UNSC Offensive star base
#1
Posted 15 February 2014 - 07:25 PM
-Sergeant Avery Johnson,Halo 3<br />
#2
Posted 15 February 2014 - 08:48 PM
Honestly this idea is purely conceptual right now. All of these ideas are nothing more than that. We would like to see a more powerful star-base geared for defense instead of the economic focused anchor. However, we are all currently focused on getting other things into the game.
#3
Posted 15 February 2014 - 09:47 PM
Honestly this idea is purely conceptual right now. All of these ideas are nothing more than that. We would like to see a more powerful star-base geared for defense instead of the economic focused anchor. However, we are all currently focused on getting other things into the game.
I know I had these ?'s for awhile and was reminded by that question on moddb
-Sergeant Avery Johnson,Halo 3<br />
#4
Posted 16 February 2014 - 01:33 AM
I'm back (temp)
#5
Posted 16 February 2014 - 08:52 AM
Ever heard of the omega class orbital emplacement? This idea has been floating around since the end of October.
*since last... January... Maybe earlier... At least with the Dev team...
#define true false //happy debugging suckers!!!!!
Notable SOTP forum/Steam chat quotes:
Donate to the forum! https://kd8rho.net/donate
#6
Posted 16 February 2014 - 09:12 AM
That was back when you used to call it the gamma station, in one such topic we debated whether or notgamma station looked like a combat station. The result of our debate was a negative So we threw some names about. Omega orbital emplacement seemed the most popular, even uni has used the term.
I'm back (temp)
#7
Posted 16 February 2014 - 09:34 AM
Right.
Basically, yes we plan to do it.
What will it look like? Cannot find property "look" of undefined.
What will its combat capabilities be? Cannot find property "defensive capablilites" of undefined.
What will its abilities be? Cannot find property "abilities" of undefined.
So basically, yes, we'll add it. Can't say anything about it though because right now, it's just an idea.
#define true false //happy debugging suckers!!!!!
Notable SOTP forum/Steam chat quotes:
Donate to the forum! https://kd8rho.net/donate
#8
Posted 16 February 2014 - 12:50 PM
When it's implemented can it have these?
- sloosecannon likes this
Help me Sergeant I'm lost in Kurfluffle land!
#9
Posted 16 February 2014 - 12:55 PM
Does it give fashion tips to the recipient?
I'm back (temp)
#10
Posted 16 February 2014 - 02:08 PM
#define true false //happy debugging suckers!!!!!
Notable SOTP forum/Steam chat quotes:
Donate to the forum! https://kd8rho.net/donate
#11
Posted 17 February 2014 - 11:09 AM
http://www.sinsofthe...combat-station/
Check the bottom. There is a concept art piece of a turreted MAC gun. (The name is orbital MAC or something), looks like it's bigger then onager, but maybe not as big as frigate MAC gun.
#12
Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:58 PM
Personally I don't see the need for an offensive UNSC star base at all, it's only real use would be to put something in asteroid fields and the like. For actual planets, an Anchor is better than another offensive structure when grouped with hangar defenses/SMACs due to it's support abilities.
#13
Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:59 PM
The point is that SMACS are glass canons, and when the enemy spams SDVs with fighters they don't last long enough to even dent the enemy fleet.
I'm back (temp)
#14
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:21 PM
So the solution is to add a station with less fighters and probably less damage output than a SMAC to combat the fighter spam?The point is that SMACS are glass canons, and when the enemy spams SDVs with fighters they don't last long enough to even dent the enemy fleet.
I'm in favor of adding it for the neutrals but Lavo is right - the new station won't be any good on a well defended planet
#define true false //happy debugging suckers!!!!!
Notable SOTP forum/Steam chat quotes:
Donate to the forum! https://kd8rho.net/donate
#15
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:46 PM
Briefly put that's a yes.
Oh it will. Just the thought of it should make you think twice.
A well defended planet does not exist. Never seen UNSC Defences do a damn thing but make a slight ding sound against the covenant fleet. Whereas the covenant starbase can cut a UNSC fleet in half.
I'm back (temp)
#16
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:49 PM
Briefly put that's a yes.
Oh it will. Just the thought of it should make you think twice.
A well defended planet does not exist. Never seen UNSC Defences do a damn thing but make a slight ding sound against the covenant fleet. Whereas the covenant starbase can cut a UNSC fleet in half.
Then you are doing something very wrong, most people can push away a covie fleet with defenses easy. What do you do for defnce specifically spectre?
#17
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:53 PM
I used to do a mix of all defensive structures, heavy on the mines. You've seen it yourself.
You know this is one of the specific topics I'm touchy on and had many arguments on my defenses, they usually end up in a flame wars.
No matter how much you try to convince me i fail to believe in them.
I'm back (temp)
#18
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:54 PM
I used to do a mix of all defensive structures, heavy on the mines. You've seen it yourself.
You know this is one of the specific topics that usually end up in a flame war.
Are they placed tactically? or just spammed around the well. My memory is failing on your defnece strategys here.
#19
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:55 PM
I used to do a mix of all defensive structures, heavy on the mines. You've seen it yourself.
You know this is one of the specific topics I'm touchy on and had many arguments on my defenses, they usually end up in a flame wars.
No matter how much you try to convince me i fail to believe in them.
Then fight Rovert.
#20
Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:56 PM
Tactically placed.
UNSC defences are nothing when facing an SDV spam.
I have fought just about everybody on this subject.
I'm back (temp)
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users