Who is in charge of balancing caps?

[lIceColon]

I'd be perfectly alright with giving up all of of my indie caps if it meant that battleships were buffed to the OP Titans that they are SUPPOSED to be.

[Occam Razor]

OK, I have read some of this and I give you my opinion on caps.
Caps should never be more agile than a snub. That is easy to understand. But, they should have more speed, as they have bigger engines and mass does not matter in space. Mass is only a factor for increasing speed, not the top speed, as in space, there is no atmosphere to resist the object.

No, that is wrong. If Freelancer was realistic there would be no top speed for anything, fighters would accelerate faster than Capital ships due to their lower mass. But Freelancer is not realistic, and it's supposed to be like that. It resembles real life Naval Combat more than realistic Space Combat. And realistically, battleships are of course slower and less maneuverable than airplanes. In my opinion Capital Ships are fine as they are, slow moving and turning objects that have a huge firepower but can't hit smaller targets.

To the whole "Battleships are too weak" discussion I would say that if you look at actual naval combat in WW2 for example, carriers were able to destroy whole convoys of battleships using their fighters and bombers, and a Battleship had hundreds of anti-air guns, but still was hardly able to defend against them. I think that's where the current combat model comes from, and thus it is good as it is in my opinion.

---

"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it."
René Descartes

[lIceColon]

I like the star wars flight model better, in which both the small blockade runner and the millenium falcon was unable to outrun a giant star destoyer, although being much more agile.

[Gateway Shipping Inc]

I like the star wars flight model better, in which both the small blockade runner and the millenium falcon was unable to outrun a giant star destoyer, although being much more agile.

It does make some sense. In a "chase down" scenario, the Star Destroyer could go a maximum speed and keep up with the Falcon. However, in a large fleet battle like in Return of the Jedi, they're moving very lumbering and slow in order to stay in formation and avoid collisions, whereas the Falcon, being more agile, can fly around practically as good as an X-wing. Agility and speed don't necessarily go hand in hand.

---

♦ Gateway|: Information   ♦ Gateway|: Recruitment   ♦ Reporting Facility    ♦ Company Roster

[Unlucky_Soul]

To the whole "Battleships are too weak" discussion I would say that if you look at actual naval combat in WW2 for example, carriers were able to destroy whole convoys of battleships using their fighters and bombers, and a Battleship had hundreds of anti-air guns, but still was hardly able to defend against them. I think that's where the current combat model comes from, and thus it is good as it is in my opinion.

Comparing Discovery Freelancer to WW2 is not an accurate measure for comparisons. WW2 Battleships DO NOT have shields. Also WW2 Ships were always at a disadvantage because ships were more or less stagnant in the water compared with fighters and bombers in the air. If the same fighter/bomber engine was outfitted to a boat it would be slow. Water being a heavier medium than air tends to slow down speed. Also in Water you can move forward or sideways, whereas in air you can do barrel rolls, nose dive etc.Think of water as 2D and the air as 3D. There is more scope of maneuvers for fighters/bombers than a Ship in the water. If you have to make comparisons you make comparisons with a torpedo boat or a gunboat, since they are both on the same playing field. Their success is not so good as fighter or bomber.

Anyways back on track, i think Cap battles in discovery shouldn't be based on skill. it should lean more towards teamwork/strategy.

---

[Unlucky_Soul]

--delete-- Double post

---

[Highland Laddie]

Anyways back on track, i think Cap battles in discovery shouldn't be based on skill. it should lean more towards teamwork/strategy.

Therein lies part of your answer. For most ships, aside from Destroyers and other BSes, it DOES take teamwork to take down a BS. So the system is basically working how it is supposed to.

[lIceColon]

i think Cap battles in discovery shouldn't be based on skill. it should lean more towards teamwork/strategy.

It would be true if caps weren't the giant one-man fighters they are right now, unfortunately there is no automation with the turrets and for a player to play the role of both the helmsman and the 22 gunners and the captain at the same time does take a ton of skill.

If only caps were neigh big, but BARGE ginormous Titans, and with incredibly high defense but the same offensive capability they currently have so a cap fight wasn't just a 4 minute thing, instead a Titan battle would be just two sides chipping away at each other's defense little bit by bit inflicting as much damage onto the enemy titan while keeping the enemy's forces off their own Titan.

Either make current BS'es Titans or introduce a new TItan ship class, please.

[SkyNet]

Anyways back on track, i think Cap battles in discovery shouldn't be based on skill. it should lean more towards teamwork/strategy.

They should be based on both, skills and strategy.

[Antonio]

Battleships are HIGHLY specialized.
They are meant for fighting other battleships. Period.
Everything else pretty much wrecks them.
Problem is crappy razors and solarises. In 4.85, a solaris Ossie with just 1 razor was a hell of a threat.
They can be used for supporting others with regens or docking rights or to provide a "safe area" where you can run to because the enemy chasing you won't dare to come that close to a BS.

---

SNAC Montage Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Thruster SNAC