As far as I know, from what I've read, the Kol is the only capital ship that hasn't been converted into a military vessel. It was built as a military vessel.



I really agree with you here. The Kol was an especially good example as it's supposed to have combat class firepower. As we're still far from release of the game, however, we can but hope such features will be added.

yes but that is how the story gose their ships are modified civilian vesseles but the kol should look better cos that was desgined soly as a destroyer not a civilian ship with guns lol and we dont know about the other 2 races cos they are ment to be alot better than tec bu the tec get huge fleets

They are meant to be weak!

Here is my take on this problem. Someone mentioned why should we care about putting AA on capital ship while it's nowhere near as effective as using Flak frigate, that's half of the problem.


Right now Fighter/Bomber is too insignificant of a threat to Capital ships that they really matter a damn. Why should I chase down a squadron when I can take out the Mother body much easier to begin with. There are too few squadrons and they do little damage to the capship to make they really pose a threat. Frankly right now it's not that big of a much difference whether the cap ships have AA or not


My proposal is to make Bomber more lethal (about 1/3-1/2 more powerful), and in turn give the Capital ships some limited AA defense, I would say about 1/5 - 1/3 the capacity of a Flak Frigate. This means the capships will still need Flak Frigates to compose a serious defense, a lone Capship can be swarmed by bombers if it's careless. However it also offer a decrease of defensive against bombers. It's not much by individual but say a group of 3 Capital Ship should have enough defense to fence of a bomber rush. Since right now not having AA on capital ship feels too much like an artificial handicap, and that's an immersion killing point.


I have another quirk about this, if possible I'm willingly trade of the Hangar space on capital ships for AA defense. First, it's more realistic. Second, it emphasizes better the variety between ships functionality, especially that of the carriers because right now their low number of squadron, low power of their squadron and actually decent fire power of themselves make the role of the carriers not as distinguishable as I feel they should be.


Maybe the carriers should have more squadron, at the sametime remove the squadron from other capital ships but give them raw AA defense, and make the squadron more powerful. This may be a better combination.

One last thing i want to add, make the capital ships bigger. Bigger capital ships = a greater sense of awe. Like HOLY SMOKES 20 HUGE CAP SHIPS JUST JUMPED IN ! I want to have momments where im just admiring an adversary's fleet in size and eyecandy.

I want hot sexy capships, not because i feel alone, no. I want a hot sexy capship because i have eyes, and they want one ! *(spoof of that retarded wendy's hot juicy burger commercial)*

in essence I agree. their lack of AA is clearly an attempt to balance them out, but they should have SOME sort of indigenous AA capability (besides fighters). Their fighters should be their BEST defense, with a meager-but-capable-of-knocking-out-a-few-attackers-before-it-pecked-to-death backup

yea i garee totaly its just stupid not having aa any 1 wth half a brain would put aa on thier cap ship and i think that cos carrier is good at supporting bombers so it should hav aa to help with other fighters and i meen alot and little or no cap ship attacking capabilities but cos bombers be better that shouldent be to much of a problem unless it has no escorts.

Every ship should have the weapons it needs to do its job. And then job of a cap is not shotting down fighters or bombers. That's the job of the fighters it can carry or the smaller ships in the fleet. Mix your team and this discussion is useless.

hey I am in the Navy
Carriers ARE our Capital Ships. And yes they do rely on the Battle groups for overall defense, but they are formidable in their own right. Stripped off all their support ships, a carrier still packs a serious punch.

On board fighters are by the far the most potent weapon, but they are not helpless, thus position on some minor AA capabilities. It would be realistic, in a uh...intergalactic space domination game...ummm okay, I'll stop now

a ship should have basic aa as defualt it just stupid that it dosent

Capital ships do fire at enemy fighters and bombers with their secondary weapons as they're able; plus they're able to house their own fighters/bombers. If you want more fighter/bomber defense than build Flak Frigates - that's what they're there for. No ship is designed to stand alone and survive (though cap ships can certainly dish it out). Combined arms is the name of the game, just like in real life.

We're not entertaining adding more anti-fighter/bomber defense to capital ships when systems already exist in the game to handle it.

Ummm... I believe you mean to say that capital ships have the option to fire at fighters/bombers, should it be implemented, currently the code seems to exist, but here is what it looks like:

CanFireAtFighter FALSE

I checked every TEC capital ship and they are all set to that for every type of weapon on the ship...



**runs and hides**

Yarlen, if you need some help teaching lordkosc a lesson. Im here to help

multi go away!

*hides*

Well, they used to then. Multi - go beat up, lordkosc!

Who in thier right minds would build a capital ship then leave it wide open to bombers?

Yes, sexy ships are good. But effective is better. Getting abck to the topic at hand, this seems like a very major oversight. The TEC might be a lot less experienced at ship design than the other two factions, but good tactics is good tactics. Even with Flak Frigs as support vessels, ya don't send a Cap ship out without some sort of personal Point Defence. What if those flak frigs you're depending on for this role are taken out? Then what? It just seems to me that the current doctrine has a huge gaping hole in it. I can see how this would add to the TEC's naivety as a warfaring race, but even they would learn from their mistakes over time. Maybe there could be a technology at the top of the autocannon line to give them the ability to autotrack fighters. At least it would be something.

And I agree with Space Voyager on the more is better thing. Maybe a shuffle in the classing system. I like now how we went from just Frigs and Caps to having the midclass Cruisers to break up the frigates a bit. We could do the same thing with the Caps. There could be a lower class of capital ship like destroyers or Dreadnaughts, the current group of cap ships, then a race unique super capital ship. The kind of ship that is so expensive to build and maintain, that you could only have one, period. The kind of ship that is so massive in and of itself, that is has it's own gravity well, or can alter the gravity well of whatever planet it's orbiting.

Thats how the Pwnicus 1 died in Beta 1 So inexperienced I was...

*gives lordkosc a Super Wedgie* hehehe

Multi, I don't think Yarlin needs help taking care of anything. Sniper here already has one confirmed kill here on the boards.

lol kk thats good i dont want overpowered aa on cap ships i like big fleets of ships supporting each other maby have cap ships shooting fighters in the patch?

Yarlen is like Paris Hilton, drunk all the time and followed by "fans"
so he will need some help..

haha that was good, and we also should start calling him Sniper...

Okay, I notice there are a lot of posts about how unrealistic it is that the TEC capital ships don't have anti-strikecraft weapons (KOL flak being the exception). If you guys want realistic, then 3 or 4 hits from a SINGLE bomber should kill ANY capital ship. Oh, I bet there aren't many people wanting that level of realism, are there?

Bombers are already massively downgraded in power, I don't see the need to make them even less capable by equipping all capital ships with powerful point defense weapons.

Let's take a look at modern real world navies for a moment. Sure, cruisers and carriers are equipped with point defense/anti-missile missiles weapon systems. But notice that these ships almost entirely rely on layers of picket ships and fighters to defend themselves from incoming missiles and bombers.

If these real life capital ships tried to defend themselves without picket ships and fighters, they would be toasted very quickly.

Realism AND gameplay tell us that SOASE capital ships should also use layers of flak frigates and fighters to defend against bomber attacks.

*It would be neat if flak frigates could target bomber torpedos.

When i see the capital ships, i think Bismarck amd King George V.
I dont know much about the King George battleship, but for the Bismarck it took ALOT of torpedoes and bombers to take it out. It was an easy target for bombers, since it had very weak AA defences, so thats why the Bismarck was escorted by a Carrier as i remember.

But i agree, realism in games doesnt always mean fun.

If the Cap ships gets AA or not, wouldnt bother me either way