Galaxy Gunship - Page 2

SpcFarlen · 2012-06-02, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Pepsi

I don't like the idea of all the GG's guns pointing in one direction because I can see a good VS Scythe pilot being able to stay in the Galaxy's blind spot and be able to win a 1 on 1 against a 12(?) man ship.

Maybe others don't share my ideals about the Galaxy but I don't think one Scythe should be able to take on a fully loaded GG. The Scythe (as well as all the other air supremacy fighters) already have the speed and maneuverability advantage over the Galaxy or the GG. it should take a combined effort to down a loaded GG or Galaxy.

Not every craft should be able to counter every other, at least in my thinking though it looks that wont be the case. Its the trade off in the design. Thats why i said have it be a cert option so it can become a very focused fire based platform. Where yes, that is its weakness. So it should not be used on its own but with support along with it.

Blackwolf · 2012-06-02, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Pepsi

I don't like the idea of all the GG's guns pointing in one direction because I can see a good VS Scythe pilot being able to stay in the Galaxy's blind spot and be able to win a 1 on 1 against a 12(?) man ship.

Maybe others don't share my ideals about the Galaxy but I don't think one Scythe should be able to take on a fully loaded GG. The Scythe (as well as all the other air supremacy fighters) already have the speed and maneuverability advantage over the Galaxy or the GG. it should take a combined effort to down a loaded GG or Galaxy.

See I have to disagree. I think it should depend on what the vehicle is geared for, not it's man power. The same argument doesn't hold much water compared to, say, a WWII air craft carrier. All it really takes is a good hit from a 1 man fighter plane on the right spot and you can sink a floating city. These kinds of hits happened even against aircraft supported by other ships with heavy armament.

A galaxy gun ship geared towards ground combat should have difficulties when facing even 1 air superiority fighter.

I will agree that it shouldn't be as easy as flanking the right side.

Pepsi · 2012-06-02, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

See I have to disagree. I think it should depend on what the vehicle is geared for, not it's man power. The same argument doesn't hold much water compared to, say, a WWII air craft carrier. All it really takes is a good hit from a 1 man fighter plane on the right spot and you can sink a floating city. These kinds of hits happened even against aircraft supported by other ships with heavy armament.

A galaxy gun ship geared towards ground combat should have difficulties when facing even 1 air superiority fighter.

I will agree that it shouldn't be as easy as flanking the right side.

I shudder at a game where one well (or random) placed shot can destroy even the beefiest of targets. There are some things we should take from reality, but I think the "randomness" factor of real life should stay in real life. The rules of gaming should be as consistent as the rules of Chess. There should be no random occurrences like a pawn countering a rook about to capture it.

I suppose I don't have a problem with the #1 ranked pilot being able to down a GG consistently, but I just want to make sure the GG isn't a flying matchbox. In my view a GG should be able to hold its ground against an average Scythe pilot, but soloing a GG should be something only the aces can perform.

Peacemaker · 2012-06-03, 08:45 PM

The whole idea behind this is that it would require team work to protect a GG. It's supposed to be an ground pounding death machine but it needs a vulnerability, that would be enemy aircraft. The solution is escort aircraft. This mirrors real life. AC 130s have lots of jamming equipment and some flares. They have zero anti air offensive ability. The GG in PS1 was able to shred enemy aircraft, it didn't need escorts. The new one should, that's why I advocate putting the guns on one side.

Also as a side idea, I think the new GG should have a slot for a person to designate targets, and I don't think it would be horrible to give him a tail gun. Coordination of the guns would be cool.

TeaReks · 2012-06-03, 09:40 PM

If 5 people are needed to crew the GG then 5 air superiority fighters should be able to kill it no problem. Four should have a harder time and so on.

Sledgecrushr · 2012-06-03, 09:49 PM

I love the idea of a galaxy gunship. And it should maybe have up to three slots for guns. One big gun and a couple of support weapons. This thing is going to eat up your resource pool and it shouldnt be flying naked where any air superiority fighter could take it out.

Peacemaker · 2012-06-03, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by TeaReks

If 5 people are needed to crew the GG then 5 air superiority fighters should be able to kill it no problem. Four should have a harder time and so on.

2 shouldn't have trouble. Just cause five crew it doesn't mean u need five to kill it. It's rock paper scissors. GG beats ground. Fighters beat GG. AA fire kills fighters. Tanks and infantry beat AA. The GG should be protected by fighters, it shouldn't be able to defend its self. All offense.

Top Sgt · 2012-06-03, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by Toppopia

Ahh. Then yes, that sounds good. I would like to see an AC-130 style Galaxy.

agreed it would be sweet to see it act as a spookie and left fire and ground pound.

Zekeen · 2012-06-03, 10:27 PM

If I'm piloting an AC-130 styled Galaxy, with one side pointed arsenal, and a Scythe comes up to my blind side......

I'm clegging the mother huffer. 180 degree spin, upside down flying! I'll take you down first! Then I'll land the Galaxy on its top! If you're getting taken down by aircraft from your blind spot, you're obviously not an insane enough pilot to handle it!

Fenrys · 2012-06-04, 03:25 AM

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Yeah something like that. Passengers don't have much to do on a gunship but it would be nice to include 2 or 4 slots for ground based fire support. Maybe 2 infantry and 2 MAX spots, the passengers could drop and serve as AA deterrents if the thing came under attack from air or AA.

All gal slots will be multi-purpose - max and infantry will be able to use the same seats.

If we can customize the weapons systems of a gal gunship like we can with tanks, I'd load 4 AA MAX and swap all the side miniguns for cannons.

GhettoPrince · 2012-06-04, 03:40 AM

So, going by what we've seen so far, it seems like the cert tree gives you the option to specialize to an insane degree or cert out lots of weapons and vehicles so you have more options but less impact.

I heard in the interview something about how low level galaxy certs give you fewer seats and you have to parachute out, while high level ones give you extra seats and MAX seats and you get to jump out in a fast armored capsule. Why wouldn't they just do the same thing here?

like maybe low level cert gunships have a few weak guns with limited arcs, high level certs add on cannons and maybe a grenade launcher or mortar? I'm probably wrong, but that's the way I think they are going with it.

Tikuto · 2012-06-08, 12:57 PM

Re-invention of PS1. This is what we all understood from last year or the year before that, probably since PS2 was discretely announced years ago.

Galaxy is a transport ship.
Galaxy is not a battle ship.

Keep this distinction in-mind and then go here to contribute your idea for something new:
THREAD: A warship to replace 'Galaxy Gunship'