Wahant Assault ship

[Methos5000]

I searched on some of the old posts but didnt really find any solid answers. But why is the Bolters on the Wahant Slow-Loading? Its the only set of Bolters in the game with Slow-Loading and the fluff even says that the Wahants were upgraded to the current model prior to the outbreak of all their battles. Or is this the same as the rear firing anti-fighter beam weapon on the Drahk ship (ie. makes no sense what-so-ever)?

 

[Burger]

They are not slow-loading, are they? I don't have the book at work but according to my ship viewer only the torpedoes and mass drivers are. Please let me know if I have it wrong

 

[H]

you have to consider the ship design process. . ..

dude, pass me another bottle of JD, man thats sweet stuff, only had a bottle so far, light some more of the Ganje. Ok dudes, what about this for a ship stat?
you sure man, it's Not EA, we can't make it that good
wow, dude, your right, I nearly forgot, give it slow loading, and find some other way to downgrade it. . I'll see what everyone else thinks. . .

 

[Burger]

I'll see what everyone else thinks. . .

Since when was this a part of the ship design process?

 

[H]

oh I fully believe that he askls peoplem but then as they all say

yes thats fine, we are all robots programmed never to argue...

 

[Hash]

you have to consider the ship design process. . ..

dude, pass me another bottle of JD, man thats sweet stuff, only had a bottle so far, light some more of the Ganje. Ok dudes, what about this for a ship stat?
you sure man, it's Not EA, we can't make it that good
wow, dude, your right, I nearly forgot, give it slow loading, and find some other way to downgrade it. . I'll see what everyone else thinks. . .

ROFL - yeah I reckon it's like the end of the Willy Wonka sketch in How it Should have ended...

http://www.howitshouldhaveended.com/Divx links/Willy_Wonka.html

 

[Burger]

ROFL - yeah I reckon it's like the end of the Willy Wonka sketch in How it Should have ended...

http://www.howitshouldhaveended.com/Divx links/Willy_Wonka.html

Are you trying to imply that Bry is an Oompa Lumpa??

 

[Reaverman]

ROFL - yeah I reckon it's like the end of the Willy Wonka sketch in How it Should have ended...

http://www.howitshouldhaveended.com/Divx links/Willy_Wonka.html

Are you trying to imply that Bry is an Oompa Lumpa??

Bry?

 

[Burger]

Bry?

Bry = Bry Steele = Mongoose Steele

 

[voodoomachine]

Bry = Bry Steele = Mongoose Steele

Now we switch Bry for a word that closely rhymes with it....like "try", and we're using old rhyming slang.

Try = Bry = Bry Steele = Mongoose Steele.

 

[Reaverman]

Bry?

Bry = Bry Steele = Mongoose Steele

OIC

 

[thePirv]

I think this is just another example of a screw up in printing getting through the Proof Reading :lol: and then us being told that the Bolters are supposed to be Slow Loading.
and yes, EXACTLY like the Drakh Cruiser where the playtesters were told it shouldn't be anti-fighter, but because it was published as such, nobody had the balls to say "Yeah, we screwed up, it shouldn't actually be like that."

 

[Locutus9956]

nobody had the balls to say "Yeah, we screwed up, it shouldn't actually be like that."

With Mongooses track record on the proofreading front you'ld think they might be used to it by now....

 

[Nomad]

I suspect it was a cut-and-paste error, from a line previously reading 'Disruption Torpedoes'.

 

[Majoun]

WARNING: the following views expressed within absolutely contain sarcasm


Obviously a publishing typo, but perhaps we should look at it in another perspective. I think it might be a typo of a larger scale, half-full / half- empty scenario, and that what they actually meant was that ALL bolters are slow loading. This philosophy should apply to the Drakh beams as well, ALL meant to be anti-fighter.

Sarcasm off

 

[CodeofArms]

Obviously a publishing typo, but perhaps we should look at it in another perspective. I think it might be a typo of a larger scale, half-full / half- empty scenario, and that what they actually meant was that ALL bolters are slow loading. This philosophy should apply to the Drakh beams as well, ALL meant to be anti-fighter.

you cant be serious! that would make the tagrath balanced

 

[Celisasu]

Obviously a publishing typo, but perhaps we should look at it in another perspective. I think it might be a typo of a larger scale, half-full / half- empty scenario, and that what they actually meant was that ALL bolters are slow loading. This philosophy should apply to the Drakh beams as well, ALL meant to be anti-fighter.

you cant be serious! that would make the tagrath balanced

Well obviously all Drakh beams should have anti-fighter. Just look at the Light Raider. It's one of the only two ships with it's proper anti-fighter beams. :wink:

 

[thePirv]

Except that in the case of the Light Raider, another typo crept in where they only made it AP, not Super AP, which is a shame

 

[Voronesh]

Nonono....

we cant make all Drakh Beams Anti-Fighter......

I mean that would make them good, wouldnt it? And since were so heavily EA balanced right now (Nono trust me the old Sag was perfectly balanced, just trust me and my crystal ball), its got be be all slow-loading bolters....

We just forgot to cut and paste it to all the other ships.....so yes there you have it, the Wahant is the only Dilgar ship with correctly printed bolters....

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

(Yikes who gave me that shot of sarcasm in my morning tea)

 

[NX_Phoenix]

In all seriousness on the topic remember that the same weapon system name can have different abilities attached to it. Look at Twin Particle Array, Particle Beam, Medium Pulse Cannon, Fusion Cannons, Ballistic Torpedo, Burst Beam, Light Pulse Cannon, Molecular Pulsar, Heavy Laser Cannon, Medium Laser Cannon, and maybe a couple others: the characteristics for the same weapon on different ships is different. Yes in this case it may be a copyediting error, but it also may not be a copyediting error.

But in the spirit of sarcasm on this thread...Yes, and all double damage giving refits should have the AD loss rounded down and then add 1 to the remaining AD...or 1 shouldn't be added...or 1 should be added...