding factors in fleet engagements. During the Battle of Baka Kar the Mjlnonir uses its heavy laser turrets to smash up Vorgath and when they get closer to him they even use the small point defense turrets (low caliber laser, mass driver, etc) and cause quite a bit of damage. Granted the their target is unshielded but its armor is plenty thick to give a good fight.

Also in wc3 and wc4 we see laser batteries engaging enemy capships with a degree of success. Don't discount lasers just because they are lasers.
Click to expand...

True, but Heavy laser Turrets wont do Jack against Phase shields
 
Ships in WC3/4 all have phase shields. I have a feeling you don't know/understand the evolution of shield types in WC. As shields improved at certain points so did missiles/guns and this went back and forth throughout the war (2634 - guns/missiles no, torpedoes yes, 2654 - guns/missiles yes, torpedoes yes, 2665 guns/missiles no, torpedoes yes, 2669 guns/missiles yes, torpedoes yes, 2671 guns/missiles yes, torpedoes yes, 2681 guns/missiles no (except plasma), torpedoes yes)

That's the quick explanation, if you do a search I'm sure there will be several threads on the matter.
 
All weapons can damage phase shields. It's just most weapons don't do enough damage to be noticeable and/or the phase shields recover too quickly to see any effect. However, there is a saying: One mosquito sting is annoying; athousand can kill you...
 
Think about this though, In WC 3 and 4 you can take down the shields of a cap ship pretty easily using lasers. Its barely if at all possible w/ the ships in WC2. And my other point is, The concordia could go toe to toe w/ ANY ship in the wing commander 3 game and probably either win, or do a lot of damage before fall, all this w/ its stats from WC 2 unchanged. The Tiger's Claw can't. So yeah Changing stats around is unfair, and telling me that the Tiger's Claw would be able to beat the Concordia... oh man thats one Wild theory. Tell you what, lets go find a Two player game, we'll equip one carrier with the manueverability, weapons, and fighter Numbers of the claw, then equip my carrier w/ that of the Concordia, have the two duke it out and SEE who wins ok!?
 
F4U Corsair said:
Think about this though, In WC 3 and 4 you can take down the shields of a cap ship pretty easily using lasers. Its barely if at all possible w/ the ships in WC2. And my other point is, The concordia could go toe to toe w/ ANY ship in the wing commander 3 game and probably either win, or do a lot of damage before fall, all this w/ its stats from WC 2 unchanged. The Tiger's Claw can't. So yeah Changing stats around is unfair, and telling me that the Tiger's Claw would be able to beat the Concordia... oh man thats one Wild theory. Tell you what, lets go find a Two player game, we'll equip one carrier with the manueverability, weapons, and fighter Numbers of the claw, then equip my carrier w/ that of the Concordia, have the two duke it out and SEE who wins ok!?
Click to expand...

And, as pointed out before, you're talking about two ENTIRELY different types of craft. The Concordia is a dreadnought - it's meant to go toe-to-toe with other ships, which is why it has the PTC in the first place, though it ALSO has carrier capability. The Tiger's Claw is a Strike Carrier - meant to get in alone, get out alone, and be a CARRIER - it uses its fighters in anti-capship roles, which means bombers when torps are the only way to reliably kill craft, or fighters when the balance of weapons-versus-shields is tilted towards Weapons, as it is in WC1 and WC3 to a lesser extent.

However, you could probably KILL the Concordia with another capship, like a destroyer using torpedoes, or a cruiser using torpedoes and fighters. The Concordia cost a lot more than that destroyer or cruiser did, so even if the Concordia manages to take the other ship with her... you've still lost a lot of resources and crew, and are stuck on the losing end of that equation since the money you just spent on the Concordia was wasted. The enemy got a relatively 'cheap' kill at that point, since it cost them only the cost of those torps and that destroyer or cruiser, which is undoubtedly less than that of the Concordia.

As Blackjack said, it shouldn't be the carrier that decides the outcome of a carrier-versus-carrier fight; it's the fighters that should be doing it.
 
Was there a point to any of that? I KNOW all that already, and youve more then made my point, The tiger's claw is in no way capable of taking out the Concordia as a certain someone said, so I dont see what all the rest of that way about.
 
Any carrier or should i say its fighters are capable of taking out any ship in the Wing Commander universe with the exception of perhaps the H'varkann. And even thought they never go into detail in WC3 you can make a safe bet that the ships that killed Concordia over Vespus were carrier launched fighters. So fighters launched from the Claw (assuming it was upgraded the way Wolfhound was upgraded to be flagship of the fleet see end run) could kill her. It really does come down the the skill of the Commander the flight wings and as all of military history shows a bit of luck.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I don't like the stats that we have, so I made up new ones, and also I disabled the primary weapon on the ship I don't want to win.

Welcome to SpaceBattles, ladies and gentlemen.
Click to expand...
Damn Them all!!!!!!!! :)
 
It would only be fair to have a fight between capships of equal "tech level". So either only some weapons damage shields, or they don't. Tech explanation is not really necessary.
 
Delance said:
It would only be fair to have a fight between capships of equal "tech level". So either only some weapons damage shields, or they don't. Tech explanation is not really necessary.
Click to expand...

Because in war everything is fair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top