Warcradle Studios are looking for active community members to support the forum upon its relaunch!
If you're interested, drop us an email at forum@warcradle.com.

Captain Frederic

Spartan Vanguard
  • Content count

    1,528
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Captain Frederic

  • Rank
    Strategos (General)

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Isle of Grandeur

Recent Profile Visitors

698 profile views
  1. I don't disagree with your assessment. The Sorylians would be better described as resilient than tough but not everyone can easily parse that difference. Sorylians take hits but can keep dishing out damage which is not the same as being "unbreakable".
  2. The definition of Battlestation in FSA seems to be a large weapon platform with relatively limited mobility and 360 degree firing arcs equipped with systems to sustain an orbit if necessary.
  3. Stationary is a relative term especially in space. Compared to other models battlestations as they exist now are already practically stationary compared to the ships with FSD. Especially in the vastness of space something can be considered both in a set location and mobile.
  4. I think Sorylians tactics represent the same line of thinking in Planetfall and Firestorm Armada. Focus on resilience and strategically placed explosive firepower for initial engagement. In close quarters those tactics take a back seat to the raw physical power of the lizards. The only difference is what range you can execute precision explosions in space versus on a planetary surface, The only glaring piink elephant in the room as far as I'm concerned is the Sorylian Leviathan. The first and only Sorylian model I have no interest in purchasing.
  5. Even easier fix. Change the designation to "Mobile Battle Stations"
  6. They only need fixed for people who think they're broken.
  7. I still think this is simply a matter of trying to ascribe our sense of what a Battlestation is when it's representing more than that. If these vessels had been called "Space Barges" but worked the exact same way would this be an issue for anyone? I doubt it, instead I think people would be saying "Space Barges are a dumb name they should have just called them Battle Stations people would be able to accept the fact they move around." To me Battle Stations describe a class of slow moving massive space vessel that are "Effectively" stationary compared to the rest of the fleet unless they execute extreme measures (ie" Drives to the max" and/or gravity slingshots.
  8. Just because a Battle Station is part of a patrol fleet doesn't mean it's on Patrol. More likely the scenario is occurring in proximity to the Station and the station is in that proximity because there is something worth fighting over. But if you have an area fraught with conflict why not have a Battlestation travel a circuit through the area we have a mindset of stations needing to be in orbit but they are just as easy to imagine in a role more like massive battle barges.
  9. I think this debate hinges on how exactly Battlestations get into position. it isn't really clear. Perhaps they are commonly built in shipyards and then shunted into near position (by some external system or maybe even an internal system with limited capability compared to a traditional FSD). After that initial jump they then need to manuever into position very slowly. if 2 Stations show up the battle probably reflects the culmination of tensions building as both sides have slowly been manuevering their stations into position the battle occurs when 1 side finally decides to strike.
  10. Steve I just want to once again thank you for all your work on maintaining the Battlescribe files. You are a true asset to this community.
  11. Comparing individual ships isn't as effective as comparing overall fleets. yes the Veydreth battleship is probably better but the Sorylian frigates are definitely superior in their class. Meanwhile in the mid range things are a lot more competitive. you don't play battleship versus battleship you play fleet versus fleet.
  12. I shunt my admiral in often.
  13. You seem to be moving the goal post here. You were talking about AD now your talking about defenses. I think we can agree Sorylians could be adjusted closer to the middle but those changes should also preserve their uniqueness. Sorylians are about optimal positioning (even more so than Dindrenzi arguably since I believe the Din niche is "powerful attacks"). Improvements would ideally help them move into position by either getting there faster; being in better shape when they get there, or some combination of the two.
  14. This is a common misunderstanding about Retractable plating, It actually helps every arc while in effect. Arguably it would be perfect for Sorylians because it wouldn't change their close game it would only help them during those turns they have to spend moving into position.
  15. I think if Sorylians had more kinetics standard Dindrenzi players would start to be bothered. while it may not be actualized fully I think while Dindrenzi and Sorylians share an emphasis on positioning there is a perception Dindrenzi sacrifice manueverability and some resilience for big AD at long ranges. If Sorylians get too many range options while still being perceived as resilient then Dindrenzi may seem diminished by comparison. i'm not saying Sorylians wouldn't benefit from more range just when adding those options they need to be looked at in terms of how they relate to other fleets outside of combat as well (i.e.: during fleet selection).
Warcradle Studios are looking for active community members to support the forum upon its relaunch!
If you're interested, drop us an email at forum@warcradle.com.