Jump to content

John Maynard

Imperium Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


About John Maynard

  • Birthday October 23

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United Kingdom
  • Interests
    Aviation, Climbing, Music (especially British style brass bands)

Recent Profile Visitors

1,873 profile views
  1. Under the public > mercenary tab, you will sometimes see a mission titled "Break in at Kareah" that will direct you to the eponymous security post so you can clear it out. If you travel to Hurston, there are contracts available such as "Evict illegal occupants" that are similar, although you will need to destroy or evade some AA turrets before landing. There are criminal options at Hurston as well, although I can't remember the name.
  2. Ah I've just seen the list here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/17256-Ship-Showdown-Let-The-Battle-Commence For anyone that was wondering the list is as follows: 300i 600i Explorer 890J Avenger Titan Caterpiller Connie Aquila Cutlass Black Dragonfly Lancer MIS Lancer MAX Gladius Hammerhead Reclaimer Retaliator Bomber Valkyrie Vanguard Warden
  3. Which ones were previously on sale? With that knowledge we can deduce the remaining 14 ships available (or at least the ones that are usually limited).
  4. Holding onto mine for exactly those hopes! I can't wait for them to announce new modules - I'm sure it's a question of when not if.
  5. Grabbed an upgrade for my HH, I think you are both right about the Polaris offering great value for money, and I expect a considerable price hike when it goes live. As a rule of thumb, the bigger the ship, the better the value (although there are exceptions), so I've condensed my pledges from many small ships into a few larger ones. For me, things like ground vehicles and the argo utility vehicle just aren't worth it for cash right now when you can buy a powerful solo-able ship and earn anything smaller with relative ease in game.
  6. I'm not one for premature celebration, but this is now firmly within 'break out the popcorn' levels of concern!
  7. I have been primarily flying the Vanguard for a few years now, and have seen the ups and downs of its performance. While I am in love with the idea of the ship, the design falls down with me in several areas. In this post (mostly copy-pasted from a post I made on Spectrum that didn't gather much response), I would like to gather some feedback on my thoughts for a dream rework. The one massive disclaimer with my idea is that it's highly unlikely to happen - it constitutes a massive internal redesign. I appreciate that many will disagree with me, but I would still like to hear what others think. When approaching this rework my first priority was improving survivability, and the second was increasing the offensive capabilities. Whilst attending to those tasks, I also wanted to retain a degree of versatility. The core idea of my rework is the amalgamation of the cockpit and the life pod. The dorsal turret would become unmanned and move to the rear to allow the pod to eject upwards. In the cockpit, the Pilot and RIO would sit side-by-side in fixed seats, with access to the rear between their seats. There would be an airtight door behind them leading to the life pod, which would now be directly attached to the cockpit. In the event of an emergancy, either operator could initiate the ejection sequence, firing the whole escape system upwards. This achieves my primary aim, as it drastically reduces the time to escape. Previously, both crew would have to make their way to the life pod and launch it from there, which would take valuable seconds. Furthermore, combining the pod with the cockpit and separating them with an airtight door would mean that a pressurised environment could still be created in the event that either the cockpit or the pod were vented. It also results in a reduction in pressurised volume, lowering the chances of a depressurising hit. The pod would contain beds, personal weapons, food/water supplies, facilities to cook, and a toilet/shower combination, shrunk as small as possible. Life support systems, emergancy patching and repressurisation kits, and extended supplies would be stored in the roof space. Normal access to the pod would be through a hatch in the floor, leading down a ladder fixed to the forward landing gear. To exit the pod in an emergancy, the main cockpit glass could be blown out by detcord or small arms fire. The pod itself could not survive atmospheric braking, but would come equipped with parachutes and small thrusters to ensure a safe landing if ejection occurs in atmosphere. As for the weapons, I would do away with the proprietary nose guns altogether. I would also try to recess the main gun as much as possible, to reduce the exposure to fire. To give a higher forward firepower, I would add a gun to the bottom side of each nacelle. For missiles, I would have interchangable racks stored in the volume between the life pod and the nacelles. This covers my secondary aim, as the much wider distribution of the weapons reduces the chance of a one-shot disarm. My personal opinion (and this is where many will differ) is that internal missile bays should be limited in their refit options. This leads my on to my final aim, the retention of versatility. I have imagined four role configurations for this Vanguard: The Fighter, the E-War Platform, the Fighter-Bomber, and the Scout. The differences between them would only be the standard loadouts, making one frame reconfigurable for multiple tasks. As the standard model, the Fighter would have a gimballed S4 ballistic repeater in the nose (with no spin-up time), a gimballed S3 energy repeater under each nacelle, and would have it's missile bays configured to hold many S2 and S3 missiles. The E-War Platform would have a fixed S5 distortion cannon in the nose, a gimballed S3 energy repeater on each nacelle, and would replace 1/2 the S2 missiles with dataspike missiles. Finally it would replace the S3 missiles with an enhanced computer package, to work in tandem with the dataspike missiles. The Fighter-Bomber would have a fixed S5 ballistic cannon in the nose, a fixed S4 ballistic cannon on each nacelle, and would replace all of the missiles with four S6 torpedoes The Scout would have a gimballed S4 energy repeater in the nose, a gimballed S3 energy repeater on each nacelle, and would replace the S3 missiles of the Fighter with an enhanced sensor package. All of the variants would carry two S3 energy repeaters in the turret by default. Thanks to Aniron from Spectrum for mentioning that the nacelle weapons should be underneath instead of on top, to aid access. The Vanguard may have to operate from distant FARPs, where advanced loading equipment would be unavailable. I have used my barely existant MS paint skills to provide a basic diagram to aid this description. All of the volumes are vague, and may be adjusted somewhat to make the design feasible. The red outline indicates the ejection pod and cockpit, and the ladder on the landing gear. The red dashes indicate the storage space above the ceiling above the ejection pod. The orange areas indicate the landing gear. The yellow areas indicate the unmanned turret position. The green areas indicate the volume to be filled with other internal systems - e.g. fuel tanks and power plants. The blue areas indicate the modular missile bays. The purple areas indicate the new weapon positions.
  8. 6 turrets each holding 4 S4 guns is utterly obscene... I love it!
  9. Yes, but as I said to Ironclaw in a PM, I'll need some form of verification, especially as you have such little activity on the forums here, restricted only to the sales areas. PM me if you're interested.
  10. Interesting update on loadouts - besides the hull variants and internal modules, there are some further differences. The Warden and Hoplite have a S5 main gun listed, and 1xS + 1xM computer loadout. The Sentinel has a S4 main gun, and 2xM computers. Finally the Harbinger has the worst of both, with a S4 main gun, and 1xS + 1xM computers. Of course, this is early days on the new loadout screen, so typos and errors are likely.
  11. I am offering 1x LTI Polaris, for $725 USD. Paypal only, fees included. It is an upgrade from an LTI Retaliator Base, and includes the poster and model of the Retaliator.
  12. Slightly off topic, but spotted this in my crew room today, made me laugh.
  13. Likewise, as far as Imperium is concerned, JTAC/FAC will most likely be an academy qualification available to our players. This will ensure correctly trained people are spread throughout our FPS forces. I'm not sure what state the academy is currently in, but to my knowledge, they were aiming to create short courses relating to most in game tasks so we can keep track of people's in game capabilities.
  14. This came up a while back (when I was regularly active, so over 18 months ago) within the Imperium section of the forums here. At the time, CAS was a 'maybe, in the far future', but that seems to be a lot closer now - especially on the largely unclaimed celestial bodies. As far as use of CAS within our org goes, I imagine that one would be required to complete a course within our academy to qualify for CAS missions. This will enable us to have CAS trained pilots within most squadrons, giving us better coverage than we would have with a single dedicated group.
  • Create New...