[FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Slashman
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue, 12. Oct 10, 03:31
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Slashman » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 14:00

So I think the main issue is that folks were expecting that destroyers would get a rebalance to limit the ridiculous number of fighters they carry. That is fair and good. I personally think it should be averaging around 4 plus an M ship at the most.

The contention comes when we see the Paranid carrier getting adjusted to 16 fighters. People think this is terrible (with some hyperbole thrown in because its the internet). What I'd first like to know is how many fighters the other carriers get rebalanced to. Does this rebalance come with a price change as well and are other things being planned to make this not have a large impact on fighter combat?

And if this is a complete rebalance of all ship capacities in the game, maybe we should wait and see what they have in mind before we get all hot under the collar and start throwing things at Egosoft.
If you want a different perspective, stand on your head.

User avatar
Axeface
Posts: 2939
Joined: Fri, 18. Nov 05, 00:41
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Axeface » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 14:17

Slashman wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 14:00
And if this is a complete rebalance of all ship capacities in the game, maybe we should wait and see what they have in mind before we get all hot under the collar and start throwing things at Egosoft.
This.
Ragnos28 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 12:08
Raptor34 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 11:57
Aren't they still keeping the old carriers?
So you already have a choice. Not like they are taking those away.
There is a post, more lines up, that says that what happen to the Zeus E should happen to all carriers in the game...rebalance and all that...from someone that admits that he don't use carriers anyway, so he thinks nobody should.
Perhaps I didnt explain myself properly. I didnt say that all carriers should get exactly the same treatment as the Zeus E, that would result is zero variety which is the opposite of what im obviously asking for...... I said the rest of the game should be rebalanced around this new paradigm of balance and variety.... I didnt say the colossus shouldnt have 40 S capacity (although Ide prefer if it was reduced to some degree to make it functional), I said I want variety and I also appreciate the other benefits that an overall reduction (for all freighters and destroyers) and reshuffle (for carriers) in capacity affords.

GCU Grey Area
Posts: 7776
Joined: Sat, 14. Feb 04, 23:07
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by GCU Grey Area » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 14:27

Axeface wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 14:17
I didnt say the colossus shouldnt have 40 S capacity (although Ide prefer if it was reduced to some degree to make it functional...
I'm curious, why do you consider Colossus a non-functional carrier because it can carry 40 fighters?
Worked perfectly fine for me during my Argon game, even with a full complement of fighters.

jlehtone
Posts: 21801
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by jlehtone » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 14:41

Having a bigger gun is no advantage if one does not use it. What is the Order of Battle of the NPC factions? How many ships do they have and how do they use them? Does that match both the ship capabilities and the enemies that they must face?

In other words, will Zeus E give Paranid an advantage that the old Zeus did not? Does the old Zeus ever have over 24 fighters? If not, then only player is affected. Unfortunate, but as already said: player has liberties that AI can never take.
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.

Raptor34
Posts: 2475
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Raptor34 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:09

GCU Grey Area wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 13:16
Raptor34 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 11:57
Aren't they still keeping the old carriers?
So you already have a choice. Not like they are taking those away.
Great, so if I want a proper carrier for a Paranid fleet I have to use the ugly old one (which incidentally is a hell of a lot smaller than the new one).
Huh? I was assuming it would be the same size more or less at the very least.
If it's even bigger it sounds annoying to fly around. Isn't it supposed to be faster? And presumably more maneuverable?

jlehtone
Posts: 21801
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by jlehtone » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:21

Raptor34 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:09
Huh? I was assuming it would be the same size more or less at the very least.
If it's even bigger it sounds annoying to fly around. Isn't it supposed to be faster? And presumably more maneuverable?
Captain Collins' video shows both new and old. Alas, no clear scale to judge by: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4sesqcIETc
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.

j.harshaw
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon, 23. Nov 15, 18:02

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by j.harshaw » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:31

jlehtone wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:21
Raptor34 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:09
Huh? I was assuming it would be the same size more or less at the very least.
If it's even bigger it sounds annoying to fly around. Isn't it supposed to be faster? And presumably more maneuverable?
Captain Collins' video shows both new and old. Alas, no clear scale to judge by: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4sesqcIETc

Code: Select all

Dimensions (width, height, length):
Old Zeus	1617.134m	692.283m	1971.007m
Zeus E		1650.375m	606.875m	2247.446m

Old Odysseus	364.82m		327.784m	600.611m
Odysseus E	359.913m	343.388m	1099.141m

Raptor34
Posts: 2475
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Raptor34 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:45

j.harshaw wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:31
jlehtone wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:21
Raptor34 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 15:09
Huh? I was assuming it would be the same size more or less at the very least.
If it's even bigger it sounds annoying to fly around. Isn't it supposed to be faster? And presumably more maneuverable?
Captain Collins' video shows both new and old. Alas, no clear scale to judge by: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4sesqcIETc

Code: Select all

Dimensions (width, height, length):
Old Zeus	1617.134m	692.283m	1971.007m
Zeus E		1650.375m	606.875m	2247.446m

Old Odysseus	364.82m		327.784m	600.611m
Odysseus E	359.913m	343.388m	1099.141m
Thanks!
The Oddy seems about what it should be going by images.
But damn, the Zeus becomes even more of a pancake.

abisha1980
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue, 11. Dec 18, 18:25
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by abisha1980 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 16:48

Ragnos28 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 09:05
abisha1980 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 06:16
yea swarming is a drone job not a S task.
S ships task suppose to be intercept bombers (not being the bomber)

why i think this is the suppose Hierarchy
Homeworld, Starwars, SoSE, & EvE even most land based strategy games follow similar routes
Yeah, because in RL fighters are not bombers as well...wait, they are...oh well. Propeller planes in ww2 were fighters and bombers, modern jet planes are fighters and bombers, space fighters will most likely be the same..why? because is a tactically sound idea.

As for your last phrase, X4 is not "Homeworld, Starwars, SoSE, & EvE", maybe that's the reason I play X4...plus I'm more of BSG fan...I wonder why the creators of that show did not use drones in there :gruebel:
because a Modern Jet carry a few missiles do not makes them a bomber
why do you think a stealth bomber (called a stealth bomber?) because it's task is to bomb a area
or a other example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjiKdfZhVzU
do you see a jet plane fighter? yea escorting a bomber
Retail investor, η+18,9% 2022 (η+7.1% 2023) (η+0,74 2024) 95% in bonds.
Young people don't be freaking stupid invest also (not in BTC but in real stocks)

flywlyx
Posts: 956
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by flywlyx » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 17:13

abisha1980 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 16:48
because a Modern Jet carry a few missiles do not makes them a bomber
why do you think a stealth bomber (called a stealth bomber?) because it's task is to bomb a area
or a other example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjiKdfZhVzU
do you see a jet plane fighter? yea escorting a bomber
Do you know the well-known "B-17 Flying Fortress" only carries 7.8 tons of bombs, while "F35C Lightning II" could carry 8.1 tons?
There are tactical bombers and strategic bombers, F-35 is called multirole combat aircraft because its role includes aerial bombing.
So there isn't any problem calling F35 a bomber.

User avatar
Axeface
Posts: 2939
Joined: Fri, 18. Nov 05, 00:41
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Axeface » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 17:47

Why do people even use naval carriers and fighter aircraft as an analogy for space carriers anyway? They are not the same situation at all. A better analogy for space carriers would be naval warships launching speedboats or something. Fighter jets are hugely effective in terrestrial warfare and especially when launched from carriers because fighters operate on a plane that naval ships cannot. In space it is not the same, and space fighters just make even less sense when you think about these things.

flywlyx
Posts: 956
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by flywlyx » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 18:01

Axeface wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 17:47
Why do people even use naval carriers and fighter aircraft as an analogy for space carriers anyway? They are not the same situation at all. A better analogy for space carriers would be naval warships launching speedboats or something. Fighter jets are hugely effective in terrestrial warfare and especially when launched from carriers because fighters operate on a plane that naval ships cannot. In space it is not the same, and space fighters just make even less sense when you think about these things.
Because X4 is not a space war simulation.
The basic of any space war is orbit and it is not here at all.
If yoy have played naval warfare game you will see what this comparison comes from.
The basic logic is similar, big ship counter small ship, small ship counter air plane, air plane counter big ship.
And in X4 it is not addressed So well but you still can feel it.
It is not reality, it is just a game.

GCU Grey Area
Posts: 7776
Joined: Sat, 14. Feb 04, 23:07
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by GCU Grey Area » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 18:23

Axeface wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 17:47
Why do people even use naval carriers and fighter aircraft as an analogy for space carriers anyway? They are not the same situation at all. A better analogy for space carriers would be naval warships launching speedboats or something. Fighter jets are hugely effective in terrestrial warfare and especially when launched from carriers because fighters operate on a plane that naval ships cannot. In space it is not the same, and space fighters just make even less sense when you think about these things.
For me it all comes down to subsystems, particularly engines. If I can smash those on enemy ships they're a lot less effective. Good way to do that is to use S bombers armed with missiles which have a wide blast radius (particularly like Starburst for this). They're a lot more agile than using anything bigger for the task, can get into position faster & can mostly dodge incoming turret fire. Conversely I don't want enemy fighters to do the same thing to my capitals so I use more fighters (in an intercept role) to eliminate them before they can reach my fleet. They also guard my bombers from enemy fighters since they are often poorly equipped for a dogfight.

Ragnos28
Posts: 916
Joined: Wed, 4. Mar 20, 00:28
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Ragnos28 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 18:25

Axeface wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 17:47
Why do people even use naval carriers and fighter aircraft as an analogy for space carriers anyway? They are not the same situation at all. A better analogy for space carriers would be naval warships launching speedboats or something. Fighter jets are hugely effective in terrestrial warfare and especially when launched from carriers because fighters operate on a plane that naval ships cannot. In space it is not the same, and space fighters just make even less sense when you think about these things.
Man...do I have a sci-fi franchise for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0BD4jmTS_M :mrgreen:

Nanook
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 27829
Joined: Thu, 15. May 03, 20:57
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Nanook » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 19:50

Axeface wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 17:47
... In space it is not the same, and space fighters just make even less sense when you think about these things.
Well, I've thought about these things and I believe you're wrong. If there were no fighters, then big ships wouldn't have to go to the trouble of mounting anti-fighter defenses and could simply mount bigger weapons against the enemy. However, when the enemy counters with fighters, that big ship without anti-fighter defenses is now helpless against them and guess what happens? :P

It's called Combines Arms, and any military force that doesn't support that is at a huge disadvantage. So now you've got to say "Oh, yeah, I guess fighters do make sense." :doh:
Have a great idea for the current or a future game? You can post it in the [L3+] Ideas forum.

X4 is a journey, not a destination. Have fun on your travels.

abisha1980
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue, 11. Dec 18, 18:25
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by abisha1980 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 20:19

do you guys even know how fast the new E-Carrier is in travel? it go's a whooping 6000 in travel mode with speed of 290m/s normal speed
Retail investor, η+18,9% 2022 (η+7.1% 2023) (η+0,74 2024) 95% in bonds.
Young people don't be freaking stupid invest also (not in BTC but in real stocks)

grimgore
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue, 20. Nov 18, 12:58
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by grimgore » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 21:55

abisha1980 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 20:19
do you guys even know how fast the new E-Carrier is in travel? it go's a whooping 6000 in travel mode with speed of 290m/s normal speed
Yes what is the point in arming? He won't be able to destroy a Colossus, let alone a Raptor. It can always run away quickly, but it won't work with the stubborn Xenon. They won't let you go. The only thing that matters in a large carrier with this armament is capacity. If it were an L-carrier, I would say super. But it's a huge XL carrier.

GCU Grey Area
Posts: 7776
Joined: Sat, 14. Feb 04, 23:07
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by GCU Grey Area » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 22:10

abisha1980 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 20:19
do you guys even know how fast the new E-Carrier is in travel? it go's a whooping 6000 in travel mode with speed of 290m/s normal speed
Yeah, it's fast, unnecessarily so for a carrier. Really not sure what to do with it. Too fast to use in a conventional fleet (given that it's so much faster than any version of Odysseus) & a fleet consisting of just a carrier & a bunch of fighters is a fleet distinctly lacking in punch. May end up having to install the basic Minuteman mod on it's engines - the increase in boost is largely irrelevant but it would at least chop 25-30% off the travel speed (so destroyers could keep up). Frankly would vastly prefer higher fighter capacity than excessively fast engines I'll likely need to nerf to get anything resembling fleet cohesion.

Ragnos28
Posts: 916
Joined: Wed, 4. Mar 20, 00:28
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by Ragnos28 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 22:18

abisha1980 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 20:19
do you guys even know how fast the new E-Carrier is in travel? it go's a whooping 6000 in travel mode with speed of 290m/s normal speed
It will be a great carrier to fly personaly...the thing is, you will need some real carriers to protect it :D
Ok, I had my fun :P The only thing I see it good for is anti Kha'ak patrol...so an enhance design ship that I will not see about 90% of the time...win win :roll:

abisha1980
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue, 11. Dec 18, 18:25
x4

Re: [FEEDBACK]New Paranid Carrier can only carry 16 fighters? - WAI.

Post by abisha1980 » Fri, 28. Jan 22, 22:22

Ragnos28 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 22:18
abisha1980 wrote:
Fri, 28. Jan 22, 20:19
do you guys even know how fast the new E-Carrier is in travel? it go's a whooping 6000 in travel mode with speed of 290m/s normal speed
It will be a great carrier to fly personaly...the thing is, you will need some real carriers to protect it :D
Ok, I had my fun :P The only thing I see it good for is anti Kha'ak patrol...so an enhance design ship that I will not see about 90% of the time...win win :roll:
that's why it can launch 4 fighters and 1M at start of a battle.
it's a great ship to fly personally few Xenon not gonna be a pain and it quite agile and fast.

like the perfect frigate we never had.
Retail investor, η+18,9% 2022 (η+7.1% 2023) (η+0,74 2024) 95% in bonds.
Young people don't be freaking stupid invest also (not in BTC but in real stocks)

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”