Forums » Suggestions
Xang Xi Dragonfly
A Revenant-class Xang Xi medium bomber. In this model, Xang Xi engineers sacrificed the two small ports for one large port; cargo space for a stronger engine; and added additional armor. The Xang Xi Dragonfly is comparable to the Hornet-class light bomber, but equipped for heavy ordinance.
Levels: 2/2/4/2/1
Faction: Xang Xi
Faction Level: 600
Armor: 13,000
Cargo: 8
Weapons: 2L
Mass: 10,000 kg
Lenth: 13 m
Thrust: 400
Turbo thrust: 400
Max speed: 70 m/s
Spin torque: 12 Nm
Turbo speed: 210 m/s
Levels: 2/2/4/2/1
Faction: Xang Xi
Faction Level: 600
Armor: 13,000
Cargo: 8
Weapons: 2L
Mass: 10,000 kg
Lenth: 13 m
Thrust: 400
Turbo thrust: 400
Max speed: 70 m/s
Spin torque: 12 Nm
Turbo speed: 210 m/s
This could be interesting, and there's no fancypants version of the Revenant yet.
+1 :)
+1 :)
Absolutely, XX needs a new ship and VO needs a new bomber. This is great.
+1
Stats-wise it doesn't really feel like a Revenant. I recommend cargo 18, max speed 65 m/s (the few ships with 70 or better are highly specialized) and spin torque of 10 Nm.
And as far as the license goes, none of the other Revenant models have a mining requirement, so I don't see why this one should. Trade should probably only be 1 as well. (Note none of the Ragnarok models have trade or mining reqs either)
Stats-wise it doesn't really feel like a Revenant. I recommend cargo 18, max speed 65 m/s (the few ships with 70 or better are highly specialized) and spin torque of 10 Nm.
And as far as the license goes, none of the other Revenant models have a mining requirement, so I don't see why this one should. Trade should probably only be 1 as well. (Note none of the Ragnarok models have trade or mining reqs either)
Yeah, not sure why a bomber would need trade or mining at all... or 18 cargo for that matter. However, +1 to the overall idea.
I would suggest also reducing the top speed to 65m/s. Seeing as specialized *fighters* have 70 and 75. As for the cargo space that seems fine, if it is a bomber it doesn't need a lot of cargo space.
+1 for Xang Xi Dragonfly. Good idea, still I like the Banshee a little bit more.
+ and what's the turbo drain? 48, 50, 54, 55, 57, 60?
+ make it weight less - 9500 kg
+ make it cargohold 14 cu, instead of 8. (already too many ships with 8 cu, hog, raptor, cent)
+ speed 60 m/s looks better, than 70 m/s. No need 2L and high combat speed at the same time. It already has huge armor and big thrusts.
+ and what's the turbo drain? 48, 50, 54, 55, 57, 60?
+ make it weight less - 9500 kg
+ make it cargohold 14 cu, instead of 8. (already too many ships with 8 cu, hog, raptor, cent)
+ speed 60 m/s looks better, than 70 m/s. No need 2L and high combat speed at the same time. It already has huge armor and big thrusts.
60 m/s would give this thing a HORRIBLE handicap in most combat. Look at what people have to say about the Raptor mk2.
First, add/post the original specs, making easier to compare. Something as "Max Speed: 60 (mk3: 65)"
+1 to new ships or specialized variants. BUT...
Stats changes: OP / changed (Rev.mk3) -> why
Turbo Drain: ?? / 52 (50) -> more power requires more drain
Armor: 13,000 / 15.000 (12500) -> a decent armour upgrade, ~20%, op is 4%
Mass: 10t / 11t (10t) -> more armour and engine results in more mass!
Max speed: 70 m/s / 60 (65) -> bombers does not have to be fast
Turbo speed: 210 m/s / 200 (200) -> bombers does not have to be fast
Spin torque: 12 Nm / 11 (9.5) -> bombers are nor agile/manouvrable
Comparing resulting accelerations, with original normal/turbo thrust (350N) to OP (400N) and mass (in tons for easier reading)
Rev. Mk3: 350N / 9.8t = 35.7 N/t
OP org: 400N / 10t = 40 N/t, or +14%
OP Alt 400N / 11t = 36.4 N/t, or +2%
Finally, I'd prefer to see the Wraith model for this role... I prefer that ship model, even outdated and 'flat', than the Rev... even more considering it comes from gray space.
+1 to new ships or specialized variants. BUT...
Stats changes: OP / changed (Rev.mk3) -> why
Turbo Drain: ?? / 52 (50) -> more power requires more drain
Armor: 13,000 / 15.000 (12500) -> a decent armour upgrade, ~20%, op is 4%
Mass: 10t / 11t (10t) -> more armour and engine results in more mass!
Max speed: 70 m/s / 60 (65) -> bombers does not have to be fast
Turbo speed: 210 m/s / 200 (200) -> bombers does not have to be fast
Spin torque: 12 Nm / 11 (9.5) -> bombers are nor agile/manouvrable
Comparing resulting accelerations, with original normal/turbo thrust (350N) to OP (400N) and mass (in tons for easier reading)
Rev. Mk3: 350N / 9.8t = 35.7 N/t
OP org: 400N / 10t = 40 N/t, or +14%
OP Alt 400N / 11t = 36.4 N/t, or +2%
Finally, I'd prefer to see the Wraith model for this role... I prefer that ship model, even outdated and 'flat', than the Rev... even more considering it comes from gray space.
60 m/s would give this thing a HORRIBLE handicap in most combat. Look at what people have to say about the Raptor mk2.
arf, still, you personally use it even against ONE prom ;) my bot saw how ye killed ONE activists in raptor.
arf, still, you personally use it even against ONE prom ;) my bot saw how ye killed ONE activists in raptor.
Bombers are not famous for their maneubvrability...
Mass: 10t / 11t (10t) -> more armour and engine results in more mass!
No duh, hence the cargo nerf, as explained in the OP. The stats you propose for thrust and max speed make this a slug; it only has two large ports and (I agree with) 15k armor, you don't need to make it as slow as a rag.
+1 to trade 1, no mining reqs. Also +1 to 65 m/s turbo speed, giving it potential as a heavy fighter, provided the stats are not killed like Alloh suggests.
No duh, hence the cargo nerf, as explained in the OP. The stats you propose for thrust and max speed make this a slug; it only has two large ports and (I agree with) 15k armor, you don't need to make it as slow as a rag.
+1 to trade 1, no mining reqs. Also +1 to 65 m/s turbo speed, giving it potential as a heavy fighter, provided the stats are not killed like Alloh suggests.
No duh, hence the cargo nerf,
Ok, so, they replaced EMPTY SPACE with something, thus reducing cargo capacity. That anything must have more mass than the original nothing... so, how can more armour plus an engine so bigger that invades former cargo bay, and heavier ports can weight less ?
Since OP proposed a medium bomber, it does no need to be agile... or rebrand it as tactical bomber or strike/attack fighter and you have a decent role for its improved acceleration and maneuvrability.
If you increase its spin torque, max speed, thrust AND reduce weight as OP,+, you don't have a bomber, but a heavy/attack fighter. As that I'd accept proposed stats... 9.5 to 12 is +26% more agile!
Ok, so, they replaced EMPTY SPACE with something, thus reducing cargo capacity. That anything must have more mass than the original nothing... so, how can more armour plus an engine so bigger that invades former cargo bay, and heavier ports can weight less ?
Since OP proposed a medium bomber, it does no need to be agile... or rebrand it as tactical bomber or strike/attack fighter and you have a decent role for its improved acceleration and maneuvrability.
If you increase its spin torque, max speed, thrust AND reduce weight as OP,+, you don't have a bomber, but a heavy/attack fighter. As that I'd accept proposed stats... 9.5 to 12 is +26% more agile!
You're proposing a slug like a rag, not a 'medium bomber'. I'll admit I didn't think about the cargo space thing >.> but there's still no excuse for making it so slow. It's not nearly the size of a rag, has less armor, ports, etc, and your stats are quite similar. Spin torque, by the way, is not agility; it's the ship's ability to turn to face a different direction and roll.