Talk:Subs - Revision history

Magic9mushroom: /* Why no air intercept? */ missed an indent

2019-03-31T08:18:45Z

Why no air intercept?: missed an indent

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 31 March 2019
Line 23:		Line 23:
	:Well, I mean, reason #1 is that half of the sub weapons definitively don't work out of water (torpedoes, which generally can't fly) and we don't have any evidence either way about the other ones (they could well rely on water cooling, for instance). Reason #2 is that the target-acquisition systems of the submarines appear to be sonar-based, and that won't work (or rather, will work very differently and not as well) in air. Between these, the X-Com subs would seem to be at a distinct disadvantage.		:Well, I mean, reason #1 is that half of the sub weapons definitively don't work out of water (torpedoes, which generally can't fly) and we don't have any evidence either way about the other ones (they could well rely on water cooling, for instance). Reason #2 is that the target-acquisition systems of the submarines appear to be sonar-based, and that won't work (or rather, will work very differently and not as well) in air. Between these, the X-Com subs would seem to be at a distinct disadvantage.

	Really, the weird bit isn't that the subs can't fight in the air - it's that they can fly in the first place. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 10:18, 31 March 2019 (CEST)		:Really, the weird bit isn't that the subs can't fight in the air - it's that they can fly in the first place. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 10:18, 31 March 2019 (CEST)

	== Sub design concepts ==		== Sub design concepts ==

	Just a bit of trivia on the design of the advanced subs, and most probably the alien subs as well. Found this out myself recently. Try goggling Irwin Allen's "Voyage To The Bottom of the Sea" for the FS-1 Flying Sub. I'm very convinced that the Hammerhead and the alien sub (especially the colours) in the intro were influenced by this ship. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 01:33, 27 April 2012 (EDT)		Just a bit of trivia on the design of the advanced subs, and most probably the alien subs as well. Found this out myself recently. Try goggling Irwin Allen's "Voyage To The Bottom of the Sea" for the FS-1 Flying Sub. I'm very convinced that the Hammerhead and the alien sub (especially the colours) in the intro were influenced by this ship. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 01:33, 27 April 2012 (EDT)

Magic9mushroom: /* Why no air intercept? */

2019-03-31T08:18:26Z

Why no air intercept?

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 31 March 2019
Line 20:		Line 20:

	What are the 'various' reasons, do tell? Because it uses the same code base as EU, with air combat being replaced by water combat? Because flying subs only carry underwater weapons? (Why?) Are there any reasons given in-game or in canonical materials that give an explanation or rationalisation for what is, basically, pretty weird? [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 16:27, 28 October 2010 (BST)		What are the 'various' reasons, do tell? Because it uses the same code base as EU, with air combat being replaced by water combat? Because flying subs only carry underwater weapons? (Why?) Are there any reasons given in-game or in canonical materials that give an explanation or rationalisation for what is, basically, pretty weird? [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 16:27, 28 October 2010 (BST)

			:Well, I mean, reason #1 is that half of the sub weapons definitively don't work out of water (torpedoes, which generally can't fly) and we don't have any evidence either way about the other ones (they could well rely on water cooling, for instance). Reason #2 is that the target-acquisition systems of the submarines appear to be sonar-based, and that won't work (or rather, will work very differently and not as well) in air. Between these, the X-Com subs would seem to be at a distinct disadvantage.

			Really, the weird bit isn't that the subs can't fight in the air - it's that they can fly in the first place. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 10:18, 31 March 2019 (CEST)

	== Sub design concepts ==		== Sub design concepts ==

	Just a bit of trivia on the design of the advanced subs, and most probably the alien subs as well. Found this out myself recently. Try goggling Irwin Allen's "Voyage To The Bottom of the Sea" for the FS-1 Flying Sub. I'm very convinced that the Hammerhead and the alien sub (especially the colours) in the intro were influenced by this ship. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 01:33, 27 April 2012 (EDT)		Just a bit of trivia on the design of the advanced subs, and most probably the alien subs as well. Found this out myself recently. Try goggling Irwin Allen's "Voyage To The Bottom of the Sea" for the FS-1 Flying Sub. I'm very convinced that the Hammerhead and the alien sub (especially the colours) in the intro were influenced by this ship. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 01:33, 27 April 2012 (EDT)

NKF: /* Sub design concepts */ new section

2012-04-27T05:33:54Z

Sub design concepts: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:33, 27 April 2012
Line 20:		Line 20:

	What are the 'various' reasons, do tell? Because it uses the same code base as EU, with air combat being replaced by water combat? Because flying subs only carry underwater weapons? (Why?) Are there any reasons given in-game or in canonical materials that give an explanation or rationalisation for what is, basically, pretty weird? [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 16:27, 28 October 2010 (BST)		What are the 'various' reasons, do tell? Because it uses the same code base as EU, with air combat being replaced by water combat? Because flying subs only carry underwater weapons? (Why?) Are there any reasons given in-game or in canonical materials that give an explanation or rationalisation for what is, basically, pretty weird? [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 16:27, 28 October 2010 (BST)

			== Sub design concepts ==

			Just a bit of trivia on the design of the advanced subs, and most probably the alien subs as well. Found this out myself recently. Try goggling Irwin Allen's "Voyage To The Bottom of the Sea" for the FS-1 Flying Sub. I'm very convinced that the Hammerhead and the alien sub (especially the colours) in the intro were influenced by this ship. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 01:33, 27 April 2012 (EDT)

Tauon at 23:27, 22 December 2010

2010-12-22T23:27:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:27, 22 December 2010
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)		Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

			The Hammerhead is faster to build and has a higher chance of success when taking on a dreadnaught singlehandedly than a manta - making it a great throw-away interceptor against those pesky very large subs in the later stages of the game. One might even consider using it as standard interceptor instead of the manta. 12 aquanauts are also usually enough to deal with any recovery mission.--[[User:Tauon\|Tauon]] 18:27, 22 December 2010 (EST)

	== Why no air intercept? ==		== Why no air intercept? ==

Spike: /* Why no air intercept? */ new section

2010-10-28T15:27:21Z

Why no air intercept?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:27, 28 October 2010
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)		Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

			== Why no air intercept? ==

			Due to various reasons, X-COM flying-subs are forbidden from engaging enemy ships in air-to-air combat while flying over dry land.

			What are the 'various' reasons, do tell? Because it uses the same code base as EU, with air combat being replaced by water combat? Because flying subs only carry underwater weapons? (Why?) Are there any reasons given in-game or in canonical materials that give an explanation or rationalisation for what is, basically, pretty weird? [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 16:27, 28 October 2010 (BST)

Magic9mushroom at 09:25, 20 August 2009

2009-08-20T09:25:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:25, 20 August 2009
Line 8:		Line 8:

	OTOH, the Hammerhead does better against the Dreadnaught (more than twice as much HP), and unlike the Lightning in UFO, is actually useful because of the Lobbie Commander required to get the Leviathan. The Manta's improved over the Firestorm, but the Hammerhead's far more improved over the Lightning. And the Lightning costs more than the Firestorm in UFO.		OTOH, the Hammerhead does better against the Dreadnaught (more than twice as much HP), and unlike the Lightning in UFO, is actually useful because of the Lobbie Commander required to get the Leviathan. The Manta's improved over the Firestorm, but the Hammerhead's far more improved over the Lightning. And the Lightning costs more than the Firestorm in UFO.

			Oh, and by the way, the Hammerhead has a bigger range than the Manta. Twice the fuel capacity and not much less speed.

	Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)		Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

Magic9mushroom at 09:07, 20 August 2009

2009-08-20T09:07:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:07, 20 August 2009
Line 6:		Line 6:

	:::Looks odd, but I guess in one way of thinking, the Manta is the superior interception sub while the Hammerhead(awesome lil ship, by the way) only provides a lesser transportation role, being a mini Leviathan. Its interception role is greatly weakened by having the shortest operational time and range of all the subs despite the good acceleration. My opinion says it should be the more expensive because it's a specialty craft, but perhaps the higher Manta price was to make the player spend more money on ships that they might use more. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 04:00, 20 August 2009 (EDT)		:::Looks odd, but I guess in one way of thinking, the Manta is the superior interception sub while the Hammerhead(awesome lil ship, by the way) only provides a lesser transportation role, being a mini Leviathan. Its interception role is greatly weakened by having the shortest operational time and range of all the subs despite the good acceleration. My opinion says it should be the more expensive because it's a specialty craft, but perhaps the higher Manta price was to make the player spend more money on ships that they might use more. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 04:00, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

			OTOH, the Hammerhead does better against the Dreadnaught (more than twice as much HP), and unlike the Lightning in UFO, is actually useful because of the Lobbie Commander required to get the Leviathan. The Manta's improved over the Firestorm, but the Hammerhead's far more improved over the Lightning. And the Lightning costs more than the Firestorm in UFO.

			Ah well, not like 20 Aqua Plastics and a bit of money matter anyway at that stage of the game. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 05:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

NKF at 08:00, 20 August 2009

2009-08-20T08:00:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:00, 20 August 2009
Line 4:		Line 4:

	::I checked. Indeed you are correct. How odd. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 03:33, 20 August 2009 (EDT)		::I checked. Indeed you are correct. How odd. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 03:33, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

			:::Looks odd, but I guess in one way of thinking, the Manta is the superior interception sub while the Hammerhead(awesome lil ship, by the way) only provides a lesser transportation role, being a mini Leviathan. Its interception role is greatly weakened by having the shortest operational time and range of all the subs despite the good acceleration. My opinion says it should be the more expensive because it's a specialty craft, but perhaps the higher Manta price was to make the player spend more money on ships that they might use more. -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 04:00, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

Magic9mushroom at 07:33, 20 August 2009

2009-08-20T07:33:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:33, 20 August 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:

	:I checked it in-game before I amended the post. I tried to build a Hammerhead and a Manta, and it is the Manta that costs more. But someone else should double check in case I got it wrong. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 11:26, 19 August 2009 (EDT)		:I checked it in-game before I amended the post. I tried to build a Hammerhead and a Manta, and it is the Manta that costs more. But someone else should double check in case I got it wrong. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 11:26, 19 August 2009 (EDT)

			::I checked. Indeed you are correct. How odd. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 03:33, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

Spike: I did check but someone else should

2009-08-19T15:26:00Z

I did check but someone else should

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:26, 19 August 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I think the Hammerhead costs more than the Manta. Can we check this? [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 04:35, 19 August 2009 (EDT)		I think the Hammerhead costs more than the Manta. Can we check this? [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] 04:35, 19 August 2009 (EDT)

			:I checked it in-game before I amended the post. I tried to build a Hammerhead and a Manta, and it is the Manta that costs more. But someone else should double check in case I got it wrong. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 11:26, 19 August 2009 (EDT)