Page 1 of 2

Defend Turrets

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:32 pm
by Legacy
Why is my government even spending money to build these things, which cost as much or more than a fighter or bomber capable of taking them out, if they need to be defended? Seems a bit wasteful to me to have them sitting there, then have a couple squadrons of ships defending what are supposed to be defensive emplacements.

Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 9:41 pm
by Fighter_Ace
Oh my gosh, Legacy! You are absolutely hillarious!!! ROFL! Image

And I must say... you make a VERY good observation.

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 3:16 am
by Legacy
This game, more than almost any other I've played, illustrates the futility and stupidity of war.

From hospitals to turrets to unproductive factories and skirmishes in empty space over absolutely nothing...

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:23 am
by umeboshi110
lol, this is true...
but, at least for the turrets, though they may cost as much as a normal ship in credits, it's possible that, because of their actual physical design (ie stationary "structures"), they cost much less than the mobile ships we use.

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:31 pm
by Legacy
umeboshi110 wrote:lol, this is true...
but, at least for the turrets, though they may cost as much as a normal ship in credits, it's possible that, because of their actual physical design (ie stationary "structures"), they cost much less than the mobile ships we use.

I doubt it, they've heavier and have as many components as a regular ship. Add to that the need to be stabilized in a position in space perfectly when deployed, having to be guarded by fighters to stand a chance, and needing to be repaired, replaced, and relocated after a battle, and I think they are a poor investment.

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 5:26 pm
by Empty Hat
Could be politics? reassure the civilians that they are defended; or to make sure another segment of military command can't reassign your defences.

I mean you've got to wonder about commands sense of humour when you have a bombing mission and all that's available are fighter types when there were plenty of bombers for that defend politician mission last mission.

nice observation by the way :)

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:34 pm
by Fighter_Ace
I still have to agree with Legacy 100% on this one. It seems completely absurd to have to defend turrets - a mechanism supposed to be designed to defend it's self whilst also protecting other assets :? .

Defending radars, observatories, or a starbase is completely different. These things are unarmed and it makes sense. "support turrets" or "reinforce holding" would make a much better objective. And Legacy also makes another very important point about the comet-miners, hospitals, civilians, and starbases. Seriously, what point do they serve other than being blown up?!

Personally, I think the ship factories and repair bases should perform as they are titled. Currently they are just... objects with a small cash value to whomever takes them out. They really have no purpose for the allies defending them. Explain that... :x Talk about a waste of government funding. :x x2

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 9:36 pm
by Legacy
Empty Hat wrote:Could be politics? reassure the civilians that they are defended; or to make sure another segment of military command can't reassign your defences.

I mean you've got to wonder about commands sense of humour when you have a bombing mission and all that's available are fighter types when there were plenty of bombers for that defend politician mission last mission.

nice observation by the way :)

Soldiers who have been issued a rifle in one caliber and rounds in another over the last couple centuries would probably have to agree with you on the mental state of their superior. Or, in the case of chopper pilots in Vietnam, they were issued six round revolvers but their ammo came in multiples of seven, just like it would for those issued colt .45 pistols. So you'd have a six gun, and 21 bullets. That's enough to load three and a half times. My Government teacher, and other pilots, have told me that they carried a loaded pistol, a reload, and one round for after that...

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 5:55 am
by Old Man Johnson
Actually, heavy turrets clock in at a neat 115 credits, and supers come in at 189. Considering that a couple supers can put a serious dent in multiple enemy squadrons, I'd say they're a decent investment. And having a squadron on standby as well as static defenses is much better than just turrets alone; allied ships can pursue them and dogfight, which turrets, for obvious reasons, can't do.

As for Starbases and Factories, yeah, they're pointless. But Engine Factories only cost 37 anyway..

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:46 pm
by Empty Hat
As for Starbases and Factories, yeah, they're pointless. But Engine Factories only cost 37 anyway..[/quote]

Given how much my engines get shot off I'm glad they're there. Imagine if our ships relied only on the repair bots trying to cobble them back together, Cm units getting more ragtag with each repair, then as you hit the hyper space it all sputters out and your ship drifts lifeless into an unfueled drachan. An ignoble end but, :) trully guerilla.

Legacy. Are you familiar with the saying "Lions led by donkeys"?

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 4:05 pm
by Legacy
Empty Hat wrote:As for Starbases and Factories, yeah, they're pointless. But Engine Factories only cost 37 anyway..


Given how much my engines get shot off I'm glad they're there. Imagine if our ships relied only on the repair bots trying to cobble them back together, Cm units getting more ragtag with each repair, then as you hit the hyper space it all sputters out and your ship drifts lifeless into an unfueled drachan. An ignoble end but, :) trully guerilla.

Legacy. Are you familiar with the saying "Lions led by donkeys"?[/quote]
The allied command of the Great War?

I sometimes wish I could, after missions, scavenge for parts to repair/upgrade ships much like I can in many of the Mechwarrior/Battletech games. It would be neat, especially in some kind of defense scenario where you would defend against wave after wave of enemy, and your only way to repair(other than repair bots) would be to reallocate parts from crippled ships.

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 4:37 pm
by umeboshi110
I doubt it, they've heavier and have as many components as a regular ship. Add to that the need to be stabilized in a position in space perfectly when deployed, having to be guarded by fighters to stand a chance, and needing to be repaired, replaced, and relocated after a battle, and I think they are a poor investment.

Still, what costs more, a fighter or an AA gun in real life, even when the turret uses more material and weighs more? In CM, turrets probably don't have that "Critical Mass engine" and whatever else may be needed to maneuver in space. Just because it says they use certain parts on the game screen doesn't mean that the turrets are actually built in the exact same way. Use your imagination!

Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 5:40 pm
by TheKangaroo
Talking about imagination, for me it makes perfect sense that the factories don't actually do anything. I mean: if you were a factory worker and the whole facility was about to get bombed, would you just keep building those missiles? I for one would take a seat over in that rescue pod already (must take a little time to evacuate dozens of workers), and anyway: these battles last how long? A couple of hours at max. I think it would take days to build even a simple starship. But whatever, I don't want to ruin your parade and I guess I'd also like them buildings do something.

Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:09 am
by Legacy
TheKangaroo wrote:Talking about imagination, for me it makes perfect sense that the factories don't actually do anything. I mean: if you were a factory worker and the whole facility was about to get bombed, would you just keep building those missiles? I for one would take a seat over in that rescue pod already (must take a little time to evacuate dozens of workers), and anyway: these battles last how long? A couple of hours at max. I think it would take days to build even a simple starship. But whatever, I don't want to ruin your parade and I guess I'd also like them buildings do something.

That's a valid point. I still think the turret defense missions illustrate the futility of war in a way that would make Dalton Trumbo proud.

Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:11 am
by Empty Hat
TheKangaroo wrote:Talking about imagination, for me it makes perfect sense that the factories don't actually do anything. I mean: if you were a factory worker and the whole facility was about to get bombed, would you just keep building those missiles? I for one would take a seat over in that rescue pod already (must take a little time to evacuate dozens of workers), and anyway: these battles last how long? A couple of hours at max. I think it would take days to build even a simple starship. But whatever, I don't want to ruin your parade and I guess I'd also like them buildings do something.


But munitions facories are unlikely to be empty, they would have been producing us our beloved plectrons before they were alerted to the threat.

I personaly believe that all my factories are empty because old man Johnson's command section requisitions all the purple fireworks :o


Actually I'm suprised there isn't a turret that's all turn; they could get an intimidating 90? swivel without any thrust but none of them turn faster then 72? which is less impressive then a fighter and gives up there true advantage.