Fighters kill bombers, bombers kill capital ships, capital ships kill smaller capital ships, smaller capital ships kill fighters.
Will we have this kind of balance in Rebirth? It'd force fleets, especially those containing bigger ships to be mixed and composed of various kinds of ships working together to beat the enemy. It'd mean there's no "one ship to own them all" and Carriers able to host both fighters and bombers would suddenly rise to the top of the foodchain where they belong.
Rock/paper/scissors ship balance model?
Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum
Rock/paper/scissors ship balance model?
Where is it?
Hm. Something like that would be good, but on the other hand - if capital ships are completely invulnerable to anything but torpedoes, for example, and torpedoes respectively can only damage capital ships, that would be taking it way too far.
A universal scaled damage model, properly balanced with laser types and such, would still be better, imo.
A universal scaled damage model, properly balanced with laser types and such, would still be better, imo.
Hi,
Balance will be interesting in Rebirth In think...
I designed a capital ship, it's got ALL Torpedo/Missile turrets - it gets owned by fighters IF they can get past it's defensive wing but capital ships are TOAST.
I designed a capital ship, it's got 80% anti-fighter class weapon turrets with a few light missiles thrown in - Fighters beware!
From the information we have we can define the balance of our larger ships by the sounds of it, as we can our STATIONS which is interesting to say the least! I.e. My station has some heavy anti-capital ship weapons mounted, but I also added a fighter bay module (would be cool eh?) or maybe being a HUGE station it can just dock loads of ships anyway. A large contingent of docked fighters provide a defence against smaller attackers, against which the anti-capital guns mounted on the station are in-effective due to target tracking speed etc.
For smaller vessels I'd imagine there's less cusomisation options, however again we might have a "fighter" chassis modded for speed and carrying heavy torpedoes...
Bernd's information so far has been really great, but of course has led to more questions and speculation. I'd be interested to know what customisation options, if any, are applicable to smaller craft. Imagine if you will you are engaged by something your ships computer (or crew) identify as a "fighter", without a close up scan who knows what it's configuration might be? I LIKE that...if that's how it's implemented!
Cheers,
Scoob.
Balance will be interesting in Rebirth In think...
I designed a capital ship, it's got ALL Torpedo/Missile turrets - it gets owned by fighters IF they can get past it's defensive wing but capital ships are TOAST.
I designed a capital ship, it's got 80% anti-fighter class weapon turrets with a few light missiles thrown in - Fighters beware!
From the information we have we can define the balance of our larger ships by the sounds of it, as we can our STATIONS which is interesting to say the least! I.e. My station has some heavy anti-capital ship weapons mounted, but I also added a fighter bay module (would be cool eh?) or maybe being a HUGE station it can just dock loads of ships anyway. A large contingent of docked fighters provide a defence against smaller attackers, against which the anti-capital guns mounted on the station are in-effective due to target tracking speed etc.
For smaller vessels I'd imagine there's less cusomisation options, however again we might have a "fighter" chassis modded for speed and carrying heavy torpedoes...
Bernd's information so far has been really great, but of course has led to more questions and speculation. I'd be interested to know what customisation options, if any, are applicable to smaller craft. Imagine if you will you are engaged by something your ships computer (or crew) identify as a "fighter", without a close up scan who knows what it's configuration might be? I LIKE that...if that's how it's implemented!
Cheers,
Scoob.
![[ external image ]](http://i.imgur.com/ByxGjz7.jpg){kind=link}
But that's not how ship design works. A politician tells the military what they want, then a committee decides on all the features it should have, and then the engineers are given a grease smudged napkin that talks about fairies and lasers and magic superhulls that can perform every possible role on the battlefield and kill everything.
So you get a Bradley.
Ship design is going to be limited by what roles you can give to a hull. A tiny ship is suitable for tiny equipment like sensors, small cargo, and single payload weapons. A medium ship can use a wide variety of gear and adopt many different roles like deep space scout, trade ship, dog fighter, boarding vessel, or heavy bomber. A large ship is limited to some mixture of heavy combat or logistics, and lacks the flexibility of roles that medium ships have.
A simple Fighter>cap>corvette>fighter model just wouldn't work. What if a corvette was made specifically to kill capital ships? What if a fighter has weapons to disable those corvettes? It'd throw the model completely upside down!
So you get a Bradley.
Ship design is going to be limited by what roles you can give to a hull. A tiny ship is suitable for tiny equipment like sensors, small cargo, and single payload weapons. A medium ship can use a wide variety of gear and adopt many different roles like deep space scout, trade ship, dog fighter, boarding vessel, or heavy bomber. A large ship is limited to some mixture of heavy combat or logistics, and lacks the flexibility of roles that medium ships have.
A simple Fighter>cap>corvette>fighter model just wouldn't work. What if a corvette was made specifically to kill capital ships? What if a fighter has weapons to disable those corvettes? It'd throw the model completely upside down!