Scimitar vs WC 2 / 3 Kilrathi ships

Upgrading the weapons to particle cannon but with the same missile loadout might be all right. It still should have less shields than the Hellcat and less armor than the Thunderbolt (or in WC2 era, shields about the same thickness as the Sabre). Speed and maneuvering-wise it would be about equal to the Thunderbolt (a smidgen less cruise speed and a smidgen more afterburner speed). Roughly this would make it moderately inferior to the Hellcat all-around except for having slightly better armor, which would explain why Scimitars were mostly withdrawn in favor of Hellcats where possible.

As far as viability goes, any of the pre-WCIV enemies that have turrets (notably the Gothri, Vaktoth, Paktahn, Sorthak, and the WC3 corvette) would be trouble but against anything else it can come close enough to matching on protection and firepower if not speed.
 
Aginor said:
If those are seconds per full circle the 4/4/4 would make sense for the Sartha and the 6/6/7 would also make sense for the Scimitar IIRC. It doesn't make 90° per second but more than 45° (which would be 8/8/8). Then I just don't get the value of the Salthi. It should be around 4/4/4 if you remember WC1. That thing certainly turns faster than a Scimitar and I'm pretty sure it can easily turn 90° in a second. Same with the Sartha.
Click to expand...

The numbers can't possibly be seconds per circle, because then less is better, but we consistently see more maneuverable ships having higher values (Rapier 10/10/10 > Hornet 8/9/8 > Scimitar 6/6/7 > Raptor 6/5/6. Salthi 14/12/22 > Hhriss 12/10/15 > Dralthi 10/14/10 > Krant 7/10/7 > Jalthi 7/7/7 > Grahta 6/6/14). You're inverting the numbers for no apparent reason. Even though it makes no sense for them to be "degrees per second", I always assumed that it was similar to the speeds being in "kps", even though it makes no sense for them to be in kilometers per second. What I actually think is possible is that the WC1/2 values are in RADIAN per second (which kind of makes sense...A Rapier can probably make about one and a half turns in a second or so), and in later games they switched the engine (and the appropriate manual entries) to degrees per second. But that's just a theory.
 
The numbers are, as stated, degrees per second - it's just that for some reason, WC1 & 2 manuals skipped a zero when listing these stats. Multiply by ten, and you get the proper values. It's definitely not radians.
 
EDIT: Quarto beat me, this is @Farbourne

One and a half 360° turns in one second? I don't think so. That would make the Rapier four times as nimble as the Darket.

I just checked some random numbers in the WCPedia (Sartha 4/4/4, Scimitar 6/6/7, Vaktoth 45°/s, Darket 90°/s which would perfectly fit together).

But you are right, the rest of the numbers don't fit.
- degrees per second are ruled out for the WC1 ships, that would be capship values.
- revolutions per second are ruled out, those would be 0.x seconds
- radian per second is too much, as stated above

Perhaps it is tens of degrees per second. So 8 means 80°/s, and 10 means 100°/s
So most of the ships would beat the Darket in agility. But.... meh. I've flown the Darket (Saga uses WC3 values IIRC) and it is almost too agile. Either I remember WC1 wrong and the Hornet and Rapier were really annoying to fly, or the numbers don't fit.
Also I'm pretty sure the Dralthi wasn't more nimble than the Rapier...
 
Aginor said:
Either I remember WC1 wrong and the Hornet and Rapier were really annoying to fly, or the numbers don't fit.
Also I'm pretty sure the Dralthi wasn't more nimble than the Rapier...
Click to expand...

In WC1, after you got used to flying the raptor, the Hornet and Rapier are almost too manouverable, and less fun to fly, then flying the Scimitar actually gives a better handling feel. The most fun ship to fly I found to be the WCP's piranha because of it's nimble handling.
 
yeah, it is the same in my mod when you are used to the Dralthi and Vaktoth and then climb into the Darket. Or in WCP with the Vampire. But when you look at those numbers the Rapier would be even worse and I don't remember that TBH.
 
I think that is accurate about the manoeuvering, as I enjoyed flying the Hornet and Rapier. But I retained a soft spot for the Raptor and the Scimitar, I would often fly a losing path so I had the opportunity to fly in more difficult circumstances in the Scimitar (weird I know).

The modified Scimitars I am calling the 'Keris' upgrade. Originally I thought about having a squadron of Ferrets, but upgraded Scimitars give a more desperate feel to the circumstance of fighting off pirates + Kilrathi.
 
Just out of curiosity: Are you doing just a story or a mod/campaign for some game?
If it is the latter: In which engine? Sorry if I missed it, I can't remember.

EDIT:
Wait, now I remember. It was the story with the militia Exeter some weeks ago.
 
Upgrading the weapons to particle cannon but with the same missile loadout might be all right.
Click to expand...

I don't think I would want to fly this Scimitar; the mass driver feels like an important part of what makes the Scimitar great in the first place... that heavy gun for close, dirty combat.

And I think it's important to consider that there's not some linear progression of guns. Is this even really an 'upgrade'? The particle cannon does less damage and uses nearly twice as much power... it's only an upgrade in that it's more of a ranged weapon. So what you're doing here is coming up with a different way for Scimitars to fly, not just subbing in a more deadly gun.
 
Aginor said:
Perhaps it is tens of degrees per second. So 8 means 80°/s, and 10 means 100°/s
So most of the ships would beat the Darket in agility. But.... meh. I've flown the Darket (Saga uses WC3 values IIRC) and it is almost too agile. Either I remember WC1 wrong and the Hornet and Rapier were really annoying to fly, or the numbers don't fit.
Also I'm pretty sure the Dralthi wasn't more nimble than the Rapier...
Click to expand...
You have to keep in mind, the engine affects the flight speed, and that in turn affects agility. A ship that can turn 100 dps and flies at 1000 km/s will feel much less manoeuvrable than a ship with the same turn rate but a top speed of 500 km/s, right? Well, consider that 1000 km/s in WC1 means something different than it does in WC3, something different still than it does in WCP, and something different still than it does in FS2 (Saga). The biggest differences of all are between the sprite-based games and any of the 3d model games, because scaling in the sprite-based games just works completely differently. What all this means is that the Darket in Saga is different to the Darket in WC3 - although the difference is probably smaller than the difference between a Standoff Sartha and a WC2 Sartha.

Anyway, the Kilrathi in WC1 were actually remarkably agile. Remember, if you look at the manual, the Kilrathi seem superior in every aspect. I've checked the in-game stats, and while the superiority is not carried across as far as armour and shields go (Confed ships have some undocumented upgrades), speed and manoeuvrability are in almost every case exactly the same as in the manual. An exception is the Salthi, which is even better in-game than in the manual, with a roll value of 22(!). So, yes, the WC1 Dralthi was in fact more manoeuvrable than the Rapier.

Something rather curious happened to the Kilrathi after WC1 - the WC2 the Kilrathi ships are just amazingly inferior to their Confed equivalents. Can it be that this was the point when Wing Commander started getting "dumbed down" for the casual gamer? ;) . However, in their defence, the manual stats are frequently much worse than the in-game stats. In-game, the Sartha has 8/8/8, which is still a far cry from the Salthi, but at least it's not as awful as the manual states. Similarly, the Jalkehi and the Grikath do not have 2/2/2 and 3/3/3 respectively, but both have 4/4/4. The Drakhri is the exception, because it's worse in-game than in the manual - its manoeuvrability drops from 7/7/7 to 6/6/6.
 
Would replacing the massdriver with a particle cannon not place more stress on the (ancient) powerplant? And yes, I know we have no numbers on those.
 
I can't imagine how it wouldn't. I think it's a little unfortunate that Privateer gave us all the idea that guns are completely interchangeable... in reality it can't be that easy. The particle cannon is supposed to be replacement for the /neutron gun,/ and its specifications certainly seem to line up to a weapon designed to fit into that slot (in terms of energy use, anyway.)
 
I dearly wish that we'd seen/flown the Scimitar in-game in WCIV, as per novel, but only if it had retained the properties of the version we flew in WC1. Undoubtedly had it appeared again it would have been a revised version, probably modded by the BW. I think it could take the place of the Vindicator, which IMHO was far too nice for the Border Worlds budget. Would have loved to have taken on Excaliburs and Bearcats in the Scim.
 
-danr- said:
I dearly wish that we'd seen/flown the Scimitar in-game in WCIV, as per novel, but only if it had retained the properties of the version we flew in WC1. Undoubtedly had it appeared again it would have been a revised version, probably modded by the BW. I think it could take the place of the Vindicator, which IMHO was far too nice for the Border Worlds budget. Would have loved to have taken on Excaliburs and Bearcats in the Scim.
Click to expand...
Then Pliers would have likely outfitted them with stormfires... And ofcourse his custom cloack.
 
Meh. That means if I include the WC1+2 ships I indeed have to rebalance them. Sucks. Whatever, maybe it will be fun.
 
Quarto said:
Anyway, the Kilrathi in WC1 were actually remarkably agile. Remember, if you look at the manual, the Kilrathi seem superior in every aspect. I've checked the in-game stats, and while the superiority is not carried across as far as armour and shields go (Confed ships have some undocumented upgrades), speed and manoeuvrability are in almost every case exactly the same as in the manual. An exception is the Salthi, which is even better in-game than in the manual, with a roll value of 22(!). So, yes, the WC1 Dralthi was in fact more manoeuvrable than the Rapier.

Something rather curious happened to the Kilrathi after WC1 - the WC2 the Kilrathi ships are just amazingly inferior to their Confed equivalents. Can it be that this was the point when Wing Commander started getting "dumbed down" for the casual gamer? ;) . However, in their defence, the manual stats are frequently much worse than the in-game stats. In-game, the Sartha has 8/8/8, which is still a far cry from the Salthi, but at least it's not as awful as the manual states. Similarly, the Jalkehi and the Grikath do not have 2/2/2 and 3/3/3 respectively, but both have 4/4/4. The Drakhri is the exception, because it's worse in-game than in the manual - its manoeuvrability drops from 7/7/7 to 6/6/6.
Click to expand...

The Kilrathi seemed to go through a fundamental shift in design outlook between WC1 and WC2. With the exception of the two "super heavies"--the Gratha and the Jalthi--the Kilrathi fighters in WC1 are all extremely nimble and yet incredibly under-armed. Even the Krant (a terribly bizzarre fighter, with the speed and armor of a heavy fighter, but the manueverabililty and guns of a light fighter), which started life as a bomber, IIRC, sports just a pair of lasers. The vast majority of Kilrathi fighters seem to sport just dual lasers, which matches them in firepower with a Hornet and leaves them outgunned by everything else in the Confed arsenal. And yet they can outfly everything confed, until the Rapier comes along. Then, at the other end of the spectrum, you have the Gratha and the Jalthi, which are almost like corvettes or bombers, sporting thick armor, massive firepower, and almost no flying ability.

Then, in WC2, it seems like the Kilrathi ship designers got tired of being under-armed, and went the other way. The *light* fighter now sports neutron guns, but is (by comparison to its Confed counterparts) incredibly slow, and fairly unmaneuverable. The Drakhri is a bit better, but is still out-performed by the Confed Rapier. And the heavies seem to have gotten even heavier.

In the meantime, Confed ships still strike a balance in both games.
 
Hmm
Bandit LOAF said:
I don't think I would want to fly this Scimitar; the mass driver feels like an important part of what makes the Scimitar great in the first place... that heavy gun for close, dirty combat.
Click to expand...
Hmm, good point. What alternatives can we think of for upping the Scimitar's gun power, then? Implement a "heavy" mass driver like the ones on the Avenger in WCIV? Bolt on a second pair of regular mass drivers?
 
Actually two mass driver cannons are not bad.
If you try out the games and mods you will find that they pack quite a punch. When I fly the Sabre in Saga I often only use the two mass drivers because they don't need much energy and still do damage. Hell, I even switch to lasers only when flying the Arrow, although those don't do much damage because just like in WC3 the ion guns use too much power. And even with two lasers you can do some damage in WC3.
So if you want to mention a weapon upgrade I would just say that improving the <technobabbel> improved the speed of the bullets or something. That would increase both the damage (kinetic energy 1/2*m*v²) and the hit chance.

And also you can mention that you upgraded the missile racks so it can carry IR missiles on two of its racks, and it can use modern missiles instead of the old ones (given that there was an upgrade of the missiles between WC1 and WC2, which I tend to assume).


If I had to upgrade the Scimitar I would also try to give it better shield generators (either faster recharging or higher strength) so it could come close to the Hellcat and of course I would try to upgrade the engines so it can fly 340/1200 instead of 320/1120

I wouldn't change the maneuverability, but with the better engines it may be a bit faster accelerating.

That way you would retain the things everybody loves about the Scimitar and just make it a bit better.

Just don't overdo it, the Scim won't become a Hellcat and that is OK.
 
That sounds like a good place to start and after reading this thread and a couple of others. I am after a tweaked Scimitar so stronger shield generators, upgraded missile racks, better engines and better guns seems about right.

Now from the books in the WC universe have stated that the Scimitar can carry torpedos... how many do you think that they can carry and how would the Scims be used in a strike package? Would we see a strike flight of four Scims with another four flying top cover for instance or would you use the later ships from WC - 2 / 3 to provide top cover?

Alternatively with a flight wing of 8 - 10 scimitars, what aircraft would perform the AWACS role? I am thinking of an equivalent of the RN operating early warning helos during the Falklands, C & C shuttles perhaps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top