262 réponses à ce sujet

[Aimi]

Yeah, the thing about dreadnoughts in WWII was that it took an awful lot to go right for the attacking carrier planes for them to sink. HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse were only sunk because their commanding officer made a series of very serious errors (advancing beyond the range of any sort of cover whatsoever with just two capital ships and relying on the dreadnoughts' anti-air fire-control radars for defense when those radars were awaiting repair at that point). Yamato, similarly, was pretty much by itself and had no air cover. And so was the Bismarck, which notoriously gave the Royal Navy fits during the attempts to sink it. It took the Royal Navy a year of concerted attacks to destroy the Tirpitz. Both Bismarck and Tirpitz, unaccountably, operated as raiders, mostly (but not always) by themselves, a nonsensical disposition for capital ships.

And so on, and so forth.

By comparison, dreadnoughts that served as integral parts of a larger fleet remained relatively safe for basically the entire war.

[Someone With Mass]

I should mention that all the enemy has to do to counter a fleet of fighter is to launch their interceptors, spacecrafts which are specifically designed to shoot down enemy fighters.

Fighters are just meant to attack larger ships with their torpedoes.

[incinerator950]

Edit: Durp

Modifié par incinerator950, 26 janvier 2012 - 03:04 .

[SykoWolf]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...


Obviously they'd remove the useless things. The stealth system if I recall was half of the orignial normandies cost. But I'm not sure you noticed that the reapers coverage is not quite 100%. They can't quite seem to reach far enough to do anything about rear attacks, so if a few stealth ships can get behind them in some hit and run attacks then that would be just great. They wouldn't even  need stealth since they're just that fast that they can hit reapers who are concentrating on attacking other large vessles.

Well sovereign was a dreadnought and theres probably several classes of reaper ships, thus cancelling out your theory.

[Poison_Berrie]

Someone With Mass wrote...

I meant range as in how far the projectile can travel, not its effective range, which I'd imagine is limited to the ship's computers' scan range.

If you launch a slug like that in space, it'll keep going until it hits something.

The effective range is determined by at what distance the target can adjust course to get out of the projectiles range. Which is dependant on speed of projectile and size and maneuvering speed of the target.

Also it keeping on going until it hits something is a disadvantage, since the thing being hit might end up belonging to you or an ally. That's why mass drivers are probably only used if there is an insignificant to no chance of missing.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Like I said - 12000 fighters can outperform and utterly wipe the floor with 100 Normandy Mk1's.
That number of fighters literally doubles the strength of the Alliance navy!

No since a fighter is an easy target for point defense. It's kinetic barriers are no doubt a lot weaker and pointless against lasers. And at long range they can start picking them off with bigger guns and long range countermeasures. 
By the time those fighters are nearby their numbers have dwindled signifcantly. I certainly hope such fighters are actually unmanned.

darkiddd wrote...

Yes but the shielding would be the same so this still makes dreadnaughts practically useless against a dozen of cruisers or a hundred of frigates with it. 

Are we sure the shielding is the same? Do we know if the drive core also creates the kinetic barriers and whether this is directionaly proportional to the size of said drive core alone? Even so the Normandy use it's dive core as propulsion as well, so that is going to be drain as well.
Not to mention that Dreadnought would have thicker hull and more compartments. Space for redundancy (secondary bridge) and taking damage.

That pitting one dreadnought against dozen of cruisers or hundreds of frigates seem like an overwhelming odds situation regardless of armaments.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Big wuff. The Normandy was usefull because the story explicitly made it so. 
What are the chances of glactic civilization depending on a stealth frigate?

As an actual warship it's of little use.

That was never what it was designed for. It's intended for intellegence and dropping things behind enemy lines. Which it apparently does quite well.
That said it's stealth drive could be usefull for hit and run attacks on patrols or flanking.

[Wulfram]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Also it keeping on going until it hits something is a disadvantage, since the thing being hit might end up belonging to you or an ally. That's why mass drivers are probably only used if there is an insignificant to no chance of missing.

.

While this is what the game says, it's silly.  Space is too big for this to be an issue.

You might worry about this in a training exercise, or if you're engaged in routine patrols where your safety isn't threatened, but in a serious war it makes no sense.  I mean, we'll bomb the crap out of occupied friendly nations to kick out the enemy, but we won't fire because we're worried that we've got a tiny chance of hitting an inhabited planet in a millions of years?

Modifié par Wulfram, 26 janvier 2012 - 04:25 .

[Dewart]

I love how this discussion has been going. A lot of good points all around. I think at this point though the only real answer to the reaper invasion would be to have a balanced compliment of all ship classes. Humanity and the rest of the galaxy has only one possible weapon and that is to (hopefully) have superior tactics/cunning compared to the reapers. If tactics/cunning is our weapon then we need balanced forces to be able to suit any plans on the fly.

[TornadoADV]

The SR-2 is a Heavy Frigate, or in WW2 USN parlance, a Destroyer Leader. As we can see, it has the hitting power of a Cruiser, but neither the staying power or the loiter time on station. It's a glass cannon and should be treated as such, it's better suited to being the lead ship of frigate flotillas/wolfpacks then being it's own swarm or trying to be part of a Cruiser Battleline.

[Poison_Berrie]

Wulfram wrote...

While this is what the game says, it's silly.  Space is too big for this to be an issue.

You might worry about this in a training exercise, or if you're engaged in routine patrols where your safety isn't threatened, but in a serious war it makes no sense.  I mean, we'll bomb the crap out of occupied friendly nations to kick out the enemy, but we won't fire because we're worried that we've got a tiny chance of hitting an inhabited planet in a millions of years?

Or you hit the place you're trying to protect. 
Oops sorry Citadel, the enemy got out of the way.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Barhador wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Will they? 12000 fighters..that a LOT of missiles/torpedos. Small agile targets.

Assuming just 4 missiles per fighter - that's 48000 missiles.

You loose 1, you loose 1 pilot.
You loose 1 cruiser, you loose 300 people.

You lose your figthers you lose 12.000 pilots
You lose your similar priced cruiser you lose 300 people,

No. 12000 fighters is not equal to a single cruiser. Maaaabye 2 DN's.

Also, you loose a cruiser you instantly losoe a huge chunck of the firepower and 300 people.

Fighters have a  lot longer survivabiltiy agaisnt the reapers, if nothing else because of how many there are. Reapers can 1-shot cruisers. They can probably 1-shot fighters, but that's a small loss of firepwoer comparably.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Which makes 12000 fighters even more enticing.

Not really.

The Normandy has longer travel range, more utility and more mobility than a fleet of fighters. It is a lot faster to take one ship through a relay than it is for a thousand, or twelve thousand. With such small cores, I'd think that those fighters needs to discharge pretty often as well.

Besides, it's not supposed to be a frontline ship. It's supposed to sneak in undetected and drop off infiltration teams in enemy bases and carry out stealth strikes. That can sometimes be better than any fleet. Like when the Normandy snuck past the geth fleet in ME1. Good luck doing that with a fleet of fighters, carriers and cruisers.

With a fleet of fighters, carriers and crusiers, you wouldn't be sneaking in the first place.

[Wulfram]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Or you hit the place you're trying to protect. 
Oops sorry Citadel, the enemy got out of the way.

There is a specific case where you're fighting very close to a planet and the enemy chooses to use it for cover.  But your targetting computers should be easily able to warn you when that is a risk, since it's far simpler than working out how to hit an enemy craft which isn't following a simple predictable path.

And if you're trying to defend a planet, probably not a good idea to let the enemy get between you and it.

And if you're not fighting right next door to a planet, then it's only very very specific trajectories which will pose a risk.  And if a shot does go astray, you can always call them up and tell them to put a dreadnought in the way before the thing arrives.

Also, the Citadel could take it, at least with the arms closed.  Thing is freakishly tough

[Poison_Berrie]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No. 12000 fighters is not equal to a single cruiser. Maaaabye 2 DN's.

Also, you loose a cruiser you instantly losoe a huge chunck of the firepower and 300 people.

Fighters have a  lot longer survivabiltiy agaisnt the reapers, if nothing else because of how many there are. Reapers can 1-shot cruisers. They can probably 1-shot fighters, but that's a small loss of firepwoer comparably.

That does assume a reaper has only one type of weapon. Why wouldn't a reaper have point defense weapons?

[Wulfram]

I don't think Sovereign or the walking reaper in the trailer ever show any sign of having any point defence, or indeed any weapon except their main gun.

But the cinematics tend not to make much sense when compared to the codex, so I'm not sure whether we should believe that.

Modifié par Wulfram, 26 janvier 2012 - 06:02 .

[Aimi]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

With a fleet of fighters, carriers and crusiers, you wouldn't be sneaking in the first place.

With a fleet of fighters, carriers, and cruisers, you wouldn't be there in the first place, because a fleet sent into the Terminus apparently would've caused a war.

[G3rman]

I can't believe how glorified fighters are getting in this thread. Do you know the minuscule amount of firepower they provide?

12,000 fighters =/= 1 Frigate/Cruiser/Dread in terms of actual damage output.

They are like bug bites, you can't make a successful assault with just fighters. If that was possible I'm sure they would have done it against Sovereign.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No. 12000 fighters is not equal to a single cruiser. Maaaabye 2 DN's.

Also, you loose a cruiser you instantly losoe a huge chunck of the firepower and 300 people.

Fighters have a  lot longer survivabiltiy agaisnt the reapers, if nothing else because of how many there are. Reapers can 1-shot cruisers. They can probably 1-shot fighters, but that's a small loss of firepwoer comparably.

Unless the Reapers launch their Oculi, which don't have to worry about things like GARDIAN lasers or other intercepting weapons shooting down their payload like the fighters have to. 

I'd imagine that they're a lot more agile than those fighters as well. Probably don't have to worry that much about fuel either. 

And then you've wasted credits worth of 12 000 fighters which you could have spent on supplies, weapons or on reinforcing other ships with upgrades.

Not to mention that the firepower of those fighters will probably annoy the Reapers at best. The second those fighters have launched their torpedoes, they're useless and easy prey.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 26 janvier 2012 - 06:29 .

[Ganayev]

Somewhere in the codex they mentioned, that the length of space battle is limited by the amount of heat a warship produces from shooting and hits on shields. And on longer encounters the crew suffers from rising temperatures. So the bigger the ship, the more heat you can store or radiate back to space.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No. 12000 fighters is not equal to a single cruiser. Maaaabye 2 DN's.

Also, you loose a cruiser you instantly losoe a huge chunck of the firepower and 300 people.

Fighters have a  lot longer survivabiltiy agaisnt the reapers, if nothing else because of how many there are. Reapers can 1-shot cruisers. They can probably 1-shot fighters, but that's a small loss of firepwoer comparably.

That does assume a reaper has only one type of weapon. Why wouldn't a reaper have point defense weapons?

Eh? Sicne when do I assume a reaper only has 1 type of weapon?
Point defences would be shootign down fighters - I dont' think the tentacle beams are a good choice agaisnt fighters.

[Lotion Soronarr]

G3rman wrote...

I can't believe how glorified fighters are getting in this thread. Do you know the minuscule amount of firepower they provide?

12,000 fighters =/= 1 Frigate/Cruiser/Dread in terms of actual damage output.

They are like bug bites, you can't make a successful assault with just fighters. If that was possible I'm sure they would have done it against Sovereign.

How do you know the firepower of the fighter?
If shep cna carry a Cain, when can a fighter mount?

you know that single fighter today can take out a carrier, right? Firepower is becoming more and more compact with time.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No. 12000 fighters is not equal to a single cruiser. Maaaabye 2 DN's.

Also, you loose a cruiser you instantly losoe a huge chunck of the firepower and 300 people.

Fighters have a  lot longer survivabiltiy agaisnt the reapers, if nothing else because of how many there are. Reapers can 1-shot cruisers. They can probably 1-shot fighters, but that's a small loss of firepwoer comparably.

Unless the Reapers launch their Oculi, which don't have to worry about things like GARDIAN lasers or other intercepting weapons shooting down their payload like the fighters have to. 

I'd imagine that they're a lot more agile than those fighters as well. Probably don't have to worry that much about fuel either. 

And then you've wasted credits worth of 12 000 fighters which you could have spent on supplies, weapons or on reinforcing other ships with upgrades.

Not to mention that the firepower of those fighters will probably annoy the Reapers at best. The second those fighters have launched their torpedoes, they're useless and easy prey.

IIRC, fighters have guns. Regular guns. So you can't intercept those.

And how many occuli does a reaper carry? How does a cruiser fair against occuli?

Apparenlty, i nthe Me universe, fighters are powerfull enough.

[Wulfram]

I doubt really doubt fighters regular guns would do anything against a dreadnought's shields, let alone a reaper. The codex makes it clear that their role is to use torpedoes to take down the shields, leaving them open to attack from frigate and cruiser mass accelerators.

In the ME universe, Dreadnoughts have been considered the decisive arm for centuries. There's presumably a reason for that belief.

[ParagonForLife]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

I'd say that that putting Thanix cannons on every large ship would be a pretty big mistake, because that thing has probably a pretty limited range because of the magnetic field that holds the stream together, while the main gun of a dreadnought has virtually unlimited range, thanks to Newton's law.

You've got a point on the magnetic field (though you have to wonder how such a field would work on the distance it has now), but the range of a main gun of a dreadnought is bound by speed and target maneuverablity and is not unlimited.

no he meant an object in motion stays in motion unless acted upon by an outside force you can fire the main gun and it can go till the end of the universe if it doesnt hit anything 

[G3rman]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

G3rman wrote...

I can't believe how glorified fighters are getting in this thread. Do you know the minuscule amount of firepower they provide?

12,000 fighters =/= 1 Frigate/Cruiser/Dread in terms of actual damage output.

They are like bug bites, you can't make a successful assault with just fighters. If that was possible I'm sure they would have done it against Sovereign.

How do you know the firepower of the fighter?
If shep cna carry a Cain, when can a fighter mount?

you know that single fighter today can take out a carrier, right? Firepower is becoming more and more compact with time.

If they are so effective why weren't they used exclusively at the Battle of the Citadel?  Let them take out Sov if they were so strong..fact is they aren't.

[ParagonForLife]

G3rman wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

G3rman wrote...

I can't believe how glorified fighters are getting in this thread. Do you know the minuscule amount of firepower they provide?

12,000 fighters =/= 1 Frigate/Cruiser/Dread in terms of actual damage output.

They are like bug bites, you can't make a successful assault with just fighters. If that was possible I'm sure they would have done it against Sovereign.

How do you know the firepower of the fighter?
If shep cna carry a Cain, when can a fighter mount?

you know that single fighter today can take out a carrier, right? Firepower is becoming more and more compact with time.

If they are so effective why weren't they used exclusively at the Battle of the Citadel?  Let them take out Sov if they were so strong..fact is they aren't.

thats because only the alliance has any large numbers of carriers the turians and asari build dreadnoughts but the alliance build carriers because carrier numbers arent restricted like dreadnoughts are 5:1 means that the alliance has to wait untill 5 Turian Dreadnoughts are built to build a single one so instead they build dozens of carriers which have no limit