Jump to content


Imperium Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


About Panpiper

  • Birthday 01/16/1959

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Extropian transhumanism, sustainable AND sustained economic, technological and human growth, individual freedom both social and economic, peaceful civil disobedience, science and scientific philosophy, technology, cosmology, futurism, gaming, martial arts, global realpolitik, military, economics.

Recent Profile Visitors

910 profile views
  1. Yea, the desk is ok, though there is no seating for anyone who is visiting the office, and that's not ok. The bedroom however is a joke. I have seen much better beds in most minivan campers. That bedroom has alone at least as much room as a minivan, yet the bed is the barest minimum of a bench cot. Submarines have bigger sleeping cots! I am universally unimpressed with any CIG interior design.
  2. Actually I prefer the new turret placement. Where it was before it's fire arc was quite limited with regard to rearward targets. Where it is now I think it has a much clearer/larger field of fire. When in a fight, a Carrack isn't going to be dog fighting per say, it won't be maneuvering to get targets in it's forward arc. It's maneuvers will instead simply be evasive. It's weapons meanwhile will want the largest possible arcs of fire.
  3. I am far from convinced they haven't simply forgotten the bottom turret, and when it's released they'll apologize and tell us that it's too late to fix it. Of course the most cursory glance through their own Carrack forum would alert them to the issue, but I seriously doubt anyone on the design team bothers to actually check the forums. The couple of people who do check (not on the design team) seem blithely unaware of the issue, or they just don't give a crap.
  4. I too was quite unhappy with the Q&A and how it diverged from the brochure. I was/am particularly incensed by them stating that it would be 'less' maneuverable than a Constellation, despite several references in the brochure that implied the exact opposite. A 'less' maneuverable ship with fixed guns is completely ridiculous. Them stating that the guns can be gimbaled also makes absolutely no sense. They are nested deep inside the hull. The only way to gimbal them would for them to either clip through the hull, or be mounted external to the hull. Saying those guns can be gimbaled is literally the same thing as saying the four fixed nose guns on the Vanguard can be gimbaled. They cannot. That said, I do not think they are imagining this ship as one that will dogfight with attacking fighters, but rather a ship that is designed to excel at running away. Even the fallacious Q&A said it would be fast. A heavy forward fixed armament in theory could give it the ability to blow through a ship that is in front of it so as to prevent it from engaging it's quantum drive. Such a ship actually 'trying' to stay in front so as to keep the 600i from running would effectively be 'trying' to stay in the 600i's fixed gun sights. My guess is that I could live with that, if it truly is an effective escape artist. Equipment wise, with the explorer package, the 600i is roughly on a par with the (much cheaper) Aquila. That makes it a bad value if only looking at it's known functionality. However it does have one thing that no other similar ship has, something that is of ENORMOUS value to me personally. It has a clear cockpit largely unobstructed by superfluous occlusions like struts and badly placed controls. Short of a ship having some ability to pay for itself, and some means of not dying, there is nothing more important to me than having a nice cockpit. I waited on the Q&A before making a decision. I was very disappointed in the Q&A. In the end though, on the last day, I traded away my Aquila for a 600i. I expect I will mostly be a tourist in the game, and I want that cockpit. I was willing to effectively pay $160. to add that cockpit to the functionality of an Aquila. Any other 'prestige' effects that go with it will be icing. It is too early to know whether flying around with four NPCs for crew will be financially viable in the 600i. But the ship has been touted as being highly automated/automatable, including the remote turrets. It's nice to have the option for effective soloability. That said, I very much do want to have a crew of around four NPCs, both for RP purposes and security when exploring. (For instance, I am hoping I'll be able to add different Voice Attack packages to each of them.) I have enough in store credit for some other ~$400. ship whose primary function will be UEC grinding. I have no idea what that will be. I regret not picking up a Banu Merchantman as that would well fit the sort of gameplay I would be most comfortable with. A Hull D in comparison just seems so utterly prosaic for my tastes, though I expect it would be among the most profitable for safe space grinding. I have available for the moment a Starfarer Gemini, but while I am sure that too would be a good cash grinder, I loathe pretty much everything about it; it's cockpit, the style of gameplay 'work' in the grind, the FPS level of it's interior, everything. So I still don't know what I'll do for money in the game. I am an older gamer (pushing 60) with both arthritis 'and' bursitis, so it's not going to be any twitch combat, that's for sure.
  5. Maybe CIG simply decided that their cash flow required an injection of an extra million dollars?
  6. I stand by my certainty that the maintenance cost of Javelins will be sufficiently high that they will for the most part stay parked, and only come out when their owning player's guilds need firepower for fleet action. Operating them for regular patrol, cargo runs, etc., will cost more than the owning player could possibly earn while doing so. So even if there are a larger number of them theoretically in the game, they will still remain a fairly rare sight. What 'will' count is the number of Javelins a guild 'could' muster.
  7. A Javelin, a Starfarer Gemini and a flight of Vanguards, would make for a solid. In practice however, I expect Javelins will sortie as part of fleet actions and if something was serious enough to call for a Javelin, it would probably have an Idris or three added to the mix, along with their compliment as well. I expect Javelins will have a fairly serious maintenance cost associated with flying them and that they will not come out to play except when that cost can be justified. I expect frankly that Idri will have the same cost issue, keeping them from routinely touring about. A 'capital' ship that players could realistically afford to actually cruise in would probably be the corvette that the Idris used to be, the corvette which will supposedly be designed 'someday'. I would be very interested in such a corvette. The Javelin and Idris are just too big for anything other than prestige and ace in the hole.
  8. I want to fly a corvette. I would equip it with a major electronic warfare suite and configure the ship such that it's traveling signature will read as a stock Taurus. I'll paint a Taurus silhouette on the facing I would show to a sensor blip. Legible to someone who gets close enough will be a bumper sticker; "Go ahead, gank this." ​Then as the griefers get sufficiently close to get a good bead on the Taurus silhouette, just before I open fire, that's when they see that the 'Taurus' is also being escorted by a couple of stealthed Vanguards coming out from behind. The "Gank Bait Squadron".
  9. Do we have any idea how many Vanguards got picked up by Imperium members? Personally, I have one (or rather soon will thanks to NewzyOne). I also intend to pick up another ship for touring known space (likely a general purpose Constellation, or better). My plan is to essentially park the Vanguard in Imperium space and use the other most all the time. The Vanguard is there so that if there is an emergency in Imperium space, I can simply log off of wherever I am in the other ship, and log in with a different character that stays with the Vanguard. Voila, instant military reserve that can get somewhere relatively fast. It would be nice to know if there will be sufficient numbers to form Vanguard wings and such.
  10. I have read or heard CIG referring to electronic warfare as being one of the things multi-crewed ships might well have someone dedicated to. There is definitely some form of electronic warfare that is being built that will be a mini-game sufficient to, at least in theory, occupy a human during combat. I seem to recall mention of such EW requiring both energy and data pipes, so it is not a freebie attack, it uses ship resources. Sadly I do not recall where I got that from.
  11. This I fear will be the fate of the Vanguard if people attempt to use it as an escort, for the same reasons.
  12. Sounds to me that your friends need to fly Freelancer Mis. Have autotargetting gimbals and seeking missiles, and their inability to target won't be so much an issue.
  13. I am not convinced that the Vanguard will be a good long range escort fighter, long range, certainly, but escort fighter, not so much. The low maneuverability coupled with it's forward firing weapons means that more agile fighters will literally be able to fly rings around it, with it's return fire limited solely to it's turret. For the Vanguard to play to it's strengths, it needs to use superior speed to accelerate out of the range of a fighter engagement so as to turn back and come in for a frontal strafing run. Accelerating out of the range of the engagement means leaving behind whatever they are supposed to be escorting. A smart pirate of course will leave boarding the prize for after the escort is dealt with, but while it is waiting for the escort to come back with it's strafe, it will certainly do what it needs to do to reduce the fire of its prize. Whomever is being escorted is not going to appreciate seeing their escort fly away, regardless if that is good tactics, given that they will then be subject to the undivided fire of their attacker, for at least a bit.
  14. I agree that the Vanguard certainly will not be faster than racers or the speediest of fighters. But those fighters that can keep up with a Vanguard will find the fire of two size two guns from the Vanguard's turret to be harrowing, especially given that their pursuit vector will largely line them up to be easy targets. And while a fleeing Vanguard might also be a similarly easy to hit target, it can take a LOT more fire than the racer/fighter.
  • Create New...