Obsolete ships

[Earthworm]

Every ship could also benefit from 20 missile 10 torps, a heavy Plasma cannon, the Fission guns, autotracking computers, jump drive, tractor beam turrets, unlimited decoys......... But that doesn't mean they'll get them. Yes, a ship like a Vampire that already is superior to the Lance, could use a power plant like that, but it won't get it, and it won't really need it under normal circumstances.

 

[Madman]

Gemini uses the same currency as the rest of confed, and inflation is not 300 percent in the change from wc1 to wc2 (10 years) (besides priv is in between)
Centurion is hard but its a civvy ship, it has trouble dealing with one gothri, on sare can take out a squadron

THe vampire is fast its true, and good for its one use, but the dragon is harder, and better for multipurpose, besides, say you are bill gates, do you:
buy a couple of destroyers and a carrier and a couple of vampires
or buy 2 dragons
hmm
dragons, are more devastating and easier to hide, simple as that also faster than a carrier

The dragon is not guaranteed to have been lost, the BL probably still exists and with them some dragons, besides covert ops will have some, that kind of establishment always does

The midway is designed to not need an escort, and to be able to launch retrieve even when part damaged
But the vesuvius can do this, launches are done mid air and the entire ship must be destroyed to stop it, 8 torps will down the midway, 6 tubes, 2 hangers

The vesuvius holds 250 ships and about 10 squadrons
the midways holds 100 ships and about 3 squadrons
the midway costs more,
the vesuvius has more turrets and needs minimal destroyer escort
the midway still needs destroyer escort
the midway is a fleet control ship and needs no escort? impossible

the confederation does the same with 1 destroyer but has launch damage problem
the benegal does exactly the same is 40 years old and is about 10 billion cheaper

 

[Earthworm]

Originally posted by Madman
and inflation is not 300 percent in the change from wc1 to wc2 (10 years) (besides priv is in between)

No, Privateer is set in the same year as WC3.

THe vampire is fast its true, and good for its one use, but the dragon is harder, and better for multipurpose,

No, the Vampire can do practicly any job as good if not better than the Lance, except for not having such a long range.

say you are bill gates, do you:
buy a couple of destroyers and a carrier and a couple of vampires
or buy 2 dragons
hmm
dragons, are more devastating and easier to hide, simple as that also faster than a carrier

That's the dumbest thing I heard all day. Comone on, you would still need a capship for those Lances, they can't fly forver, and can't be serviced without any equipement. And what's that about being easier to hide? Cloaking is useless at the Prophecy time...

the BL probably still exists and with them some dragons, besides covert ops will have some, that kind of establishment always does

No, the Project is most definetly dead... there might be some survivors that escaped and live somewhere, but than they wouldn't be the Project anymore.... There is no way for an organization that small, one that just lost it's leader and funding, to survive with everyone and their mother looking to gun them down.

The midway is designed to not need an escort, and to be able to launch retrieve even when part damaged

The Midway was designed to operate alone during PEACE time. During conflict it's to serve as a mobile center of operations, located at the center of a battle group.

But the vesuvius can do this, launches are done mid air and the entire ship must be destroyed to stop it, 8 torps will down the midway, 6 tubes, 2 hangers

Eh, you don't need to destroy the Vesuvius to stop it from launching fighters, that's just illogical...

The vesuvius holds 250 ships and about 10 squadrons
the midways holds 100 ships and about 3 squadrons

Those numbers are so horribly, horribly wrong that it's not even funny... The Vesuvius can carry 400+ fighters, the Midway can carry 252+

the midway costs more,

The Midway class costs less, that's why it's being built....

the vesuvius has more turrets and needs minimal destroyer escort

Actually, the number of turrets the Vesuvius carriers is never revealed to us.

 

[Dragon]

Earthworm, do you have a picture of the Vampire over your bed and kiss it goodnight and say "we will be together in my dreams"?
You are starting to worrie me.

The Dragon have something that the vampire does not.
It have a very long range, a squadron of Dragons does not need a carrier to get to his objectives no matter how far they are, it only need a place to land, it can do that even planetary based.
You are also comparing two Fighters that are 10 years apart, just saying that the Vampire is better that the Dragon of 10 years ago, well if the Dragon is still around it would have gone by upgardes, like the T-Bolt and the Excalibur, and dont say that those ships are not any better that before, well the Dragon of 10 years ago was far better that those two ships, so any upgrade could put the Dragon at the same (if not a higher) level that the Vampire.
The Dragon does have advantages over the Vampire in the tactical area, since its greater range make it a better choise in some type of missions that are placed deep inside enemy space, since a carrier would bring unwanted guests.

 

[WildWeasel]

Well, at least his name isn't Vampire, Mr. Dragon.

[Edited by WildWeasel on 01-30-2001 at 16:59]

 

[Ladiesman^]

Originally posted by Madman

the midway is a fleet control ship and needs no escort? impossible

Why? Why is it impossible? While it may not be true, it's nowhere near impossible. It's actually quite easy to have a carrier that doesn't need escort. You just need to arm it like you would a destroyer or whatever. That's like saying every ship needs an escort. It doesn't matter what type it is. Hell, my personal opinion is that fighter combat is overdone in WC (Of course, it IS a space fighter game, so it does have a reason). The whole thing with ships never coming anywhere near each other is kinda dull, and doesn't seem quite useful. The only reason to have space fighters would be to conteract others fighters, or get the jump on someone who doesn't have fighters. It seems to me like most combat would be cap ship based. Atmospheric fighters still have their uses, but with a cap ship capable of orbital bombardments they even seem to loose some of their effectiveness.

 

[Earthworm]

Originally posted by Dragon
Earthworm, do you have a picture of the Vampire over your bed and kiss it goodnight and say "we will be together in my dreams"?
You are starting to worrie me.

Cute... yet you appear to love the Dragon/Lance at least as much as I love the Vampire.

It have a very long range, a squadron of Dragons does not need a carrier to get to his objectives no matter how far they are, it only need a place to land, it can do that even planetary based.

First, Confed fighters, unless on some extremly speciall assignment won't need a long range which the Lance provided. The Project did need it though. Second, just because they have a huge range doesn't mean they can fly forever... they need to be maintained, repaired and taken care of just like any fighter. Flying super long missions over long distances certainly won't do anything to help the condition of the fighter...

You are also comparing two Fighters that are 10 years apart, just saying that the Vampire is better that the Dragon of 10 years ago, well if the Dragon is still around it would have gone by upgardes,

But why would you want to upgrade a very expensive fighter, when you have a cheaper fighter that you can upgrade? And there is always a limit to which the fighter can be upgraded. Tell me why the Excal or T-bolt never underwent any major upgrades since the end of the war?

like the T-Bolt and the Excalibur, and dont say that those ships are not any better that before,

The only notable difference is the better shielding...

well the Dragon of 10 years ago was far better that those two ships, so any upgrade could put the Dragon at the same (if not a higher) level that the Vampire.

But than it would be even more expensive. For the money required to do that, I'm sure you could upgrade the Vampire and make it even better they your beloved Lance.

The Dragon does have advantages over the Vampire in the tactical area, since its greater range make it a better choise in some type of missions that are placed deep inside enemy space, since a carrier would bring unwanted guests.

Unless frlying for the special operations, that range won't be needed. Besides, this one thing couldn't possibly ofset all the advantages the Vamp has over the Lance.

 

[RFBurns]

Vampires have a big advantage over the Dragon in its manuverability rating. Those rotating engine nacells give that Vampire one heck of a roll rate! As well as increasing its pitch rate. It also can fly faster, both max engine speed and afterburner speed (Vamp,WCP SO). It can carry more weapons, and has better armor and shields. Maybe a new, special conditions Vampire would fit the bill. A model with the renewable energy source, one that could be fitted with a cloak for those black op situations. If there were survivors of the Black Lance group after WCIV, I seriously doubt any of those pilots that got away in one of those Dragon fighters would be willing to just dock at some port only to have his craft confiscated. They will hide out in outer lying worlds, areas not frequent by Confed patrols or militia groups. Who knows, some ex-Black Lance pilot probably has one parked on a platform under his regular craft in the hanger! Since his craft does not need refueling, he can easily modify the craft to carry the latest weapons. The Dragon's armor and shield ratings are good enough even for WCP SO. In effect, that 10 year old Dragon would be a very effective platform and very usefull in the SO universe. Heck even the Centurion with weapon updates would be a good fighter. Maybe increase its max speed on afterburn, load up a couple of tachyon and cloudburst guns on that puppy and your set!

Placing the Dragon fighter into market would be a bit over the edge, however, selling them striped down would be pointless. If Confed is going to increase its fighter capacity by building cheaper fighters, which in turn means more numbers of craft built, I wouldnt want to face off with 4 Vampires in a Dragon at all!! Those Vamps will run circles around that Dragon. I dont think that Confed would have to worry about someone taking on their entire fleet with a few Dragon fighters! Thats like painting a big bull's eye on your tail and dropping all your defenses in a melee!

RFBurns

"Worthless insect!" [Casey, WCP/SO]

 

[Dragon]

Originally posted by WildWeasel
Well, at least his name isn't Vampire, Mr. Dragon.

[Edited by WildWeasel on 01-30-2001 at 16:59]

My usually callsigh is Renegade, it comes back from "Renagade, The battle of jacob star" but that was taken, I try to use Maveric but that was also taken, so I try Dragon that is similar to a user name that I am using, It work.

But I am glad that EW does reconize that there is a place to the Dragon, Special Ops.
And BTW EW if the dragon its still used It would be cheaper that during WC IV time, 10 years have pass, so several of his expensive systems are now current used by WC P time, so a Dragon will be cheaper to make (by using the original designes) in WC P time.
And a upgrade would put the Dragon price tag in the same level that during WC IV time.if that expensive.

 

[WildWeasel]

I was wondering if you'd see that.

 

[Napoleon]

A dragon's major advantage is speed during combat, on many missions I have run out of Afterburner fuel during combat and have been left hanging in the middle of a fire fight with enemy fighters out running my as soon as they are targeted. That is why I perfer the Dragon.

BTW perhaps in P/SO time a cloaking device reduces the range before a cloaked ship is detected, thus it is not a complete cloak, but it is a way to give your pilots a few more seconds to plan their attack before they are discovered.

 

[RFBurns]

I think that both the Dragon and the Vampire would work nicely side by side in a mission. I would of course would want to fly one of the Dragons. But if I was going up against a hord of Devil Ray's, the Vampire would be my choice for that battle. The Dragon simply does not have the agility like the Vampire, and them Devil Ray's can give even the Vampires a work out! I am in agreement with Napoleon about being in a battle and running out of fuel. Flying on fumes is not something you need to be worried about in heavy battle. Many times in WCIV and WCP I found upon returning from a mission, sometimes my ship would have a drop of afterburner fuel left! And that situation does not help when you return to your carrier only to find 100 bugs swarming about trying to kill your carrier! Its a toss up between the two. Question would be, which one would be likely to survive an all out continuous attack. Of course the Dragon will never have to worry about afterburner. Vamps have more missles. The Dragon can cloak. Vamps can run circles around the Dragon. Vamps guns are more powerfull than the Dragons, not saying that you couldnt load up a pair of updated tachyon guns to a Dragon. Both are about the same size. Both can wreak some havoc on an enemy. Hard choice for shure! But if I had to bet on which one would be left after the meyham, Id have to say that the Dragon would prevail. It simply has more defensive capabilities than any other craft. It can hide, it can out-afterburn any other ship, excluding Privateer craft. And it does indeed have some mega-awsome Fission cannons!

RFBurns

"Don't get blown up, thats all Ive got right now!" [bartender, Privateer/RF]

[Edited by RFBurns on 01-30-2001 at 17:48]

 

[Dragon]

I am just waiting to EW show up and say

"Cloak does not work in WC P since there is now anti-cloak devises" or something like that, so EW dont post if you are just saying this.
EW would be right (as far that we know, since I dont know about the anti-cloak tecnology, the Bugs can detect cloaked ships but how? we dont know if their fighters have that capability from start or that is relayed to then from a special ship [like the lanpray, since those things are useless as a fighters]), but if any of you help me undestand why cloak ships are know detectade please post away since I have not found anything about that in any site about that.

 

[AzraeL]

Originally posted by Ladiesman^
Hell, my personal opinion is that fighter combat is overdone in WC (Of course, it IS a space fighter game, so it does have a reason). The whole thing with ships never coming anywhere near each other is kinda dull, and doesn't seem quite useful. The only reason to have space fighters would be to conteract others fighters, or get the jump on someone who doesn't have fighters. It seems to me like most combat would be cap ship based. Atmospheric fighters still have their uses, but with a cap ship capable of orbital bombardments they even seem to loose some of their effectiveness.

The whole point of having fighters is to take down enemy bombers (and their fighter escort of course). The whole point of having bombers is to take down enemy capships. So if you have no fighters or bombers you will be pretty much defenceless against those who do (unless you have a real good anti-bomber escort frigate or something).

Fighters and bombers have one serious disadvantage - Range. And that is governed more by the pilot then anything, so this even covers Dragons. Even they can't fly forever. I don't know about you, but I hate just driving a couple of hours to the beach, so I would imagine that the the combat effectiveness of a pilot would decrease significantly after spending long times in the cockpit. I imagine that bombers would have a better range (larger crew could spell each other over long distances, notice how except for the xcal, generally only the bombers have jump capability) but they will be vulnerable once they stray outside their fighter cover. Of course, they also have to land to refuel/rearm.

So, fighters need to be launched from a base, either a planet/starbase or a Carrier. Any fleet without carrier support is vulnerable to fighter/bomber attack as soon as it strays within range of an enemy that has bombers. So your carrier group becomes the primary battle fleet. That's not to say that battleships are without purpose. Once something, be it an enemy carrier group, starbase, or planet, gets into range of those guns it will be in serious trouble. However the battleship will still need fighter cover or effective anti-bomber escorts to get it into range.

Carriers still have a weakness. They can only carry so many fighters. And once a carrier group starts rubbing up against another one those losses are really going to mount up. (if anything, those losses are severely understated in the WC games. You'll personally take down a couple of hundred enemy, yet there will only be one or two names erased off your own chalkboard. Still, I guess you are the super-ace Christopher Blair). Once it's out of fighters, the carrier is useless and must retreat to resupply.

Anyway, I don't think that carrier battles are overstated in Wing Commander. While capships remain vulnerable to bombers, the bomber and the carrier group will be the primary weapon of war. And of course, since you play the role of a fighter pilot, you're only going to see the carrier wars. Of course, capships will still go head to head when they get within range. The Concordia made good use of her phase transit cannon in a couple of battles, while the Intrepid, Versuvius, and St. Helens go at it in WC4. But the whole point of having fighters and bombers is to try to keep the enemy away.

Of course, that's just the Wing Commander universe. It seems to mirror our own (both WW2 and modern day) situation. From memory, most of the significant battles in the the US/Japan conflict of WW2 were carrier battles where the enemy fleets never even came close to each other.

In a number of recent space sim's there has been a trend to make the capships larger and deadlier. Once you make a capship large and powerful enough to be impervious to bombers, the bombers and hence fighters will become irrelevant. Carriers will become useless and space wars will become capship battles. Of course, the cost of such a mega-battleship will be astronomical. And then, if you are building mega-battleships, why not build mega-bombers - a 'small' ship (say the size of a WC corvette) that carries a couple of mega-torpedoes. These could be built at a fraction of the cost of a mega-battleship and you just need to get one of those mega-torpedoes to hit. Of course, then you can build normal bombers to take out the mega-bombers at a fraction of the cost and you're back where you started again. Megabattleships just don't seem that economically viable. Of course, you could build one or two, like the Kilrathi Dreadnought from WC3.

 

[Dragon]

there is something that they forget to put in the WC universe, Fuel .
A fighter will run out of fuel before the pilot fall asleap,
a pilot can also take a nap and dont need to worrie since the autopilot is on and there are warning sounds in case something hostile show in the radar.
The afterburner uses its on supplie it does not take it from the fighter main reserves, one of the reasons that the Wasp is so small its bacause it does not have a lot of fuel, since it for a point defense role.

 

[RFBurns]

fuel

Agreed! Didnt Meistro say in WCP "Naptime!" I dont think he meant to nap during battle, but meant taking a nap between nav points in a mission, most of them are well over 1,000,000 cliks away!! I can just imagine a space fighter docking into a futuristic Chevron to refuel! (roflmao).

RFBurns

"Tell me you've made the delivery run!" [Tayla, Privateer/RF]

 

[AzraeL]

Originally posted by RFBurns
I am in agreement with Napoleon about being in a battle and running out of fuel. Flying on fumes is not something you need to be worried about in heavy battle. Many times in WCIV and WCP I found upon returning from a mission, sometimes my ship would have a drop of afterburner fuel left! And that situation does not help when you return to your carrier only to find 100 bugs swarming about trying to kill your carrier!

Okay, this is YOU. But let's think logically about what a fighter is designed for.

Logically, both you and the enemy have fairly similar tech levels (if you have lower, you're either going to steal the enemies or have its butt whomped). Your fighters are going to be roughly equal. Your pilots are going to roughly equal. Assume your numbers in any given battle are roughly equal. You have only a 50% chance of survival.

In a battle, what are the chances that you will run out of fuel before you are killed normally? You say you ran out of fuel many times. How many kills did you have at the time? 15? 20? More? Turn up the difficulty level until you are averaging one death per kill, then count the number of times you are killed because you run out of fuel. Personally, I think the last time I ran out of fuel was sometime in WC2. We must have different flying styles.


Let's take a full on battle. You send out 10 Dragons. 5 are shot down. 5 make it home.
Alternatively you send out 10 Vampires, 5 are shot down, one runs out of fuel and is shot down. 4 make it home. Which is more economically viable? Of course, the poor sucker who ran out of fuel isn't going to be too happy, but there was a 50-50 chance he was going to die anyway.

Besides, if there seems to be a common problem with running out of fuel, it's far cheaper to simply enlarge the fuel tank then to install m/am drives.

Originally posted by RFBurns
Its a toss up between the two. Question would be, which one would be likely to survive an all out continuous attack. Of course the Dragon will never have to worry about afterburner. Vamps have more missles. The Dragon can cloak. Vamps can run circles around the Dragon. Vamps guns are more powerfull than the Dragons, not saying that you couldnt load up a pair of updated tachyon guns to a Dragon. Both are about the same size. Both can wreak some havoc on an enemy. Hard choice for shure! But if I had to bet on which one would be left after the meyham, Id have to say that the Dragon would prevail. It simply has more defensive capabilities than any other craft. It can hide, it can out-afterburn any other ship, excluding Privateer craft. And it does indeed have some mega-awsome Fission cannons!

It's a pointless argument (This goes for everybody).

The Vampire is a Space Superiority Fighter. It is the best. It is faster, more manouvreable and better armed then the Dragon and comes at a fraction of the cost. In a straight up fight, the Dragon will be dead long before the Vamp runs out of burner fuel.

That's not to say the Dragon is a bad ship. It's a solid fighter, but that's not its strength. It can cloak, is jump capable and has unlimited range (as long as the pilot can stand it and it doesn't need to rearm). But its purpose is not to be a Space Superiority fighter. It seems to be custom built as a spy or assassin's tool. It can strike anything, anywhere, any time. If it wants to kill a fighter, it will do what Seether did in the opening WC4 movie - cloak, get on its tail, uncloak and unload those Fission guns up its arse. If it is outnumbered or outgunned it will cloak, fire up those unlimited burners and get the hell out. The Vampire will win a straight up fight, but there will never be a straight up fight with a Dragon.

The shear cost of a Dragon means that it will never be used as a main fleet fighter. In fact, it will probably never be placed in a situation where it is likely to be lost. Two different fighters, two very different purposes. Each excels in the area it was designed for.


Just had a thought. I wonder what the maintenance/safety aspect of a matter/antimatter engine is. Perhaps not something you want your techs messing around with, or a damaged one landing on your nice shiny flight deck.

[Edited by AzraeL on 01-30-2001 at 18:57]

 

[RFBurns]

Every pilot has their own style, their own way of flying. And if something works for a pilot, they tend to stick with it, rather than trying to adept to someone elses way of flying. Like I said, if they can stick to the six, out manuver their opponent etc, then more power to them. If you like to fly like your putting on a stunt show during battle, you might raise an eyebrow or two on the enemy side, but I seriously doubt anyone on your wing would be paying attention. They would be too busy fighting the enemy, rather than trying to impress them. As far as the distance thing, anytime you have to stop for anything during war hampers your chances of winning that war. If a wing of fighters have to refuel so often, I mean, what if the enemy doesnt give you a chance to break away and go catch up to that refuel tanker? Maybe you could ask them to stop for a few minutes while you go refuel.

RFBurns

"Your'e a loose end looking to be tied pal!" [pirates, Privateer/RF]

 

[Earthworm]

Originally posted by Dragon
But I am glad that EW does reconize that there is a place to the Dragon, Special Ops.

Yeah, it's range would be usfull in long range missions that require recon and such. But overall, the Vamp remains a better fighter (which isn't to say that hte Lance is bad, it's still better than all of the Prophecy/SO fighters.

And BTW EW if the dragon its still used It would be cheaper that during WC IV time, 10 years have pass, so several of his expensive systems are now current used by WC P time, so a Dragon will be cheaper to make (by using the original designes) in WC P time.

Cheaper, yes, but not cheap enough. The matter/antimatter powerplant is basicly a minaturized drive from a capship, and ten years later it won't be much cheaper.

 

[Dragon]

Fuel is important, if not, why the kilrathi had all those tanker in WC III or why would you need to refuel to strike that kilrathi base in WC II?
The Dragon does not need that, its anti-matter reactor can be as dangerous a spark in a refueling sitituation, The Dragon does have a very long range, it can be used to strike at targets that are three systems away from its home base, making that ship very handy to be use aginst targets without puting a carrier in any danger, because it does not matter the cost of even a wing of Dragons if that loss will not be the same as one of a Carrier, since the vampires in order to strike would need to be at a jump point leading to the target system, if they would be detectaded a conter-strike would be send against the Carrier , and a loss of a Carrier is far worst in the terms of money and personal since any ship that would not have fuel to escape would be at least captured, that is far worst that losing a wing of Dragons.
12 Dragons or 1 Carrier with all fighters abord ship?