Discovery Gaming Community

I am quite sure I will discover several new types of flames for posting this, but here goes:

Our Capital Ships are All Messed Up.

As I see it, there are currently three types of TRUE capital ships: Battlecruisers, Battleships, and Dreadnoughts. Battlecruisers are, by definition, the size of and as well-armed-as Battleships, but horrendously lower-armored. Hence, I request that we give the Battlecrusiers more firepower, say, four to six BS turrets instead of two.

Battleships are about where they need to be now.

My biggest dig right now, though, are Dreadnoughts: a Dreadnought should be much bigger, much more heavily armored, gunned, and much more heavily priced than a battleship. I currently fly my little Bretonian Battleship, and, though she is not a particularly maneuverable ship, just because she is so small and slightly more well armored (I pack a MK VII, as to most people's MK IV-VI), can fly circles around and easily destroy with quarter-hull-left, an Outcast Dreadnought. There are currently five ships in Discovery requiring the Dreadnough classification: The Outcast Dreadnought, the Kusari Battleship, the Rheinland Battleship, the Battlestar II, and the now-defunct Corsair Dreadnought. For their size, these ships are underarmored, underpowered, and underpriced. In mah Humble Opinion, we need these ships to get another four guns each, a half-again increase in powerplant, a half-again increase in Armor, and a price of at least a billion credits. It will persuade more people to use cheaper, lighter Battleships such as the Osiris and Bounty Hinter Battleship, and leave the Dreadnoughts to the people who can actually pay for them, such as higher-tier players and factions.

I am personally happy with what we have now.

A capital ship is anything that requires a lot of people to operate, basically gunboats and up. The four classes of Gunboat, cruiser, battlecruiser and battleship are all fitted and balanced to how they should be.

It would get a little too confusing if we further divided the ships into more sub-categories.

Verg

Could also solve Epy's problem by naming them all battleships:)

CP

Most of the new ships are named correctly. Vanilla capital ships won't be renamed anyway, since they were meant to keep the names that game devs gave them.

As for separating different ships into different classes by price, this sounds doubtful. They'll still use same shields and weapons, plus have similar number of turrets. What's the use of buying a more expensive and bulky ship then?

lets say, the naming and description just adds to the atmosphere and flavour of the game. and lets not take it too seriously. They are class/names that the factions give their ships, rather than using an "official classification".

so, the zoners name their battleship "juggernaut" - it does sound big, but not like "i-will-kill-you-on-sight". it fits OK, for a non military faction, but doesn t mean that ship is smaller, less armoured or armed than another battleship. dreadnaught implies the biggest, meanest ship in the arsenal. (whatever you call your biggest ship)

in the end, it fits to the ships in the game. there is the outcast dreadnaught and the liberty dreadnaught. both are the biggest, strongest ships in their factions. And thats about it.

introducing a new, stronger class, will only add to the frustration people have with smaller ships. now its allmost impossible to take down a capship allready ( provided you re on your own of course, in a pack it works ) - there are people that claim they soloed a battleship in a bomber - but i have yet to see that. putting even more powerful ships into the game won t help the balance, even if it made sense in a roleplaying way, it ll hurt the balance.

there is no maintanence cost in the game for a battleship, people can still suicide their damage away ( and its sadly still allowed ) and shields prevent expensive ships from most damage. if there was no autorepair for suicide/death, and a higher repair cost, and only minor shields that protect from pebble collisions. since that won t happen, adding stronger ships isn t a good idea. <-- just my opinion.

That's pretty much what expected. Still, had to try...

I'm gonna have to say this:

The liberty carrier is the largest battleship that the Liberty Navy can access. And despite being called a carrier, it actually does fulfill the role of a battleship or dreadnought.

My view of a battlecruiser has always been a ship the size of a cruiser, with the armour of one, but the firepower of a battleship. This is what one is, and what one should be. Not the size of a battleship, otherwise its armour would be way too thin.

All this needs is a rename thing.

The Liberty dread needs to be renamed to a battleship, the Carrier to a dreadnought, with other things like that. However, the distinction is not really needed, as we all know what is mean't, and its not really a big deal. I would rather find battleships not to get bounced around by a fighter or rock than the ships renamed. We have bigger things to deal with. This is, imo, not really that important at the moment...no offense of flames intended.

Dreadnought = Battleship: info

Battlecruisers: Way more powerful than a regular cruiser, but not powerful enough to match a battleship. Those are used to hunt&kill cruisers, and to flee in case they stumble upon a more potent ship (Dreadnought or Battleship, as you wish to name them).

Battlecruiser: info

I posted those links here to avoid misunderstanding:)

Glyph

Can we please make Dreadnoughts bigger? they're supposed to be huge and...they're not.

I'm personally fine with the way Battleships, Dreadnoughts and Juggernauts are now in terms of the stuff said previously about their size, firepower and relative price to other ships of its class. But the battlestars are way undersized.