View Thread
Page 1 of 2: 12
|
 Siege Cannon and the old school
|
|
| enterprise |
Posted on 04-11-2005 16:46
|
 Posts: 81 Joined: October 10 2005 |
i think that homeworld cataclysm is a forgotten game. the accolite, the siege cannon and the beautiful fast dreadnought. for example it's possible mount on the motership an evolution of the siege plasma cannon or see a squadron of VCA turn into a swarm of accolite that fire 200 missile against an al khaid? i will like a lot destroy an attacker vagyr fleet with a big sphere of plasma  ! |
|
|
|
| Itharu |
Posted on 04-11-2005 19:44
|
 Posts: 363 Joined: September 23 2005 |
Uhg........ you're forgetting that HW:C Was not a RELIC game. It was made from Barking Dog Studios that is nafarious for making halk-assed RTS games. The only reason it kind of looks good is because they got a licence to the HW engine and HW titles. It had some decent concepts (in flight view... kind of), other than that, it didn't add much to the rest of the game, and barely filled in some between HW1 and HW2 stuff. It could have been better. Much better.
-Fear the Might of the Imperial Cortharian Fleet
|
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 04-11-2005 20:08
|
 Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
It also officially "happened" in the official HW universe. That said, it was a decent game. Sure, it could have been butter, but HW2 could also have been finished. You know...the plot they originally wanted to do but didn't have enough time? Things like that. Many of the HWC concepts have been explained on these very boards, as to why such and such concept is or is not presently acceptable. The siege cannon had many problems with it, and will not be making a reappearance in PDS to my knowledge. It's one big shot trap. Bad. 200 missiles: If you have enough strikecraft, sure. That's a lot of investment for little return, however. The Acolytes have already been explained away, as has the energy cannon. The dreadnaught was based on an ore processor. True, it incorporated Bentusi energy management techniques, but when compared to even 3g frigate, remembering that it's been a century since HW1 and perhaps 85 years since HWC, the frigate would beat the everliving crap out of the Beast-era dreadnaught. Especially considering the PDS on the frigate, which the dreadnaught does not possess. |
|
|
|
| maw3194 |
Posted on 04-11-2005 23:14
|
 Posts: 66 Joined: September 02 2005 |
It could have been butter? I agree that HW:C ships would be impractical for PDS, and that the Siege Cannon was a silly concept, but I did enjoy it, it was what got me to buy the other Homeworlds and I did enjoy the story, especially the Vampire Virus (I like that alliteration). Remember, the Old School doesn't mean the Good School, though there was better respect then (how would I know, I still go there and don't know any better), the nature of technology is to evolve, think of the QJ. Seems like it was years since I was last here
|
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 05-11-2005 16:43
|
|
Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Yes, butter. Butter is better...than margerine! |
|
|
|
| schumador |
Posted on 10-11-2005 13:54
|
 Posts: 70 Joined: September 21 2005 |
I never really liked the Dreadnought from HW:C; however, I *loved* the destroyers! They were maneuverable, they had cannons, ion beams *and* missiles! Plus they were compact and quick... I really enjoyed their look, too. Deck out the ships from HW:C with PDS systems and there you go! Maybe another Sobani-style force with its own ships... |
|
|
|
| Cobalt Shiva |
Posted on 10-11-2005 17:43
|
 Posts: 118 Joined: September 07 2005 |
Kiith Somtaaw's adapted mining vessels were in many ways clever, but they existed in a battlespace that was decidedly lower-intensity than the current 5G environment. However, I imagine the existing Monitor design was probably built by someone with Somtaaw blood, and we've established that the Kunde Corporation is the descendants of the 'Beastslayers.' (Yes, that's canon.) All that shows that some of HW:C's concepts can be adapted to the new battlespace. I'd particularly like a review of the feasibility of Mimic and Leech-type vessels...actually, I'll do it myself. Mimics - not feasible, at least not masquerading as ships. PDSverse combat vessels just have too many sensors, and SOMEONE would notice that those 'destroyers' were a bit funny- their drive plasma wasn't the right strength, they turned too fast, and they weren't shooting. What's the point of holographic emitters, anyway? Visual contact is a secondary method of identifying targets, not a primary one. Better to have a stealth ship that can be used as a drifting surveillance platform than waste money on holographic emitters. I imagine Leeches could be detected very easily; hull armor probably has pressure sensors or something similar. "This is tactical control..."
|
|
|
|
| enterprise |
Posted on 10-11-2005 18:50
|
|
Posts: 81 Joined: October 10 2005 |
if you remember when leechers attack to the hull send a virus in security system and all alarm will be disabled, you will not see any damage provoked by this very little ship if they stay on your ship and in the middle of a battle you think that this sensors will distinguish a leech from a hit on the hull by a projectile? however i think that mount a siege cannon on a super capital ship will be very funny, with all the tecnology development on plasma weapon i think that the power of this weapon may be very increased. the best to destroy a formation of attacking fighter and frigate and a problem for capital ship subsystem. also the swarm tecnology may be a good weapon against the last generation of fighter. and the repulsion field tecnology? imagine this wonderful defense system mounted on a shipyard under fighter attack or the chance for a capital ship to save his subsytem.... the only tecnology that i think is taken from cataclysm is the advanced ion cannon tecnology. if anyone remember other tecnology that can be suggestion for new weapon. yes is passed some time from cataclysm ages but the mass driver tecnology was taken from past by kharakian people when discover that with newest tecnology on super electromagnetic accellerator this weapon is very very lethal... to boldly go where no one has gone before
|
|
|
|
| Nemmerle |
Posted on 10-11-2005 22:52
|
|
Posts: 113 Joined: September 16 2005 |
We fight in the age of the networked battlespace, maybe one ship would miss the leech on its hull, but the ship flying beside it wont and you can't really override the other ship's sensors with a virus in the same way. The problem with a siege cannon idea is that it's essentially just a large target. It's much better to use a lot of smaller weapons that can be targeted accurately and carry the same or better firepower than it is to have one big gun that can be taken out and then leaves you completely helpless. There is already something similar to the swarm fighter project in both the probe adaptation and the progenitor AI hull. |
|
|
|
| Cobalt Shiva |
Posted on 10-11-2005 23:56
|
|
Posts: 118 Joined: September 07 2005 |
Also, regarding siege cannons - remember the scale. One METER of inter-ship distance in the HW2 engine is a full kilometer of space. That means a 'plasma blast' (or any area effect-weapon) is really very limited. A thermonuclear detonation (from an HVM warhead) will cause as much blast damage as HW:C's ridiculous siege cannon. You'll never catch an entire fleet in a single blast, not with the distance between ships - you'll be lucky to get more than a single strikecraft squadron. "This is tactical control..."
|
|
|
|
| Cobalt Shiva |
Posted on 10-11-2005 23:56
|
|
Posts: 118 Joined: September 07 2005 |
Also, regarding siege cannons - remember the scale. One METER of inter-ship distance in the HW2 engine is a full kilometer of space. That means a 'plasma blast' (or any area effect-weapon) is really very limited. A thermonuclear detonation (from an HVM warhead) will cause as much blast damage as HW:C's ridiculous siege cannon. You'll never catch an entire fleet in a single blast, not with the distance between ships - you'll be lucky to get more than a single strikecraft squadron. "This is tactical control..."
|
|
|
|
| Itharu |
Posted on 11-11-2005 01:43
|
|
Posts: 363 Joined: September 23 2005 |
I'm just wondering where we're getting this inter-ship distance spacing from? Has it been written by the HW:2 Engine developers or was it implimented by the PDS team?
-Fear the Might of the Imperial Cortharian Fleet
|
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 11-11-2005 03:28
|
|
Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
I know it's been accepted by the PDS team, don't know if Relic had anything to do with it. |
|
|
|
| Itharu |
Posted on 11-11-2005 03:58
|
|
Posts: 363 Joined: September 23 2005 |
Okay, tatically, I'm thinking that's a huge waste of space. I know it's not smart to keep the fleet togeter, but each ship 1Km appart is a little extreme I think. I understand there's got to be considerations for getting weapons fire crossed and such, but there just seems to be something off about a 1Km sphere of no ships around a ship.
-Fear the Might of the Imperial Cortharian Fleet
|
|
|
|
| enterprise |
Posted on 11-11-2005 10:57
|
|
Posts: 81 Joined: October 10 2005 |
the problem if we use termonuclear weapons is that the radiaton will kill the crew of the ship that later pass trought the space when the warhead is explosed. and i think that a siege cannon (remember that the cataclsym cannon is type 2, not planetary) if upgraded to type 1 will destroy hundreds of space's kilometers. for the problem that the ship is too weak with a siege cannon because it's the only weapon remember that also torpedo frigate have only a heavy weapon that is futile in near combat. the only thing to do is an escort to boldly go where no one has gone before
|
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 11-11-2005 11:39
|
|
Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
We use thermonuclear weapons and railgun shells quite frequently in the battlespace. Spacefaring vessels are by necessity equipped with very good radiation shielding. Passing through an area where a nuke was detonated is fairly harmless compared to a lot of the energies floating around out there. |
|
|
|
| Itharu |
Posted on 11-11-2005 12:27
|
|
Posts: 363 Joined: September 23 2005 |
Why wasn't that seige cannon like ship in PDS 6.2 recycled and given an even larger cannon? I know it was a precurser to the now standard 3x1200m Cannons on Battlecurisers, supermoniters and the bombardment ship, but from an economic standpoint, wouldn't making a lot of smaller ships with one cannon be better than making one ship with a lot of cannons? I mean it does the same thing, but just doesn't have all the eggs in one basket for bombing.
-Fear the Might of the Imperial Cortharian Fleet
|
|
|
|
| enterprise |
Posted on 11-11-2005 13:17
|
|
Posts: 81 Joined: October 10 2005 |
yes all people says that is better many weak weapon that one very destructive but i think that the siege cannon can be mounted on ship type the (i don't remember the name) artillery prince of hiigara that with his huge mass cannons can destroy a ship from distance. i say that a similar type of artillery can be used to make an energy based artillery weapon that can destroy more than one ship for time in an area. i really don't understand why the game don't have a simple mass destruction weapon. ok siege cannon is not really god, i understand, but why not a big heavy fusion weapon. dammit we are in future and we can't make a simple termonuclear weapon? to boldly go where no one has gone before
|
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 11-11-2005 13:21
|
|
Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Thermonuclear weapons are used all the time. All of the big missiles are nuclear fusion weapons, especially the SRAM. The Vagyr missiles were originally called fusion missiles...doesn't that give a clue? In terms of energy release, Fusion > Fission. |
|
|
|
| enterprise |
Posted on 11-11-2005 13:26
|
|
Posts: 81 Joined: October 10 2005 |
i said a big artillery termonuclear weapon that destroy many ship in a vast area
to boldly go where no one has gone before
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2: 12
| Jump to Forum |