How long would it take for a Tallahasse to destroy a Ranger?

[dacis2]

Let's say a Ranger class was heading towards a jump point, and a hostile (don't ask.) Tallahassee jumped in, and started blasting at the Ranger. Would it go down in a few salvoes? Or would it take alot more than that?

And while we're on the topic, let's say that a Vesuvius class (it was chasing the Tallahassee) jumped in, how long would it take the Vesuvius to kill the Tallahassee?


I need this for the Wing Commander spacebattle I'm doing, which has this scenario.

 

[fongsaunder]

Well, although Ive never played WC3, there are a few factors involved.
1.Position-If u can get broadside to an enemy vessel, u can fire all your guns but the enemy can fire their front guns if they fly head on
2.Tactics-If the commander wants to kill a specific part of the ship first ie Shields, etc
3.Armament-Depends on power drain/firepower of diffrent weapons have diffrent effect on battles.
4.Fighters-How good pilots are, how do they fly, who live who dies, well, you get the point.

No idea on T vs R but my money's on a quick kill facing the Vesuvius (and it's fighters)

 

[dacis2]

what about just the Vesuvius and all its guns?

 

[Sarty]

I think it would be a quick kill for the Vesuvius even without it's fighters. The Vesuvius' guns heavily outmatches those of a Tallahassee. I'm not sure about against the Ranger though. The Tallahassee only has one more laser turret than the Ranger, and they have the same shield/armor rating. It could very easily just end up being a slugging match. Although, due to how close the fight would be, I think the Ranger would have enough time to get some fighters out, which would tip the scale.

 

[MaHeSw]

Don't forget the element of suprise. If the Tallahassee manages to suprise the Ranger then it would probably be a quick kill.

 

[Edfilho]

I think the Ranger wouldn't be able to point as many guns at the other ship as the tallahassee...

 

[ChrisReid]

Let's say a Ranger class was heading towards a jump point, and a hostile (don't ask.) Tallahassee jumped in, and started blasting at the Ranger. Would it go down in a few salvoes? Or would it take alot more than that?

And while we're on the topic, let's say that a Vesuvius class (it was chasing the Tallahassee) jumped in, how long would it take the Vesuvius to kill the Tallahassee?

I need this for the Wing Commander spacebattle I'm doing, which has this scenario.

What's a "spacebattle?" This sounds like the type of debate that would occur at that horrible Spacebattles message board. It's kind of an impossible topic because there is no qualified answer. I mean, you can easily measure the defensive ship's shield and armor specs and compare them to the attacker's offensive specs, but what does that get you? If you simulated this, there'd be a different result every time, with a wider and wider range of possible times as you added more and more realistic factors. This doesn't even begin to address dramatic factors. If the story calls for the defending ship to fall like the Kilrathi fleet at the end of the WC Movie, then that's what'll happen. If the story calls for the defending ship to just keep on going after relentless bombardment such as the Intrepid in WC4, then that's what'll happen.

 

[Manic]

I'm not going to start in on the whole canon-ness of the WCM, but... it is kind of odd that in the movie, shields are not brought online until after a jump, whereas in the games(what little we see of it), shields are kept online - in fact, in the case of privateer they recharge a bit.

Anyway, back on topic. I would think that the weaponry on each vessel is about even. The Ranger would have a clear advantage, in terms of fighters. If it had fighters on patrol, which is likely, it could recall them for defense. It's also likely that both craft have a compliment of capship missiles on board- possibly nullified by the existance of the fighters and point defence turrets. All-in-all, I'd say the Ranger has the upper hand, despite the element of suprise.

 

[Delance]

That depends a lot. With a full fighter complement, the Ranger would completely destroy the Tallahasse with little problem. Without fighters, it would probably be a tought battle, since the Ranger is capable of facing other capships. The Vesivius is stronger than both.

 

[BrynS]

I'm not going to start in on the whole canon-ness of the WCM, but... it is kind of odd that in the movie, shields are not brought online until after a jump, whereas in the games(what little we see of it), shields are kept online...

The Kilrathi destroyer in the movie appears to emerge from the jump point in Sol with its shields active.

 

[dacis2]

3d animation depicting a "space battle"

I guess I should phrase that a little better.

I'm working on it, should be done in around two months.


OT:
Right now I'm wondering if a Tallahassee got the jump on a Ranger, would a single broadside do significant damage to a fully shielded Ranger if every shot hit? Artistic license and whatnot, but I don't want the Suspension of Disbelief to take too hard a hit.

And let's say a Tallahassee and a Vesuvius went one on one, head to head. The victor is obvious, but would it take several minutes, a running battle, or is the Tallahassee roadkill?

EDIT: Currently the script/storyboard/whatever involves a Confed spec-ops wing on a Ranger for inconspicuousness concluding a multi-system anti-piracy operation. A bunch of Excaliburs with the Ranger in tow are busy wiping out the last of the pirate's fighters near a jump point when three pirate Tallahassees jump in, closely followed by a Confed Vesuvius that was pursuing them. Having arrived first, the Tallahassees attack the Ranger, which has to withdraw. Which begs the question, will the Ranger get blasted too fast?

 

[Death]

Up to 400 fighters/bombers, vs one cruiser?

*squish*

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Ick, SpaceBattles.

First of all, the suggestion in recent years is of course that 'Ranger-class' and 'Tallahassee-class' may be the wrong labels for the two ships you're describing.

Now, loathe as I am to admit it (the situation, after all, makes absolutely no sense - you don't let an enemy cruiser within range of your carrier...), this is something you should have been able to figure out using math (in gameplay terms, at least): the cruiser's maximum broadside should be:

1.8 cm x 16 (8 dual laser turrets)
plus
30.0 cm x 8 (4 dual anti-matter guns)

... which comes to 268.8 cm.

The Victory-type light carrier has 4,000 cm of shielding/armor to any side, so it should take some 15-plus hits from the cruiser's capital guns to break her down.

Of course, that ignores all sorts of things: whether or not the Tallahassee can hit with all its turrets at the same time, whether or not it's a WC3 or a WC4 version (the latter which has significantly less weaponry), whether or not it's able to hit with its Capital Ship Missile (a single-shot kill weapon if ever there was one), whether or not there's weaponry not simulated in the games (torpedo tubes, for instance)... all of this speaks to one greater concept: the outcome of this battle is whatever you want it to be. You're making some kind of CGI movie, you're telling *your* story -- come up with a way for it to happen the way you want. You're the director... Steven Spielberg doesn't round up a bunch of dinosaurs and then film whether or not actors can escape being eaten.

 

[Ijuin]

According to the scenario he put up, the three Tallahassees comes in through the jump point unexpected while the Ranger has its Excalibur squadron deployed. In that context, I think that the Excaliburs and Ranger together could kill maybe one and cripple a second (or cripple two) before the Ranger blows up, assuming that all three Tallahassees concentrate their full attack power on the Ranger and Excaliburs (as opposed to trying to outrun the Vesuvius that is about to come through the jump point). I do believe that the Ranger will not survive the engagement unless the Vesuvius shows up very quickly.

 

[dacis2]

All right, thanks for all the help.

oh, and uhm... which turrets are which on the Tallahassee again?

 

[Death]

The Victory-type CVLs (CVL isn't an official WC designation, just used for convenience), by the way, also have a capship missile launcher underneath the bow, which could skew things a bit.

And out of curiosity, where are the CVL's escorts? Even if only a light carrier, a carrier is still not an asset to be deployed without some variety of backup capship support, under normal circumstances.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

oh, and uhm... which turrets are which on the Tallahassee again?

Go back and reread my last post, which both corrects the designation and answers your question.

 

[fongsaunder]

The Victory-type CVLs (CVL isn't an official WC designation, just used for convenience), by the way, also have a capship missile launcher underneath the bow, which could skew things a bit.

And out of curiosity, where are the CVL's escorts? Even if only a light carrier, a carrier is still not an asset to be deployed without some variety of backup capship support, under normal circumstances.

The Tiger's Claw did not get THAT kind of treatment.

 

[Death]

The Bengal class was designed for independent ops, which is why it's referred to as a strike carrier instead of just "carrier" or "fleet carrier". It's definitely more potent alone than a Victory-type CVL (which also has only 2/5ths the fighter loadout of the Claw, 40 vs 104).

That being said, there were missions where the Claw had one or more destroyer escorts, ditto the WC2 Concordia (though with 8 AMGs plus the PTC, it was a fairly potent anti-capship platform without any assistance, and phase shields immune to fighter guns and almost all warhead-based weapons made regular fighters a limited concern).

 

[dacis2]

Go back and reread my last post, which both corrects the designation and answers your question.

okay, so the "Cruiser" 's main antiship armament (AMGs) are not modelled. Nuts.

and I took the class names from the Ships Database on the main site. Mind changing that to eliminate any further confusion?