SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Discuss ships, sections, and designs.
User avatar
RobAK801
Doomsayer
Posts: 1400
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:19 pm

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by RobAK801 » Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:08 am

usermist2 wrote: *snip* They'll also hold much less fuel, so I'm guessing that there will be no tanker or extended range roles for DEs.

I think that many of the specialized DE roles will be taken over by CR sized vessels, we already have a CR ER section. I can see a CR tanker class it could be like the refinery we have now but slightly cheaper without the refine fuel ability with the Support DN taking over the traditional refinery role.

I think we may see many DE roles switched to CR mission or command section roles. Jammer and WW command sections would be nice. The DE class will be mostly combat support (PD, Armor, Torp, Spinal, etc) like oversized drones, or I could be totaly wrong, just wait and see! :D
N* makes me miss my Commadore 64 and my copies of Starflight I + II :(

SolForce Grunt 1: With the Suul'ka on the loose Command has issued a F.U.C.K. You order.
SG2: A what?
SG1: A Fight Until Cthulu Kills You order!

User avatar
Remnant
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:00 am

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Remnant » Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:57 pm

Yeah, I see little reason why DE battleriders would not be focused on combat-related abilities.

I can also imagine cloaked battleriders, shielded battleriders, maybe jammer/EW-battleriders and planetary assault (biowar, bombardment, assault shuttle carrying ect.)
- And the horror of entanglement-battleriders with entanglement on "autocast" or something 8)

... and drone-carrying battleriders... :lol: (that's gotta be a lotta' small, swirly things)

(hey, hey; imagine this - a LV carrying some DN battleriders, which again carries CR battleriders, which again carries DE battleriders, which again carries drones! :insane: )


Ah, imagination goes wild... *drools*
"When the going gets tough - the tough hide under the table"

"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science"

User avatar
RobAK801
Doomsayer
Posts: 1400
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:19 pm

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by RobAK801 » Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:49 am

Riders on riders seems kind of redundant to me. I don't see the devs doing that, ie no drone/assault shuttle DEs. Why use what little space you have on a DE for a rider mounting when you could put weapons on it and carry the drones/assult shuttles on a bigger heavier armed and armoured CR+ sized ship.

Edit: fixed typo
N* makes me miss my Commadore 64 and my copies of Starflight I + II :(

SolForce Grunt 1: With the Suul'ka on the loose Command has issued a F.U.C.K. You order.
SG2: A what?
SG1: A Fight Until Cthulu Kills You order!

User avatar
Coyote27
Posts: 2958
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 5:13 am

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Coyote27 » Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:01 am

DE-sized assault shuttles might be more likely. Zuul already have wraiths, after all.
"In the absence of any orders, go find something and kill it." -Erwin Rommel

User avatar
Remnant
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:00 am

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Remnant » Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:31 pm

Mostly meant as a joke :roll:
- though I could see how DEs with high-yield drones might be effective against other squadrons of DE, or light defenses, or ships that are not primarily combat-oriented.


And DE sized assault shuttles doesn't sound unreasonable.
"When the going gets tough - the tough hide under the table"

"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science"

Anaris
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Anaris » Tue Mar 02, 2010 5:32 pm

we're fighting in a bigger area, and finding the enemy is important. a cruiser or destroyer that can deploy drones could be a useful scout-in-force, tying the enemy up with smaller ships until true battle-oriented fleet elements can arrive to engage.
look, i'm being nice.

Allattar
Posts: 2161
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 6:52 pm

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Allattar » Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:35 pm

Lol all that wasted space on an LV carrying big ships that carry smaller ships to carry destroyers.

Why not if you wanted a lot of little ships, just carry a lot of little ships :) your giving up firepower on the cruisers and carried DN's to carry de's :)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
Every darn time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
shadow wolf wrote:Sorry to be so English.

Anaris
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Anaris » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:56 pm

we assume that a cruiser, since it's a class defined by size, that contains DEs uses the same space as a cruiser that doesn't.

we also know that cruisers will be capable of faster movement than DEs - ie, faster than light, and given the larger area of engagement we're dealing with (whole systems), it is possible that local ftl travel would be useful for deployment.
look, i'm being nice.

User avatar
Coyote27
Posts: 2958
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 5:13 am

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Coyote27 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:29 am

I expect that node missiles will be a cruiser-sized engine frame with either three/four missiles on it, or a single large missile possibly with multiple warheads. Node biomissiles would be great as well.
Or perhaps selectable warheads :o , so you could choose a single large bomb, conventional or corrosive missile submunitions, torpedoes, a COL deployer, biomissiles, or other things we haven't though of.
"In the absence of any orders, go find something and kill it." -Erwin Rommel

User avatar
SpardaSon21
Posts: 1869
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:24 am

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by SpardaSon21 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:34 am

As long as I can stick an area-of-effect antimatter warhead in my Node Missiles, consider me happy.

User avatar
Profound_Darkness
Posts: 3700
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:46 am

Re: SOTS 2:Battlerider speculation

Post by Profound_Darkness » Thu Mar 04, 2010 3:28 am

Something to consider for those very small ships (drones, assault shuttles) is that they are very short range. They are short range STL. The riders (DEs) are long range STL, no FTL. Carriers are FTL. So I can see a situation where a Cruiser carrier pops out of FTL, deploys a couple of DE riders, which then deploy a couple of high speed drones for scouting duty... eventually those little drones come back and redeploy...

For all we know, you have to put an STL engine section on a 'rider' in order to dock with the carrier. So a way to keep you from having nested eggs (LV carrying DNs, carrying CRs... etc) would be to have the carrier part require FTL, or even make it a single section ship.
Mecron wrote:... "Hey aliens!! Candygram from the planet of crazy talking monkeys!!" ...

my fav tactical w/fav races :)

Post Reply

Return to “The Ships”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests