Goliath is faster than a Trident and never had any problems in CvC, I would expect two prepared pilots to be able to be a threat to a single unprepared pilot.

"Please bump the grid back up so it can at least field two capital turrets."

??? You can equip two capital turrets just fine. Two rail turrets works, as does 2 capital cannons. And capital rails will one shot kill lots of the ships in the game.

Or equip a cap swarm (35 grid), 2 firecrackers(8 grid) and a TU mine(4 grid) for a total of 47 grid.

cap swarms: 35 grid
Cap rails: 25 grid
cap cannon: 25 grid
firecracker: 4 grid
gem tur: 4 grid
gat tur: 4 grid
gauss tur:4 grid
rep tur: 4 grid
neut III tur: 4 grid
shield tur: 4 grid
pcb tur: 4 grid
neut II tur: built in

Goliath power cell; 55 grid. Mix and match my friends.

If we had autonomous turrets, or slightly more damage on standard turrets (or remove lenbs from unrats) then i wouldnt be bothered by it but having 3 turrets doing next to no damage against unrats that u need to kill quickly then meh not interesting in subbin nor playin.

A high velocity one-hit-one-kill weapon on a turret is a bigger threat than you are making it seem.

Unrats are intended to be a major risk to freighters, be they Trident or otherwise. Please recalibrate your expectations accordingly.

U cant even escape in a goli from them. Jeez its safer in a ec89 then goli

U cant even escape in a goli from them. Jeez its safer in a ec89 then goli

What are you talking about? The goli's acceleration is perfect to get away from them. Turbo away and kill the pcb raptors with your cap rail.

I posted this in another thread. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuyAZ_xR9Lw

U cant even escape in a goli from them. Jeez its safer in a ec89 then goli

While not detracting from waf's tactical argument, the above sentence is also a good example of having the wrong expectations. Saying "hey, my small nimble craft is better able to avoid the fighter-pirates than my giant, lumbering freighter" is like.. well.. yeah? Player-capships are not intended to be serious warships at present.

Maybe they have some combat-support and reasonable defensive capabilities, but still seriously benefitting from fighter escort in high-risk situations, especially where larger numbers of fighter attackers are concerned.

To put it another way, you are flying something more like:



And not:



An analogy might be made to something like a Liberty Ship, which was basically a WWII transport that had some guns for limited defensive capability, but no one would confuse it with a "warship", or expect it to survive a major attack un-supported.

Cool. Let me know when you get to this level:

Your example ship is so powerful it doesn't even actually exist in the regular canonical timeline of the star trek universe. So, don't hold your breath waiting to own some hilariously OP military ship here, either.

Yeah, sure, everyone wants their own Super Star Destroyer. Even though all of Star Wars only had a few of them.

Giving everyone a Super Star Destroyer would not make the game better.

I'm here to make the game better, as a whole.

We'll eventually have more powerful ships, and serious warships. They will also have to have serious limitations and balancing factors to keep them from screwing up the whole game.

The current Goliath and Trident are not warships, so don't expect them to fend off clouds of Unrats without concern.

That's the point.

+1 to m15's pirate capship suggestion.
Similar to trident but lacking cargo for more speed. Only 2 turrets and two small ports

Heres an idea. Make the shield bubbles bigger and allow ships to fly through but not weapons

I want constellation/capella so bad :P