이 사이트는 자바스크립트를 사용합니다.
브라우저에서 자바스크립트를 활성화 해주십시오.
라이브
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
베타
General Lore Discussions
답글 달기
보드 인덱스로 돌아가기
HiVolt
의 게시글
but in actual combat, it fails flat against the hammer, not only because the hammer is faster and lighter, but also because the guns of the hammer are placed in movable turrets that can aim in any direction, front+back+sideways......
while the guns on the breaker can only aim sideways.....
I wouldn't be quick to discount the Skybreaker. It's much more heavily built than the Hammer, and that alone means it would be able to take much heavier fire than the Hammer could.
A few direct hits to the hull of the Hammer would be a very bad thing; where with the Skybreaker, unless it was the frontal cannon hitting it, direct hits at broadside probably wouldn't do much damage.
355559
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Adamsm
의 게시글
Of course, that's something else we don't really know; how often can the main cannon fire on the Hammer? Sure it's the heavier gun, but is it really that good in a long air fight if it's only able to fire every five minutes or so? And more then likely, it's a Black or Twilight Dragon who crashes the Hammer.
Skreeran
의 게시글
Nah, I think the Hammer still wins. Slow deflation is preferable to just having a rotor stop moving and free falling.
Why? One rotor stopping=/=the whole thing falling. It still has one other one to guide it down. If the balloon pops or explodes the Hammer has no other way of staying up. Two things:
1. The Skybreaker has two main rotors. With one rotor on the side stopping, that is dead weight. It will pull that side down, tip the ship, and the whole thing starts to freefall.
2. The balloon wouldn't pop or explode unless the gas is flammable, and even with Goblin design, I don;t think anyone would be stupid enough to use flammable gas on a ship made for combat use.
Adamsm
의 게시글
2. The balloon wouldn't pop or explode unless the gas is flammable, and even with Goblin design, I don;t think anyone would be stupid enough to use flammable gas on a ship made for combat use.
Uh.... World War 2 zeppelins?
Skreeran
의 게시글
2. The balloon wouldn't pop or explode unless the gas is flammable, and even with Goblin design, I don;t think anyone would be stupid enough to use flammable gas on a ship made for combat use.
Uh.... World War 2 zeppelins?I was not aware of WW2 zeppelins.
Point is, I personally doubt that the Horde would use flammable gas. And even if they did, Rank pointed out that they use metal for the interior of the balloon.
(Of course, with that much extra weight, they'd probably have to use highly compressed gas to keep it afloat, which would make it fall faster if you can puncture the steel...)
HiVolt
의 게시글
Of course, that's something else we don't really know; how often can the main cannon fire on the Hammer? Sure it's the heavier gun, but is it really that good in a long air fight if it's only able to fire every five minutes or so?
I was actually thinking this myself. That's why I called it a large siege weapon rather than a readily usable cannon. Something that large would take quite a bit of time to load. I could see it being used only as a siege weapon most of the time, with an initial "shock and awe".
Monday
의 게시글
2. The balloon wouldn't pop or explode unless the gas is flammable, and even with Goblin design, I don;t think anyone would be stupid enough to use flammable gas on a ship made for combat use.
Uh.... World War 2 zeppelins?I was not aware of WW2 zeppelins.
Point is, I personally doubt that the Horde would use flammable gas. And even if they did, Rank pointed out that they use metal for the interior of the balloon.
Why wouldn't they use flammable gas? The Horde doesn't have the same technology we have, so I wouldn't be surprised if they used helium (IIRC that is the gas used to power balloons for flight. Not like party balloons, but zeppelins). Ever lit a helium balloon on fire?
Skreeran
의 게시글
Of course, that's something else we don't really know; how often can the main cannon fire on the Hammer? Sure it's the heavier gun, but is it really that good in a long air fight if it's only able to fire every five minutes or so?
I was actually thinking this myself. That's why I called it a large siege weapon rather than a readily usable cannon. Something that large would take quite a bit of time to load. I could see it being used only as a siege weapon most of the time, with an initial "shock and awe".Seems magazine fed, from what I've seen.
2. The balloon wouldn't pop or explode unless the gas is flammable, and even with Goblin design, I don;t think anyone would be stupid enough to use flammable gas on a ship made for combat use.
Uh.... World War 2 zeppelins?I was not aware of WW2 zeppelins.
Point is, I personally doubt that the Horde would use flammable gas. And even if they did, Rank pointed out that they use metal for the interior of the balloon.
Why wouldn't they use flammable gas? The Horde doesn't have the same technology we have, so I wouldn't be surprised if they used helium (IIRC that is the gas used to power balloons for flight. Not like party balloons, but zeppelins). Ever lit a helium balloon on fire?Hydrogen is flammable, Helium is not.
Monday
의 게시글
Hydrogen is flammable, Helium is not.
Hmm... You're right. However if the gas is compressed and the balloon does explode it wouldn't be pretty.
Again, Hammer isn't better than Skybreaker and Skybreaker isn't better than hammer. They are two different ships with different capabilities and strengths weaknesses. Let's leave it at that, mk?
Skreeran
의 게시글
Hydrogen is flammable, Helium is not.
Hmm... You're right. However if the gas is compressed and the balloon does explode it wouldn't be pretty.
Again, Hammer isn't better than Skybreaker and Skybreaker isn't better than hammer. They are two different ships with different capabilities and strengths weaknesses. Let's leave it at that, mk?I still think that it would be lot easier to take out one of the Skybreaker's rotors than to take out one of the Hammer's balloons.
Yes, they're designed for different purposes, but in a fight, I think the Hammer would win. The Skybreaker is designed more as a mobile base and high altitude bomber, for use against ground forces; the Hammer is designed for air combat.
Adamsm
의 게시글
Eh, the gunship battle shows that both ships are equal lol.Of course, that's something else we don't really know; how often can the main cannon fire on the Hammer? Sure it's the heavier gun, but is it really that good in a long air fight if it's only able to fire every five minutes or so?
I was actually thinking this myself. That's why I called it a large siege weapon rather than a readily usable cannon. Something that large would take quite a bit of time to load. I could see it being used only as a siege weapon most of the time, with an initial "shock and awe".Seems magazine fed, from what I've seen.Even magazine fed, it would still have some time between shots, just because of the size of the thing.
HiVolt
의 게시글
All of this talk about strategy and tactics makes me wish for WC4.
I would love to see all this new tech, magic, etc. incorporated into an RTS.
355559
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Skreeran
의 게시글
Eh, the gunship battle shows that both ships are equal lol.*insert "Game mechanics ≠ lore" comment here*Of course, that's something else we don't really know; how often can the main cannon fire on the Hammer? Sure it's the heavier gun, but is it really that good in a long air fight if it's only able to fire every five minutes or so?
I was actually thinking this myself. That's why I called it a large siege weapon rather than a readily usable cannon. Something that large would take quite a bit of time to load. I could see it being used only as a siege weapon most of the time, with an initial "shock and awe".Seems magazine fed, from what I've seen.Even magazine fed, it would still have some time between shots, just because of the size of the thing.But that time can't be too long.
Adamsm
의 게시글
Eh, the gunship battle shows that both ships are equal lol.*insert "Game mechanics ≠ lore" comment here*But of course lol.
Of course, that's something else we don't really know; how often can the main cannon fire on the Hammer? Sure it's the heavier gun, but is it really that good in a long air fight if it's only able to fire every five minutes or so?
I was actually thinking this myself. That's why I called it a large siege weapon rather than a readily usable cannon. Something that large would take quite a bit of time to load. I could see it being used only as a siege weapon most of the time, with an initial "shock and awe".Seems magazine fed, from what I've seen.Even magazine fed, it would still have some time between shots, just because of the size of the thing.But that time can't be too long.Aye, but it also wouldn't be instant either, just based on the size of the ammo they would be using.
Monday
의 게시글
Hydrogen is flammable, Helium is not.
Hmm... You're right. However if the gas is compressed and the balloon does explode it wouldn't be pretty.
Again, Hammer isn't better than Skybreaker and Skybreaker isn't better than hammer. They are two different ships with different capabilities and strengths weaknesses. Let's leave it at that, mk?I still think that it would be lot easier to take out one of the Skybreaker's rotors than to take out one of the Hammer's balloons.
Yes, they're designed for different purposes, but in a fight, I think the Hammer would win. The Skybreaker is designed more as a mobile base and high altitude bomber, for use against ground forces; the Hammer is designed for air combat.
It's true. Epic boarding action incoming.
Rankkor
의 게시글
Hydrogen is flammable, Helium is not.
Hmm... You're right. However if the gas is compressed and the balloon does explode it wouldn't be pretty.
again, the ballons are made of steel, not cloth, thus they can't explode........ at best if you concentrate enough cannon fire on 1 spot you can eventually pierce the steel, but that would leave the balloon with a hole, it would not explode simply because it's not made of cloth.........
and
Again, Hammer isn't better than Skybreaker and Skybreaker isn't better than hammer.
I disagree, each ship as a strenght on 1 side, and a weakness in another one.
as far as air dominance goes, the hammer completely pwns the breaker, the hammer is simply made for combat, and for inspiring dread and fear on the enemy.
as far as practicality and scouting goes the breaker is better, since the breaker has a larger cargo hold, and more space, you can pack that thing high with siege engines and para-troopers for rapid deployment on enemy territory, and an extra nuclear bomb for razing bases.
Hammer=Fighter
Breaker=Carrier&Scout
plus when it's time to bolt out, the rocket engine on the rear of the hammer makes it a much faster ship to leave a battle that's going sour......
Rankkor
의 게시글
now, you know what could be AWESOME?
that there isn't anymore a Orgrim's Hammer or a Skybreaker........
that is to say, no more a single flagship, instead a FULL FLOTILLA of horde ships and alliance ships.....
multiple breakers multiple hammers, but with diferent names after the heroes of both sides.......
Alliance examples......
Lothar's Shield.
Faith of Alonsus.
The TrollSlayer.
Greymane's Pride.
Horde Examples:
The Gorehowl.
Durotan's might.
Liandrin's Light
BloodFrenzy's Honor.
The Gnomish Punter
Interest
의 게시글
now, you know what could be AWESOME?
that there isn't anymore a Orgrim's Hammer or a Skybreaker........
that is to say, no more a single flagship, instead a FULL FLOTILLA of horde ships and alliance ships.....
multiple breakers multiple hammers, but with diferent names after the heroes of both sides.......
Alliance examples......
Lothar's Shield.
Faith of Alonsus.
The TrollSlayer.
Greymane's Pride.
Horde Examples:
The Gorehowl.
Durotan's might.
Liandrin's Light
BloodFrenzy's Honor.
The Gnomish Punter
Lolol. I would totally pilot that ship too.
답글 달기
로그인이 되어있지 않습니다. 답글을 달려면
로그인
하거나, 계정이 없다면
회원가입
을 해 주세요.