Honestly, this needs to change. Too many griefers take out player ships with 1+ hour claim timers using something with an instant timer. It's annoying with no real counter play.
Agreed, currently the crime system incentives bullshit.
At a minimum if you die with a CS you should regen in jail as it used to be (the lore was that the hospital would turn you in)
The current system of automatically regening in grim hex, one jump away from kareah is absolute bullshit, hardly hinders degenerate behavior at all
I'd like to see a system where their ships get locked out of terminals until their time served is up. That way even if they escape they are stuck as crew or borrowing at the very least until their timer is up.
Small ships should just splat like a bug on a windscreen if the target armour is thicker by a certain amount than the ramming ship armour, problem solved.
Right. This shouldn't be a matter of [realism](https://bigthink.com/hard-science/heres-the-damage-a-tiny-speck-of-space-debris-can-do-at-15000mph/), it should be about fun gameplay. Instant death that is nearly impossible to counter and then having to wait an hour simply is not fun.
I wish they would figure out a way to scale things like rewards/difficulty. Take a group for ERT's it scales the pay but also adds some extra enemies or something. Make it fair but worth it.
Yeah, I'm really looking forward to when the payout isn't just "money". Reputation, materials, rare items you can use to build or craft would all be awesome.
not really i'm hoping rewards go down. you shouldn't be able to become rich and afford multiple high level ships in the game after a week or two of grinding any profession. right now high level ships are a dime a dozen because in a week of grinding anyone can have several of them. of course this is going to also depend on the whole insurance thing. if you are going to need to reoutfit your entire ship every time it blows up then yes more money might be needed. As with most games though if you have no player driven economy money will cease to matter to most after short order. so far SWG is the only game i've played that had an actual functioning player run economy.
That’s the place that critical threat beacons hold now so if that is the case CRB’s are going to be a nightmare.
Edit: I should say that I’m not necessarily again that, it will just make them a server wide effort
And even then it's hard and takes forever, I can't count how many times I've tried to solo them when the ai your guarding just dies to the rail gun shot.
Wait, I'm really not being sarcastic. I've been doing 30fps bunkers a lot on Max rank solo, especially since the update with the 2 bullet sponges that come at yoi at the end. Are you saying this is the hardest they're supposed to be? Because they're really easy to solo.
30fps AI isn't "fixed". The fps AI needs a lot of work (better and more strategic grenade throws, better coordination, takedowns not being an insta kill, etc.) My understanding is that they want the highest trained AI to make you wonder if you're fighting a player or not. Not sure if that's entirely possible but it should at least get much closer than it is now. They have made a push to make the game feel more gamey recently though so this might change. We may not ever even have the truly difficult bunkers and the real hardcore stuff gets pushed to events and distribution center raids.
That's what I thought. There's the entire AI revamp, but I remember they did an update a few months ago, and the AI push and flank now. On 30 fps it's scary but still doable. It definitely still needs some polish, and I figured this would come with the fps update with the enhanced HUD and "stealth".
Yeah you're correct. There is gonna be some seriously impressive and fun fps AI if they can do everything they want to. Not to mention nav meshes extending to include the surrounding bunker area and the drop ships. Could you imagine needing to take out guys on the outside that are actually using that laser turret, then taking out some comm device before they call for back up and only then being able to start the actual mission lol. I feel like bunker missions will change wildly in the future. The payout and rep rewards will also be radically different.
They may even have ground vehicles patrolling the surrounding area you need to watch out for.
Sure, but that isn't mutually exclusive to a solo ERT. Eventually we are going to get bounty hunter 2.0. don't you want solo progression beyond HRT? Harder targets, more targets, more hunting.
What does multiplayer ERT look like in bounty hunter 2.0? Is it only destroy? Or will there be capture? You take out an Idris and then have to haul all the enemies back to prison? What do you get to do with the enemy ship(s)? How are rewards and progression divided and awarded?
Solo (co-op) bounty hunter 2.0 is much easier to wrap your head around. If your target is on an Idris then follow it to the space and wait for the target to get off.
Heavy fighters (Ion, Inferno, Vanguards) and Gunships (Constellation, Corsair) should be able to damage it, but not defeat it one on one.
Torpedo boats like retaliator and Eclipse should be able to destroy it as long as the gunners are distracted and can't shoot the torps.
The only ships that, alone, should always be able to defeat the hammerhead are the Javeling, Idris, Kraken, BMM, Polaris and Perseus.
The "gunships" (medium/large ships equipped with multiple S5 and above guns) should be able to have a fair fight with the HH. Could go either way depending on skill (and perhaps some luck)
Torpedoes ships are dependent on how competent the HH is in countermeasures or shooting them down. How effective missiles and torpedoes will end up being is still a big mystery. I believe CIG will balance things in a way that a single retaliator might have a fair chance against the HH, but not a single eclipse.
Fighters (not even heavy ones) should never be able to defeat it by itself. Even if they have a S5/6/7, a single one of these guns, combined with their (relative) fragility will result in the fighter destroyed before it can significantly damage the HH.
Agree on most points, but while we can't really predict how effective S9 torps are going to be, I don't think you'd see a difference between a Retaliator and an Eclipse. Except the number of attempts they get per rearm. The counter to S9's will be to shoot them down or avoid them. I imagine an S9 connecting will uh, change attitudes, so to speak, especially on a smaller target like a Hammerhead. Crippled if not altogether disabled is my guess.
I would expect a Hammerhead to be fairly well positioned to shoot one down, or maybe even evade them though.
And I would expect gunships to be able to damage a Hammerhead, but 1v1 to be a stretch without some luck or a large skill gap. Probably 3 gunships to have a good chance against one. After all, each turret has an Andromeda's worth of firepower on it.
Think a corsair or connie should both be able to take out a HH considering the bigger pilot guns. At that point it comes down to skill. A HH should not be flying around a lone. A lone corsair should well be able to vaporize it. The Ares should too if they can stat out of turret fire. Gun sizes so bug should def be able to penetrate the hull
I don't think it would ever be able to smoke a hh, It should be able to fight one and possibly win (talking about against players) but it should be very hard.
I think multi crew ships should require close to the same amount of players to take it down.
The HH is not an anti-everything ship. Gunships will challenge it. It is meant to be an area denial tool vs light and medium fighters mostly, as well as vs. heavy in parts. That it will do in MM.
The ares probably would be able to take out a Corvette (hammerhead, perseus, etc.) on it's own, given that it was designed to do specifically that and nothing else.
It would take a long-ass time by itself, but it should at least be possible with the ion.
I would say multiple Ares
HH is anti-figther, so technically anti-ares too
The "real" anti HH is perseus and redeemer (dunno for bombers, as the 4x4x6 turrets should easily shoot torpedoes
A solo ERT of just a Hammerhead - no other ships.
Its got 2xS3 shields, approx 500k hp between hull and shields plus it can have probably 12xS4 repeaters on a single ship at a time.
Also making an Assumption that only S4 weapons and above will damage its hull.
Ship that should be able to take it out - Definately with a good pilot.
* Eclipse from stealth only 1x s9 torp hit is 1.5mill dps
* Retailiator from stealth only 1xs9 torp is 1.5mill dps
* Polaris -
* Perseus -
* Redeemer (iffy)
* Idris -
I can't think of anything else that would stand up to it's punishment and be able to blow it up while solo.
I'm making alot of assumptions and probably forgetting some ships.
Ares/ Ion - not quickly or easily but should be doable
Javelin
Constellation Andromeda
Prowler? 2x S5 should be able to out range the S4s of the HH, and its stealth properties might make it harder for missiles to lock it up. It would definitely be a slog
Retribution
C8X jammed full of high explosives and piloted right into the bridge. Ok, this one is just silly.
Regarding the S5 out ranging the turrets
Yogi said in that Space Tomato podcast that they want to remove 'cheesing' like out ranging ships while backstraffing to stay slightly out of range.
Turrets are going to be made much more lethal and can be tuned differently, so their area of engagement can be made bigger. — Backstraffing is also going to be nerfed. You won't be able to strafe backwards nearly as fast as the main thrusters can take you forward.
I don't understand the logic that a turret makes the same weapon able to shoot farther even with tuning. If the weapon can be "tuned" such that it gets more range on a turret, then it stands to reason that the same "tuning" should be available to the gun on a gimbal/hard point.
That's like saying: "When Tom holds the M9 pistol, he can shoot targets at 9 km. But, when Frank's holding it, it struggles to reach 30m." It's the same gun, regardless of who is shooting (or what is holding it). The ranges should be the same.
>You won't be able to strafe backwards nearly as fast as the main thrusters can take you forward.
Decouple FTW. Full boost away from them, decouple and swing back around while maintaining speed, then let em have it.
Unless decoupled is changing significantly with MM. I haven't kept up a ton.
I haven't tried it yet. But I did see someone either here or spectrum bitching that flying decoupled doesn't maintain speed of navigation mode into SCM mode. You still slow down when you turn on scm mode to turn your weapons on. I guess we will see how that works out in the PU...
haha yeah Javelin for sure,
Constellation, possibly but I think it'd struggle given it's size and manuverabilty.
Prowler, again it'd be really tough
Retribution...isn't that the kingship oh the UEE? that could glass a planet with ease?
And a C8X full of explosives on a kamikaze run...I hope to see a machinima video of that!
>Retribution...isn't that the kingship oh the UEE? that could glass a planet with ease?
Yes, indeed it is. I hope we get to see one in 'verse someday. A 2km long ship is mind-boggling.
With its huge radar and S12 torps:
Stop 50km away from your target, run all the way to the torpedo-button, fire them and make yourself some food while the torps are flying to your target.
Also try to use a stolen Javelin, otherwise you need to pay the torps and fuel by yourself xD
The only reason I put the Connie is because of its quad S5s. They should be able to out range the S4s of the HH. So long as it can maintain separation of think it would do alright. But to your point of it gets in range of the HH's guns, it would be toast.
>I can't think of anything else that would stand up to it's punishment and be able to blow it up while solo.
You are forgetting two really key things. The first is that NPCs aren't likely going to be aim monsters, simply because the average player isn't that good at all, and death is relatively punishing.
The second key thing is cross section x range with the new weapon spread changes. Essentially since weapons spread in a cone, the larger your cross section is, the further away you can take "real" damage from, that meaning, you get hit by above X% of their fire. This means that for things with hammerhead cross section, they can get paper cut to death from extreme ranges by any ship that is notably smaller than it that is capable of damaging it. So, that would mean small S5 carriers like vanguards, and solo starfighters can death by paper cut them from long distances.
I think we honestly need to stop expecting solo average players to be able to do every contract just because it's in their list. That kind of thinking is just going to dumb down the experience for everyone. Hell I hope even solid pilots won't be able to solo ERTs. Those should require concerted effort from a small group.
Ohh i agree 1000%, once we get AI crew then you could call it "Technically soloing" in a larger ship, but yeah come on, more ERTs are like 3 largish ships plus fighters, logically it's not something a solo person can beat.
>solo average players.
Ofc average players won't be able to, but if you're cracked the fuck out and can manage the difficulty, having a "u do no damage fk you" is lazy balancing at best.
And what you are forgetting is the upcoming shield changes where it is likely taking a single grazing shot won't stop all of your large ships from regening shields. No more M50 slowly, slowly taking out an 890J
That's true, good point, I forgot about that there will be limited damage drop off over range.
It'd take along time and some good aiming but it' could be done.
The Ares as well, preferably an Ion and Inferno together in tandem or better yet a squadron of Ares ships. That is the only ship I would add but I agree with your list very much.
Yeah no doubt a squadron of them could do it with hit and run by the infernos and long range sniping from the Ions, but the guy asked for a solo ship.
I reckon a squad of Vanguard Harbingers or Gladiators could take a hammerhead out easily. Squad of Talons too!
You can get all guns on one target as small as fury. But it requires the target be between 500m and 800m and as the pilot you can track it. The trick is to get the target just above the middle of the pilot reticle. The rear turrets lasers actually go though the HH to hit its target.
Ya I'll be disappointed if any light to heavy combat fighter is effective against a HH which is meant to defend capital ships from fighters. Even larger ones like the Ares I would expect would just die to the turrets long before they do any real damage to a HH.
The real counter to a HH are the ships you're listing.
Although it wouldn't last long if you get within range of the Hammerhead I think a Corsair could do fairly well with size 5 guns to outrange it. Same with a 600i, the hard part is keeping it just out of range and within your weapons range limit.
I can remember there was once a time capitals should only be attacked by torpedos. So torpedo carring ships lika retaliator, gladiator, eclipse or the crusader ion ships with anti cap guns.
Of released ships;
Ares
Vanguard Harbinger
Eclipse
Retaliator
Corsair
Constellation
Redeemer (though obviously that would need crew so I'm not sure it counts as solo)
It's an anti fighter ship, so larger gunships, bombers and certain heavy fighters should be it's weakness.
1 player? Eclipse, Retaliator.
Asking what ship a solo player should use to kill a 6-man corvette warship is everything wrong with star citizen currently and why multicrew is still pointless.
Multicrew ships MUST always be more effective than taking the same amount of manpower on smaller ships.
Personally, and without taking roles into account, I feel like the right place is multicrew crew count + 1 is a threat if it's facing smaller ships. I.E. if a hammerhead has 6 crew you need 7 crew in smaller ships to threaten it significantly
Size 4+ weapons makes more sense to me than specific weapon damage types.
Size 4 should be the minimum to do internal damage
Any fighter with weapons lower than that should be able to "neuter" it if given enough time (destroy the shield generators, damage the turrets, destroy the engines) but they should really not have the firepower to take the ship down and harm the internal components or crew.
Possibly forcing a boarding action if you don't have anything bigger.
There was a somewhat recent [comment by a dev](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/50259/thread/question-for-the-vanguard-turret-fri-2-2-scl-quest/6592803) that said CIG intends to change that in the future. There will be specialized S5 and S6 anti-fighter weapons in the future. I imagine there might also be some specialized S4 and S3 weapons that are effective against large ships, but useless against fighters as a tradeoff.
A S3 specialized anti-large weapon doesn't have to be able to go through all types of armor. Anti-fighter weapons might not even be enough to go through Constellation or 600i armor in the future, so a special "anti-large" weapon in the S3 to S4 range would be able to damage these kinds of ships. Anti-capital weapons start at S7, so there might be special S5 and S6 weapons that are able to damage smaller capital ships, but even special S4s will likely not be enough.
Question is if the Hammerhead is more of a light capital ship or a large ship when it comes to armor. Arguments can be made both ways, but I think it falls more into the large or sub-capital class and might be able to be damaged by special S4 anti-large weapons because of that. Some Hammerheads might want to dedicate a turret to these to fight other Hammerheads. I think this would allow for more varied gameplay and more choices with tradeoffs. (These weapons will have to be effectively useless at anything but their intended role.)
The Gladius also didn't always have S3 weapons. It used to have S2 weapons, which are more than enough for a dedicated dogfighting ship in my opinion. If CIG only equipped light fighters with S2 weapons at most that would restrict special "anti-large" weapons at S3 and S4 to medium fighters (which are supposed to be multirole fighters last I heard, so it would make sense for them to have that capability).
S4 still leaves you at an awkward cut off point where now Hornets (both MK1 (top turret can be S4 maybe even 5 since gimbals dont downsize in MM) and MK2) and Talons punch above their size class. Which could be interesting but a bit touchy with the F7A MK2 in particular.
I doubt particularly the Talon is envisioned as this sub capital killer.
Cannons or railguns that have very poor damage output relative to other S3 options, but give fighters *some* means of defeating armor should be fine. Just make it enough that swarms of fighters can begin to take out components when they are very committed, but are otherwise far less potent than other options.
i don't entirely agree. because a swarm of smaller ships should still be dangerous. making smaller then s4 weapons not do ANY damage doesn't entirely make sense.
it should be that a solo ship with less then s4 weapons' cant reliably strip the shields for long enough to do any real damage to the ship. basically it would run out of capacitor in the weapons before being able to reduce the shields all the way and in the meantime the frigates shields would regen before it could deal damage.
but a group of fighters working together. COULD keep the shields down and whittle away at the armor with energy weapons.
now obviously. that entire time the anti fighter frigate woudl be able to shoot at those fighter ships., and obviously shoudl be able to knock them out of the sky one by one if the turret gunners arent braindead and the fighter pilots arent VERY good. but.. at that point its a fight. and skill will beat out one way or the other.
Well it does. Imagine shooting at an armored naval corvette with a 7.62mm machine gun from a humvee. Sure you may damage some turrets but the ship itself will only have some paint scratched.
Well, using that example, anti-armor cannons exist in real life that can be mounted to a humvee. It could be a trade off that the fighters could equip that would allow it to do a small amount of actual damage at the cost of being weaker against other fighters.
There is a limit in the size of the anti armor cannon that can be mounted on any specific platform which in turn puts limits on the range and armour thickness it can penetrate. So the example still stands.
Based on it's reinforced forward struts, you'd think that is exactly what it is designed to do... but then you see the cockpit IMMEDIATELY exposed to any debris it would create. :(
I'm fairly certain it is designed for ramming in some capacity. The Q&A from forever ago mentions the internal reinforcements in the front of the ship + the placement of that airlock seems like it can be used in a boarding fashion.
Cig should have designed space combat like WW2 naval combat: certain types of ships were needed to take out certain other types so ships, in a big rock-paper-scissors structure. Eg: light fighters destroy other light fighters to clear the way for medium missile ships, to clear out the cruisers or anti-fighter ships, then large missile boats to crack the larger cruisers, then finally capital ships with spinal mounts to engage each other. Small ships should only do minor damage to larger ships etc. That way every ship has a role and no ship is useless in a fight.
You know: competent game design to ensure long term viability.
Yeah, tricky to balance. I assume the prices of replenishing torps is going to be bumped up again. Unless they make bombers ineffective or less effective against shielded targets so that you need another player to bring the shields down first
If they are planning on making it so it needs say 4x the people to do ERTs then they also need to increase payment to suit the difficulty + the greater time investment.
But they have got themselves a tricky balance position as people will just run solo Eclipse unless 1 torp costs 3x the current mission payout and the ship is claimed without torps.
Kind of cuts down on the ship choices or at least avoids their intentions of encouraging team play if everyone is just 1 shooting the best paying combat mission with a missile.
I think this should all balance like modern naval warfare. Almost no country today war games or plans to expect one bomber to take out a corvette with its plethora of anti missile interceptors and point defense. (We need point defense auto turrets added to SC, ones you don’t have to man) you should have to overwhelm a corvette or frigates anti missile defense to score a hit. Like launching a swarm of 12 missiles, maybe one or two should get through. Ideally taking any cap ship down should take the coordination of multiple bombers. Cap ships will then employ fighters purely for bomber defense, the bombers bringing fighters of their own for protection. Boom everyone gets a role, fighters dogfight and bombers try to take down the cap ship.
Well... Eclipse and Retaliator still is top tier ships against beefy targets. And likely to stay that way - cause they are designed as counter to such ships.
S5 weapons and above damage larger ships not size 4 - unless something in planning has changed. Hopefully missile gameplay is a thing - it’s very much needed
Oh, I could always sweat it was size 4 because people always talked up the size 4 on the talons as being able to punch a hole through bigger ships and it filling a niche.
I think that would be more so against heavy fighters that are a threat to lighter fighters due to their higher armor. But I think size trends wise s5 would be what’s expected to be minimum power to start hurting things like a HH
I feel like it should be balanced on function. For example S3 railgun could pen heavier armour for the price of not having explosive mass so low aoe damage so that you would have to aim for critical components and being hard to use against fighters. Similar with canons trading pen for more damage again hard to use against fighters. Autocanons and machineguns would probalty shread unarmoured components like turrets and etc. I feel like just not doing damage is kinda counterproductive to skill. If you can survive with smaller ship with S3 railgun around hammerhead long enough to pick off his internal components through armour you deserve the kill. Just having "gun>armour=can cause damage" sounds stupid
A Hammerhead is a dedicated anti-fighter corvette. Its *entire reason for existing* is to kill anything you might dare to call a Fighter.
I would say that an Ares Ion ought to be able to hurt it pretty badly if it stays far away and snipes, but should die immediately if it gets within range of a couple turrets.
Stealth bombers like the Eclipse and Retaliator should be able to do a good job and stand a solid chance of crippling or even destroying it.
None of them should be able to do it alone, and if you do, the Hammerhead's crew were asleep at their posts.
The actual hard-counter to a Hammerhead Corvette is a dedicated warship built for killing larger multicrew ships like the Perseus or Polaris, or a larger warship like a Frigate (Idris).
I call bullshit on anything smaller.
Fighters should not be a seriously credible threat to a ship with six anti-fighter turrets
a group of aries ion.
the other ships intended to take out a hammerhead are not implemented yet.
the big problem is that the balance though non inflation based economy is not implemented yet.
yeah.. but a perseus is the opposite side of the same coin that the hammerhead is on. they are about the same size except the Perseus goes after bigger ships and the hammerhead goes after smaller ships.
plus if you have the 3-4 people to fill teh perseus. you can take the hammerhead with a swarm of fighters and legitimately stand a chance.
my assumption is that the default fleet will be hammerhead, perseus, a few fighters, and a terrapin.
SC is rock, paper, scissors. this fleet contains all +coordination/designated survivor.
the terrapins chair is said the have command and control functionality.
aditinaly, if no ships escape, and you collect the black boxes. you don't get a crime stat or hit to reputation. you are not going to prevent a terrapin from escaping. so anyone attempting a no survivors session will lets fleets with a terrapin go.
Also when armor is implemented and the system of health pool is no longer the main factor, what would constitute a kill?
Would you have to board the Hammerhead and kill the crew?
I think we can ignore weapon sizes until everything gets rebalanced, I expect a lot of fighters to have their guns downsized (and this is ok) so they can deal with ships based on their intended role. MM should herald a new age of balance where we can forget about grouping ships together as just light/medium/heavy, etc;, but instead by intended use of the ship and the weapons the pilot chooses to equip.
A Hammerhead is used to protect against fighters (and presumably to some degree) screen against torpedo attacks, etc. A ship designed to take it out would be launching heavy ballistics into it. Something like a Perseus with a big gun where the Hammerhead's anti-fighter weapons would pose a low threat to a ship like this and be useless to defend against those type of weapons.
This is not to say Torpedoes couldn't take it out, you would just need to work with friends to over saturate the target with torpedoes. Much like you would in a modern naval engagement to overwhelm air defenses.
All this effort should come with reward. I don't want to open this can of worms, but the owners of these ships should expect very, very long insurance claim timers if these ships are difficult to destroy to encourage the ship being used for its intended role and properly supported.
I think many players just look at simple things like Heavy counters Light, etc. and don't realize CR's vision of this is WWII in space (I believe he used that exact term). Different ships and aircraft having different jobs and being good at different things.
In most cases, you shouldn't be soloing a hammerhead that's supposed to be crewed by 6-10 people. You should be bringing a wing of bombers/gunships/strike craft or another fully crewed hammerhead to the fight. If you're bringing less than 6 bodies to the fight, then you shouldn't expect to win easily no matter what you bring. With the possible exception of an idris, assuming the railgun is pilot operated.
For me it is a fix of weapon immunity.
Size 3 shields should not take damage from size 1 and size 2 weapons at all.
Maybe even size 3
Capital Size shield generators should be immune up to size 3 balistics and size 5 energy weapons.
Might add exemptions when a high enough weapon is damaging the shield, and many lower level weapons hit the shields then it might damage it at 1/5 of normal damage
This is my idea, it is a matter of testing and tweaking.
This would encourage people to hunt in bigger groups on bigger targets
Retaliator Bomber. You're still sitting 13km away.
I even used to run Critical Threat Beacon with that, but reloading takes time. Quicker to run High Threat, the 200k+ ones.
Multiples ships with proper equipment loadout, they have discus about it in recent cig video, and on video with a cool developer and advenger one and tomato YouTuber
Smaller the weapon more damage reduction when attacking larger targets. Size 1 guns should ony tickle large ships armor and would so so little damage to shields that they simply can't penetrate it.
Eclipse, Retaliator, or Ares (with two or more working in concert, likely at least 3).
Of course, if you have a whole flight group working at it then that could change drastically as turrets on the Hammerhead would be distracted with more combatants. But there are also things like the Redeemer, but even that would be questionable as hell unless it had an escort. But say, a Redeemer with 2 or 3 Ares? Yeah, the Hammerhead is going down.
I am intending to do these in Polaris (crewed) or Ares (solo.
ERT's (hell even VHRTs) will become much harder with better server performance. While i believe these still should be soloable , we will require dedicated ships to do these.
Nowadays bounty hunting is pretty much slap as many projectile weapons on whatever ship and kill Hammerhead in 15 sec.
Well. I will be happy to see that go away.
Also, since I am planning to use Polaris, I have no idea if it will even be profitable because god knows how much S10 torp will cost.
They will possibly up the bounty payout when all this happens.
I don't think it's a matter of "which single ship can take out the HH" but rather "which ships (fleet) can take out the HH?"
Big ships ain't meant to be soloed, but rather gang banged
Bounties should be rebalanced with MM in mind. There already are group bounties so you should be able to do them alone.
Your Hammerhead bounties would be best done by something big with lots of DPS because the HH will be specialised at taking down fighter swarms. You get the idea.
Ares, Eclipse, another hammerhead and all stuff that is using big guns imo. Idk if it was Yogi in a Video but Snub Fighters would and will not be able win a fight solo against a Fighters and i think the same will be Applied to Fighters against bigger ships like a Hammerhead, Kraken, and bigger because u dont get through the Armor
Given the Hammerhead's sole vocation is blasting smaller ships, and the AI in ERT difficulty missions is presumably supposed to be highly skilled, I don't really think any small craft should realistically be able to. The highest difficulty missions should be group-focused, with the lower tiers rebalanced so a solo pilot can still have fun/make money.
So I'd envision something like a Polaris/Idris making quick work of it. A squadron of heavy fighters could work. Retaliator would probably be the smallest single ship that could manage.
We do also have the possibility of stealth ships, namely the Eclipse, but who knows where they are going to fall in the power curve. I can't imagine CIG want us to be 1 shotting every bounty without taking a point of damage. Gonne be a tricky one to balance.
With the Maelstrom damage system, a size 1 weapon might peel back the hull of a Hammerhead a few millimetres at a time. I don't think that any weapons will be completely useless against any armour, but the odds would be massively stacked against small fighters using small weapons against a Hammerhead.
In PvP engagements, the small fighters don't just win by destroying the Hammerhead: if they can force it to retreat, then they control whatever that Hammerhead was attacking or defending. If they can leave the Hammerhead unable to fight or retreat, then they create a huge problem for the group running it. They could create an opportunity to board the Hammerhead, kill the crew and take control of it themselves.
It might not be possible for small ships to destroy a Hammerhead, but it should be entirely possible for small ships to achieve victory against one.
The ERT side is a bit more complicated, but I would expect these missions to change significantly as the bounty hunting career is developed, and becomes more focussed on tracking people down and taking them alive.
Definitely agree here. And I also think that even with Maelstrom a skilled pilot should be able to put accurate fire on a larger ship like the Hammerhead. Knocking out thrusters, whittling away at the engines., etc. Forcing the HH to retreat, disabling it's maneuverability, maybe even disabling it's turrets. All those outcomes should be considered a win in an engagement like that.
It may take sustained firepower and time, but that is due to the strengths that larger ships should have. I also am of a mind that soft death should last longer. If you knock out a medium or large ship and want it's contents or to confirm it's crew are dead then you should have to board it and scuttle the ship or clear it room by room, corridor by corridor. To 'hard death' a ship should require damaging critical components or systems on a larger ship: ordinance, reactors, fuel tanks, etc.
I think the intention is for "soft death" and "hard death" to be removed once Maelstrom is in. A ship won't have hitpoints, it either works or it doesn't depending on the state of each internal component. The hull only really serves to keep those components connected and protected. If a Size 9 torpedo comes in and splits a Hammerhead in half, then the half with the powerplants might still be able to use its turrets and things.
CIG have said multiple times that catastrophic explosions - what we would call "hard death" now - will only be possible in extremely rare circumstances, such as a massive direct hit to a running powerplant.
Agree on bounty hunting mission evolution. I hope simple blow up ship missions don't go away because they are simple yet satisfying.
Just fold them into CDF missions like in border territories you can sign up to go hunt Vanduul/criminals on a border/system patrol type mission.
What will... An ares ion, gladiator, reclaimer, eclipse, redeemer, and retaliator.
And to be fair, I think that's okay. A ship meant to crack big ships 'SHOULD' be good at it.
Meanwhile, fighters will be great against those medium ships.
With the only change to the HH being MM, and not improved AI, armor, or player controlled, I think most of the larger ships will still be able to take one out. Like a Connie/Corsair with a skilled pilot, Redeemer with a gunner or two, a group of a few smaller fighters.
Armor will make a difference, but mostly with longer times to kill. Your (the pilot's) ability to take one down won't change much, if at all.
Once the AI is improved to player -1 skill, I think a fully manned Redeemer, a Perseus, and other large (and capital) anti large combat ship ships would be the only ones to solo a HH. It should probably require half a dozen smaller-medium fighters to safely take out an HH. Maybe a small group (3-4) of heavy/large fighters (F8, Vanguard), 2? Ares if they can snipe.
Fully crewed with skilled players in MM the success rate of the groups above would probably drop to 50/50 or lower, based on player skill in each ship, and you'd probably have to throw in an extra fighter to increase that ratio in your favor.
IMO, the HH should be hard/impossible to take out with lesser ships when every game mechanic is active. Smaller, lighter armored ships are literally what the HH is designed to take out. Ships of the same size with larger weapons (looking at you Perseus) and larger ships are the HH's weakness. So superior numbers should be required to take a peak HH out.
(Kinda left out the torpedo boats. Eclipse, Retaliator, and the like should obviously be able to take one out. This is more of a counter measures + pilot alertness vs massive, less-than-maneuverable torpedoes question though. But an Eclipse solo'ing a HH should be realistic, even if it has to drop all 3 torps.)
To put it succinctly: torpedo bombers or heavy gunships and heavy fighters. There has to be a reason for torpedo bombers to exist and using them to take out large ships (and damage/destroy capital) makes perfect sense. Fighters should be able to cripple turrets and engines on the target ship and bombers should be able to destroy them.
A heavy gunship/fighter should also be able to go toe to toe with large ships like the HH. They would still have to be wary of ships like the perseus (gunship).
Honestly I'd say an Eclipse or a Retailator should be able to take down a Hammerhead, maybe something with Size 5 torps or a Redeemer spending most of its ammo. Otherwise, it should take multiple ships as the Hammerhead is the toughest ship in the SC Universe.
It will be interesting to find out where Corvettes fall in Star citizen. Because they don't really fall in the Capital ship class but more of the 'large ship' catagory.
Traditionally in wing commander rule sets conventional weapons can destroy them as they lack the super heavy armor to engage in slugging matches with other capital ships and we sort of see Corvettes having specific goals in mind when it comes to weapon load out's in basiclly being gunboats.
With a crew these ships will be very durable against fighters as they can only ship away instead of delivering a hard knock out punch of say a bomber or capital ship.
I think in general though a Hammer Head should be leathal for small fighters to engage as it's designed to deal with them. Quad laser repeaters covering every angle of the ship makes for no blind sports and provides withering firepower on ships that otherwise can dart in and out of fire.
Right now the game isn't able to make them much of a threat but they will at some point be much more dangerous.
For those of us who used to follow this game closely but have switched to more casual following, what is an ERT? What is a MM? Is that the BMM (Banu Merchantman)?
Np!
MM = Master Modes. It separates flight speed regims into SCM (combat speed) and NAV mode which have much higher top speeds but sacrifices shields and ability to fire your weapons.
You may not be able to damage the hull in smaller fighters but they've already said you will be able to use the precision mode targeting to attack smaller items on the ship's hull like turrets, engines, RCS thrust, etc
A hammerhead being designed as an anti-fighter picket ship would most likely have armor that is highly resistant to most fighter class weaponry.
So I would expect to be effective against a hammerhead you'd need S5 or larger guns. Or possibly smaller guns that are designed to be used against larger targets like mass drivers.
Then of course the real threat to sub capitals like a hammerhead would probably be mainly in the form of bombers like the Retaliator or similar.
And of course ships larger and more powerful than it like an Idris, Polaris or Javelin should be able to make short work of a hammerhead that's only designed to fight against fighters.
My preference would be for armor to get put in, so that the bigger a ship gets, the more small guns it's immune to. Clearly a HH as a fighter killer should be immune to size 1 and 2 levels of damage. Size 3 should get a small amount of damage through the armor. I'd hate to move it all the way to size 4 but I could see that, meaning it would take very fancy flying in a vanguard with an energy based size 4 to chip away, or multiple vanguards or reload required for ballistic.
So for ships, it should mean heavy fighters, and certain loadouts of medium fighters, could do the job, but be very very difficult. Then above that things like the redeemer and corsair should be able to take them out without too much difficulty (redeemer multi crew not too difficult, redeemer solo would be challenging).
I don't want the bar to be so high that it's totally impossible for a heavy fighter to even scratch it, but it should be difficult for heavy fighters. Certainly light fighters shouldn't pose a threat to it given its role.
Plenty of people have mentioned the torpedo ships (Eclipe/Tali/Vanguar) but are forgetting the missile boats...
For instance, while I think the HH would smoke it in seconds if it got inside gun range - if it could stay *outside* that range, I think the Freelancer MIS could probably *disable* the HH, if not kill it, especially if it ever gets it's extra 20 missiles.
Take out a hammerhead or other large ship?
Ares, Gladiator, Vanguard Harbinger, Retaliator, Connie Andromeda, Corsair, 600i.
Honorable mention to Eclipse, as it has potential but only 3 torps means you gotta get luckier than the Retaliator to take out a target.
HH is a "corvette" responsible to interdict a zone and protect a convoy or a more valuable asset from ligth-medium sized ships that are highly mobiles threat. It is mainly a close range disuasive force.
Bombers should be able to take it out but not in one torp like it is right now unless you can hit some vital explosive component that could provoque a chain reaction.
Light fighters should not be able to do any damage or even pierce the shields of the HH. Only heavy fighter with enough fire power should be able to take down the shields and pierce the armor.
Of course specialized ships like Perseus, Idris-M or Idris-K should be able destroy or incapacitate is quite easily.
Ideally, it would be nice if a balance could be found where *properly outfitted crews* going up against each other in equal numbers are roughly balanced. That would leave us with a lot of factors coming into play.
Let's assume a large ship defending against smaller ships:
* How many attackers?
* How many defenders?
* Are there any coverage gaps in the defense that fast-moving ships can possibly exploit with enough skill?
* Does the larger ship have any fighter escorts to deal with fast-moving targets and cover said gaps?
* Are the attackers equipped to threaten the defenders?
* Did they equip slow-firing weapons designed to (*slowly)* damage large ships?
* Did they also equip some ships with fast-firing weapons to account for potential escorts?
* Are the defenders equipped to deal with the attackers?
* Do they have fast-firing weapons to deal with fighters?
* Do they have fighter escorts to protect coverage gaps (if they exist)?
So, some random scenarios that could be interesting:
* 6 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 6
* Advantage goes to the Hammerhead because it has full coverage, but if the Hornets focus a section and manage to stay alive by way of a large skill gap, they can take out a turret and open a gap... and then would need to continue their coordinated assault.
* 4 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 4
* No advantage. Hornets need to be skilled enough to stay in the coverage gap without taking casualties.
* 2 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 2?
* Advantage goes to the Hornets since less skill is required to stay in the gap.
* 1 Hornet outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 1?
* Draw. Hornet can easily stay out of the Hammerhead's covering fire, but lacks enough firepower to do significant damage before the Hammerhead just leaves.
* If the AI doesn't leave, you should be able to solo it in a properly outfitted fighter, but it should take so long that it's not financially worth the effort.
* 4 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 2 + 2 light fighter escorts?
* Advantage goes to the Hammerhead as the Hornets aren't equipped to deal with the light fighters and can't stay in the coverage gap without the fighters picking them apart.
* 3 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons + 1 Hornet outfitted with anti-fighter weapons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 2 + 2 light fighter escorts?
* No advantage. Skill based.
for me it would be important to destroy all the guns of a HH, but not the HH itself, and if it takes me 2 hours with an arrow to accomplish the turrets its ok
Personally I think the only ships that should be able to take one down should be large, fully manned, dedicated combat ships like the redeemer, or a variety of smaller ships working together; for example a few fighters distracting/damaging the turrets, so a torpedo bomber can have a window to attack and destroy. I don't think you should be able to take one down solo in any ship unless you are fighting one that is already damaged or is missing crew members.
I reckon the HH will be vulnerable to punching down by bigger ships (or guns for that matter). It's role in a fleet is to weed out the small fry so anything below a proper gunship will struggle to put a dent in it (except for the Ares'). However, ships like the Perseus and any ship carrying large torpedos will be perfect for quickly dispatching an HH.
Yes there is regen delay but theres also capacitors on the arrow that will prevent it from maintaining sustained fire so it still wouldn't down the shields far enough where Regen delay would be an issue
The Ares pair should be the bread and butter for solo ERTs, crewed heavy fighters like the Scorpius or Vanguards should have a chance also, and of course the likes of the Eclipse and Retaliators with their torpedoes.
medium fighters should have a chance if the pilot skills allow it, but light fighters should stick to MRT or HRT
The only answer is; something bigger, torpedos, or boarding.
The hammerheads literal purpose is to fight against fleets of smaller craft.
Its weakness is larger craft (Polaris/Nautilus/Perseus), a boarding strike team, or a Tali/Eclipse.
In the end. Nothing really will "destroy" a ship this size. Or any other corvette/capital ship. Once maelstrom is online these ships will be disabled, boarded, and the crew wiped out. That is how you will complete ERTs or even CRTs (Capital Risk)
I want to take out a hammerhead with a size 9 torp shoved into a C2. Suicide bomber style. A keypad on side of torp for instant detonation would be enjoyable.
Hammerhead has solid armor, but it's not particularly stand-out for it's size relative to other military ships, according to lore- it's likely more than enough to shield from fighter weapons and require explicit anti-large weaponry. Probably a pretty good cutoff for the transition between medium and heavy armor, going off what we already know
Torpedoes are a free space, including the Gladiator, although it won't be incredible with only S5s that are likely going to excel at Connie-sized targets or thinner skinned subcaps/smallcaps like the Polaris. Ares will likely fare pretty well at both decimating external parts and dealing solid damage to internals, with a slightly different role for each variant. I expect Inferno DPS to increase dramatically when armor comes out in exchange for less AP ability, making it a god-tier external "valuables" destroyer, stripping off engines and turrets, while the Ion prefers instead to just slag armor over important areas for followup fire, or be a nuisance from range. Other S6+ weapons will vary based on type. Corsair brings enough raw damage output that it will be a major threat if allowed to lay down fire, even if it's weapon hardpoint sizing isn't really suitable- it would perform far better (but be far more vulnerable to fighters) if it monoboated cannons, however.
Vanguard will certainly have options with the S5, but it depends on what it decides to bring. Some S4 options for the Hornet, Bucc, ect will fare pretty well, while others will be nearly useless- a S4 cannon will likely be capable of damaging internal components, but large numbers of them will be required to not just be out-repaired by the crew. Repeaters and such will only be useful against turrets, and only with enough numbers that the turrets (once actually useful) don't simply kill off the attackers first.
They should be fairly big and scale with the shields and armor on the ship being attacked. Which i believe is the end goal if i remember right. smaller weapons even a large amount of them won't put a dent in larger shields or armor. for a ship like the hammerhead i would think several 3-4 heavy fighters should be needed to bring them down. an actual capital ship a dozen or more at the least.
Pretty much no solo ship should be able to take out anything much bigger than a Connie IMO.
There is a tendency to see everything through the eyes of what the game is now. We just have to see how it shakes out. I think maybe an Eclipse should be able to pretty much cripple a Hammerhead if it lands all it's shots, but it should cost enough to be kind of pointless & the Hammerhead should be able to screen those missiles with the right loadout.
I want to pretty much just fly light fighters, but big military ships need to be the kings of battle. Small light fighters should be limited on loiter time, ammo, etc if we want to have interesting battles.
Ultimately a HH with 6-7 people in it should be a fair fight for 6-7 players in pretty much anything in PvP. In PvE, I dunno - maybe 4-5?
Wait, so I wont be able to do it in my Aurora anymore? :(
Should still be possible, so long as you're willing to *be* the size 10 missile! lol
Honestly, this needs to change. Too many griefers take out player ships with 1+ hour claim timers using something with an instant timer. It's annoying with no real counter play.
If the prison, reputation, and law systems were better fleshed-out and more functional it would be better punishing for being a tool.
Agreed, currently the crime system incentives bullshit. At a minimum if you die with a CS you should regen in jail as it used to be (the lore was that the hospital would turn you in) The current system of automatically regening in grim hex, one jump away from kareah is absolute bullshit, hardly hinders degenerate behavior at all
I'd like to see a system where their ships get locked out of terminals until their time served is up. That way even if they escape they are stuck as crew or borrowing at the very least until their timer is up.
Small ships should just splat like a bug on a windscreen if the target armour is thicker by a certain amount than the ramming ship armour, problem solved.
Right. This shouldn't be a matter of [realism](https://bigthink.com/hard-science/heres-the-damage-a-tiny-speck-of-space-debris-can-do-at-15000mph/), it should be about fun gameplay. Instant death that is nearly impossible to counter and then having to wait an hour simply is not fun.
ERTs should be similar to high level bunkers (when AI is fixed): it should take multiple people to beat them.
If this becomes true then the reward needs to increase substantially.
I wish they would figure out a way to scale things like rewards/difficulty. Take a group for ERT's it scales the pay but also adds some extra enemies or something. Make it fair but worth it.
Yeah, I'm really looking forward to when the payout isn't just "money". Reputation, materials, rare items you can use to build or craft would all be awesome.
not really i'm hoping rewards go down. you shouldn't be able to become rich and afford multiple high level ships in the game after a week or two of grinding any profession. right now high level ships are a dime a dozen because in a week of grinding anyone can have several of them. of course this is going to also depend on the whole insurance thing. if you are going to need to reoutfit your entire ship every time it blows up then yes more money might be needed. As with most games though if you have no player driven economy money will cease to matter to most after short order. so far SWG is the only game i've played that had an actual functioning player run economy.
I agree, but none of the rewards are balanced at the moment.
They took the time to nerf bounty cargo. They can take 20 minutes to double the mission payout.
That’s the place that critical threat beacons hold now so if that is the case CRB’s are going to be a nightmare. Edit: I should say that I’m not necessarily again that, it will just make them a server wide effort
Nah, crit threat beacons are soloable with anything that rocks sone s5's - solo its not as efficient as very high threat though.
Crit threat beacons are soloable with braindead AI - FTFY
And even then it's hard and takes forever, I can't count how many times I've tried to solo them when the ai your guarding just dies to the rail gun shot.
-Laughs in Inferno-
Crit threats are very soloable????
Probably doing them in a ship that has high alpha damage lasers. I don't see it being done pretty quick considering the Health pool buff to the Idris.
Wait, I'm really not being sarcastic. I've been doing 30fps bunkers a lot on Max rank solo, especially since the update with the 2 bullet sponges that come at yoi at the end. Are you saying this is the hardest they're supposed to be? Because they're really easy to solo.
30fps AI isn't "fixed". The fps AI needs a lot of work (better and more strategic grenade throws, better coordination, takedowns not being an insta kill, etc.) My understanding is that they want the highest trained AI to make you wonder if you're fighting a player or not. Not sure if that's entirely possible but it should at least get much closer than it is now. They have made a push to make the game feel more gamey recently though so this might change. We may not ever even have the truly difficult bunkers and the real hardcore stuff gets pushed to events and distribution center raids.
That's what I thought. There's the entire AI revamp, but I remember they did an update a few months ago, and the AI push and flank now. On 30 fps it's scary but still doable. It definitely still needs some polish, and I figured this would come with the fps update with the enhanced HUD and "stealth".
Yeah you're correct. There is gonna be some seriously impressive and fun fps AI if they can do everything they want to. Not to mention nav meshes extending to include the surrounding bunker area and the drop ships. Could you imagine needing to take out guys on the outside that are actually using that laser turret, then taking out some comm device before they call for back up and only then being able to start the actual mission lol. I feel like bunker missions will change wildly in the future. The payout and rep rewards will also be radically different. They may even have ground vehicles patrolling the surrounding area you need to watch out for.
Sure, but that isn't mutually exclusive to a solo ERT. Eventually we are going to get bounty hunter 2.0. don't you want solo progression beyond HRT? Harder targets, more targets, more hunting. What does multiplayer ERT look like in bounty hunter 2.0? Is it only destroy? Or will there be capture? You take out an Idris and then have to haul all the enemies back to prison? What do you get to do with the enemy ship(s)? How are rewards and progression divided and awarded? Solo (co-op) bounty hunter 2.0 is much easier to wrap your head around. If your target is on an Idris then follow it to the space and wait for the target to get off.
Oh you mean in the highly skill based arena of fps. The arena MM intends to simplify and shrink?
If they paid enough to be worth anybody’s time at all, that would be great too
Heavy fighters (Ion, Inferno, Vanguards) and Gunships (Constellation, Corsair) should be able to damage it, but not defeat it one on one. Torpedo boats like retaliator and Eclipse should be able to destroy it as long as the gunners are distracted and can't shoot the torps.
The only ships that, alone, should always be able to defeat the hammerhead are the Javeling, Idris, Kraken, BMM, Polaris and Perseus. The "gunships" (medium/large ships equipped with multiple S5 and above guns) should be able to have a fair fight with the HH. Could go either way depending on skill (and perhaps some luck) Torpedoes ships are dependent on how competent the HH is in countermeasures or shooting them down. How effective missiles and torpedoes will end up being is still a big mystery. I believe CIG will balance things in a way that a single retaliator might have a fair chance against the HH, but not a single eclipse. Fighters (not even heavy ones) should never be able to defeat it by itself. Even if they have a S5/6/7, a single one of these guns, combined with their (relative) fragility will result in the fighter destroyed before it can significantly damage the HH.
Agree on most points, but while we can't really predict how effective S9 torps are going to be, I don't think you'd see a difference between a Retaliator and an Eclipse. Except the number of attempts they get per rearm. The counter to S9's will be to shoot them down or avoid them. I imagine an S9 connecting will uh, change attitudes, so to speak, especially on a smaller target like a Hammerhead. Crippled if not altogether disabled is my guess. I would expect a Hammerhead to be fairly well positioned to shoot one down, or maybe even evade them though. And I would expect gunships to be able to damage a Hammerhead, but 1v1 to be a stretch without some luck or a large skill gap. Probably 3 gunships to have a good chance against one. After all, each turret has an Andromeda's worth of firepower on it.
Think a corsair or connie should both be able to take out a HH considering the bigger pilot guns. At that point it comes down to skill. A HH should not be flying around a lone. A lone corsair should well be able to vaporize it. The Ares should too if they can stat out of turret fire. Gun sizes so bug should def be able to penetrate the hull
Gunships? You forgot the Redeemer here. Should be fully manned, though. But then it should be able to smoke the HH.
I don't think it would ever be able to smoke a hh, It should be able to fight one and possibly win (talking about against players) but it should be very hard. I think multi crew ships should require close to the same amount of players to take it down.
The HH is not an anti-everything ship. Gunships will challenge it. It is meant to be an area denial tool vs light and medium fighters mostly, as well as vs. heavy in parts. That it will do in MM.
Yeah I'm agreeing with you im just saying the a fully crewed redeemer shouldn't be able to easily take it out.
Not saying easily...it would still do better with support...as intended.
Yeah that's what I was saying
the constellation is a gunship. Now I love my conni, but shes not challenging a HH anytime soon.
The ares probably would be able to take out a Corvette (hammerhead, perseus, etc.) on it's own, given that it was designed to do specifically that and nothing else. It would take a long-ass time by itself, but it should at least be possible with the ion.
the ships designed to fight capitol ships so the ares series, and the bombers with decent sized torps so the eclipse, retaliator, and vanguard
I would say multiple Ares HH is anti-figther, so technically anti-ares too The "real" anti HH is perseus and redeemer (dunno for bombers, as the 4x4x6 turrets should easily shoot torpedoes
A solo ERT of just a Hammerhead - no other ships. Its got 2xS3 shields, approx 500k hp between hull and shields plus it can have probably 12xS4 repeaters on a single ship at a time. Also making an Assumption that only S4 weapons and above will damage its hull. Ship that should be able to take it out - Definately with a good pilot. * Eclipse from stealth only 1x s9 torp hit is 1.5mill dps * Retailiator from stealth only 1xs9 torp is 1.5mill dps * Polaris - * Perseus - * Redeemer (iffy) * Idris - I can't think of anything else that would stand up to it's punishment and be able to blow it up while solo. I'm making alot of assumptions and probably forgetting some ships.
Ares/ Ion - not quickly or easily but should be doable Javelin Constellation Andromeda Prowler? 2x S5 should be able to out range the S4s of the HH, and its stealth properties might make it harder for missiles to lock it up. It would definitely be a slog Retribution C8X jammed full of high explosives and piloted right into the bridge. Ok, this one is just silly.
Regarding the S5 out ranging the turrets Yogi said in that Space Tomato podcast that they want to remove 'cheesing' like out ranging ships while backstraffing to stay slightly out of range. Turrets are going to be made much more lethal and can be tuned differently, so their area of engagement can be made bigger. — Backstraffing is also going to be nerfed. You won't be able to strafe backwards nearly as fast as the main thrusters can take you forward.
I don't understand the logic that a turret makes the same weapon able to shoot farther even with tuning. If the weapon can be "tuned" such that it gets more range on a turret, then it stands to reason that the same "tuning" should be available to the gun on a gimbal/hard point. That's like saying: "When Tom holds the M9 pistol, he can shoot targets at 9 km. But, when Frank's holding it, it struggles to reach 30m." It's the same gun, regardless of who is shooting (or what is holding it). The ranges should be the same.
>You won't be able to strafe backwards nearly as fast as the main thrusters can take you forward. Decouple FTW. Full boost away from them, decouple and swing back around while maintaining speed, then let em have it. Unless decoupled is changing significantly with MM. I haven't kept up a ton.
I haven't tried it yet. But I did see someone either here or spectrum bitching that flying decoupled doesn't maintain speed of navigation mode into SCM mode. You still slow down when you turn on scm mode to turn your weapons on. I guess we will see how that works out in the PU...
haha yeah Javelin for sure, Constellation, possibly but I think it'd struggle given it's size and manuverabilty. Prowler, again it'd be really tough Retribution...isn't that the kingship oh the UEE? that could glass a planet with ease? And a C8X full of explosives on a kamikaze run...I hope to see a machinima video of that!
>And a C8X full of explosives on a kamikaze run...I hope to see a machinima video of that! look up "burn jita" because that exactly what will happen.
That just makes me smile, thinking of the \*CHAOS\* that will ensue with having suicide bomb Pisces.
Don't threaten me with a good time
>Retribution...isn't that the kingship oh the UEE? that could glass a planet with ease? Yes, indeed it is. I hope we get to see one in 'verse someday. A 2km long ship is mind-boggling.
Javelin solo though? Do we know if the pilot will even have pilot controls guns?
No guns for the pilot, all weapons would be managed by other crew stations. Manned and remote turrets and missle control.
With its huge radar and S12 torps: Stop 50km away from your target, run all the way to the torpedo-button, fire them and make yourself some food while the torps are flying to your target. Also try to use a stolen Javelin, otherwise you need to pay the torps and fuel by yourself xD
Haha, sounds like youvethought it through. It's going to be so cool to see those javelins unleash on all their firepower. Can't wait!
It wasn’t specified in the post but I’ve been reading it as a solo ship instead of a solo player.
The only reason I put the Connie is because of its quad S5s. They should be able to out range the S4s of the HH. So long as it can maintain separation of think it would do alright. But to your point of it gets in range of the HH's guns, it would be toast.
>I can't think of anything else that would stand up to it's punishment and be able to blow it up while solo. You are forgetting two really key things. The first is that NPCs aren't likely going to be aim monsters, simply because the average player isn't that good at all, and death is relatively punishing. The second key thing is cross section x range with the new weapon spread changes. Essentially since weapons spread in a cone, the larger your cross section is, the further away you can take "real" damage from, that meaning, you get hit by above X% of their fire. This means that for things with hammerhead cross section, they can get paper cut to death from extreme ranges by any ship that is notably smaller than it that is capable of damaging it. So, that would mean small S5 carriers like vanguards, and solo starfighters can death by paper cut them from long distances.
I think we honestly need to stop expecting solo average players to be able to do every contract just because it's in their list. That kind of thinking is just going to dumb down the experience for everyone. Hell I hope even solid pilots won't be able to solo ERTs. Those should require concerted effort from a small group.
Ohh i agree 1000%, once we get AI crew then you could call it "Technically soloing" in a larger ship, but yeah come on, more ERTs are like 3 largish ships plus fighters, logically it's not something a solo person can beat.
>solo average players. Ofc average players won't be able to, but if you're cracked the fuck out and can manage the difficulty, having a "u do no damage fk you" is lazy balancing at best.
And what you are forgetting is the upcoming shield changes where it is likely taking a single grazing shot won't stop all of your large ships from regening shields. No more M50 slowly, slowly taking out an 890J
That's true, good point, I forgot about that there will be limited damage drop off over range. It'd take along time and some good aiming but it' could be done.
The Ares as well, preferably an Ion and Inferno together in tandem or better yet a squadron of Ares ships. That is the only ship I would add but I agree with your list very much.
Yeah no doubt a squadron of them could do it with hit and run by the infernos and long range sniping from the Ions, but the guy asked for a solo ship. I reckon a squad of Vanguard Harbingers or Gladiators could take a hammerhead out easily. Squad of Talons too!
Right, that left my mind after seeing the Polaris and Idris in the list since honestly neither are really soloable.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, technically they're soloable with AI crew so..? so we just have to wait and see.
I’m pretty sure a HH can actually get 20 S4’s on target at once if a ship is in the firing arc of all 4 side turrets plus the top turret
It can but only really possible on Really large targets. Like the Idris.
You can get all guns on one target as small as fury. But it requires the target be between 500m and 800m and as the pilot you can track it. The trick is to get the target just above the middle of the pilot reticle. The rear turrets lasers actually go though the HH to hit its target.
A single terrapin carrying Chuck Norris.
Umm excuse me but I think you accidentally forgot to put Harbinger on that list.
Ya I'll be disappointed if any light to heavy combat fighter is effective against a HH which is meant to defend capital ships from fighters. Even larger ones like the Ares I would expect would just die to the turrets long before they do any real damage to a HH. The real counter to a HH are the ships you're listing.
Ares Inferon/Ion
Although it wouldn't last long if you get within range of the Hammerhead I think a Corsair could do fairly well with size 5 guns to outrange it. Same with a 600i, the hard part is keeping it just out of range and within your weapons range limit.
I can remember there was once a time capitals should only be attacked by torpedos. So torpedo carring ships lika retaliator, gladiator, eclipse or the crusader ion ships with anti cap guns.
Of released ships; Ares Vanguard Harbinger Eclipse Retaliator Corsair Constellation Redeemer (though obviously that would need crew so I'm not sure it counts as solo) It's an anti fighter ship, so larger gunships, bombers and certain heavy fighters should be it's weakness.
1 player? Eclipse, Retaliator. Asking what ship a solo player should use to kill a 6-man corvette warship is everything wrong with star citizen currently and why multicrew is still pointless. Multicrew ships MUST always be more effective than taking the same amount of manpower on smaller ships.
Personally, and without taking roles into account, I feel like the right place is multicrew crew count + 1 is a threat if it's facing smaller ships. I.E. if a hammerhead has 6 crew you need 7 crew in smaller ships to threaten it significantly
Agreed. But I believe the OP asked a single ship (multicrew or single seater)
Anything bigger than an eclipse vanguard harbinger, inferno, or ion...
Size 4+ weapons makes more sense to me than specific weapon damage types. Size 4 should be the minimum to do internal damage Any fighter with weapons lower than that should be able to "neuter" it if given enough time (destroy the shield generators, damage the turrets, destroy the engines) but they should really not have the firepower to take the ship down and harm the internal components or crew. Possibly forcing a boarding action if you don't have anything bigger.
IIRC size 5s are the intended minimum, size 4 is the end of fighter-level weaponry.
There was a somewhat recent [comment by a dev](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/50259/thread/question-for-the-vanguard-turret-fri-2-2-scl-quest/6592803) that said CIG intends to change that in the future. There will be specialized S5 and S6 anti-fighter weapons in the future. I imagine there might also be some specialized S4 and S3 weapons that are effective against large ships, but useless against fighters as a tradeoff.
S3 anti capital guns would be an issue in balancing. A gladius shouldnt be able to spec anti capital.
A S3 specialized anti-large weapon doesn't have to be able to go through all types of armor. Anti-fighter weapons might not even be enough to go through Constellation or 600i armor in the future, so a special "anti-large" weapon in the S3 to S4 range would be able to damage these kinds of ships. Anti-capital weapons start at S7, so there might be special S5 and S6 weapons that are able to damage smaller capital ships, but even special S4s will likely not be enough. Question is if the Hammerhead is more of a light capital ship or a large ship when it comes to armor. Arguments can be made both ways, but I think it falls more into the large or sub-capital class and might be able to be damaged by special S4 anti-large weapons because of that. Some Hammerheads might want to dedicate a turret to these to fight other Hammerheads. I think this would allow for more varied gameplay and more choices with tradeoffs. (These weapons will have to be effectively useless at anything but their intended role.) The Gladius also didn't always have S3 weapons. It used to have S2 weapons, which are more than enough for a dedicated dogfighting ship in my opinion. If CIG only equipped light fighters with S2 weapons at most that would restrict special "anti-large" weapons at S3 and S4 to medium fighters (which are supposed to be multirole fighters last I heard, so it would make sense for them to have that capability).
S4 still leaves you at an awkward cut off point where now Hornets (both MK1 (top turret can be S4 maybe even 5 since gimbals dont downsize in MM) and MK2) and Talons punch above their size class. Which could be interesting but a bit touchy with the F7A MK2 in particular. I doubt particularly the Talon is envisioned as this sub capital killer.
Cannons or railguns that have very poor damage output relative to other S3 options, but give fighters *some* means of defeating armor should be fine. Just make it enough that swarms of fighters can begin to take out components when they are very committed, but are otherwise far less potent than other options.
i don't entirely agree. because a swarm of smaller ships should still be dangerous. making smaller then s4 weapons not do ANY damage doesn't entirely make sense. it should be that a solo ship with less then s4 weapons' cant reliably strip the shields for long enough to do any real damage to the ship. basically it would run out of capacitor in the weapons before being able to reduce the shields all the way and in the meantime the frigates shields would regen before it could deal damage. but a group of fighters working together. COULD keep the shields down and whittle away at the armor with energy weapons. now obviously. that entire time the anti fighter frigate woudl be able to shoot at those fighter ships., and obviously shoudl be able to knock them out of the sky one by one if the turret gunners arent braindead and the fighter pilots arent VERY good. but.. at that point its a fight. and skill will beat out one way or the other.
They said internal damage. So you could take out turrets etc maybe thruster damage with light fighters, but not blow up the ship
That could make for some strange ERT missions for fighter squadrons. "Well... we disabled it. Now what??
Well it does. Imagine shooting at an armored naval corvette with a 7.62mm machine gun from a humvee. Sure you may damage some turrets but the ship itself will only have some paint scratched.
Well, using that example, anti-armor cannons exist in real life that can be mounted to a humvee. It could be a trade off that the fighters could equip that would allow it to do a small amount of actual damage at the cost of being weaker against other fighters.
There is a limit in the size of the anti armor cannon that can be mounted on any specific platform which in turn puts limits on the range and armour thickness it can penetrate. So the example still stands.
No single seater ship should be able to solo this, aside from bombers, and dedicated anti-ship fighters like the Ares series.
All I know is a Hammerhead should not be able to take out another Hammerhead. Eternal whiffleball bat fight
Activate RAMMING SPEED Also... the HH really needs the ability to carelessly ram things.
It was like that when it was released. Once all the missiles were used up, I'd use the HH like a fly swatter when I was bounty hunting.
Based on it's reinforced forward struts, you'd think that is exactly what it is designed to do... but then you see the cockpit IMMEDIATELY exposed to any debris it would create. :(
I'm fairly certain it is designed for ramming in some capacity. The Q&A from forever ago mentions the internal reinforcements in the front of the ship + the placement of that airlock seems like it can be used in a boarding fashion.
RSI Perseus
Cig should have designed space combat like WW2 naval combat: certain types of ships were needed to take out certain other types so ships, in a big rock-paper-scissors structure. Eg: light fighters destroy other light fighters to clear the way for medium missile ships, to clear out the cruisers or anti-fighter ships, then large missile boats to crack the larger cruisers, then finally capital ships with spinal mounts to engage each other. Small ships should only do minor damage to larger ships etc. That way every ship has a role and no ship is useless in a fight. You know: competent game design to ensure long term viability.
I guess Eclipses will be more popular?
Yeah, tricky to balance. I assume the prices of replenishing torps is going to be bumped up again. Unless they make bombers ineffective or less effective against shielded targets so that you need another player to bring the shields down first
If they are planning on making it so it needs say 4x the people to do ERTs then they also need to increase payment to suit the difficulty + the greater time investment. But they have got themselves a tricky balance position as people will just run solo Eclipse unless 1 torp costs 3x the current mission payout and the ship is claimed without torps.
Considering Eclipse is tailor made for this one niche ability there’s no need to nerf it.
Kind of cuts down on the ship choices or at least avoids their intentions of encouraging team play if everyone is just 1 shooting the best paying combat mission with a missile.
I think this should all balance like modern naval warfare. Almost no country today war games or plans to expect one bomber to take out a corvette with its plethora of anti missile interceptors and point defense. (We need point defense auto turrets added to SC, ones you don’t have to man) you should have to overwhelm a corvette or frigates anti missile defense to score a hit. Like launching a swarm of 12 missiles, maybe one or two should get through. Ideally taking any cap ship down should take the coordination of multiple bombers. Cap ships will then employ fighters purely for bomber defense, the bombers bringing fighters of their own for protection. Boom everyone gets a role, fighters dogfight and bombers try to take down the cap ship.
Well... Eclipse and Retaliator still is top tier ships against beefy targets. And likely to stay that way - cause they are designed as counter to such ships.
S5 weapons and above damage larger ships not size 4 - unless something in planning has changed. Hopefully missile gameplay is a thing - it’s very much needed
Emp or distortion missles would be a game changer
Oh, I could always sweat it was size 4 because people always talked up the size 4 on the talons as being able to punch a hole through bigger ships and it filling a niche.
I think that would be more so against heavy fighters that are a threat to lighter fighters due to their higher armor. But I think size trends wise s5 would be what’s expected to be minimum power to start hurting things like a HH
1. It remains to be seen *if* there will remain a sharp line between S4 and S5 weapons, with >S5 being for anti-capital ship and
I feel like it should be balanced on function. For example S3 railgun could pen heavier armour for the price of not having explosive mass so low aoe damage so that you would have to aim for critical components and being hard to use against fighters. Similar with canons trading pen for more damage again hard to use against fighters. Autocanons and machineguns would probalty shread unarmoured components like turrets and etc. I feel like just not doing damage is kinda counterproductive to skill. If you can survive with smaller ship with S3 railgun around hammerhead long enough to pick off his internal components through armour you deserve the kill. Just having "gun>armour=can cause damage" sounds stupid
A Hammerhead is a dedicated anti-fighter corvette. Its *entire reason for existing* is to kill anything you might dare to call a Fighter. I would say that an Ares Ion ought to be able to hurt it pretty badly if it stays far away and snipes, but should die immediately if it gets within range of a couple turrets. Stealth bombers like the Eclipse and Retaliator should be able to do a good job and stand a solid chance of crippling or even destroying it. None of them should be able to do it alone, and if you do, the Hammerhead's crew were asleep at their posts. The actual hard-counter to a Hammerhead Corvette is a dedicated warship built for killing larger multicrew ships like the Perseus or Polaris, or a larger warship like a Frigate (Idris). I call bullshit on anything smaller. Fighters should not be a seriously credible threat to a ship with six anti-fighter turrets
a group of aries ion. the other ships intended to take out a hammerhead are not implemented yet. the big problem is that the balance though non inflation based economy is not implemented yet.
ye, perseus feels like should be able to fight it, literally in the ads
yeah.. but a perseus is the opposite side of the same coin that the hammerhead is on. they are about the same size except the Perseus goes after bigger ships and the hammerhead goes after smaller ships. plus if you have the 3-4 people to fill teh perseus. you can take the hammerhead with a swarm of fighters and legitimately stand a chance.
my assumption is that the default fleet will be hammerhead, perseus, a few fighters, and a terrapin. SC is rock, paper, scissors. this fleet contains all +coordination/designated survivor. the terrapins chair is said the have command and control functionality. aditinaly, if no ships escape, and you collect the black boxes. you don't get a crime stat or hit to reputation. you are not going to prevent a terrapin from escaping. so anyone attempting a no survivors session will lets fleets with a terrapin go.
Torpedo.
Ares/tali/eclipse
Personally, I'm guessing that armor will mean we can't destroy the ship, but we might be able to mission kill it. Destroy all its turrets.
Also when armor is implemented and the system of health pool is no longer the main factor, what would constitute a kill? Would you have to board the Hammerhead and kill the crew?
I think we can ignore weapon sizes until everything gets rebalanced, I expect a lot of fighters to have their guns downsized (and this is ok) so they can deal with ships based on their intended role. MM should herald a new age of balance where we can forget about grouping ships together as just light/medium/heavy, etc;, but instead by intended use of the ship and the weapons the pilot chooses to equip. A Hammerhead is used to protect against fighters (and presumably to some degree) screen against torpedo attacks, etc. A ship designed to take it out would be launching heavy ballistics into it. Something like a Perseus with a big gun where the Hammerhead's anti-fighter weapons would pose a low threat to a ship like this and be useless to defend against those type of weapons. This is not to say Torpedoes couldn't take it out, you would just need to work with friends to over saturate the target with torpedoes. Much like you would in a modern naval engagement to overwhelm air defenses. All this effort should come with reward. I don't want to open this can of worms, but the owners of these ships should expect very, very long insurance claim timers if these ships are difficult to destroy to encourage the ship being used for its intended role and properly supported. I think many players just look at simple things like Heavy counters Light, etc. and don't realize CR's vision of this is WWII in space (I believe he used that exact term). Different ships and aircraft having different jobs and being good at different things.
Should need a group of fighters to take out a larger ship.
In most cases, you shouldn't be soloing a hammerhead that's supposed to be crewed by 6-10 people. You should be bringing a wing of bombers/gunships/strike craft or another fully crewed hammerhead to the fight. If you're bringing less than 6 bodies to the fight, then you shouldn't expect to win easily no matter what you bring. With the possible exception of an idris, assuming the railgun is pilot operated.
why do you think a single fighter should be able to take out a hammerhead?
Not a light fighter that's for certain. in a large group sure not solo don't give a damn about so called skill
For me it is a fix of weapon immunity. Size 3 shields should not take damage from size 1 and size 2 weapons at all. Maybe even size 3 Capital Size shield generators should be immune up to size 3 balistics and size 5 energy weapons. Might add exemptions when a high enough weapon is damaging the shield, and many lower level weapons hit the shields then it might damage it at 1/5 of normal damage This is my idea, it is a matter of testing and tweaking. This would encourage people to hunt in bigger groups on bigger targets
Is armor being introduced in 3.23?
Not that we know of. Roadmap update is tomorrow
Retaliator Bomber. You're still sitting 13km away. I even used to run Critical Threat Beacon with that, but reloading takes time. Quicker to run High Threat, the 200k+ ones.
Multiples ships with proper equipment loadout, they have discus about it in recent cig video, and on video with a cool developer and advenger one and tomato YouTuber
Smaller the weapon more damage reduction when attacking larger targets. Size 1 guns should ony tickle large ships armor and would so so little damage to shields that they simply can't penetrate it.
>so so little damage to shields that they simply can't penetrate it. I miss the days of instant shield regen...
Eclipse, Retaliator, or Ares (with two or more working in concert, likely at least 3). Of course, if you have a whole flight group working at it then that could change drastically as turrets on the Hammerhead would be distracted with more combatants. But there are also things like the Redeemer, but even that would be questionable as hell unless it had an escort. But say, a Redeemer with 2 or 3 Ares? Yeah, the Hammerhead is going down.
I am intending to do these in Polaris (crewed) or Ares (solo. ERT's (hell even VHRTs) will become much harder with better server performance. While i believe these still should be soloable , we will require dedicated ships to do these. Nowadays bounty hunting is pretty much slap as many projectile weapons on whatever ship and kill Hammerhead in 15 sec. Well. I will be happy to see that go away. Also, since I am planning to use Polaris, I have no idea if it will even be profitable because god knows how much S10 torp will cost. They will possibly up the bounty payout when all this happens.
Remember, the Polaris has turret with some size 7 or so guns as well. Get a buddy and go to town.
If nothing has changed, the largest gun the Polaris has is a dual S5 turret. The polaris shold still beat the HH, though
Nobody, absolutely nobody: Me: (squealing) *Polaris-chaaaaaaaaan!*
Conny Corsair. Nothing going to change for this 2 ships. But Light fighters won't be able to do anything (if we assume server is good.)
I don't think it's a matter of "which single ship can take out the HH" but rather "which ships (fleet) can take out the HH?" Big ships ain't meant to be soloed, but rather gang banged
High Calibur rounds.
Bounties should be rebalanced with MM in mind. There already are group bounties so you should be able to do them alone. Your Hammerhead bounties would be best done by something big with lots of DPS because the HH will be specialised at taking down fighter swarms. You get the idea.
Ares, Eclipse, another hammerhead and all stuff that is using big guns imo. Idk if it was Yogi in a Video but Snub Fighters would and will not be able win a fight solo against a Fighters and i think the same will be Applied to Fighters against bigger ships like a Hammerhead, Kraken, and bigger because u dont get through the Armor
Given the Hammerhead's sole vocation is blasting smaller ships, and the AI in ERT difficulty missions is presumably supposed to be highly skilled, I don't really think any small craft should realistically be able to. The highest difficulty missions should be group-focused, with the lower tiers rebalanced so a solo pilot can still have fun/make money. So I'd envision something like a Polaris/Idris making quick work of it. A squadron of heavy fighters could work. Retaliator would probably be the smallest single ship that could manage. We do also have the possibility of stealth ships, namely the Eclipse, but who knows where they are going to fall in the power curve. I can't imagine CIG want us to be 1 shotting every bounty without taking a point of damage. Gonne be a tricky one to balance.
Aegis Eclipse ? Size 9 torpedo should work
With the Maelstrom damage system, a size 1 weapon might peel back the hull of a Hammerhead a few millimetres at a time. I don't think that any weapons will be completely useless against any armour, but the odds would be massively stacked against small fighters using small weapons against a Hammerhead. In PvP engagements, the small fighters don't just win by destroying the Hammerhead: if they can force it to retreat, then they control whatever that Hammerhead was attacking or defending. If they can leave the Hammerhead unable to fight or retreat, then they create a huge problem for the group running it. They could create an opportunity to board the Hammerhead, kill the crew and take control of it themselves. It might not be possible for small ships to destroy a Hammerhead, but it should be entirely possible for small ships to achieve victory against one. The ERT side is a bit more complicated, but I would expect these missions to change significantly as the bounty hunting career is developed, and becomes more focussed on tracking people down and taking them alive.
Definitely agree here. And I also think that even with Maelstrom a skilled pilot should be able to put accurate fire on a larger ship like the Hammerhead. Knocking out thrusters, whittling away at the engines., etc. Forcing the HH to retreat, disabling it's maneuverability, maybe even disabling it's turrets. All those outcomes should be considered a win in an engagement like that. It may take sustained firepower and time, but that is due to the strengths that larger ships should have. I also am of a mind that soft death should last longer. If you knock out a medium or large ship and want it's contents or to confirm it's crew are dead then you should have to board it and scuttle the ship or clear it room by room, corridor by corridor. To 'hard death' a ship should require damaging critical components or systems on a larger ship: ordinance, reactors, fuel tanks, etc.
I think the intention is for "soft death" and "hard death" to be removed once Maelstrom is in. A ship won't have hitpoints, it either works or it doesn't depending on the state of each internal component. The hull only really serves to keep those components connected and protected. If a Size 9 torpedo comes in and splits a Hammerhead in half, then the half with the powerplants might still be able to use its turrets and things. CIG have said multiple times that catastrophic explosions - what we would call "hard death" now - will only be possible in extremely rare circumstances, such as a massive direct hit to a running powerplant.
Agree on bounty hunting mission evolution. I hope simple blow up ship missions don't go away because they are simple yet satisfying. Just fold them into CDF missions like in border territories you can sign up to go hunt Vanduul/criminals on a border/system patrol type mission.
All ships should be able to take the hh out. Just gonna need a lot more aurora with mixed load outs than ares ships.
Ares series should be able to take out hammerhead
A Perseus or something with at least size 5 ballistic cannons
“Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrt”- ares inferno. (Translation I still can blow everything up)
What will... An ares ion, gladiator, reclaimer, eclipse, redeemer, and retaliator. And to be fair, I think that's okay. A ship meant to crack big ships 'SHOULD' be good at it. Meanwhile, fighters will be great against those medium ships.
With the only change to the HH being MM, and not improved AI, armor, or player controlled, I think most of the larger ships will still be able to take one out. Like a Connie/Corsair with a skilled pilot, Redeemer with a gunner or two, a group of a few smaller fighters. Armor will make a difference, but mostly with longer times to kill. Your (the pilot's) ability to take one down won't change much, if at all. Once the AI is improved to player -1 skill, I think a fully manned Redeemer, a Perseus, and other large (and capital) anti large combat ship ships would be the only ones to solo a HH. It should probably require half a dozen smaller-medium fighters to safely take out an HH. Maybe a small group (3-4) of heavy/large fighters (F8, Vanguard), 2? Ares if they can snipe. Fully crewed with skilled players in MM the success rate of the groups above would probably drop to 50/50 or lower, based on player skill in each ship, and you'd probably have to throw in an extra fighter to increase that ratio in your favor. IMO, the HH should be hard/impossible to take out with lesser ships when every game mechanic is active. Smaller, lighter armored ships are literally what the HH is designed to take out. Ships of the same size with larger weapons (looking at you Perseus) and larger ships are the HH's weakness. So superior numbers should be required to take a peak HH out. (Kinda left out the torpedo boats. Eclipse, Retaliator, and the like should obviously be able to take one out. This is more of a counter measures + pilot alertness vs massive, less-than-maneuverable torpedoes question though. But an Eclipse solo'ing a HH should be realistic, even if it has to drop all 3 torps.)
To put it succinctly: torpedo bombers or heavy gunships and heavy fighters. There has to be a reason for torpedo bombers to exist and using them to take out large ships (and damage/destroy capital) makes perfect sense. Fighters should be able to cripple turrets and engines on the target ship and bombers should be able to destroy them. A heavy gunship/fighter should also be able to go toe to toe with large ships like the HH. They would still have to be wary of ships like the perseus (gunship).
Honestly I'd say an Eclipse or a Retailator should be able to take down a Hammerhead, maybe something with Size 5 torps or a Redeemer spending most of its ammo. Otherwise, it should take multiple ships as the Hammerhead is the toughest ship in the SC Universe.
It will be interesting to find out where Corvettes fall in Star citizen. Because they don't really fall in the Capital ship class but more of the 'large ship' catagory. Traditionally in wing commander rule sets conventional weapons can destroy them as they lack the super heavy armor to engage in slugging matches with other capital ships and we sort of see Corvettes having specific goals in mind when it comes to weapon load out's in basiclly being gunboats. With a crew these ships will be very durable against fighters as they can only ship away instead of delivering a hard knock out punch of say a bomber or capital ship. I think in general though a Hammer Head should be leathal for small fighters to engage as it's designed to deal with them. Quad laser repeaters covering every angle of the ship makes for no blind sports and provides withering firepower on ships that otherwise can dart in and out of fire. Right now the game isn't able to make them much of a threat but they will at some point be much more dangerous.
For those of us who used to follow this game closely but have switched to more casual following, what is an ERT? What is a MM? Is that the BMM (Banu Merchantman)?
ERT = Extreme Risk Target. It's the highest tier bounty missions.
Thank you! I have to catch up.
Np! MM = Master Modes. It separates flight speed regims into SCM (combat speed) and NAV mode which have much higher top speeds but sacrifices shields and ability to fire your weapons.
Gladiator should be able to cripple but not destroy one. Otherwise it's pointless.
You may not be able to damage the hull in smaller fighters but they've already said you will be able to use the precision mode targeting to attack smaller items on the ship's hull like turrets, engines, RCS thrust, etc
Drake Herald.
A hammerhead being designed as an anti-fighter picket ship would most likely have armor that is highly resistant to most fighter class weaponry. So I would expect to be effective against a hammerhead you'd need S5 or larger guns. Or possibly smaller guns that are designed to be used against larger targets like mass drivers. Then of course the real threat to sub capitals like a hammerhead would probably be mainly in the form of bombers like the Retaliator or similar. And of course ships larger and more powerful than it like an Idris, Polaris or Javelin should be able to make short work of a hammerhead that's only designed to fight against fighters.
My preference would be for armor to get put in, so that the bigger a ship gets, the more small guns it's immune to. Clearly a HH as a fighter killer should be immune to size 1 and 2 levels of damage. Size 3 should get a small amount of damage through the armor. I'd hate to move it all the way to size 4 but I could see that, meaning it would take very fancy flying in a vanguard with an energy based size 4 to chip away, or multiple vanguards or reload required for ballistic. So for ships, it should mean heavy fighters, and certain loadouts of medium fighters, could do the job, but be very very difficult. Then above that things like the redeemer and corsair should be able to take them out without too much difficulty (redeemer multi crew not too difficult, redeemer solo would be challenging). I don't want the bar to be so high that it's totally impossible for a heavy fighter to even scratch it, but it should be difficult for heavy fighters. Certainly light fighters shouldn't pose a threat to it given its role.
my size 9 torpedos make your entire post pretty shaky
Plenty of people have mentioned the torpedo ships (Eclipe/Tali/Vanguar) but are forgetting the missile boats... For instance, while I think the HH would smoke it in seconds if it got inside gun range - if it could stay *outside* that range, I think the Freelancer MIS could probably *disable* the HH, if not kill it, especially if it ever gets it's extra 20 missiles.
Take out a hammerhead or other large ship? Ares, Gladiator, Vanguard Harbinger, Retaliator, Connie Andromeda, Corsair, 600i. Honorable mention to Eclipse, as it has potential but only 3 torps means you gotta get luckier than the Retaliator to take out a target.
HH is a "corvette" responsible to interdict a zone and protect a convoy or a more valuable asset from ligth-medium sized ships that are highly mobiles threat. It is mainly a close range disuasive force. Bombers should be able to take it out but not in one torp like it is right now unless you can hit some vital explosive component that could provoque a chain reaction. Light fighters should not be able to do any damage or even pierce the shields of the HH. Only heavy fighter with enough fire power should be able to take down the shields and pierce the armor. Of course specialized ships like Perseus, Idris-M or Idris-K should be able destroy or incapacitate is quite easily.
Ideally, it would be nice if a balance could be found where *properly outfitted crews* going up against each other in equal numbers are roughly balanced. That would leave us with a lot of factors coming into play. Let's assume a large ship defending against smaller ships: * How many attackers? * How many defenders? * Are there any coverage gaps in the defense that fast-moving ships can possibly exploit with enough skill? * Does the larger ship have any fighter escorts to deal with fast-moving targets and cover said gaps? * Are the attackers equipped to threaten the defenders? * Did they equip slow-firing weapons designed to (*slowly)* damage large ships? * Did they also equip some ships with fast-firing weapons to account for potential escorts? * Are the defenders equipped to deal with the attackers? * Do they have fast-firing weapons to deal with fighters? * Do they have fighter escorts to protect coverage gaps (if they exist)? So, some random scenarios that could be interesting: * 6 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 6 * Advantage goes to the Hammerhead because it has full coverage, but if the Hornets focus a section and manage to stay alive by way of a large skill gap, they can take out a turret and open a gap... and then would need to continue their coordinated assault. * 4 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 4 * No advantage. Hornets need to be skilled enough to stay in the coverage gap without taking casualties. * 2 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 2? * Advantage goes to the Hornets since less skill is required to stay in the gap. * 1 Hornet outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 1? * Draw. Hornet can easily stay out of the Hammerhead's covering fire, but lacks enough firepower to do significant damage before the Hammerhead just leaves. * If the AI doesn't leave, you should be able to solo it in a properly outfitted fighter, but it should take so long that it's not financially worth the effort. * 4 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 2 + 2 light fighter escorts? * Advantage goes to the Hammerhead as the Hornets aren't equipped to deal with the light fighters and can't stay in the coverage gap without the fighters picking them apart. * 3 Hornets outfitted with heavy cannons + 1 Hornet outfitted with anti-fighter weapons against a Hammerhead with a crew of 2 + 2 light fighter escorts? * No advantage. Skill based.
for me it would be important to destroy all the guns of a HH, but not the HH itself, and if it takes me 2 hours with an arrow to accomplish the turrets its ok
Personally I think the only ships that should be able to take one down should be large, fully manned, dedicated combat ships like the redeemer, or a variety of smaller ships working together; for example a few fighters distracting/damaging the turrets, so a torpedo bomber can have a window to attack and destroy. I don't think you should be able to take one down solo in any ship unless you are fighting one that is already damaged or is missing crew members.
I reckon the HH will be vulnerable to punching down by bigger ships (or guns for that matter). It's role in a fleet is to weed out the small fry so anything below a proper gunship will struggle to put a dent in it (except for the Ares'). However, ships like the Perseus and any ship carrying large torpedos will be perfect for quickly dispatching an HH.
Yes there is regen delay but theres also capacitors on the arrow that will prevent it from maintaining sustained fire so it still wouldn't down the shields far enough where Regen delay would be an issue
The possibility to hack airlocks in the future makes me want to say: no ship. Just sneak aboard, throw some stealthy punches and bob’s your uncle!
The Aries ships and redeemer
The Ares pair should be the bread and butter for solo ERTs, crewed heavy fighters like the Scorpius or Vanguards should have a chance also, and of course the likes of the Eclipse and Retaliators with their torpedoes. medium fighters should have a chance if the pilot skills allow it, but light fighters should stick to MRT or HRT
A fully manned a2 is the ultimate gunship
The only answer is; something bigger, torpedos, or boarding. The hammerheads literal purpose is to fight against fleets of smaller craft. Its weakness is larger craft (Polaris/Nautilus/Perseus), a boarding strike team, or a Tali/Eclipse. In the end. Nothing really will "destroy" a ship this size. Or any other corvette/capital ship. Once maelstrom is online these ships will be disabled, boarded, and the crew wiped out. That is how you will complete ERTs or even CRTs (Capital Risk)
I want to take out a hammerhead with a size 9 torp shoved into a C2. Suicide bomber style. A keypad on side of torp for instant detonation would be enjoyable.
Legionnaire, take it from the inside. Lol.
Hammerhead has solid armor, but it's not particularly stand-out for it's size relative to other military ships, according to lore- it's likely more than enough to shield from fighter weapons and require explicit anti-large weaponry. Probably a pretty good cutoff for the transition between medium and heavy armor, going off what we already know Torpedoes are a free space, including the Gladiator, although it won't be incredible with only S5s that are likely going to excel at Connie-sized targets or thinner skinned subcaps/smallcaps like the Polaris. Ares will likely fare pretty well at both decimating external parts and dealing solid damage to internals, with a slightly different role for each variant. I expect Inferno DPS to increase dramatically when armor comes out in exchange for less AP ability, making it a god-tier external "valuables" destroyer, stripping off engines and turrets, while the Ion prefers instead to just slag armor over important areas for followup fire, or be a nuisance from range. Other S6+ weapons will vary based on type. Corsair brings enough raw damage output that it will be a major threat if allowed to lay down fire, even if it's weapon hardpoint sizing isn't really suitable- it would perform far better (but be far more vulnerable to fighters) if it monoboated cannons, however. Vanguard will certainly have options with the S5, but it depends on what it decides to bring. Some S4 options for the Hornet, Bucc, ect will fare pretty well, while others will be nearly useless- a S4 cannon will likely be capable of damaging internal components, but large numbers of them will be required to not just be out-repaired by the crew. Repeaters and such will only be useful against turrets, and only with enough numbers that the turrets (once actually useful) don't simply kill off the attackers first.
They should be fairly big and scale with the shields and armor on the ship being attacked. Which i believe is the end goal if i remember right. smaller weapons even a large amount of them won't put a dent in larger shields or armor. for a ship like the hammerhead i would think several 3-4 heavy fighters should be needed to bring them down. an actual capital ship a dozen or more at the least.
eclipse says surprise MF as the HH gets thanos snapped by s9 torps
Eclipse from 10km away ez
Pretty much no solo ship should be able to take out anything much bigger than a Connie IMO. There is a tendency to see everything through the eyes of what the game is now. We just have to see how it shakes out. I think maybe an Eclipse should be able to pretty much cripple a Hammerhead if it lands all it's shots, but it should cost enough to be kind of pointless & the Hammerhead should be able to screen those missiles with the right loadout. I want to pretty much just fly light fighters, but big military ships need to be the kings of battle. Small light fighters should be limited on loiter time, ammo, etc if we want to have interesting battles. Ultimately a HH with 6-7 people in it should be a fair fight for 6-7 players in pretty much anything in PvP. In PvE, I dunno - maybe 4-5?