Signs that the midway is nearing the end of its 90 day warranty

However, none of the carriers you dont win the war off of survive... we still have an enemy to deal with here, so they have to toast your old carrier to give you a reason to fight again. Or they could go back and deal with the 2 they missed and hit the Midway in the third installment...
 
None of the carriers you don't win the war with? You mean the carriers in the first two game? Out six games! I'm seeing a not a pattern!
 
One pattern *I* see is that you never get to fly off the same carrier in more than one game (extensions (SO, SM) don't count).

WC1: Fly off Tiger's Claw.
WC2: Fly off Concordia
WC3: Fly off Victory
WC4: Fly off Lexington, Intrepid
WCP: Fly off Midway, Cerberus.

There isn't another game in the foreseeable future -- but I'd like to keep the Midway around awhile. Like the "Aurora" in STAR BLAZERS or the SDF-1 in Macross, there's somthing to be said for a gallant ship that sticks around.

Respectfully,

Brian P.
 
Originally posted by pendell
There isn't another game in the foreseeable future -- but I'd like to keep the Midway around awhile. Like the "Aurora" in STAR BLAZERS or the SDF-1 in Macross, there's somthing to be said for a gallant ship that sticks around.

Sure.
Just stabilize the Wave Gu... er Macross Canno... er Ship Killer Plasma Gun so that it doesn't blow up the carrier when its fired, give it some escorts (it always seemed kind of silly having this huge carrier out in space without a single cap ship providing escort), and you're all set!

Seriously, if and when Origin ever releases a sequel, it would make sense from a continuity stand point to keep the Midway around (the thing is huge and expensive, and they can't afford to lose a bunch of em), but I suspect Origin will pull the usual 'switch the carriers' game.
 
I enjoyed hopping from carrier to carrier... gave a sense of "career," you know?

However, I do agree that it's time to move onto a more "SDF-1," approach. I think the Midway'd be perfect for that ;)
 
WC1: Fly off Tiger's Claw. Tiger's Claw destroyed by stealth fighters.
WC2: Fly off Concordia. Concordia also destroyed.
WC Armada: Fly off Lexington, status unknown. Presumed missing and destroyed.
WC3: Fly off Victory. War is won, Victory becomes orbital museum.
WC4: Fly off Lexington, you destroy her yourself.
WC4: Fly off Intrepid. War is won, Intrepid becomes training facility.
WCP: Fly off Midway, Cerberus. Status indefinite.

Does that make my pattern a little more clear?

As for the "SDF 1" movement, you forget that all the ships named that you stayed with for an extended period of time were designed for one thing: all out war. The Midway, on the other hand, seems to be designed around a "Go forth and vaporize others, but do so cheaply or the taxpayers may complain" idiom. Almost 3 times as long and 10 times as massive as a wartime escort carrier, and just over twice the armaments... fewer if you count that many of the turrets are single instead of the more effective and far more saturating doubles. If we want a longterm mothership we should wait until the next generation of carriers, made more along the design philosophy of the Plunketts, comes into being.
 
Second Lexington was disabled, not destroyed.

I don't see the pattern... the first two are destroyed, that goes together. The rest all go on to do different things later on -- and I think we have ample non-WC evidence that no ship stays on active duty forever.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Second Lexington was disabled, not destroyed.

Really? Well, I suppose if you use leech missiles and guns....

In the FMV, it shows the [2nd] Lexington floating around, burning and with debri all over the place.

Are you going by the novel, LOAF (I never read it- sorry :()?

It would actually make more sense to disable the Lexington than destroy it. It would've made the Border Worlders look even more criminal. Destroying Confed carriers!
 
Originally posted by Col.Dom


Are you going by the novel, LOAF (I never read it- sorry :()?

It would actually make more sense to disable the Lexington than destroy it. It would've made the Border Worlders look even more criminal. Destroying Confed carriers!

In the novel Blair disabled the Lexington by detonating a torpedo just short of it's hanger deck. The resulting antimatter blast wrecked both hangers (yes, in the novel the Lexington had TWO bays, just like the Midway, one reserved for Black Lance and the other used by regular Confeds) rendering the Lex useless for offensive operations. It was withdrawn and spent a LONG time in dry dock.

Of course, I feel obliged to poke fun at Forstchen -- an Antimatter reaction (which is bigger than a nuclear blast) less than a kilometer away from ANYTHING inside the shields should wreck it as thoroughly as a direct hit...

Respectfully,

Brian P.
 
Originally posted by pendell


In the novel Blair disabled the Lexington by detonating a torpedo just short of it's hanger deck. The resulting antimatter blast wrecked both hangers (yes, in the novel the Lexington had TWO bays, just like the Midway, one reserved for Black Lance and the other used by regular Confeds) rendering the Lex useless for offensive operations. It was withdrawn and spent a LONG time in dry dock.

In the novel, Blair has a convenient switch in the fighter cockpit that allows him to prematurely detonate the torpedo (which is how he sets it off). For all intents and purposes, as far as anyone else is concerned, the torpedo would have destroyed the Lexington, but it 'coincidentally' blew up just in the perfect position to disable the flight decks without destroying the carrier.

Maniac makes a 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink' comment about the amazing coincidence, as well.
People probably make educated guesses that Blair intentionally let the carrier survive, but the original mission goal was to stop it by turning it into so much space dust, just as it was in the game.

Incidentally, as far as Blair knows, not blowing up the carrier kept Vagabond and Catscratch alive (as they were, to the best of his knowledge, still on-board the Lexington).
 
Antimatter Torps!?!

THE TORPEDOS HAVE ANITMATTER WARHEADS!? WHOA!

I thought the torpedos were conventional....

Even still, an antimatter warhead is a bit much! I need to get more info on matter/antimatter reactions and antimatter in general. I was always under the impression that antimatter, if introduced to matter (eg anything), would create a matter overlay... in other words *WHOOOOOOSH!* you're gone :eek:

Please, any info would be greatly appreciated! Thanks :D
 
Originally posted by junior

Incidentally, as far as Blair knows, not blowing up the carrier kept Vagabond and Catscratch alive (as they were, to the best of his knowledge, still on-board the Lexington).

In the novel Vagabond and Catscratch don't defect!? How odd!
 
Odd, heck Dom there barely mentioned.Get thee to a book store or other online type deal and purchase them they are all very good.
 
I didn't like the writing style, myself, and I've got other disagreements with the two 'game' novels, but...

Everyone has their own opinions.
 
Originally posted by Col.Dom


Really? Well, I suppose if you use leech missiles and guns....

In the FMV, it shows the [2nd] Lexington floating around, burning and with debri all over the place.



If you leech the Lexington it shows the FMV where the Lexington it drifting in space... Disabled, still intact.

AD
 
Originally posted by AD



If you leech the Lexington it shows the FMV where the Lexington it drifting in space... Disabled, still intact.

AD

Wait...

So is there a different FMV that's shown depending on whether you blow up the Lexington or Leech it?
(I know Paulson still dies on board the shuttlecraft, but does the Lexington itself look different?)
 
Yes there is , if you Leech the Lexington she's listing and suffering from the effects of being Leeched. I don't know how it affects the game as a whole though it does'nt on the PSX version but I'm still playing the PC version (just got it)
 
Back
Top