Dream Ship: Destroyer

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

Dream Ship: Destroyer

So; I have been jonesing for a Destroyer now; something pretty high on the tech tree, between capital and Cruiser; and probablly should be the only one of its class.

Combat wise, I think it should be a smaller adaptation of the Kol; IE the TEC's second scratch built combat vessel... maybe one beam, with a much tighter arc, and 2-3 turrets. Maybe a very expensive upgrade giving it a fighter capacity of 1. Cost would be pretty high, maybe just 1000 credits less... in combat, I would think one of these backed up by a Dunov of say Level 2, should be able to barely scrape by/kill a Kol level 1...

I want it to look powerful, be armored with nice weapons, but ultimately not combat cost effective when compared to frigates OR capital ships...

So why buy one?

The abilities i have in mind would be a 'anti missile' missile system or pin-point laser, that would significantly hamper LRMS... but cost anti-matter of course. Also the abilitiy to send a 'Phase Probe' which would basically go to a targetting phase jump lane in the system and scout the other end briefly. That might step on the scout ship's role, but you wouldn't be spamming these ships, you might have 1 in a big fleet just for the scouting support and missile defense.

So at any rate what is your dream ship?

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

RonLugge

Join Date 05/2004

+50

solves the whole "cruisers suck" problem.

What "cruisers suck" problem? They're awesome.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

Yes they are; what he is reffering to is the fact that most cruisers are a support role; which carry the perception of being not powerful deadly ships of war like real life cruisers are.

The Kodiak is the only pure bred Combat Cruiser... the Light Carrier just isnt pure-bred but it is also a 'good' or rather 'combat oriented' cruiser.

At any rate... give me my destroyer and have it be bigger than cruisers. Its space the nomenclature can be different.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Or you could rename the current cruisers 'destroyers' and make the new ships we are discussing here 'cruisers'. Cruiser's are the next biggest thing after battleships/carriers in the navy, so it makes sense.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

That is a solution, but I really just never cared for the naval nomenclature enough. It has always varied too much from era to era. The term 'Dreadnought' for example... oh my has that been confused.

Honestly I think most of the Support ships should still be called Frigates, the Kodiak should be called a Cruiser with the Light Carrier.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

Notably for visual design something like a smaller Nostromo from Aliens the movie, would proabbly work well, it has a Kol-ish design fram, it would be thinner, and probably have the same design for the engine block.

though I wouldn't mind something like the Conquest Frontier Wars ship from their intro movie (was it called the andromeda?)

Successfully updated karma reason!

Or you could rename the current cruisers 'destroyers'

But to balance them, they should be less powerful.

i think two types of those new crusiers would be enought

Successfully updated karma reason!

Or you could rename the current cruisers 'destroyers'

But to balance them, they should be less powerful.

The current 4 cruisers are:
- a heavier version of the light frigate
- a light carrier
- a repair ship (with an (imho) useless combat ability)
- a shield refiller (with an (imho) useless targeting ability)

How do you want to make them weaker? Remove the one squadron from the carrier? Degrade the heavy frigate to a light frigate? Remove the repair ability from the Hoshiko?

i think two types of those new cruisers would be enough

Two types of what? What kind of role should the fulfill? What should be their advantages, their disadvantages?

If you request a new type of ships, you have to define what their use should be, else I could also just request a new type of economic building and a new type of defense building, etc.

Honestly I think most of the Support ships should still be called Frigates, the Kodiak should be called a Cruiser with the Light Carrier.

Imho the colony ship should be reclassified as a cruiser while the heavy frigate (the cruiser one) should be reclassified as a frigate.

Successfully updated karma reason!

How do you want to make them weaker? Remove the one squadron from the carrier? Degrade the heavy frigate to a light frigate? Remove the repair ability from the Hoshiko?

I only know that IF we want to make them destroyer class ships then We need some space for true crusiers. Ther are only two options.
1.Make destroyers something weaker then they (crusiers) are now and add crusiers with similar power to those now existing in game.
2. Make capital ships more pawerful (current balance will be lost :/ ) and add crusiers with this same power as those now existing in game.

I don't know what special abilities should be added/changed.

i think two types of those new cruisers would be enough

Two types of what? What kind of role should the fulfill? What should be their advantages, their disadvantages?

If you request a new type of ships, you have to define what their use should be, else I could also just request a new type of economic building and a new type of defense building, etc.

What i wanted to say was that ther shouldn't be too much crusiers because they shouldn't have very much special abilities. In my opinion they should be primary offensive ships but they should need support of specialistic ships especialy when deealing with carriers. Type one crusier should be able to fight with some smaller ships (but not fighters/bombers), or (in gropup of 5-7) should be able to handle a offensive primary capital ship.
Second crusier should have some weapons able to destroy hard targets (not so good as first crusier) and soft ( bombers? ) as well. Sorry but i'm not good in creating details of ships.

Most important things is that crusiers should be a faster alternative for slow capital ships. Thanks to that you could fast split your forces if you need to do that.

Sorry for my horribly english... i'm in hurry and don't have time to look for dictionary

Successfully updated karma reason!

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

this is why in my original posts, I mentioned that I only wanted 1 New ship.... I wanted an odd ball ship called destroyer... now we have a discussion about a whole new class of ships...

Why are you people so stuck on the naval terms, different navies have had different terms you know.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Why are you people so stuck on the naval terms, different navies have had different terms you know.

Yes i know that it's strange, but i simply can't accept that destroyer will win over a crusier. Arghhhhh... for me this is important. For You isn't. Devs will decide.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think every space game made to date that used naval classes for ships followed the naming convention, size wise (not necessarily role wise), which is probably why it would be really odd for a lot of people to see 'destroyer' overpowering a 'cruiser', even though destroyer sounds much more menacing

For the longest time I actually thought destroyer was a size higher than cruiser, too

Actually, I take that back, if I recall correctly Destroyers in Freespace/Freespace 2 overclassed Cruisers by a very very wide margin. Especially in FS2 with beams added.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I would prefer the following.

frigates stay the same.

Destroyers would be a combat orientated ship. It would basically be slightly larger than Cobalt frigates, but 2-3X more powerful (firepower & armor) and 2-3X more expensive.

Cruisers remain much the same.

Battlecruisers similar in size and cost to regular cruisers, but with more armor/hullpoints/firepower. However, they should be pure combat vessels and have NO special abilities.

Capital Ships should remain the same.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Destroyers would be a combat orientated ship. It would basically be slightly larger than Cobalt frigates, but 2-3X more powerful (firepower & armor) and 2-3X more expensive.

Cobalt Light Frigate:
MaxHullPoints 600.000000
MaxShieldPoints 350.000000
HullPointRestoreRate 1.000000
ShieldPointRestoreRate 1.000000
BaseArmorPoints 2.000000
9.5 dps

Kodiac Heavy Cruiser:
MaxHullPoints 1050.000000
MaxShieldPoints 600.000000
HullPointRestoreRate 1.500000
ShieldPointRestoreRate 2.000000
BaseArmorPoints 5.000000
18 dps

You already have a ship that's almost twice as powerful as a Cobalt.

Battlecruisers similar in size and cost to regular cruisers, but with more armor/hullpoints/firepower. However, they should be pure combat vessels and have NO special abilities.

"with more armor/hullpoints/firepower" than which cruiser? It should cost as much as which cruiser? Cruisers have pretty diverse cost and function, so a general statement like this doesn't tell much.

1.Make destroyers something weaker then they (crusiers) are now and add crusiers with similar power to those now existing in game.

Why make them weaker? Just reclassify them (if you don't like them called cruisers), keep the Kodiac as a Cruiser and add a second type of direct fire fighting ship. How about an Ion Cruiser that does only shield damage?

2. Make capital ships more pawerful (current balance will be lost :/ ) and add crusiers with this same power as those now existing in game.

Capital ships are already very powerful. I don't think they need much more power.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

I just want ONE count em ONE ship between the Kodiak and the Capital Ship... I would prefer calling it a Destroyer... many space games have broken the nomenclature rules before... but whatever, we can call it the Battle Cruiser....

Just One...

Successfully updated karma reason!

Battle Cruiser....

A capital ship is already called Battle Cruiser.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Just One...

Too late now

1.Make destroyers something weaker then they (crusiers) are now and add crusiers with similar power to those now existing in game.

Why make them weaker? Just reclassify them (if you don't like them called cruisers), keep the Kodiac as a Cruiser and add a second type of direct fire fighting ship. How about an Ion Cruiser that does only shield damage?

Ok. But not only shield domage. Little "hard" domage as well.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Gauntlet03

Join Date 01/2004

+139

Yeah the Battle Cruiser invented for speed and guns but less armor... certainly the Akkan as the slowest capital ship fits this description!

Successfully updated karma reason!

This conversation is kind of funny

Hope it makes it in though, you can't ever have enough ships I always say.

Successfully updated karma reason!

If no other point makes it across this needs to be emphasised: there arent enough attack class frigates and cruisers. three, if you're lenient enough to call the LRMS fight worthy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

RonLugge

Join Date 05/2004

+50

If no other point makes it across this needs to be emphasised: there arent enough attack class frigates and cruisers. three, if you're lenient enough to call the LRMS fight worthy.

Define "attack" class cruisers.

Carriers attack via fighters, Kodiaks and cobalts attack directly, gardas have an ok -- not great, but ok -- punch with their anti-fighter weapons, and while siege frigates do suck as attack units, they and cielo's have weapons.

If you mean some form of "line" units, designed to engage the enemy -- and take his fire -- then yeah, only cobalts and kodiaks can do that. So what?

Successfully updated karma reason!

If you mean some form of "line" units, designed to engage the enemy -- and take his fire -- then yeah, only cobalts and kodiaks can do that. So what?

I agree... so what we only have 2. they are bad ass. just build alot of them and support them as you please. The TEC are cought off guard here remember. they dont have the resourses to disign all sorts of fancy ships. they take what they can get, use what works, and build alot of them. Youll get plenty of other ship types with the other races. balencing is really complex with a game of this scale. I aplaud the devs for the jobs their already doing!

But if theres a wish list... it would be cool to see a (one) DISTORYERRRR!!! {said in a very deep evil voice}

Successfully updated karma reason!

they are bad ass. just build alot of them and support them as you please

the point being we have two types of units, strong and weak. that hardly promotes battle diversity

every battle I've gone into I can completely wipe the floor with the enemy if they diversify while I stick with standard cobalts and/or kodiacs. so we have an issue of tactics.

I agree... so what we only have 2. they are bad ass

oh yes, because thats all that matters.

come on, even pirates have cooler point defense ships, look a their shotgun-thingies!

Successfully updated karma reason!