unwitnessed kilrathi capships:

Discuss the Wing Commander Series and find the latest information on the Wing Commander Universe privateer mod as well as the standalone mod Wasteland Incident project.
Post Reply
Shissui
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:27 pm

Post by Shissui »

chuck_starchaser wrote:For this pre-war carrier I'm thinking of a string of boxes or sardine cans with doors that open up and harnesses that push fighters out. No launch tubes; no landing platforms. Just grappling hooks and mattress springs.
Fine by me . . . & satisfies my critique; as long as, if you ignore the carrier for long enough, it can actually kick out more fire power than is mounted on the hull.

(I am even willing to accept stripping the hull &/or creative definitions of "more firepower")
I want to live in Theory. Everything works in Theory.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

And there's another issue that's pretty much related to carrier defense. The problem of jumping. During jumps, all fighters are inside the carrier, so what prevents the enemy from waiting at the other side of the jump point and attacking before the carrier can launch?

The WC Encyclopedia had a dissertation on jump points, which I can't seem to find anymore. But it seems that, officially, jumping is not entirely accurate. When you jump, you have to be as close as possible to the center of the jump point, but where you come out may be many klicks from the destination jump point. This is a matter of written canon, but the games don't reflect it graphically. It is something I've proposed that we fix. Namely, that when you jump you come out at a random location within eye shot of the destination jump point, rather than exactly at it.
Shissui
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:27 pm

Post by Shissui »

chuck_starchaser wrote:And there's another issue that's pretty much related to carrier defense. The problem of jumping. During jumps, all fighters are inside the carrier, so what prevents the enemy from waiting at the other side of the jump point and attacking before the carrier can launch?
THAT is why those early carriers died out so fast. In zero-G, if you let go of the wire cutters, then you cannot snip the bailing wire to get your fighters into combat.

After you have some veterans around, you learn to send an escort through to check for ambushes & the importance of fast launch systems.

The real difference between a Paradigm-as-carrier & a Concordia should be the ability for the Concordia to launch its entire payload in # seconds.
It is something I've proposed that we fix. Namely, that when you jump you come out at a random location within eye shot of the destination jump point, rather than exactly at it.
I fully support you on this one -- otherwise a jump point can be completely defended with mines . . . and would be.
Last edited by Shissui on Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I want to live in Theory. Everything works in Theory.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

One problem with that is that for ships to be able to scout the other side of the jump point ahead of the carrier, they have to have a jump drive. The whole purpose of the carrier is to carry ships that don't have jump drives, across jump points. Which may be why the typical kat fleet has a carrier and a cruiser. As far as I remember, the first fighter to have a jump drive was the Excalibur. I may be wrong.

Thanks for the support :) Yeah, I think that, without jump point inaccuracy, nothing can possibly make sense.
Shissui
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:27 pm

Post by Shissui »

chuck_starchaser wrote:One problem with that is that for ships to be able to scout the other side of the jump point ahead of the carrier, they have to have a jump drive. The whole purpose of the carrier is to carry ships that don't have jump drives, across jump points. Which may be why the typical kat fleet has a carrier and a cruiser.
There are two approaches here, depending on resources --
(a) You send through your "destroyer" escort & they engage the ambush. When the carrier comes through after, it should have time to start launching before it also becomes seriously targeted.
(b) Think of the point-man in a jungle patrol. You take an expendable ship with a jump drive & send it through. If it doesn't come back, you go somewhere else.

Option "b" is unlikely to be routine practice -- it will wake up the fleet on the other side. However, if we have a crippled carrier that lost its escort; trying to make it home -- then, by all means, impress our player to scout for it! It's better (for the carrier) than jumping blind.
As far as I remember, the first fighter to have a jump drive was the Excalibur. I may be wrong.
Hmmm -- jump drive probably should be more expensive -- say, 10x what it is in PR?
I want to live in Theory. Everything works in Theory.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

You ask better questions than most, that's for sure...
Shissui wrote: There are two approaches here, depending on resources --
(a) You send through your "destroyer" escort & they engage the ambush. When the carrier comes through after, it should have time to start launching before it also becomes seriously targeted.
Only problem with that is, the destroyer would get destroyed instantly.
Why?
Because there's a lot of misconceptions about what a destroyer IS.
The term "destroyer" is a short for the original name, namely "torpedo boat destroyer". Destroyers don't have escorts, because they ARE escorts, and you'd never find them flying alone. A destroyer is a ship that has one role, and one role only: To eliminate small, torpedo carrying ships that may threaten a carrier or cruiser. They are lightly armored, for the sake of mobility, and lightly aremed, since their job is to pick on little guys. And they need to be defended, by frigates and/or fighters/interceptors.
But you could send a cruiser ahead of a carrier, which is what I was suggesting the typical kat fleet would suggest.
(b) Think of the point-man in a jungle patrol. You take an expendable ship with a jump drive & send it through. If it doesn't come back, you go somewhere else.

Option "b" is unlikely to be routine practice -- it will wake up the fleet on the other side. However, if we have a crippled carrier that lost its escort; trying to make it home -- then, by all means, impress our player to scout for it! It's better (for the carrier) than jumping blind.
Yep. I would think of this as a last resort strategy.
As far as I remember, the first fighter to have a jump drive was the Excalibur. I may be wrong.
Hmmm -- jump drive probably should be more expensive -- say, 10x what it is in PR?
Absolutely. Privateer was a new game, to Origin; they weren't too concerned about things, obviously. We could, for the purpose of retconing on Origin's behalf, say that weight is the issue, more than price. Military fighters do away with jump drive for the sake of mobility and/or extra space for ordinance; whereas the ships you buy in Priv are for public sale and don't travel aboard carriers; and therefore need to have a jump drive.
starlord
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:35 pm

Post by starlord »

Wow! It seems we have a thinking tank here.
I never thought for one minute that a WC prequel would be that much needed.

Right, I've been reading the pre war carrier stuff and i've been to the CIC checking vessels (capships and fighters) service entry (when I have them, that is...)

It seems that the concordia super cruiser could serve as a limited carrier (the same way the fralthi could) and knowing the fact that I'm not sure the exeter is alive back then (they were considered new in the WC1 timelapse) I think we'll use this ship instead. Although we'll have to think of a "true" confed carrier design since the war reported numerous carrier losses on mcauliffe.

The kilrathi will also need their proper carrier for the 2 great offensives: mcauliffe and enyo, And later on in 2944 when they will push across the vega sector. Perhaps they will also need a fast anti fighter ship: a frigate.

It seems I have a problem with the snakeir superdreads though: the CIC states they entered service in 2949 (super dread design, that is. As the carrier came in later in 2955 during the firekka events in WC1 SM2)

Yet, in the movie, they are present and the movie is set 20 years before the WC1 events (which occur in 2954).

As far as the plot is concerned, It follows up greatly the storyline, Yet it ties up with the WC1 events: the played character will be bossman (known as ripper at the time: check the WC1 manual). The plot will then unfold from him serving in patrols in the mcauliffe sector from the alexandria station, up to joining the grey wolf concordia supercruiser after the destruction of alexandria (At this stage, the kilrathi will have hacked into the TKB (terran knowledge bank) and will have learned the earth's position as well as all our system's. This is why I insisted on having the trackrha spy ship design in the plot.

During his stay on the grey wolf, he will fly missions to retake mcauliffe and later enyo (including this raptor minelaying mission, and others rarely encountered in previous WC games such as officer shuttle destruction, spy ship detection and destruction (the spy ship possesses a cloak rendering it invisible to radar (although NOT to human eyes like the later stakhra stealth fighter) and will be hard to spot in an asteroid belt for instance. The grey wolf will then in 2944 assist the tiger's claw in repelling the invading kilrathi fleet and will be crippled and scuttled: the pilots will be transfered to the claw. And finally, the claw will be despatched to create a diversion near the kraz'na colony to allow terran forces to withdraw, and will then, once repaired be assign to the vega sector, where it will undertake a few missions in order to hinder the pursuing kilrathi fleet and help form a line of defense in the middle of vega sector (The situation in WC1).

This way, bossman will progressively meet the other WC1 caracters: paladin (one of the first), iceman. Later on near enyo: hunter, knight (and la doña, saved by knight), spirit's dad. Until they all become assigned to the tiger's claw and the newbies: maniac, spirit and angel.

The plot will end with a vid sequence in witch the pilots discuss the near arrival of a new recruit: a certain christopher blair...

hope this helps.
starlord
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:35 pm

Post by starlord »

Wow! It seems we have a thinking tank here.
I never thought for one minute that a WC prequel would be that much needed.

Right, I've been reading the pre war carrier stuff and i've been to the CIC checking vessels (capships and fighters) service entry (when I have them, that is...)

It seems that the concordia super cruiser could serve as a limited carrier (the same way the fralthi could) and knowing the fact that I'm not sure the exeter is alive back then (they were considered new in the WC1 timelapse) I think we'll use this ship instead. Although we'll have to think of a "true" confed carrier design since the war reported numerous carrier losses on mcauliffe.

The kilrathi will also need their proper carrier for the 2 great offensives: mcauliffe and enyo, And later on in 2944 when they will push across the vega sector. Perhaps they will also need a fast anti fighter ship: a frigate.

It seems I have a problem with the snakeir superdreads though: the CIC states they entered service in 2949 (super dread design, that is. As the carrier came in later in 2955 during the firekka events in WC1 SM2)

Yet, in the movie, they are present and the movie is set 20 years before the WC1 events (which occur in 2954).

As far as the plot is concerned, It follows up greatly the storyline, Yet it ties up with the WC1 events: the played character will be bossman (known as ripper at the time: check the WC1 manual). The plot will then unfold from him serving in patrols in the mcauliffe sector from the alexandria station, up to joining the grey wolf concordia supercruiser after the destruction of alexandria (At this stage, the kilrathi will have hacked into the TKB (terran knowledge bank) and will have learned the earth's position as well as all our system's. This is why I insisted on having the trackrha spy ship design in the plot.

During his stay on the grey wolf, he will fly missions to retake mcauliffe and later enyo (including this raptor minelaying mission, and others rarely encountered in previous WC games such as officer shuttle destruction, spy ship detection and destruction (the spy ship possesses a cloak rendering it invisible to radar (although NOT to human eyes like the later stakhra stealth fighter) and will be hard to spot in an asteroid belt for instance. The grey wolf will then in 2944 assist the tiger's claw in repelling the invading kilrathi fleet and will be crippled and scuttled: the pilots will be transfered to the claw. And finally, the claw will be despatched to create a diversion near the kraz'na colony to allow terran forces to withdraw, and will then, once repaired be assign to the vega sector, where it will undertake a few missions in order to hinder the pursuing kilrathi fleet and help form a line of defense in the middle of vega sector (The situation in WC1).

This way, bossman will progressively meet the other WC1 caracters: paladin (one of the first), iceman. Later on near enyo: hunter, knight (and la doña, saved by knight), spirit's dad. Until they all become assigned to the tiger's claw and the newbies: maniac, spirit and angel.

The plot will end with a vid sequence in witch the pilots discuss the near arrival of a new recruit: a certain christopher blair...

hope this helps.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Nice! :D

EDIT: How about a ret-con/compromise between prior canon and the movie?
Have some pretty big kat ship, in the style of that superdrednaught, but smaller?
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Let me just say one thing though, that's neither a plot nor a story.
It's a "campaign".
Which is perfectly okay, I know someone who is quite knowledgeable
of WC and has written fan fiction before, and who is hot to trot to contribute to the WC0 project.

As I was just saying to him, my vision would be multiple stories.
For example:

A story about confederation politics.
Another story, a personal one, about a character the player meets repeatedly.
Another story about companies, competition, industrial alliances.
Another story about two pilots, one from Border Worlds, one from Landreich.
The story of a bartender aboard the carrier who grew up in Avalon but later went to study at Oxford.
A plot/story about the Grovsner Colonies.
A story about pilgrims and pilgrim descendents, but told through the day to
day dialogues, rather than explained.
A romance or two?

You know what I mean? That's one of the formulas for successful fiction: Have many independent stories that sort of intertwine, and have them interspersed with the action and campaign.

And a plot.

A plot is like a story, but more connected to the campaign.

One of the recurrent formulas for plots in military fiction is of a subaltern who knows better than his superiors and decides to disobey orders and do what is right, but he'd better succeed and be a hero, or else he will face a court martial.

Or, say, the captain of the ship decides to disobey orders, and the player has to disobey orders in turn to produce the right outcome.

But the best kind of plot is the type that is hard to figure out, with many contradictory leads, that requires a lot of thinking to piece together.

EDIT:
I never saw the movie, but someone was just telling me that the movie has Bossman die... Is this true? If so, are you sure you want to take anything in the movie seriously? Maybe we could just use the movie as a side-reference for occasional artistic inspiration, but ignore any factual elements in it. Or at least incorporate any element as long as it's not one of those that contradict prior canon.

EDIT2:
If I'm understanding anything, the player never flies missions off a pre-war carrier? I think it would be a bit of a waste of work to model a special carrier and then not use it. Any chance we could put in a set of missions for it?
More generally, between McAuliffe and Custer's Carnival, we've got a span of 15 years. As a way of comparison, WC3 spans from 2669.225 to 2669:267, approximately, which is 42 days. We could make WC0 as big as all other WC games put together, if we wanted to. Not that we'd want to, but you know what I mean? We're not pressed for time at all, the way I see it; we can add and expand wherever we want.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Just a quick concept I came up with for a prewar carrier.
The big box represents probably the most greebled part,
where the power plant and fuel are.

Image

Image

The tanks on the sides are indeed fuel tanks, but the clever idea is (if I may say so :)) that they are the first tanks to be used up. By the time the carrier reaches its theater of operations, those tanks are empty, and serve as extra armor, or to draw useless fire.
Just a concept anyways.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

One thing I'd like to get my head around is, what EXACTLY is going on between Terrans and Kilrathis, prior to the war declaration? I was just re-reading the detailed timeline I put together from various other timelines, the one here; and for 2634 it says,
Victory Streak wrote:Terran Confederation Congress The TCC voted unanimously to enforce a non-agression policy with the Kilrathi and threaten military reprisals if it was broken.
I find the wording kind of funny. "Enforce Non-Agression".
It doesn't sound to me like the words one country would use if another was officially attacking it.
Could it be that Kilrathis were not "officially" attacking Terrans?
Could it be that individual Kilrathi warlords were backing Kilrathi pirate groups to raid Terran shipping?
Could it be that Terran shipping companies were backing Terran pirate groups to exact revenge?
Could it be that a war was developing by itself, and spinning out of Terran government control; and that what the Confederation Congress was talking about was 2-way enforcement? I.e.: Fighting the pirates on both sides?
This could make an interesting beginning for the story.

And later that year, when war is declaired, it goes:
Victory Streak wrote:the Terran Confederation officially declares war on the Empire of Kilrah for countless acts of piracy and unwarranted assault
...
starlord
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:35 pm

Post by starlord »

chuck, your idea of a story is very interesting, but very vast!
I hope we can handle it.
Now it seems in the movie, bossman dies, yet we see him in WC1, so we will stick to the idea that bossman is alive, and eventually, we will make spirit's father die instead (I forgot his name: see WC1 manual).

The pre war terran carrier looks just fine. I think it will be a valuable addition to the game in the mcauliffe battle, where a number of such carriers are obliterated by the kilrathi assault.

regarding kilrathi doctrine, I suppose that the fact terrans were "tolerating" those "accidents" comes from the fact that they didn't want to engage in a war after the pilgrim conflict. (plus the fact that the opponents are not human and have unknown ressources could be quite disturbing).
The fact that the kilrathi didn't attack on a big scale could have been by chance: I suppose they were studying the terrans.
Finally, the destruction of the anna magdalena, a transport convoying terran children by the kilrathi started the real war.


Regarding the movie pics, my numcam seems to be dead, so I'll try to find a new way to get pics of the snakeir and the sivar and the spy ship.
I think the movie rapier mark 1 and the movie dralthi can be incorporated using the link I provided you.

I thought of a name for the kilrathi carrier and the kilrathi heavy fighter based on the movie dralthi concept, I'll give you that soon, hope you like it.

I also saw in the CIC an interesting thing regarding the krant: the mark 1 was actually a dive bomber, while the mark 2 encountered in WC1 was a medium fighter. I wounder if we could use the mark 1 as well as the mark 2. They would have the same design, but like the manta in WC prophecy, the bomber would have red stripes on it's wings and would be less maneuverable (and naturally would have a different missile payload).

tell me what you think!
starlord
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:35 pm

Post by starlord »

chuck, your idea of a story is very interesting, but very vast!
I hope we can handle it.
Now it seems in the movie, bossman dies, yet we see him in WC1, so we will stick to the idea that bossman is alive, and eventually, we will make spirit's father die instead (I forgot his name: see WC1 manual).

The pre war terran carrier looks just fine. I think it will be a valuable addition to the game in the mcauliffe battle, where a number of such carriers are obliterated by the kilrathi assault.

regarding kilrathi doctrine, I suppose that the fact terrans were "tolerating" those "accidents" comes from the fact that they didn't want to engage in a war after the pilgrim conflict. (plus the fact that the opponents are not human and have unknown ressources could be quite disturbing).
The fact that the kilrathi didn't attack on a big scale could have been by chance: I suppose they were studying the terrans.
Finally, the destruction of the anna magdalena, a transport convoying terran children by the kilrathi started the real war.


Regarding the movie pics, my numcam seems to be dead, so I'll try to find a new way to get pics of the snakeir and the sivar and the spy ship.
I think the movie rapier mark 1 and the movie dralthi can be incorporated using the link I provided you.

I thought of a name for the kilrathi carrier and the kilrathi heavy fighter based on the movie dralthi concept, I'll give you that soon, hope you like it.

I also saw in the CIC an interesting thing regarding the krant: the mark 1 was actually a dive bomber, while the mark 2 encountered in WC1 was a medium fighter. I wounder if we could use the mark 1 as well as the mark 2. They would have the same design, but like the manta in WC prophecy, the bomber would have red stripes on it's wings and would be less maneuverable (and naturally would have a different missile payload).

tell me what you think!
Shissui
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:27 pm

Post by Shissui »

chuck_starchaser wrote:Just a quick concept I came up with for a prewar carrier.
It is not clear to me -- where is the docking bay?

I sure hope it is not that dark patch to front & centre. Even a peace time designer would realise that it's a bad idea to try to land at the business end of a carrier -- if you miss, your fighter looks like a bug splat.

If we go back to your bill hooks & bed springs proposal, how about armoured bay doors where you have the rear drop tanks; or between the drop tanks. These would look like a good idea to an early designer -- as the central body of the ship would be well armoured when the doors are closed. The people who use it, on the other hand, would hate them -- you need to be able to accept damaged fighters at any time in combat.
The tanks on the sides are indeed fuel tanks, but the clever idea is (if I may say so :)) that they are the first tanks to be used up. By the time the carrier reaches its theater of operations, those tanks are empty, and serve as extra armor, or to draw useless fire.
Just a concept anyways.
You did want these designs to be flawed. Here is another idea that looks good to the peace time designer, but not to the fleet officer. Because we are using energy weapons, the real protection of these tanks is nearly pointless (because they will vaporise immediately); yet, the carrier loses half of its jump range early in combat. Any form of "running battle" could leave this carrier without the range to make it home.
I want to live in Theory. Everything works in Theory.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Shissui wrote:
chuck_starchaser wrote:Just a quick concept I came up with for a prewar carrier.
It is not clear to me -- where is the docking bay?

I sure hope it is not that dark patch to front & centre. Even a peace time designer would realise that it's a bad idea to try to land at the business end of a carrier -- if you miss, your fighter looks like a bug splat.
I got an email from Maverick of wcplanet asking the same thing. As I said to him I've no idea where the dockings are; I was just doodling.
Certainly not the front horns. Those things serve no purpose that I know of, but are mandatory in all large ships in WC. They all have those ram things at the front, painted in black and yellow stripes. :)

Yeah, I doodled that because the concept I came up with earliers, of boxes, was not coalescing in my mind. Hope that will change.
If we go back to your bill hooks & bed springs proposal, how about armoured bay doors where you have the rear drop tanks; or between the drop tanks. These would look like a good idea to an early designer -- as the central body of the ship would be well armoured when the doors are closed. The people who use it, on the other hand, would hate them -- you need to be able to accept damaged fighters at any time in combat.
The tanks on the sides are indeed fuel tanks, but the clever idea is (if I may say so :)) that they are the first tanks to be used up. By the time the carrier reaches its theater of operations, those tanks are empty, and serve as extra armor, or to draw useless fire.
Just a concept anyways.
You did want these designs to be flawed. Here is another idea that looks good to the peace time designer, but not to the fleet officer. Because we are using energy weapons, the real protection of these tanks is nearly pointless (because they will vaporise immediately); yet, the carrier loses half of its jump range early in combat. Any form of "running battle" could leave this carrier without the range to make it home.
Hmmm... Sounds like a plan.
I'll try to doodle something along those lines, and post back.

@Starlord:

I'm still thinking about a possible pre-war piracy stage. What crossed my mind is a cinematic, or a spy report, whereby it is revealed that debate among the kats boils down to whether Terrans are a "prey" race.

Humans being omnivorous throws the kats off.

They split into two factions:

The agressive faction says that no superior carnivore would eat fruit. Plant leaves maybe, but not fruits.

The cautious faction says that humans also hunt for sport. And that many of the kat pirate pilots report being "hunted" mercilessly after the slightest provocation.

Finally, an even more cautious kat faction likes to remind the others that the mantu were like that too: no carnivors, apparently, yet switching to carnivore behavior when preyed upon.

Two factions against one. But the first faction secretly redoubles their investment in supporting piracy in the fronteer. Human corporations that have interests at stake such as shipping, are doing the same: fostering attacks on kat shipping by terran pirates.

So the whole thing spins out of the control of both governments.

The Anna Magdalena could have been a setup by a conspiracy between fronteer shipping companies, people in the military, and military equipment manufacturars. Say there were two Anna Magdalenas. The one with children followed a different route, and changed names along the way. The false one purposely flew into kat space, and the propaganda machine was ready to go.

Sorry, I have a tendency towards realism.. :D

Anyways, nothing of this necessarily has to come up in the plot; but if we adopted these things as facts and shaped our plot accordingly, perhaps parts of it would make a subtle, subliminal impact on the story and dialogues.
starlord
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:35 pm

Post by starlord »

Looks good, but this would somehow give the kilrathi an untirely new look: They would not be anymore the merciless hartless ruthless (etc...) aggressors.

If we consider the prophecy (WC prophecy) we are given an explanation to their behaviour: Although it is unclear when, the kilrathi were "visited" by a race called the nephilim which proved so powerful even to them they referred to them as gods. Yet the nephilim leave, refusing to fight the kilrathi as they deem them unworthy to engage ( they no doubt considered K technology too primitive compared to theirs). Yet they stated they would come back (see the prophecy) when the kilrathi would meet their match:

"there shall come a time when he who has the heart of a kilrathi
but is not kilrathi born (blair) shall rain cleansing fire down upon us (temblor bomb, kilrah, WC3) and knathrak, an era of great darkness, shall embrace us (the arrival of the nephilim).

So what shall we do?

Do we keep the old misteriously savage kilrathi, or do we spawn a kilrathi race immerged in plots very much like the terrans?

It's true the great ideas of those plots (I recognise a privateer player) could make great continuities, yet we may completely remold the kilrathi in the process. I don't know if fans would like it...

Naturally those are just my thoughts, I may be wrong.

Also one thing: one of the greatest assets of the kilrathi is that they are much united under a ductaturial regime (with the exception being the gorath khar rebels). This way, they all consider us as prey fodder, which makes them an even more formidable enemy... If you split them into factions, they will appear vulnerable to emotions, corruption, etc... And will loose some of their charisma and mistery.

As I said, those are my feelings and that doesn't prove I'm right. Perhaps later in WCU, we could use that plot and test it on the gorath khar rebels...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

starlord wrote:Looks good, but this would somehow give the kilrathi an untirely new look: They would not be anymore the merciless hartless ruthless (etc...) aggressors.
Maybe you have a point.
If we consider the prophecy (WC prophecy) we are given an explanation to their behaviour: Although it is unclear when, the kilrathi were "visited" by a race called the nephilim which proved so powerful even to them they referred to them as gods. Yet the nephilim leave, refusing to fight the kilrathi as they deem them unworthy to engage ( they no doubt considered K technology too primitive compared to theirs). Yet they stated they would come back (see the prophecy) when the kilrathi would meet their match:

"there shall come a time when he who has the heart of a kilrathi
but is not kilrathi born (blair) shall rain cleansing fire down upon us (temblor bomb, kilrah, WC3) and knathrak, an era of great darkness, shall embrace us (the arrival of the nephilim).
You're mixing up the Mantu and the Nephilim; but everybody does that :) Two different races. The neph are insect-like; the mantu aren't.
So what shall we do?

Do we keep the old misteriously savage kilrathi, or do we spawn a kilrathi race immerged in plots very much like the terrans?
I wasn't trying to modify the k race; I'm trying to *find out* what they are really like. And it seems to me that, although they are pretty agressive, they are not necessarily like the nephilim (destroy, destroy, destroy). They have a kind of honor, a peculiar kind of honor, but honor after all. They do have emotions, like fear; and much of their bravado is a cover for their cowardice --of each other and their dictator/emperor. They are carnivorous, and they equate carnivore to "superior". And just like carnivores often prefer not to eat other carnivores, it seems to me that might color their thinking about which races to engage in war, and what to do with them. Although sometimes they seem to think af other carnivore races as being good for making slaves of. Which is what ends up happening when they capture human worlds.

What seems to me particularly inconsistent is the number of years that pass from the Iason incident to McAuliffe. It doesn't make sense.
And the battle of McAuliffe happens right after Terrans formally declare War. Not only that, but the Kirlathi Emperor orders the destruction of McAuliff and all Terran vessels AFTER the Terran war declaration.
The fact that the confederation congress was speaking of "enforcing non-agression" before the war; and then declare war citing "acts of piracy", all these things lead me to believe that the kats were reluctant to get into a war, just as we were; and that what was going on was an escalating pirate war, beyond the control of either government.

It's true the great ideas of those plots (I recognise a privateer player) could make great continuities, yet we may completely remold the kilrathi in the process. I don't know if fans would like it...
What I want to know is whether the image we, fans, have formed about the kilrathi is accurate. The unanswered questions above seem to tell a different story.
Also one thing: one of the greatest assets of the kilrathi is that they are much united under a ductaturial regime (with the exception being the gorath khar rebels). This way, they all consider us as prey fodder, which makes them an even more formidable enemy... If you split them into factions, they will appear vulnerable to emotions, corruption, etc... And will loose some of their charisma and mistery.
But the Kilrathi are much more divided than the Terrans are. It's just that the divisions are not apparent to someone looking from the other side of the front line. There were two assassination attempts on the Emperor or Prince Trakath, I can't remember which. I used to have a good link talking about Kilrathi history... And the fact you have Kilrathi Rebels is in-game proof. Naturally, they will all see humans as "prey and fodder" once the Emperor says we are; but my question is what are they really like before they become official enemies. There's quite a few years of that, not too well described anywhere. But "acts of piracy" seems like a freudian slip, if the Confed propaganda machine were tring to bury facts contradictory to the new war propaganda.
As I said, those are my feelings and that doesn't prove I'm right. Perhaps later in WCU, we could use that plot and test it on the gorath khar rebels...
Well, that's it. The fact that there are rebels shows that kats are not like the Borg. It's a dictatorship, yes; and they are a very cowardly race; --who can't fight back their own dictators --unless they live so close to their own enemies (Gorath Khar) that they feel they can switch sides and get the latter's protection...-- think about that...

EDIT: And this is consistent with a "carnivore" sort of mentality. Carnivores are used to herbivore prey running away; they are not used to them fighting back. Their self-confidence is hard but brittle.

EDIT2:
And when humans declare war, the kat emperor sends a huge fleet. He's gripped by sudden *terror*, I say. But the fear of being seen as cowardly by other Kilrathis wins, and so he sends all the forces he can muster, all at once, in the hope of putting an end to the situation.

EDIT3:
Read this:
http://hkn.eecs.berkeley.edu/~drake/govtscr.html#kilrah
but read between the lines; much of it is from embelished kilrathi accounts.
starlord
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:35 pm

Post by starlord »

I don't know myself!
But I think (notice the work think) it would be good to keep the kilrathi shrouded in mystery.

Also, about the snakeir super dreads: most of them are 945m long (which is not "very" long. Yet it would be good to have just one command snakeir in the game (the 4KM variant): This would truly be a challenge, as this variant is the heaviest battleship the kilrathi have until the arrival of the WC3 dreadnaughts.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

starlord wrote:I don't know myself!
But I think (notice the work think) it would be good to keep the kilrathi shrouded in mystery.
I think you are damn right.
Point very well taken.
Also, about the snakeir super dreads: most of them are 945m long (which is not "very" long. Yet it would be good to have just one command snakeir in the game (the 4KM variant): This would truly be a challenge, as this variant is the heaviest battleship the kilrathi have until the arrival of the WC3 dreadnaughts.
Ok.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Alright, how's this?

Image

Image

Is that what you were thinking, Shissui?

I think this kind of meets the criteria: Looks formidable but it's junk.. :)

So, in case it isn't clear, the little boxes are ship air-locks. There'd be covers on them, which come out with the ship; then the ship thrusts forward, coming out from under the cover; then the cover can go back in.

Hmm... Maybe too complicated... Nah, just let the ships materialize somehow in the recesses and then get pushed out.

The important thing, I guess, is that when coming in for a landing you have to do pretty delicate manuvering, lining up your ship accurately over a lock, and reducing speed to zero, for the hooks to catch you and bring you into the lock.
Shissui
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:27 pm

Post by Shissui »

chuck_starchaser wrote:Is that what you were thinking, Shissui?
I admit, I had not imagined nearly that many landing bays -- but -- sure.
I think this kind of meets the criteria: Looks formidable but it's junk.. :)
LOL -- I thought that is exactly what you were after -- the Confed's first effort at a heavy carrier.
Hmm... Maybe too complicated... Nah, just let the ships materialize somehow in the recesses and then get pushed out.
In the "keep it simple" department -- heavy (armour) doors that open horizontally. Open, they partially cover the drop tanks. Closed, they cover the docking bay. The designers imagined them closed in combat, but no ship captain would ever do that in practise.
The important thing, I guess, is that when coming in for a landing you have to do pretty delicate manuvering, lining up your ship accurately over a lock, and reducing speed to zero, for the hooks to catch you and bring you into the lock.
Then put the docking squares half- to a full- fighter length from the back -- players will need to cut speed not to hit the carrier. The nuisance value will simulate that just fine.
I want to live in Theory. Everything works in Theory.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Shissui wrote:
chuck_starchaser wrote:Is that what you were thinking, Shissui?
I admit, I had not imagined nearly that many landing bays -- but -- sure.
Actually, let's really make sure we are all completely happy before I start doing some heavy work. This is the time to criticize mercilessly. I don't mind starting over a dozen times; but once I've committed to a concept and put in tons of greebling I'd hate to hear someone say "I'd do it all differently". So anything anyone is not 100% happy with, say it now.

Yes, I agree that's a lot of ship air-locks; but on the other hand, these air-locks are not re-usable; each launches one ship only. So this beast can scramble 24 fighters, bombers and/or interceptors all at once; but that's it. By way of comparison, the Bengal could scramble over 100 ships, though not all at once.
Or, perhaps there's a way of moving a ship onto an airlock from inside, but not quickly enough to be useful in an engagement.
Just my thinking about it.
In the "keep it simple" department -- heavy (armour) doors that open horizontally. Open, they partially cover the drop tanks. Closed, they cover the docking bay. The designers imagined them closed in combat, but no ship captain would ever do that in practise.
I'm not getting the jest of it; why would they keep them open in combat? You mean, to shorten the time for fighters landing and taking off?
We could animate the doors, but, to keep it simple, have them all open simultaneously, and remain open until the engagement ends.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Started greebling up the engines, since this is "probably" an area of low contention.

Image

But you're still on time; speak up! ;-)

Ehm, this I'm sure will come up: The engines would be covered for protection.
Yes and no. Ok, from an esthetic point of view, if we cover everything up for protection, there wouldn't be much greebling visible; so I'd rather not cover things too much.
But I'm thinking there's good justification: The engines need to radiate heat; so I could place armor plates strategically, protecting the more delicate parts.
Like there will be some electrical boxes and wiring; and those can have plates covering them, but still be visible under the armor plate.
Thoughts?
Shissui
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:27 pm

Post by Shissui »

chuck_starchaser wrote:
Shissui wrote:I admit, I had not imagined nearly that many landing bays -- but -- sure.
Yes, I agree that's a lot of ship air-locks; but on the other hand . . . each launches one ship only. So this beast can scramble 24 fighters, bombers and/or interceptors all at once; but that's it. . . . Or, perhaps there's a way of moving a ship onto an airlock from inside, but not quickly enough to be useful in an engagement.
This is the "large" early carrier? Then, 24 is probably not enough; but 48 pilots (60 fighters) would be fine. Thus, there must be a way to "reload" the launch bay.

SO, launch sequence for each side is ...
1) launch 12 fighters.
2) close & pressurise 8 bays
3) move 8 fighters out from the interior
4) clear & open 8 bays; close & pressurise the other 4
5) launch 8 fighters; load 4 more bays.
6) clear & open 4 bays; close & pressurise 4 bays.
7) launch 4 fighters; load 4 fighters (no pilots) in the closed bays

recover your breath (huff, puff, pant)
Better -- faster deployment if cycle all 12 in line 2/3/4 & then close 4 & load replacements. A fighter that is damaged very early must wait, but there is a lot more ordinance around to provide cover.

8) as fighters are damaged, accept them at any open lock & cycle them in.
9) pilot to a fresh fighter & cycle; damaged fighter to the shop; put in a new spare

Maintain 8 open bays (each side) through the whole combat. After winning, pull back the replacement fighters & start the long process of retrieval.

SO, the critical issue for deployment time is the time to cycle the pressure doors. This can be adjusted to whatever we need to balance against the later carriers.

For comparison, imagine the following launch concepts . . .

The next generation carrier is likely to use a "launch tube" principle -- these are the models with holes that run the length of the carrier -- the fighter bays are on each side of the central tube. You pressurise a small volume & eject lots of fighters, all at once, into the centre axis & they all hit the after burners on a signal from flight control. This is a lot faster than above, because you only airlock a volume slightly larger than the fighter.

A much later carrier could use side launch catapults. Load your fighters into shells & throw them into an internal transport system. The "shell" is depressurised & the queued into a rapid cycling catapult which kicks out the next fighter pre-accelerated to full speed (think of a gattling gun). Pre-loaded, this mechanism could easily launch 1 fighter per second per tube until you run out of pilots (or faster). It could also accept returning damaged fighters as fast as they could make it into the tubes & launch immediately as the last incoming fighter cleared the bore. This is much faster because, as the pressure system is separate from the launch system, you can change pressure for all of your fighters at once, both incoming & outgoing. Similarly, by using side launch, you have the surface area for a lot of tubes.
In the "keep it simple" department -- heavy (armour) doors that open horizontally. Open, they partially cover the drop tanks. Closed, they cover the docking bay. The designers imagined them closed in combat, but no ship captain would ever do that in practise.
I'm not getting the jest of it; why would they keep them open in combat? You mean, to shorten the time for fighters landing and taking off?
The doors must be open to accept incoming fighters without notice. See above, where I outline the launch cycle explicitly.

It is much better for a carrier to take back a damaged fighter & put the pilot in a fresh vehicle than it is to loose a pilot -- even for a carrier with a very slow cycle time. Pilots cost even more than fighters, both in the investment cost and the support infrastructure to keep them moving. So, I give the carrier more fighters than pilots. If you increase the pilots to match the fighter payload, you must also increase the support crew & launch systems & repair shops & fuel/munitions storage to match -- much more costly than just finding a nook or cranny in which to stuff another 300mt of fighter.
We could animate the doors, but, to keep it simple, have them all open simultaneously, and remain open until the engagement ends.
I am hesitant over the graphics (only) for the real time computation & redraw overhead for the animation. It would be great, but is it worth it for the slowest computers?

If animated, my concern could easily be met if it is disabled when a player does not use the "specular" option (the first thing to give up if your graphics card is overheating). If not animated, then just leave them open.
Last edited by Shissui on Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I want to live in Theory. Everything works in Theory.
Post Reply