In the newly imagined hit-series Battlestar Galactica, the capital ship had a very sophisticated Flak defense array capable of projecting a dense Flak shield around the battlestar. Now, I have to ask the Ironclad developers, have they ever seen the Anti-SC capabilities of a capital ship in that series? Well it looks like this:
That is a lot of Flak. Also in the series, we've seen on television how effective these Flak shields can be taking down several cylon raiders on several occasions on television. Battlestars were equipped with hundreds... of point-defense turrents that created the lightshow you see in the above picture.
In Star Wars Episode III, we saw dense capital ship Anti-Aircraft fire from the first minute.
In any canon Star Wars hand-book of ships, it lists major capital ships such as Star Destroyer as carrying several AA-missile batteries and AA-Ion cannons in addition to its TIE squadrons for a secondary line of Anti-SC defense.
In real life, the battleship - the epitome of what is considered a "capital ship" - is literally a moving Flak platform on wheels. The largest battleship ever created The Yamato had over 150 Type 96 25mm cannons, and over 25 type 93 13mm triple AA machine guns, other ships indeed almost any ship worth anything in battle carried Flak guns. Naval battles in the pacific tended to be massive Flak vs. Strike Craft contests with a lot of puff puff clouds covering the sky for miles.
The question is why then can't Capital Ships get Flak in this game? Yes, there are several caps (1-2 for each each) that has an anti-SC ability such the Kol Flak Burst, or the Dunov's Magnetize but does that really make up for Capital Ships not even having a small built in Flak defense system? No, not really.
Yes, there are a specialized type of frigate: the Flak Frigate that is meant to be the primarily Flak defense for ships in SINs but does that mean unless you always bring along Flak Frigates your capital ships will always be completely defenseless against SC? Yes, it does (not counting the starting 1-2 strike craft your non-carrier capital ships get)
What I propose is: give all capital-ships a general weak Flak capability equal to 2-3 Flak Frigates.
Why we should give Capital Ships Flak. (And Starbases)
Capital Ships loved to be focused fired on by strike craft from all types of players. They see the biggest thing on the battlefield and want to take it out. This means, Capital Ships are always in near-constant danger of strike craft every game that goes onto the mid-game. You cannot count on your Anti-matter abilities because you may not have any, and your starting SC will not be able to really protect you unless you've spammed them in the form of light carriers. This extra protection however slight is needed.
The philosophical question really is: Why shouldn't huge capital ships (and even larger Starbases) that are very expensive and valuable not be able to protect themselves against SC without relying on abilities or your own SC - even slightly? They may not even good at it, they may not be effective at it, but they should be able to fire back. In WW2, Flak was nessecarily the best option for taking down planes, and options such as interceptors were better, but that is no reason to completely strip capital ships from having it.
Why Capital Ship Flak is balanced.
The weak to moderate strenght Flak equipped on Capital Ships would only be a second to third line of defense for the capital ships against enemy-SC. Mass Flak Frigates would still be much more effective than relying solely on a Cap's light Flak defense, and your own fighter SC would also be much more effective. Essentially the balance will be unchanged from what it is right now, it'll only be just that now Capital Ships can shoot back and lightly dmg enemy SC swarming around them. Flak Frigates will NOT be obsolete (agent of Karma), Fighter SC will still be more effective, and enemy SC focus-firing on capitals will still be just as effective. Like I've mentioned, this is a humble change.
"We can live without Flak for capital ships, but do we really want to? Also on very principle we shouldn't. We owe it to the Science Fiction Genre. "
Why Starbase Flak is needed.
Everything that applied to capital ships applies here, except that Starbases in addition to being huge, expensive, and valuable, they are immobile. Strike Craft could simply avoid them, and they will be a zero threat. Now, for players attempting to assault these structures, they could send SC but its perfectly flesible and realistic they will take losses. Carrier Strike Craft, should not be able to jump in on the other side of the grav well released their strike craft, wait for a few minutes while the strike craft do their dirty work (without taking any losses, due to the lack of flak guns) then jump out once the Starbase dies. Yes, Starbases can have up to several SC of their own, but that is only available after multiple upgrades you need to buy. Starbases should already start out with built-in Flak or at least make it a cheap upgrade.
Babylon 5 station's defense grid. Interceptor Station Point Defense Guns.
Specifics: Give the Akkan, Progenitor, and the Jarrasul a moderate Flak capability.
All the other capital ships and starbases will have a weak Flak equal to 2-3 Flak Frigates, however the Mothership type capital ship I adovcate for a moderate Flak ability equal to about 3-4 Flak Frigates.
The Akkan should receive moderate Flak abilities.
Again not much of a leg up, but still important. This makes these ships even better and helps protect your fleet in the immediate radius. The reasoning for this is, Flak is a support/defense ability these ships could have in contrast to the battleship capitals with their high hp + dmg and the command caps with their great abilities. This gives player an addition reason to go with these ships as their first capital ship knowing it will be very useful even in late-game battles vs. just slightly useful in combat.
PLEASE NOTE: This thread is not here to discuss Flak balance vs. Strike Craft Carrier balance. That is for another thread, and there are plently of them out there. Please do not post something like: "Great idea, but it's all unless without a carrier fix and a general buff to flak" [I actually agree with this, but keep it in another thread]
This is Silfarion's three criteria for adding in a change to the game. That I agree with.
1. It's balanced.
2. It fits the theme of the game and what the developers had in mind.
3. It works with minimal fuss or change.
---------------------
1. - Topic for debate. I say Yes.
2. - Yes, and double Yes. I have to ask, do the developers even watch BattleStar Galactica?
3. - Yes, and triple yes. It is easily implemented and won't create much of a fuss, (except for diehards out there such as Hack87, who won't like this idea no matter how humble)
I make sure to make all my trends very specific, full of examples, and with a Rebuttal section to combat the diehards out there, who hate new ideas no matter what they are. It is my hope that most people will see the merits of this humble proposal despite the over-the-topic critics that will surely seek to destroy this thread with everything they can muster.
Objections & Rebuttal COLUMN (read this first for all you diehards out there)
— "This isn't really needed"
Having cherry on a Ice-Cream Sunday isn't needed, but it's good and moreover it's "right". If we were to simply not do a change because it wasn't crucially needed and we only did things when it was absolutely nessecary in today's society then we would not have video games, ice cream, ... toilets. This change really implements the spirt of the genre and a humble change that will not cause any problems for balance.
— "Capital Ships already have 2 things to deal with squadrons ... It's a bad idea then, its a bad idea now."
Some Capital Ships have two thing to try to deal with SC, but with 1 they fail completely, the other is very micro/anti-matter dependent. I'm talking about of course their own SC, and their own capitial ship abilities that some ships have. The flaw in the first one is that the number of squadrons a cap carries (1-3 max) will almost never be enough to really protect it against enemy swarms. Second, the abilities are anti-matter dependent and highly situational. None of these 2 give a good reason why capitals shouldn't have a reliable built in Flak both in game-terms and philosophically.
— "Capital Ships aren't supposed to be a one-ship fleet, they support, and need support... they need Flak Frigates ad fighters already with them. Capital Ships are limited by hardcoding to three weapons systems..."
They're not. Capital ships will still very much need support to be effective. Giving capital ships a weak Flak will not by any means make them one-ship conquer all wonders. Flak Frigate support will still be very much desired, Fighter support will still be very viable. As for hardcoding, there are mods out there that already has this as a feature, so we know its all very much possible.
A collection of quotes from around the Forums. Credit goes out to all involved as well as +1 Karma.
Defending against Diehard fanatics, is hard work. If you like my ideas and my comprehension threads (along with the effort I put into them) feel free to give me some Karma.
Thanks, for everyone who will support me.
Ice Cream SUNDAE, not sunday.
Although I agree 100% with the rest of your post, capital ships should have flak which AT LEAST equal to a single flak frigate. It would be nice if capital ships had lots of flak guns, although still maybe only equal in effectiveness to 2-3 flak frigates. Besides the obvious gameplay improvements, it would just look SO COOL for 12+ flak guns to be shooting in every direction in the middle of a battle
I certainly agree that Starbases need a reasonable amount of flak. I don't like gettng carrier swarmed...
Capital ships have 2 things already to deal with squadrons. Also this is not a new idea, someoeen already posted this. It was bad idea then and it's a bad idea now.
Thank you for contributing to the Sunday Rebuttal section!
Gentlemen, I wish to start off by saying its not only about the mere absolutes, nor is it about balancing against strike craft - it isn't. It's about the spirit and style of the very genre of science-fiction itself. Regardless of how you feel about strike craft, there is no good reason for capital ships to absolutely have no Flak at all absolutely. Does this make sense in science-fiction terms?
Unless Brian Fraser himself comes in here and states: Capital Ships (except for the few wirh SC abilites) shouldn't have Flak on principle, I refuse to believe it. I believe this point really does fall to our side of the house and something the opposition (everyone who rejects this proposition) cannot have as shown by the multiple examples given by the proposition.
Please consider this question when you make your responses.
Now I yield the to Mr. Marc Paris.
Well CreditSuisse, I don't have problem currently against SC, so for me it's not really needed to add some flak power to all capital whereas several capital in all nations have already anti SC abilities.
Sins capital ships are not supreme ships with no flaws.
about starbases, their best defenses vs SC is SC itself.
and remember as far as friendly SC is out of carrier friendly flak should stay quiet in order to avoid any firendly fire...you can't have at the same time flak+friendly SC to cover.
Capital ships aren't supposed to be a one-ship fleet, they support, and need support of the fleet, in which case there should be flak frigates and fighters already with them, also a Cap of each race has powerfull anti SC ability, which with proper micro is devastating. Besides (i may be mistaken on this) Capital Ships are limited by hardcoding to three weapon systems, all of which are used by all Caps, so this necesseraly isn't as easily implemented as you think. Nice job with the representation, though.
Everyone thank you so much for feedback on this subject but I want to warn everyone that very soon a known troll: Hack87 will most likely come in here with a red herring/straw man argument then pretending this entire idea is worthless.
I really hope this won't happen but in my experience this troll always comes into threads like this seeking to shred ideas and spew hate on posters and people.
Here's a warning against Hack87, please look at this idea on its own merits rather than the troll's demagoguery.
I agree with the idea of flack guns on cap ships and star bases, I came to the same conclusion a few days back using battlestar galatica as an example. Its like you either read my post or my mind lol. I do not think that it would unbalance the game at all, in fact it would actually give caps some more purpose and make them not suck as much. It would def need to be a develper update bcause the number of gun types is hard coded.
***
3. - Yes, and triple yes. It is easily implemented and won't create much of a fuss, (except for diehards out there such as Agent of Karma, who won't like this idea no matter how humble)
Incorrect, young padawan. Unless the Devs have (finally) lifted it, there is an engine limitation of 3 weapons per craft, and most (if not all) capital ships already have all three. So you'd have to strip a weapon to add the flak. Which means you're going to be playing with balance to a greater, or lesser, degree.
Lets take the Kol:
Autocannon, Laser, and Beam
'Obviously' you can't remove the beam weapons, which are it's primary damage dealers. So you can remove Autocannon -- which you upgrade to increase the Kol's 'area of effect' firepower, because they are focused on the sides. Or, you can remove the lasers, which (early game) are the primary upgrade effect for forward firepower.
Sure, it's a small balance shift... but it's there, and it's not going to make people very happy.
I thought SINs' battles alreagy looked better than Battle Star Galatica. I like the idea of weak flak additions because they would 'look' neat, and if it were balanced I would love the change. Still there is already a ship in Sins that offers this.
Perhaps a better approach than adding interceptors or making Caps more powerful, would be to slow down the speed of strike craft. This would both lower their DPS and make them easier to be taken down by the weapons capships already have.
I think a very simple mod could do this.
The greatest problem with the idea of adding flack, is that it cuts into the niche of the flak cruiser. The flak cruiser needs to be fixed quite simply. A guard command where you assign it to protect a target (like a capital ship, a starbase, or anything) would have the exact effect you are looking for. Increasing the range would help a great deal as well.
to many pictures
but otherwise i like the idea
lol credit, you always go hardcore in your suggestions, most regular suggestion just look lazy now lol.
I Supports! Maybe make it the toned down flak we have now, and then boost the power of regular flak ships, beacuse a ship specially designed for flak should be stronger against fighters (exept for the carrier caps perhaps).
Unless you made it so that the auto cannons could target fighters, for TEC it is the same weapon type between autocannons and flak friggates so logically it should be able to damage a fighter right?
Wanna know why big cap sihps no longer (even exist) have lotta flak? Because FLAK is useless against fighter/bombers. Fighters/Intercepters are useful. (seriuosly, would you want a MiG29/F18 or a ship with lots of flak?
Then for the game world, I nearly play as TEC because of the Kol flak burst..
I find Advent Halcyon's Telekinetic Push more useful. It not only damages strikecraft, but scatters them all over aswell.
yes and combine that with the energy cooldown buff effecting near by DVs and that other cap using vertigo and the other cap using reverie makes it so that SCs are pretty usless unless your oppnet has a shit load
IMO this could be solved somewhat if you had more control over the fleets formation. The Navy surrounds its capital ships (Carriers today) with special purpose ships in more or less a defensive ring. Carriers do have some defensive AA weapons (Sea Sparrow missiles, and Phalanx 20MM guns) so I think that is a good idea to an extent. The carriers primary offensive and defensive weapons are its fighter aircraft.
What Sin's has a hard time modeling is the difficulty (but not impossible) that a properly defended capital ship should encounter in such a layered defense. Now to be fair, it is a game not a fleet simulator. As other have stated there are play balances to consider. Real fleets take great lengths to try and keep capital ships out of harm’s way. What fun would that be in this game?
I completely agree with CreditSuisse, its illogical that capital ships and starbases dont have at least minimal amount of flak. dont be afraid, it will be cool, and if u want to defend against larger amount of SC, u will still have to have a lot flak frigates.
i find that setting fleet formationsto tight is usually enough tho
Hmm... upon further consideration, a starbase with 6 or so hangars surrounding it is cooler than just a starbase - that is, if the whole argument is still "it looks cool/scifi".
We can obviously see what kind of time you put into this suggestion and it is a very good suggestion. A cap ship, or a starbase, that can tear apart frigates, given enough time, falls victim to small SC and it doesn't even get a chance to defend itself. Come on, especially if the guy jumps in on one side of the well, sends in his strikecraft, murders everything in the well, and jumps back out before you know what happened.
Isnt there a thing in the entity files under the weapons on each ship that says:
Target Strikecraft or something, I remember when poking around I saw that and all the ships besides SC and Flak had it saying no, so for a test one could enable lets say the weaker guns of the cap ships and starbases to this option to yes. And from there can determine if it is balancable.
Hey that's me lol. Hehe. Yeah great post. Hopefully they will finally take this seriously and add flak to Cap Ships and Starbases.
Agree that flak makes sense for capitals/starbases, but as others have mentioned there is the three weapon limit in Sins.
I would suggest research to let capitals hit strikecraft with secondary weapons. There could be more research one or two labs up the tech tree that increases the chance to hit stikecraft(say 10% base with 4 or5 levels that give ~10% increase in chance to hit). In-universe it could be explaned as special targeting programs/sensors that permit traking and firing on quick and agile strikecraft.
Balance wise it would be important to have strikecraft be very low for targeting priority by capitals so they only go after them if there are no other enemies nearby.
I had a similar idea for starbases here
this is not a "new" idea
BUT this is needed
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
