Page 1 of 1
Homeworld ship classifications??
Posted: 2003-10-26 03:34am
by Peregrin Toker
Why are the uses of warship classifications so.... ahem, irregular in Homeworld??
The ships called Fighters and the light Corvettes are rightfully called so - but since the frigates are supposed to be all-round combat vessels rather than escort ships, shouldn't they be labeled cruisers or at least destroyers. The "Destroyers" of HW actually function more like battlecruisers if I have got it right and the "cruisers" of HW are actually more akin to the battleship equivalent.
BTW, I'm a bit of a noob to HW so if I have misunderstood something grossly, don't be harsh on me.
Posted: 2003-10-26 08:58am
by Vendetta
Frigates aren't really all-round combat vessels. There are several different types, and each one's specialised to a particular role, either capship attack, defensive escort, or a mobile repair and refuel station.
Posted: 2003-10-26 10:37am
by Alyeska
Homeworld actually has it down quite good. The firgate are highly specialized ships and you use each design as its intended. While big and powerful, the destroyers work best as the core of a formation either escorting carriers or battlecruisers. The battlecruisers indicate a big and powerful ship as well. They could go for larger ships, but they find the need is not there.
Posted: 2003-10-26 11:44am
by Shortie
The names for warship types are always changing in real life, so there's no really wrong way to use them in SF. That said, I wouldn't have done it in quite the same way as they did.
Hravy Cruisers are basically battleships, but because the Mothership is so much more impressive it'd sound a bit silly. Destroyers should really be called cruisers, so they can be CLs. HW corvettes are maybe a bit too small to be that, but I can't think of a better name, so leave it.
For Frigates I think I'd change the size class to escort and make them either frigates (assault) or destroyers (Ion Cannons). That is, short for capital ship destroyers.
Posted: 2003-10-26 05:01pm
by Uraniun235
What's with their unwillingness to use the term 'battleship' anyway? Battleship sounds a lot more badass than "heavy cruiser" or "battlecruiser".
Posted: 2003-10-26 05:06pm
by Alyeska
Maybe because there ARE battleships, they are just MUCH larger. Like maybe a fully gunned up Kuun-Lan for starters. Or how about the ship that moved the Siege Cannon about? We know there are larger ships about. These are just the easy mobile ones.
Posted: 2003-10-26 06:53pm
by Howedar
If the "Bishop #" transports were militarized, they might fit in as battleships.
Re: Homeworld ship classifications??
Posted: 2003-10-26 07:09pm
by phongn
Simon H.Johansen wrote:Why are the uses of warship classifications so.... ahem, irregular in Homeworld??
The ships called Fighters and the light Corvettes are rightfully called so - but since the frigates are supposed to be all-round combat vessels rather than escort ships, shouldn't they be labeled cruisers or at least destroyers. The "Destroyers" of HW actually function more like battlecruisers if I have got it right and the "cruisers" of HW are actually more akin to the battleship equivalent.
There's no particular reason that their fleet organization must mirror real life. For example, in the US Navy frigates (DL) once lead destroyers (DD) and destroyer escorts (DE).
Posted: 2003-10-27 10:07am
by Peregrin Toker
Alyeska wrote:Maybe because there ARE battleships, they are just MUCH larger. Like maybe a fully gunned up Kuun-Lan for starters.
Or the Sajuuk from HW2.