Transporting fighters and bombers

[ScorLibran]

Whoever "whoops up" on the other is pretty much determined by who's the better player. I've beaten the rebels as the empire head on at tech 5 before in space skirmishes. I think the empire has an advantage in space with stronger higher-level capital ships. Sure, the frigates and cruisers of the rebels have the shield power thingy, but it's pretty useless if you know how to counter it. I don't think it is a major balance upset, as we've already established that the fighters and bombers are really weak and that they are pretty much throw-aways when you are invading/in skirmish? Isn't that in itself an upset of balance that needs corrected?

The Alliance's ships at higher tech levels are definitely stronger than those of the Empire. Which is why if you're going to make anything easier for them, you'll have to take something else from them for the sake of balance.

 

I actually prefer playing the Empire in space because I find them to be more of a challenge.

 

I do agree with fighters/bombers generally being marginal units, except I surprised myself last night about the Y-Wing. I was defending a poor little lvl 2 space station against an ISD and a handful of Tartans. I had four corvettes in orbit that eventually cleaned up the enemy frigates (while I kept my bombers faaaaar away from them), and then the ISD killed my corvettes. So I'm left with two Y-Wing squadrons, somewhat beat up and only 4 ships strong, and vapor where my space station used to be. Against a Star Destroyer. At least I had my Y-Wings take out his hangar before he killed my station (and any ability to reinforce from the garrison). So I've already written off this one in my mind, thinking, "OK, maybe my bombers can take out a few of his hardpoints before he gets enough lucky shots to pop them all. Well, he didn't get enough lucky shots after all. When the Star Destroyer exploded, I had one Y-Wing left. It's funny to see a grown man yelling at a computer screen, "Come on! Just one more pass! Don't die yet!"

 

So I think I had been underestimating the little Rebel bomber, personally. I still haven't seen anything surprising with X-Wings yet, though. But if two squadrons each of Y-Wings and X-Wings (in four population slots) would actually have a good chance of taking out a lone, equivalent population ISD, I'd say they deserve their own space in the deployment roster rather than in a hangar. But I'd still support having some Rebel ships with hangars if they are sufficiently weakened somehow to keep the current state of game balance (or even repair their current advantage over the Empire).

 

If you look at US Navy and French Navy carriers then it is true bu if you looka at Soviet carrier now Russina such as Kuznetsov you are completly wrong.

Russian carriers have historically been hybrids to make up for a lack of a strong battle group escort and because their aircraft were a bit weaker than those of their adversary through the Cold War.

 

In my example I'm referring to pure, non-hybrid carriers. Giant, slow, lightly armed...but respectable defenses, in line with their fleet value. And requiring a strong battle group to escort them. This is how I'd envision an Alliance fleet carrier.

 

And the more I talk about it, the more I want to see it now, damn the game balance.

 

I have even come to the point where I don't buy the fighters anymore. I keep replacing Y-Wings if I did so I replaced them with the Corellian Gunship.

[...]

The only reason I ever buy Y-Wings is to use to the bombing runs. I even assigned them to my ground forces instead of space forces (and I always do the space battle first and sent in the ground forces after I've won the space battle, I wonder if anybody doesn't do this?).

Hmmm, I haven't used the gunship yet. I finished the Rebellion campaign yesterday, using only corvettes, Assault Frigates and Mon Cals. For space assaults I dumped the X-Wings early on, and the Y-Wings soon after. My experience described above with a couple of Y-Wing squadrons only happened in the first place because I left my pants down at one spot on my front line and had no frigates in orbit. Fun as it was, I'd still rather counter a big ship with a big ship. Or at least with a group of medium-sized ships.

 

But like you, I do keep Y-Wings in my ground assault group for the bombing runs (especially after I got addicted to spotter drone sensor pings + bombing runs). And I never did do a ground raid with the Rebellion...not because of any particular game strategy, but because I forgot I could until I had finished the campaign.

[Admiral Raven]

If you give the benefit of being able to launch fighters/bombers when you want from a capital ship to the Empire and the Rebellion then it should hopefuly stay balanced.

 

Also on your point about taking weapons away from ships if you give them hangars: Admiral Ackbar's Home One is meant to be a carrier ship and from stats I have seen on the internet should not have more guns than a star destroyer. So if some of its guns were taken away and it was given a hangar then you would keep the carrier feeling and it would be more like it is meant to be.

[ScorLibran]

If you give the benefit of being able to launch fighters/bombers when you want from a capital ship to the Empire and the Rebellion then it should hopefuly stay balanced.

The ability to hangar and deploy-on-demand between the two sides would indeed be balanced. But game balance is a bigger picture. The Rebellion, in my opinion, is already stronger in space than the Empire. Giving them this capability would give something that isn't in the game on their side currently to the already superior side. Plus the fact that the Y-Wing is considerably better unit-for-unit than the Tie Bomber, and likewise between the X-Wing and Tie Fighter, even as the Alliance fighters/bombers do cost credits to build and take population slots to deploy.

 

I'm agreeing that the convenience factor would be ideal, and that it would balance this one feature between the two sides. But it would negatively affect the overall game balance by giving the already superior side yet another feature they didn't have before.

 

Also on your point about taking weapons away from ships if you give them hangars: Admiral Ackbar's Home One is meant to be a carrier ship and from stats I have seen on the internet should not have more guns than a star destroyer. So if some of its guns were taken away and it was given a hangar then you would keep the carrier feeling and it would be more like it is meant to be.

That's a perfect example. If I'm playing with a fleet carrier, I want to feel some stress if it starts losing ships in its battle group, knowing it'll have to rely heavily on it's fighters and bombers to protect it, and that if it loses those it'll be up the proverbial creek without the proverbial paddle if facing a couple of remaining Empire capital ships.

 

If we had a "super ship" - a powerful, standalone battleship that also hangared squadrons of fighters and bombers - then that thing better cost a lot of credits, a lot of build time and take a lot of population slots (perhaps 6 or 7). In fact, I'd be all for a "carrier dreadnaught" too, IF it met these criteria. I'm all for anything that maintains a fair balance of benefits-to-cost.

 

And I don't want anyone to think I'm "anti-hangars-on-Rebellion-ships". I just want overall balance, because it's at the core of any truly great game as this one is.

[Heavyarms]

I think the best counterbalance to what's seen as a dominating rebel fleet (I don't agree with that at all, but this isn't the place for it) is to stick a shield generator hardpoint on all the capital ships. This way, you can neutralize their special and gain an advantage in return for fighter capabilities.

[ScorLibran]

I think the best counterbalance to what's seen as a dominating rebel fleet (I don't agree with that at all, but this isn't the place for it) is to stick a shield generator hardpoint on all the capital ships. This way, you can neutralize their special and gain an advantage in return for fighter capabilities.

I like that idea.

 

I also agree that the Rebellion isn't "dominating"...I wouldn't go so far as to describe them that way, I'll just say they're stronger in general. And I understand that others may feel differently about that too. I've even said myself that the Empire gets bigger ships earlier in the tech tree (specifically, the Victory frigate), and hence gets an early advantage coming out of the gate - as long as it's escorted by enough Tartans to protect it from Y-Wings - with anything close to a large Alliance equivalent ship coming only at the next higher tech level. But late game, it's Alliance all the way. Mon Cals and Home One can far outlast an equal number of ISDs, even Captain Piett's modified one.

 

Overall, through the entire course of the tech tree, I've found that the Rebellion has fewer vulnerabilities in space, and hence has an overall advantage in lasting-power. And a better starting space hero in the campaign. (Vader's a bad ass on the ground, but the Sundered Heart could mop him up in space.)

[Admiral Raven]

It will make the Rebellion better to have the hangar ability but if the Empire are given it too then they would both have exactly the same ability. So giving them both exactly the same ability I would have thought would balance it out again, kind of like in maths when you have the same number on the top and bottom of a fraction and they cancel each other out. The Rebels would still have to pay for their fighters and bombers and they would still take use up population and the Empire would still get theirs for free.

 

Another thought I had was that I think that for the Empire you should be able to carry troops on your capital ships because I find it doesn't feel right to have the troops transports just flying around on their own. It would also remain true to the films.

[ScorLibran]

It will make the Rebellion better to have the hangar ability but if the Empire are given it too then they would both have exactly the same ability. So giving them both exactly the same ability I would have thought would balance it out again, kind of like in maths when you have the same number on the top and bottom of a fraction and they cancel each other out. The Rebels would still have to pay for their fighters and bombers and they would still take use up population and the Empire would still get theirs for free.

Yes, but I'm talking scope here. You're comparing one feature on each side, and describing a balance within that scope. I'm talking about the game as a whole. For instance, the Empire is the only side that can hangar it's fighters and bombers in a space battle, but the Rebellion is the only side that can bypass the space battle and do planetary raids. An advantage for one side...by itself out of balance. An advantage for the other side...by itself out of balance. But put together all of the advantages of each side, as different as they are individually, and you'll see a well-balanced game.

 

For example if each side was rated on their unique advantages, and if the game were perfectly balanced, they may have 20 "advantage points" each (I've made this number up, just to have a reference). If you give hangars to Rebellion ships, you'd have to take away a point from the Empire, as it no longer has that particular advantage. Yes, the Empire had hangars to begin with, but the Rebellion already had 20 other advantages on their side, so giving them this one same feature the Empire has would negate it as an advantage for the Empire and leave the Rebellion with an overall advantage in the game (20 to 19).

 

So how about trading advantages? The Empire has hangared fighters and bombers, but the Alliance has planetary raids. Give hangars to the Alliance and the ability to raid to the Empire. I know the Empire would probably have no desire to "raid" a planet without taking it's orbital space first, but they could at least have the ability to do so. Now the game balance is 19 to 19.

 

Trade enough advantages, and then you have a group fighting against another group just like them. That'd be boring in my opinion. I like the diversity of the two sides, which is why I'm reluctant to give any of one's unique features to the other. But as I said, the Alliance using hangared fighters may be reasonable IF something else were done to counter their total of unique advantages to better match the Empire.

 

Another thought I had was that I think that for the Empire you should be able to carry troops on your capital ships because I find it doesn't feel right to have the troops transports just flying around on their own. It would also remain true to the films.

Good point, also. They'd get an advantage of better protecting their troops rather than having them float around on a helpless transport ship, with the caveat of making the ship they're on a more desperate primary target of the enemy, and hence they'd be facing another risk. The Alliance player would think, "If I don't blow up a troop transport...oh well. But if I don't blow up that Star Destroyer it'll surely kill my ships! So see, I didn't come to kill you troop guys, but since you're on the Star Destroyer now I HAVE to." The troops wouldn't be helpless on a Star Destroyer, but they might be even more of a target in a space battle.

 

It'd be interesting for game balance, I think.

[arkodeon]

I find that the Mon Calamari Cruisers beating the Imperial Star Destroyers is a little absurd.

 

Sure, the Mon Cals have two shield generators, but shouldn't the Empire have the superior technology? I have always found that the Corellian Corvette owns the Tartan, the Nebulon B Frigate owns the Acclamator, and so on.

 

Shouldn't it be the other way around? That would really force the Rebellion to use their fighters, and reserve any precious battleships until they are really needed. Give their fighters MAJOR advantages over the TIE Fighters, not just hyperdrive and shields. And don't make them cannon fodder, either. I am more apprehensive about using the X-Wings since I have to pay for them, but TIEs come free.

[Admiral Raven]

Yes, but I'm talking scope here. You're comparing one feature on each side, and describing a balance within that scope. I'm talking about the game as a whole. For instance, the Empire is the only side that can hangar it's fighters and bombers in a space battle

 

The Empire being able to hangar its ships like it can at the moment isn't much of an advantage because they get deployed as soon as they come out of hyperspace so at the moment it is just for show because TIEs don't have hyperdrives. I am talking about being able to deploy fighters on demand which no side can do.

[ScorLibran]

I agree. It's a marginal advantage at best. But it's faithful to the original storyline.

 

Control of deployment/recall of the fighters and bombers would be a great thing. I already grab groups of them and "point them" at something to guard or attack. I'm all for more control.

 

(My point previously was only regarding giving Alliance ships hangars, and the impact it would have on general game balance.)

[Admiral Raven]

OK, fair enough, I think it would still be cool to have home one as a carrier rather than a battleship because it gives it more of a command ship feeling and it would also be a bit different.

 

EDIT: I see you are over at the Heaven Games EAW forums Scor, nice to see you there I am General Neilus on it...

[Jan Gaarni]

the Nebulon B Frigate owns the Acclamator, and so on.

Well, the Nebulon-B frigate was built after the Acclamator, and for the Empire.

But many was stolen or their crew defected to the rebels which is why the rebels has them.

[gswift]

Ironically, there's a mod featured on Gamespot that does exactly the opposite of what you're wanting. It makes all of the emperial fighters/bombers deploy as soon as the cap ship enters the map, rather than three at a time. Choosing when, what, and how many to deploy would be much better, but that doesn't sound like something that can be modded.

[guyvii]

Sorry I misstyped. I wanted to say dissadvantage the empire.

 

There is no dissadvantage for the Empire at all. If the Empire can launch the fighters on demand they they will stand same chance as the rebels. The main difference between imperials and rebels is the cost. Tie fightrs are free as well as Tie bombers. On the other hand you have to pay for X-wings and Y-wings.

 

After all it is up to player to decide when he/she wants to bring in fighters don't you agree with that ?

 

Actully, the Empire can not launch its fighters and bomber on demand. They come out when the ship comes out. So if you warp in with a star destroyer when the ship appears, it starts spitting out its load. Right in a middle of a fight is the rebs are fast enought. no holding these boys in safety until you can launch in the clear.

For the rebs to have there fighters and bombers protected would be unbalancing because the Empire can not do this eather.

[wedge2211]

But then again...it's the Empire. That's how the Empire operates. Massive show of force, get all units in the combat area, engage at will. No Imperial commander worth his own neck would wait "until the situation is safe" before deploying squadrons.

[Orao]

And that says who ?

 

You really underestimate the Empire you hein !

 

Screw the Alliance and their pitty corrupted Republic.

[Gam]

deleted

[jedi3112]

I just played a bit with removing the artillary ships and I think it works a lot better now. Fighters don't get blown to bits that fast now, but still not perfect. I'm still thinking about altering the corvette and tartar. I think I'll replace the tartar with a lancer as soon as I try out modelling and texturing and stuff like that. With the corvette I plan on removing lots of guns and give it 2 turrets with a full 360 firearc. Just like the one in the movies. I also think in replacing the rockets of the gunship with lasers. I plan on making it like this:

 

Gunship and Lancer will now fire lots of shots and have a full 360 firearc

Corvette will fire a few shots and have a 360 firearc

Gunship will not have a lot of health

Corvette and Lancer will have a lot of health (well compared to the gunship at least)

Corvette will be quite cheap

Gunship will be somewhat more expensive

Lancer will be quite expensive

Victory Cruiser will be renamed to Victory Star Destroyer (as it is the VSD)

VSD may be enlarged somewhat

 

If you want I'll post what I did to get rid of the marauder and broadside, I don't have the files on this PC and I can't remember it right now. I'm sure I will when I see the files again though.