Best superfighter

Which is the best "superfighter"?

  • Rapier (WC1)

    Votes: 2 3.3%

  • Morningstar (WC2)

    Votes: 6 10.0%

  • Crossbow (WC2 - Bomber, but what the hell)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Excalibur (WC3)

    Votes: 25 41.7%

  • Dragon (WC4)

    Votes: 21 35.0%

  • Other (plz specify - go on, you know you want to)

    Votes: 6 10.0%
  • Total voters
    60
Yep, I loved the Excalibur... The Crossbow was not a bad bomber, but there was just a lack of visibilty (because of those huge white objects on the right and the left of the cockpit... maybe a part of the wings...)
 
What exactly were those things? I know engineers put them there for a reason, that is, if the graphics artist designed it like an engineer would go about it. Maybe someone should start a thread on what those things are.:)
 
Originally posted by Wulf
What exactly were those things? I know engineers put them there for a reason, that is, if the graphics artist designed it like an engineer would go about it. Maybe someone should start a thread on what those things are.:)
Click to expand...

I believe those things are where the torpedoes are stored, after all the Crossbow isn't that big (a lot smaller than the Broadsword actually) and torpedoes are BIG.

--Eder
 
Originally posted by Eder


I believe those things are where the torpedoes are stored, after all the Crossbow isn't that big (a lot smaller than the Broadsword actually) and torpedoes are BIG.

--Eder
Click to expand...

Yes, it is not silly... I will think about it...
 
Originally posted by NoRemorse
Yep, I loved the Excalibur... The Crossbow was not a bad bomber, but there was just a lack of visibilty (because of those huge white objects on the right and the left of the cockpit... maybe a part of the wings...)
Click to expand...


What I loved about the Excalibur was that it was a pilot's fighter. Its speed, agility, and firepower rewarded a good pilot who prepared to be aggressive and take the offensive, while the thin armour and limited cloaking punished those who were careless or overconfident. It all came down to the man (or woman) in the cockpit.

That's directly opposed to the Dragon, whose massive shields/armour and infite cloaking seemed designed to ensure that even an indifferant pilot could survive. Though given the flying skills of the Black Lance, I guess that wasn't such a bad thing. For the "Master Race" they were piss poor pilots. :D

As for the Crossbow, I felt the one crippling flaw it had was the limited gun pool. I could have lived without the turret or afterburners, if only the energy saved from the missing turrets had been fed to the forward guns.

Best, Raptor
 
Originally posted by Raptor



For the "Master Race" they were piss poor pilots. :D
Click to expand...

It depends on how you see it. The actual in-game AI may have sucked, but then again, WC NEVER had a really good AI for ANY race. Within the story though the Black Lance were supposed to be good pilots. Seether being just one example.
 
Well, Seether was pretty good. I wish all Black Lancers were as good as he. That would make WC4 a little bit more challenging.
But then again, the whole game was based on watching movies rather than gameplay. And that's why I love WCP and WCSO...
 
Originally posted by Raptor



What I loved about the Excalibur(...) It all came down to the man (or woman) in the cockpit.
(...)
Click to expand...

Well she had, just like the Dragon, those autotracking-guns, so skill was not necessarily so important. :p
 
Yeah, I remember there being a post a long time ago about that. You were supposed to have him drop right in behind ya and drop your decoys and that would be the end of it. Can't quite remember.
 
please don't make me think about first times :( Then all I think about is how long I've been here and then all that's happened recently :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top