My proposition for the Hiigaran cruisers

So, I noticed that the A variant of the old cruiser hadn't windows, and had a really great shape. Also, ALC posted a great model of a Hiigaran cruiser for the Recon cruiser.
So, basically, my idea is to use the new model for a recon cruiser, and the old cruiser model for a tier 3 advanced destroyer, which wouldn't be modular, but more powerfull in general. I don't think it will be overlaping, but more like evoluting. And instead of making it costs only 500 URs more like it is in Complex, just set the price to the efficiency, so the modular destroyer would be still worth to buy (I mean, modular base price + modules should equal the advanced destroyer base price, in terms of balancing)
Basically, it could cost something like 3000+ RU. Yes it's expensive, but remember that a small but advanced vessel should be easily able to shot down a bigger but earlier one.
Here is a screen of the ship:

How are we going to avoid overlapping with the modular cruiser which is also tier3?

A point for you.
Make it faster? Give it access to unique weapons?
Maybe am I a bit too much willing this model being used :/

What would be the role of the Advanced DD?

Being the counterpart of the Vaygr heavy DD?

So its weapons' fit would be aimed at killing Vaygr heavy DDs, and surviving the process on a 1 to 1 encounter.

Yes. As Vaygr, I always used to spam heavy destroyer early on, it's a really reliable ship considering its low cost in officers. I think Hiigarans needs something to counter it.

You already have something to counter it, though. Module destroyers. They work just fine.

Plus to 'counter' the vgr heavy DD, then you'd need to basically allow access to this advanced DD at the same time as the modular, creating the role overlap.

Now, maybe brainstorming a way that this can be the hiig's opposite number to the incoming vgr Stalker DD...

I don't think that it's normal that Hiigaran modular DD are able to deal with Vaygr heavy DD. This last one should get a small up, because at the moment normal Vaygr DD are logically useless.

I think the entire capital ship family needs to be fixed by the CEBD, lol.

A cruiser ought to be able to deal with a heavy DD.

I thought we didn't like this ship model? Very un-Hiigaran. That's why I took the time to build the modular cruiser model.

Ok, it seems that nobody like it :,(
And if I manage to make an advanced destroyer model?

PS: I know I may be boring with it, but I still don't understand why this model is judged un homeworld-y if the Vortex is not.

I would like to see Vortex cut-off either

ALC wrote:A cruiser ought to be able to deal with a heavy DD.

The tier 3 weapons on a modular DD can make the modular DD win also.

Ok, I think that DD model could need a heavy version (just model) to mark the fact that they are tier 3
I could make a heavy destroyer model when I'll be done with my battle shipyard.
A bit off topic, just to mention that my battle shipyard model won't have super capital facility, it's too much for a ship designed to be polyvalent. Also, I think that fleet carrier won't have a battle capital facility? (new fleet carrier is the old battle carrier + fleet carrier, am I right?

The new fleet carrier will only have corvette and fighter production.
The battle carrier doesn't need a super capital facility.

Yep, totally agreed. Imo, however, a battle shipyard should have a battle capital facility. But not acces to manufacturing controller, I think.

out of curiosity, why are we arming shipyards? Shouldn't "bases" be vunerable to attack? Aren't platforms there to provide for "base defence" while the fleet's away?

Battle-production ships are versatiles, but less armed than a real battle class ship and less efficient than a a production ship. Thay also don't have RU drop points, and are expensive. Their role is to bring to your fleet a real sustain. I They are basically different from classical production ship. I think it's a idea to go deeper in this type, because it's a unique feature in RTS, allowed by the space dimension.

PurpleKalamar wrote:Ok, I think that DD model could need a heavy version (just model) to mark the fact that they are tier 3

If we are looking for a Heavy Destroyer, I cleaned up this heavy destroyer a while back.  And it survived the computer crash.

Odie_76 wrote:If we are looking for a Heavy Destroyer, I cleaned up this heavy destroyer a while back.

I like the look of this one.

Niarro wrote:out of curiosity, why are we arming shipyards? Shouldn't "bases" be vunerable to attack?

Have to agree with this. "Bases" ought to have minimal armament, enough to fight off light enemy forces. They should rely on their escorts for defence, platforms and the like.

I never liked the notion of a battle shipyard that can build supercapital ships.

Odie_76 wrote:And it survived the computer crash.

Useful, that

Niarro wrote:out of curiosity, why are we arming shipyards? Shouldn't "bases" be vunerable to attack?

Have to agree with this. "Bases" ought to have minimal armament, enough to fight off light enemy forces. They should rely on their escorts for defence, platforms and the like.
I never liked the notion of a battle shipyard that can build supercapital ships.

Battle carriers can build fighters corvettes and frigates
Battle shipyard can build the same thing, just battle capital. Not super capital.

I think it's a good feature, it's original, not like all the other rts that have been made...

A battleshipyard is a base".

So, if battle shipyard is actually a base, I don't see the point of calling it battle. And I don't see the point of its purpose, that would just bring a bigger static shipyard. Overlaping.