What is your favorite carrier you served on ?

Duhhhhhh

Hey loaf, you didn't read the previous post very carefully there my friend. As I stated in my opinion I do realize that the Tiger's Claw and the Concordia are not created the same year, but they are of the same era. An ERA is alteast several hundred years spanned together. Hince; The Renissaunce era, The Dark Ages, The Industrial Revolution Era... And so on..

As far as a battle between the two ships I did say something about technology gap.. Here's the quote: "...Now I do acknowledge the technology differences of the two, so you would have to update the systems of the Claw to truely make the sides even, while adding more fighters to the concordia."

As far as the the Torpedo thing well not all Cap Ships are Truely War Ships.. But I did state: "As for having torpedo tubes, well all warships had torpedo tubes."

But I do agree with you on the, "If you've let the enemy come within range of your carrier, you deserve to die." quote. That is why I was saying in a stand up one on one fight.. Cuz let's face it.. In a perfect navy, the enemy wouldn't get past the crusiers or detroyers to even close to threatening your carrier. But carriers do sink and burn, why.. well Tactics, enemy strength, luck, and other variables..
 
The Claw did go toe to toe with at least one enemy cap ship in the movie. They fired off all of their port missile tubes and the kitties went KABOOM!. So carriers DO sometimes slug it out when they need to. But if that stupid Gerald had only listened to Paladin, Angel's squadron wouldnt have let the cats get so close.
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
The Claw did go toe to toe with at least one enemy cap ship in the movie. They fired off all of their port missile tubes and the kitties went KABOOM!. So carriers DO sometimes slug it out when they need to.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you failed to notice the extremly heavy damage, and almost complete destruction the Claw suffered during all of it's fights in the movie?
But if that stupid Gerald had only listened to Paladin, Angel's squadron wouldnt have let the cats get so close.
Click to expand...
Wha? You mean when Paladin was flying that Broadsword and later tried to convince Angel to go back? Gues what, Gerald wasn't in command of the Claw, Sansky who happened to be a Pilgrim traitor, was the CO of the Claw.
 
First of all, do you deny that the Claw went up against a cat ship and won despite any damage it took?


And second, so sue me, its been awhile since i watched it, but im pretty sure Paladin said going out on the mission was a bad idea in the first place.
 
and yes i was aware that Sansky was a pilgrim traitor. Who by the way never seemed to make a decision unless Gerald agreed with it.
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
First of all, do you deny that the Claw went up against a cat ship and won despite any damage it took?
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying that it almost got destroyed... Which is more than enough reason not to send it against capships.


And second, so sue me, its been awhile since i watched it, but im pretty sure Paladin said going out on the mission was a bad idea in the first place.
Click to expand...
Not that he had any good means of convincing anyone on the Claw... It was more of a gut feeling on Paladins part, rather that military thinking.
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
Who by the way never seemed to make a decision unless Gerald agreed with it.
Click to expand...
He seemed pretty confident about his decision to trust Blair at the begining, and later to turst Paladin...
 
I would NEVER suggest sending a carrier against other cap ships in a battle, i was just pointing out an instance when it has happened and it was able to not be destroyed.

Paladins been around long enough to know an ambush when there is one, it seemed to be based on past experience and military knowledge and tatics adding up to a very educated guess. And in a situation where its one carrier, which shouldnt go up against other cap ships as we have agreed, erring on the side of caution seems like the best idea.
 
Originally posted by Earthworm
Click to expand...
He seemed pretty confident about his decision to trust Blair at the begining, and later to turst Paladin... [/B][/QUOTE]

Probably some unconscious Pilgrim thing. :)
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
I would NEVER suggest sending a carrier against other cap ships in a battle, i was just pointing out an instance when it has happened and it was able to not be destroyed.
Click to expand...
But if anything you've proved the point that carriers should absolutely not try to fight.:)

Paladins been around long enough to know an ambush when there is one, it seemed to be based on past experience and military knowledge and tatics adding up to a very educated guess. And in a situation where its one carrier, which shouldnt go up against other cap ships as we have agreed, erring on the side of caution seems like the best idea.
Click to expand...
But than you have Sansky and Gerald, both of whom are experienced Confed officers, and at that time neither of them knew that Paladin was a Confed officer, to them he was a "rouge" contracted by the military to ferry pilots across the universe.
 
Hmmm, some how we got our points crossed, or you miss understood mine. Carriers should never fight one on one against another capship. Thats a given. They can do it if they had to. I REPEAT, HAD TO. That was what i was trying to say there.

Im not sure at what point Paladin showed Sansky Tolwyn's ring so i'll give you that last point.
 
Now to reply against the "acceleration" bit earlier becuase it is so annoying when people don;t know a damn bit of physics. First, anything has a constant mass no matter whether it is in a black hole or in the middle of deep space. Second, acceleration has nothing to do with weight or gravity, accerleration follows Newton's 1st law of motion which describes INERTIA which is independant of gravity. Inertia says that if an object is at rest it will stay at rest and if it is in motion it will stay in motion, unless some unblanced outside force affects it, ie the thrust of engines. Those engines need to put out enough force to counteract the inertia that is inherant in mass thus the higher the mass of an object, the more inertia and the more thrust for longer periods of time that it takes to speed up an object or slow it down. If WC Capships were accurate, they would have an equal number of engines fore and aft in order to lessen/increase velocity when needed.
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
They can do it if they had to. I REPEAT, HAD TO. That was what i was trying to say there.
Click to expand...
They could "try" to do it, but usually they would just get slaughtered. Yes, carriers will prabobly have to fight some battles, on unusuall/unexpected ocasions.

Im not sure at what point Paladin showed Sansky Tolwyn's ring so i'll give you that last point.
Click to expand...
That was before Paladin attempted to jump the pulsar actually.
 
Well im not sure but i think we've come to an agreement then.

I was thinking it was before the pulsar jump but i wasnt sure.
 
One more thing, to dispute a previous claim, the Midway does not carry 2x the number of fighters of any other ship. the Vesuvii carry 400 in comparison to a Midway's 250
 
Originally posted by Napoleon
One more thing, to dispute a previous claim, the Midway does not carry 2x the number of fighters of any other ship. the Vesuvii carry 400 in comparison to a Midway's 250
Click to expand...
Who claimed that anyway?

Anyhow, Midway's flight wing could very well be increased, since unlike the Vesuvius it carries a large number of marines, which would also include landing craft and other equipement for those marines, and removing that could greatly increase that 252 number.

So if you needed to convert the Midway into nothing more than a fighter launching platform like other carriers, you could make it more compareble to the Vesuvius class.
 
Yeah. You gotta remember that the prime objective of a Carrier is to BE a Carrier. Its primary weapon of offense is its bombers. Its primary weapon of defense is its fighters. With these weapons, it has a firepower and range well in excess of any capship weapon.

The carrier is a very expensive piece of equipment. Fighter/bombers on the other hand are (relatively) expendible. A carrier can lose most of its fighters and still retreat and resupply. Lose the carrier, and the fighters go to. Clearly you would want to minimize any risk to the carrier. You do this by keeping the enemy as far away as possible. The closer they get, the more risk to the carrier. Theoretically, a carrier should not need ANY fixed weaponry - its fighters should do the job.

Of course, this is not going to be the case. Most real carriers have no surface-surface weaponry (except maybe carrier/cruisers like the Kiev). They have anti-air weaponry, in case an enemy aircraft or missile gets through their air patrols, but if an enemy ship gets close then the carrier is already out of bombers and running like hell for the nearest port. WC carriers have the disadvantage that enemy capships can jump in (or the carrier has to jump), so they may be more likely to engage in ship-to-ship combat. Their primary weapons though remain their fighters.
 
While this may be the case, in WC a carrier needs ship to ship weapondry, if the opposing ship's fighters do just as good a job as it's preventing bombers from doing a good job, in which case the carriers may need to employ their cap to cap ship weapons to even the score, like to amg's on the vesuvii or the midway's unspecified heavy ion cannons
 
Carriers do have some anti-ship weapons, those are called Bombers.
Remenber that in WC I there were no invicible shields (that needed antimatter or torpedos to damage the ship), on WC II there were but your ship was a dreadnaught that have 9 antimatter guns, on WC III and WC IV shields were back to WC I style.
On WC P, we have the Midway that did not have the heavy ion guns install at the time (but had a cap missile laucher), the vesuvius do have some anti-ships weapons, older (concordia class, I dont think that are rangers around anymore) carriers are in peace time, a fight with another ship is very unlikely so they dont have any antiship weapons on those (not in the war time specs) and why sould they have?
They are not going to way anyway....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top