What I like about WC2

Concordia

Swabbie
Banned
What I like about WC2 (part I)

1.) Capships are overall superior.
-Faster: The WC1 Destroyer could only achieve 150 kps... the WC2 Gilgamesh can achieve 250 kps max. The WC2 Cruiser could even keep up with an old WC1 Corvette.
-Phase Shields: Their shields now invincible to fighter attack from guns or missiles; only torpedoes will do.
-Improved Armor: Armor ratings are now in the triple-digits, rather than double
-Better Armed: AMG's are nearly certain-doom for fighters. They also are well-designed for doing-battle with capital ships.
-Flak-Cannons seem to be more effective than in WC1 (Could be my imagination)

2.) Greater Selection of Fighters
-In WC1 there was the Hornet, Scimitar, and Raptor, followed by the Rapier added later on.
-In WC2, there are the Ferret, Epee, Rapier (from WC1), Sabre, and Broadsword. Five fighters in all...

3.) Fighters are now improved from their WC1 standards...
-Rapier is now the standard medium fighter... and far outperforms any WC1 fighter.
-The Sabre is superior in performance compared to the Raptor
-The Rapier now has extra armor...
-The Epee is well equipped for a light fighter in terms of better guns, additional missile-capacity, and even maneuverability. She is also faster than the Hornet.
-The Broadsword is a new category of fighter added, even though it was later revealed in the timeline that it had existed as early as 2648... which is HEAVILY armored, well-shielded, carries an impressive torpedo-compliment, and can even take a single AMG bolt to her front and still remain flying.
-Fighters also carry more missiles: The WC1 Hornet carried only 3 missiles, the Scimitar's and Rapier's, 5, and the Heaviest fighter, the Raptor, only carried 5 as well and a mine up its butt. The WC2 Epee carries 4, the Rapier now carries 6, and the Sabre carries up to 8.
-Most fighters carry heavier armor and shields.

4.) Newer Weapons
-Not that newer weapons are always necessary...
-Particle-Cannons replace neutron guns, as they have the same damage-potential, with almost the same range as a laser-cannon.
-Some fighters even carry turrets, like their Capship-Counterparts! Most common turret is the Neutron-Cannon, which does more damage than it's fixed-mount counterpart.
-Torpedoes- weapons which are capable of bypassing phase-shields. They require a 20-second lock-on to defeat the capital-ships phase shields. Once delivered, assuming successful delivery, 1 hit should destroy any ship smaller than a destroyer. 2-hits will take out a destroyer, and about 1-2 more for larger ships.

5.) The Stealth Fighters add an interesting twist to the story
-It was only a matter of time before stealth-technology would come into play

6.) Tractor-Beams: Certain ships are able to use magnetic fields which draw in ejection pods...
-Only large-fighters carry these.

7.) The Concordia
-Largest Capship in the Game (983.7 meters)
-Largest Fighter-Compliment (120)
-Heaviest Armed (8 AMG's, 3-Flak Turrets, 1 PTC)
-Equipped with the largest gun in the game: The Sivar-Dreadnought's weapon may have been larger, but the PTC can be used to target capital ships and even fighters.
-It forms the entire ship's Keel
-The PTC can take out any capship with a single hit.
-The Fins look cool...

8.) Timeline is set far enough in the future
-10-years from WC1SM2

9.) Characters actually look older
-They don't just look the same with grayer hair and stuff. They looked like they seriously aged.

-Concordia (I'm still working on this)
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by Concordia
-Phase Shields: Their shields now invincible to fighter attack from guns or missiles; only torpedoes will do.
That's from fighters. Ship-based energy guns can still damage capships. Well, on SO2 you also get the maces, another fighter-based weapon that can damage capships.

A nice bit of trivia, since you seem to like this kind of stuff. The WC2 mace does 2 times as much damage as a WC2 torpedo. The WC4 mace, however, does only as half the damage of a WC4 torpedo.

3.) Fighters are now improved from their WC1 standards...
-Rapier is now the standard medium fighter... and far outperforms any WC1 fighter.
But is weaker in the general scheme of things. It was a superfighter on WC1, but it's just a regular fighter on WC2.

-Particle-Cannons replace neutron guns, as they have the same damage-potential, with almost the same range as a laser-cannon.
Particle cannons didn't use to be very popular. It wasn't such a good weapon.

6.) Tractor-Beams: Certain ships are able to use magnetic fields which draw in ejection pods...
-Only large-fighters carry these.
Technically, it's turreted fighters.

7.) The Concordia
-Largest Capship in the Game (983.7 meters)
And has a nice vibrant color scheme.

8.) Timeline is set far enough in the future
-10-years from WC1SM2
So 654 years isn't enough, but 664 is *far* into the future?
 

Viper61

Spaceman
Re: Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by Delance
. . .The WC2 mace does 2 times as much damage as a WC2 torpedo . . .
LOAF and I already went at this a little bit ago in the WC2 weapons thread but I just finished WC2 again and I tried to take out a Fraltha with a Mace. It did just as much damage as a torp, I had to put another torp into it to slag it.

Originally posted by Delance
Particle cannons didn't use to be very popular. It wasn't such a good weapon.
Though it was described as one of the most significant advances in energy weapon technology.
 

Phillip Tanaka

Swabbie
Banned
I have a feeling you're going to do another thread of what you don't like about the game. Here's two you can put in. :)

Stingray
Colson
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
Re: Re: Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by Viper61
LOAF and I already went at this a little bit ago in the WC2 weapons thread but I just finished WC2 again and I tried to take out a Fraltha with a Mace. It did just as much damage as a torp, I had to put another torp into it to slag it.
Well, in the stats I remember from games and manuals, those are the official numbers.

Though it was described as one of the most significant advances in energy weapon technology.
In theory, something can be great on the story and suck in the game. The venture corvette was not useless on End Run, and was on WC1.
 

Onde Pik

Spaceman
Re: Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by Delance
That's from fighters. Ship-based energy guns can still damage capships. Well, on SO2 you also get the maces, another fighter-based weapon that can damage capships.
Yeah, pretty cool don't you think?

Originally posted by Delance
But is weaker in the general scheme of things. It was a superfighter on WC1, but it's just a regular fighter on WC2.
Exactly ;) 10 years have passed.


Originally posted by Delance

Particle cannons didn't use to be very popular. It wasn't such a good weapon.
For harrying tactics they were pretty nice. Decent range and damage.



Originally posted by Delance
Technically, it's turreted fighters.
Technically, it's turreted confed fighters. :p

Originally posted by Delance
And has a nice vibrant color scheme.
Yeah I its like when the british soldiers in the 18 - 19th century had a big white cross at the middle of their chest ;)

Originally posted by Delance

So 654 years isn't enough, but 664 is *far* into the future?
Maybe he meant relatively, between the two games. As in he liked the fact that WC2 was 10 years after WC1 and not like 2 months.
 

redwolf

Spaceman
Re: Re: Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by Viper61
LOAF and I already went at this a little bit ago in the WC2 weapons thread but I just finished WC2 again and I tried to take out a Fraltha with a Mace. It did just as much damage as a torp, I had to put another torp into it to slag it.
I remember a mission in SO2 where I took out two Fralthras whilst flying a Morningstar. Therefore, one Fralthra was downed by the Mace, the other by the two torpedoes.

A Mace took down most if not all Fralthras I encountered. There would be the odd time where it wouldn't work however and this I believe is if you aimed incorrectly, or perhaps the computer just didn't like you.

Ahhhh, if only computers could like you. If only computers looked like Vanessa Angel. If only Weird Science was back on TV! I think I might start a poll!
 

mpanty

Keen Commander
Re: Re: Re: Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by redwolf
I remember a mission in SO2 where I took out two Fralthras whilst flying a Morningstar. Therefore, one Fralthra was downed by the Mace, the other by the two torpedoes. [...]
Correct me if I'm wrong but... didn't Tolwyn or somebody else state in the briefing you could knock both Fralthras out with one Mace provided they were close enough to each other (so that the explosion would affect both)? I think I remember doing something like that, though my memory is fading... did anyone else use this tactic?
 

Concordia

Swabbie
Banned
Re: Re: What I like about WC2 (part I)

Originally posted by Delance
That's from fighters. Ship-based energy guns can still damage capships. Well, on SO2 you also get the maces, another fighter-based weapon that can damage capships.
Only Anti-Matter guns to my knowledge can damage capital ships.

A nice bit of trivia, since you seem to like this kind of stuff. The WC2 mace does 2 times as much damage as a WC2 torpedo. The WC4 mace, however, does only as half the damage of a WC4 torpedo.
But did it do 1,000 points of damage in WC2?

But is weaker in the general scheme of things. It was a superfighter on WC1, but it's just a regular fighter on WC2.
Actually both it's shields and armor have improved. It's missile payload have went up by one missile.


Particle cannons didn't use to be very popular. It wasn't such a good weapon.
But they are a good mix. Decent range, and plenty of damage. Sure Neutrons are better for doing damage, but you'd have to get pretty close to them enemies for them to work.

Technically, it's turreted fighters.
Touche

And has a nice vibrant color scheme.
I'm not too fond of the WC2 Colors... but *sigh*, I'll concur with you on that.

So 654 years isn't enough, but 664 is *far* into the future?
No, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that all this technology did not just pop-up overnight; it took ten years for all this technology to come to be.

-Concordia
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
Originally posted by Concordia
But did it do 1,000 points of damage in WC2?
A WC2 Mace did twice the damage of a WC2 Torp. I don't remember the numbers.

Actually both it's shields and armor have improved. Its missile payload has went up by one missile.
In absolute terms. In relative terms, it's just an average fighter. There are much better fighters around this time.
 
I have encountered both cases. Sometimes it was an instant kill, sometimes it needed another top. But I guess the 2nd time is always a not well aimed shot. The energy blast probably hits right between two shield areas and therefore hasn't enough energy to get through the shields and do enough damage to the armor. But it does definately more than a torpedo. An instant kill is always possible, with a torpedo you may even need 3 runs if one of them was not aimed well (Had that case once or twice).
 
Top