Worst Fighter, Bomber(general), and capship

Fighter: probably the Hellcat followed by the Piranha, they both sucked
Bomber: Broadsword, no Afterburner really sucks since Im more likely to run out of aterburner fuel then missiles
Capship: WC3 Confed Transport, lightly armed and lightly armored imo.
 
I have to say that one of the worst fighters ever was when you had to fly the Dralthi in WC1 SM2. I mean it was a scimitar except worse. No wonder they are so fun to blow up, and so damn easy too.
In wing 2 the worst was the broadsword I agree, especially when the ralatha had you with them big ole guns.
None of the others are really that pants but as for cap-ships. Well I hated the Diligent class from WC1 SM1. Whats the point, you can kill it with one salvo. Bleh.

Anyway, why were phase shields so new in WC2 yet I can kill all with my guns in WC3 and 4??
 
I always hated the arrow. It had decent speed, but it's armor, weapons, and shields were pathetic. I always took the Hellcat when possible, or the Thunderbolt. (WC3). I'd have to say that the arrow is one of the worst Confed fighters ever.
 
Fighter: Hornet, just flying a Salthi with one more missile.
Bomber: Shrike, doesn't carry enough torps to blow more than two capships and isn't nimble enough to deal with fighters.
Capship: Caernarven, cheap usually means really crappy, this ship is all the proof you need.
 
any capship with armor so thin you can breathe a hole in it I think should qualify...makes you wonder what designers were thinking...
 
climber said:
I have to say that one of the worst fighters ever was when you had to fly the Dralthi in WC1 SM2. I mean it was a scimitar except worse. No wonder they are so fun to blow up, and so damn easy too.
...

You got that impression? I mean the Dralthi is faster and more maneuverable than the Scim and IIRC also better protected. I certainly enjoyed flying the Dralthi more than the Scimitar.
And while I found the standard Dralthi in WC1 pretty easy too I can't say that about the Dralthi Mk2 in SM2: those Mass Drivers could sure make a hole in your ship.
 
Fighter: Rapier. I deliberately tried to mess up that mission in WC1 so I could keep my Raptor. And in WC2 the Rapier (along with the Ferret) lacked the ITTS, which made gunnery a tad bit more amusing. At least the Ferret had the excuse of light fighter.
Bomber: Crossbow. 1 turret instead of 3, neutron guns only good for annoyance, less missiles than a 'Sword.
Capship: Drayman. Shield generators cant cost all that much.

Note to Dishwasher:
Lexington's Air Wing didn't have any Excaliburs or Bearcats. Hence, no getting one.
 
Expendable said:
(...) And in WC2 the Rapier (along with the Ferret) lacked the ITTS, which made gunnery a tad bit more amusing. At least the Ferret had the excuse of light fighter(...)

I wanted to answer that the Rapier had the excuse of being an old fighter - but then I remembered that we see the Broadsword, Epee and Sabre in WCATV they all got ITTS by the time of WC2.

Makes me wonder why they didn't install it on the Rapier, after all it's a very popular and widespread design.

Well, I guess the designer's of WC2 just wanted to have it a touch of "old". :)

It's still my favourite fighter.
 
Hehe, I love blowing up Draymans in Privateer. I wuold have to say that the worst fighter would have to be the Talon or the Epee. As far as worst bomber I would have to say the Crossbow. And worst capship would be those Kilrathi corvettes in WC3, geez man! You can kill one with an Arrow for crying out loud! Talk about a waste of money and material.
 
Expendable said:
And in WC2 the Rapier (along with the Ferret) lacked the ITTS, which made gunnery a tad bit more amusing.

Any pilot worth his salt should'nt need or want ITTS. How can one not love the Rapier?
 
Back
Top