Topic: 20th Century Technology vs 24th Century Technology

[MrCue]

20th Century Technology.
Tomohawk - Long range (2780km) Tatical Missile. Hit chance 99.9%
Laser Guided Bomb - Short Range(1km?) Bomb. Hit Change 80% (increases with skill of pilot or bomber)
CIWS - Short range Defence (500m?) Machine gun. Hit chance 90% (1000 rds/pm = wall of lead to stop incoming projectiles)
Mines - can be set to detonate when certain magnetic shapes enter their range, thus reducing the number of "friendly" casulties
Rifle - As good as the shooter, a good sniper can hit a moving target at 600m+


24th Century Technology
Quantum (all other torps included in this) - Long range (55000km?) Tatical Missile. Hit chance 20%
Point defence? errm, what. we seem to have forgot about that in the 24th Century (could be classed as shields)
Mines - will explode whether or not the target is friendly, lack of Magnetic mines that would stick to enemys hulls(?)
K-Disruptors- Seem to ignore the fact that a computer is calculating the variables, disruptors travel faster than bullets but the computer forgets to "Aim Off" to compensate for movement of target.


Now Ideas for improvement.
Seeking weapons:- Quantums, Photons, Polarons, Plasmas - why aren't they seeking weapons? surley during the next 400 years someone will invent a better guidance system for weapons. Especialy when the target is not moving.
Point Defence:- Where are they? someone must have updated the CIWS to defend againt seeking weapons, shuttles and mines. and if they havent then let us mount CIWS thats got to be better than nothing.
Mines:- Why cant they hit the selected target? or at least not detonate on friendly targets. how about removing those silly rings? since when did mines Tell us where they are?
K-Disruptors:- Why cant the computer make the correct adjustments as to where to fire? Klingon Academy lets you turn off the computer and Aim manualy. I could do a better job at hitting targets than a level 5 Computer.



Just my rants and raves, thought i would share them all with you.
anyone else got any thoughts about all this? or maybe more Flaws in the game?

[Son of Technobabble]

Two words:
Balance Reasons.

[Son of Technobabble]

Oh, and a sniper's bullet doesn't travel at warp speeds

[MrCue]

neither does a ship at impulse

[Vysander]

i'd assume also that the state of the art ships have extremely good jamming devices which would knock off any guidance systems or to make firing really really hard (so maybe that's why we don't have drones anymore... everyone has scout sensors out the wazoo to break lock-ons)

[Son of Technobabble]

Well, right now homing missiles have a limited maneuverability and they travel at speeds way below c. So, theoretically, having a warp travelling projectile perform heavy trajectory corrections would be really hard. That's what I meant at first. However, seeker (and I really mean it) torpedos were seen at STVI, so it would be possible. But I don't think you would like a Q-Torp multivolley to home for you

I have to agree, though, about mines. The red rings are probably (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm clueless about SFB) needed elements in SFB, but now I can't see the point of having everyone see where mines are, and therefore, avoiding them (or at least trying to). But then again, this leads to a serious balance problem. AMs are overpowered, or at least that's what some people say. Now remove the warning ring and modify them so they only explode on enemy targets. With such a weapon...who would ever need just about anything else?  

[Vysander]

well... we're not really going at warp in this game..... since movement on speeds 1-100 is based on impulse power, 100 is c

So the fight is at sublight until someone hits the 'w' button

[Son of Technobabble]

Quote:
well... we're not really going at warp in this game..... since movement on speeds 1-100 is based on impulse power, 100 is c

So the fight is at sublight until someone hits the 'w' button  

True enough. Ships travel at sublight. Torps travel at warp. Anyway, I'm not so sure about speed 100 being c. Ships at warp travel at speed 200, and still, torps are way faster...

[Vysander]

we'll put that down as a graphical glitch lol....

blah.. going to make me yank out my star trek books and look it up...

Edit:  Photon torpedos generally do not fly at warp speed unless fired AT warp.  Star Trek Technical Manual, page 129

[Whiplash]

Take all these ideas and apply them to a new science fiction starship and/or battlefield combat game. In order to balance them in this game, it'd mean a total rewrite. Also its not canonical "Trek".

But they're very cool ideas. I'd love to see a sci-fi game that involved technology that "felt" truly advanced and deadly, but which also had extremely good countermeasures. All of Star Trek's weaponry does not really feel advanced to me. They seem like relatively primitive weapons with sci-fi glitzy wrappings.

W.
 

[Arcilte]

These are all good points but a game in which all weapons would hit wouldn't make the game very fun. Just throw strategy out the window. (or eject it in to space )  

[Vysander]

I still miss drones and seeking plasma though

[Tulmahk]

Well, as a long time SFC2 player who usually played Rom, I don't miss the ineffective, slow seeking plasma at all.  All your opponent had to do was go speed 31, and you were basically screwed.  Oh, you could get to within range 2 or 3 and then fire your plasma, but at those speeds even at that range you were only going to do half-damage or even less.

When it comes to plasma, there were no good old days.  Say what you will about modern plasma, at least it can catch up to the target.  

[ghostcamel]

Quote:
Well, as a long time SFC2 player who usually played Rom, I don't miss the ineffective, slow seeking plasma at all.  All your opponent had to do was go speed 31, and you were basically screwed.  Oh, you could get to within range 2 or 3 and then fire your plasma, but at those speeds even at that range you were only going to do half-damage or even less.

When it comes to plasma, there were no good old days.  Say what you will about modern plasma, at least it can catch up to the target.    

As an ISC player, i loved plasma... with a side of PPD. Together the plasma came into its own, because of the long reach and damage of the PPD compared to many of the other weapons, enemies would often seek to "close the distance" Straight into my waiting plasma launchers.

Fun times.

[Rod O'neal]

Quote:
The red rings are probably (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm clueless about SFB) needed elements in SFB, but now I can't see the point of having everyone see where mines are, and therefore, avoiding them (or at least trying to). But then again, this leads to a serious balance problem. AMs are overpowered, or at least that's what some people say. Now remove the warning ring and modify them so they only explode on enemy targets. With such a weapon...who would ever need just about anything else?  

Actually, in SFB mines that were dropped from the ship or laid before the start of the scenario, as in a minefield, were hidden. you didn't know they were there until you ran them over. There were some exceptions to this rule, minesweepers travelling at very slow speed could detect them, grab them with a tractor, and phaser them. Mines laid by transporter were visible because you picked up the transporter's signature.  Mine warfare and scout functions are almost non-existant in SFC, unfortunately.  

[Cleaven]

Quote:
Well, as a long time SFC2 player who usually played Rom, I don't miss the ineffective, slow seeking plasma at all.  All your opponent had to do was go speed 31, and you were basically screwed.  Oh, you could get to within range 2 or 3 and then fire your plasma, but at those speeds even at that range you were only going to do half-damage or even less.

When it comes to plasma, there were no good old days.  Say what you will about modern plasma, at least it can catch up to the target.    

Dear oh dear oh dear. I must have cheated all those times. Or maybe I was playing against the AI with the Captains Edition patch. I don't remember but I must have been doing something wrong.  

[Son of Technobabble]

Quote:

Actually, in SFB mines that were dropped from the ship or laid before the start of the scenario, as in a minefield, were hidden. you didn't know they were there until you ran them over. There were some exceptions to this rule, minesweepers travelling at very slow speed could detect them, grab them with a tractor, and phaser them. Mines laid by transporter were visible because you picked up the transporter's signature.  Mine warfare and scout functions are almost non-existant in SFC, unfortunately.    

Now I know a bit more about SFB, thanks. But if it wasn't a SFB rule then I just can't understand why'd they put it here. OR why did they remove the ability to tractor and phaser mines. That would stop the let's-tractor-you-into-my-little-AMs tactic.
IMO mines should be restricted to 2-3 and be better weapons, not so dumb. That would add some to the tactical planning part.  

[Draco]

Quote:
Actually, in SFB mines that were dropped from the ship or laid before the start of the scenario, as in a minefield, were hidden. you didn't know they were there until you ran them over. There were some exceptions to this rule, minesweepers travelling at very slow speed could detect them, grab them with a tractor, and phaser them. Mines laid by transporter were visible because you picked up the transporter's signature.  Mine warfare and scout functions are almost non-existant in SFC, unfortunately.    

A mine field, cool. That would be a nice addition to the planet/starbase/shipyard assault missions. Have maybe 20-30 AMMs around the planet or base as a first defense perimeter, with a few more scattered around the map, something you would have to punch through before being able to get into weapons range. Naturally the number of mines should/could go up with a higher defense value and be able to distinguish between friend and foe. If cloaking would allow someone to pass over a mine without it blowing up we could see a new reason to be Romulan. As a way of getting people to band together they might also be set so that they are more easily detected with more than one ship in game for triangulation purposes. This would also open up for a new device, a specialized mine detector to fill that otherwise unused hardpoint next to the computer in the non-cloaking races. As I understand it, one of the problems that have some up in arms about the ineffectiveness of a cloaking device is that the non-cloaking races have so much room that they can more often than not have a computer with the anti-cloaking scan, thus negating an otherwise significant edge. This would certainly fix that by forcing players to decide which is more important to see, mines, or cloaked ships.  

[Firestorm]

A mine field map would be an interesting addition.

cloaked mines, hmmmmm, dunno about that one.

A new pulse weapon that sets off mines for some distance in front of you could be interesting.

I would still like to see mines on the sensor display, maybe only when zoomed all the way in on it.

[762]

Yeah those minefields added a whole dimension to base assaults. Minesweepers suddenly became a real important variant.

Add that to the GAW wish list: SFB mine warfare rules.