Weapon ops crew member...

[god-demis]

Hi all. Recently I asked online about the weapon ops, if anybody knows his exact usage. Nobody could give me a certain answer, someone said that a weapon ops increases your weapon's range. We tried it with Seejay and indeed the weapons range is increased by 50m, but without increasing the MDTS range as well..
So, my question is: if the only thing that the weapon ops does is increase the weapon range without increasing the MDTS range too, is he really worth it? Because without the MDTS you can't hit s%#t, especially at a great distance. Is it possible that he could increase other weapon sections as well, that are more hard to detect? e.g. damage, refire rate, energy consumption...

[Nigel_Strange]

The energy is the most important part. Try firing your cannons until you're dry with and without the weapons officer, and you will find that you can fire for a much longer time with than without. I never go anywhere without one.

[Maarschalk]

Yep, Weapons Ops increases your weapons efficiency, rate, energy, accuracy and range, depending on his skill level....

[Nubarus]

Because without the MDTS you can't hit s%#t, especially at a great distance.

I blow up foes outside MDTS range a lot with the additional 50m range.

Try fighting without MDTS for a while to improve your aiming.

[god-demis]

well, if all this is true, then the weapon ops is a must have.. I wonder why the military ships don't have one....

[Nubarus]

well, if all this is true, then the weapon ops is a must have.. I wonder why the military ships don't have one....

I was wondering about that too today.

Maybe Vice should add a 2 man crew to the bigger military frames as well.
That and more equipment slots so you can add all the shield/weapon boosters available and the auto-repair unit.

[Marvin]

A military-only fire control computer would do just as well.

[Aures]

Well almost as well, you would still have to go through the hassle of replacing your crew and training them up again every time you swap into a military frame and back to a civilian. Doesn't take long to train them up, but finding them in the first place is a pain and at high ranks it takes a fair amount of time to adjust the wages even in 500 increments. I would happily trade all my missile slots in a mil frame for two (or even one) crew capacity.

[god-demis]

The energy is the most important part. Try firing your cannons until you're dry with and without the weapons officer, and you will find that you can fire for a much longer time with than without. I never go anywhere without one.

...and yet another good reason not to use the military ships...

[Nubarus]

Best solution is clearly adding a crew of at least 2 to the larger navy boats so that people who like to try out some navy hardware are able to keep their trusted loyal crew.

I would also like to see more equipment slots added to all navy boats.
Maybe a solution is give em the abillity to use assembly points to add em since a 2400 gallon fuel tank doesn't really help a navy opperator anyway.

It's supposed to be a fighter, not a mid space fuel tanker.

[Edited on 2-13-2011 by Nubarus]

[god-demis]

Totally agree in this one...

[Marvin]

It's supposed to be a fighter, not a mid space fuel tanker.

Trouble is, fighters are traditionally single-seat craft. Some are two-seaters, with the non-pilot operating most of the electronic gear. But experience has shown that a good pilot can handle a couple dozen well-placed buttons all by him/herself ... and most fighter pilots prefer to fly alone. For a whole slew of reasons.

[Nubarus]

That's because fighter pilots are cocky bastards.

This is in space, in the future, I am sure ppl have devolved into something "better" by then.

Besides, I am pretty sure that when you do deep intergalactic exploring you really don't want to be all alone out there. hehe.

[Marvin]

Unless, of course, you're headed for the Dagobah system.

[Maarschalk]

LOL...Marv, your watching to much Starwars for an Explorer.....:P

[yamo]

Trouble is, fighters are traditionally single-seat craft. Some are two-seaters, with the non-pilot operating most of the electronic gear. But experience has shown that a good pilot can handle a couple dozen well-placed buttons all by him/herself ... and most fighter pilots prefer to fly alone. For a whole slew of reasons.

...add a tailgunner.

[Marvin]

Good idea. Just don't rely too much on the "turret" gunner to shoot down all those missiles.

[Dave S]

I think adding equipment hardpoints and 1-2 crew would be huge (I agree that having a smaller fuel load would be a worthy trade for these things in the shipyard). If the option were at least there, I think you would see a wider variety of ship types out there instead of nearly everyone flying a Starmaster. Those are the only things that have kept me from using the military frames.

Either way the game is still a huge hit. Well done Vice!

[DaveK]

If you want crew and more equipment slots etc etc etc , then get a civilian ship. With the recent IDS booster system, civvie ships seem to have few disadvantages in terms of acceleration and top speed.

If you want a Ferrari (looks cool, sexy engine growl and lets you play at being "Top Gun"), then get a military ship.

Allow crew and extra equipment slots in a military ship (along with a beer can/coffee cup holder) and the next "wouldn't it be great if . . ." we will be hearing about is a cargo bay (or five) and low and behold we will be watching the Ferrari version of a white van (UK) - or Transit Van (??) or whatever the rest of the world use to describe a small cargo/work van - chug by with stick on "go faster stripes", exhaust extensions and fluffy, lucky dice hanging from the rear view camera piloted by someone who thinks that he was given an "Ace pilot" certificate along with the van keys! :P:P:P:P

provocative or what!

[Nubarus]

It's not really about that DaveK, what is going on now is that 97% of the players fly a Starmaster, simply because that ship can be anything from a very capable fighter to a well fitted cargo hauler.

None of the military ships can even come close as a capable fighter due to the fact that it lacks in equipment, energy and crew.

I can live with not having an engineer because he cannot move around a military frame to fix stuff, but at least a Weapon Ops seems logical to add to all military frames, like a 2 seat fighter.
As for more equipment, in it's current state a military frame is unable to install all the essential combat hardware, in order to do that you need 6 slots.

If Vice would add 1 Equipment slot and 1 crew slot I will happely trade my Starmaster for a navy ship and be a pure fighter like I really love to play.

What I do find a little weird is that you can turn a Starmaster, the most heavy civil frame into a more manueverable and more capable fighter then the biggest military frame, the Chimera. This is the biggest riddle for me in Mercenary at this time.

[MMaggio]

For what it's worth, I agree. I too would like to see a 2 seater mil ship with or w/o an equipment slot.
Sooner or later, everyone ends up with the same ship & practically the same load out

[SeeJay]

A crew member in a fighter would make things a bit more intresting.

[DaveK]

Hi

I agree that a two seater would be realistic (but no more or it becomes more like a bomber). The pilot would handle weapons launch/firing and the electronics guy (or gal) would handle their optimisation (range - power - reload time), ecm, shield monitoring and balance etc

The performance of a fighter would take a bit of a hit if it had to be big enough for two, though - perhaps a bit less manouverable or else more expensive to pay for the better engines/wings/thruster system

But as someone has already pointed out, a military-only combat computer controlled system could do the job. I wonder what having a real second person (the equivalent of a gun turret operator) would be like (handling ecm, navigation, shields, weapon optimisation etc).

I can see the point that a StarMaster is so good the rest don't get a look in - I fly one myself!!:P though I'm not competent enough for fur ball combat - I just potter around exploring and kicking ass (one at a time) if some bully picks on me

[Nubarus]

I would prefer a 2 seater over a computer though, that way you can save a 100/100 Weapon Ops crew member.

[Marvin]

I would prefer a 2 seater over a computer though, that way you can save a 100/100 Weapon Ops crew member.

That being the case, there should be a sub-routine so that the WSO (back-seater) can never reach 100% ... assuming not all military flyers are top-notch ... and also assuming that, in the military, you don't get to pick who you fly with. In fact, the sub-routine should allow for the WSO to actually make things worse!