It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I love wing commander games, but i really hate some of their spaceships...

In Wing Commander nearly all spaceships have good perfomance in combat, even the Hornet, but honestly the Scimitar is such a piece of crap... i can´t remember how many times i died with that piece of shit until i replayed the game just bought on gog.com and i repeated the space dead dance again, and again...

All other ships, specially the Raptor, are really good ones. (Probably the Raptor is my favourite fighter from both WC1 and 2) The Rapier is also very good, but i think the Raptor wins in firepower and resistance, with a minimum loss on agility.

BUT... here it comes Wing Commander 2... that im in this moment replaying... Don´t you think nearly ALL spaceships on this game are pieces of s.... compared to the killrathi?

If the game were a real war, i bet the humans will perish...

The Ferret:

Ironically the non-misile fast space "coffin" Ferret is a good ship for the missions you´re going to fly with it, it´s fast and it´s weapons are going to work for the mission you are going to pilot it, even the thougher ones.

The Epee:

Here it comes the crap... it´s so fast, and so weak in shields and hull that you always finish crashed and destroyed with some other spaceship out there... it´s just a suicide fighter, at least after coping with it´s speed is a great figther to evade, but it takes longer than ever to destroy the enemy because you´re more time evading and recovering shields that attacking.

The WC2 Rapier:

It should be as good as the previous Rapier, but even if the manual tells you its "improved" version of the old Rapier, you´re going to face killrathi spaceships much better than you, in hiull, in weapons, in everything... just maybe in manouvering you´re at the same level or better. The weapons are ok but you´re going to miss the "target system" for lasers. It´s not there.

Sabre:

Supposed to be the best spaceship you pilot in the game, it´s exactly like the Epee in the practice because the enemy is going to be much harder, fast, weak, and it has the laser cannons so "separated" that when you are going to use "full guns" rarely you will hit a spaceship with the four. It´s such a piece of s.... i hate it as much as i hate the Epee.

Broadsword:

Probably the best fighter in the game, even if it lacks afterburners, the hull and shields are so powerful... plus the AI turrets (or controlled by you) plus the mass cannons put in a smart way in the front of the ship, plus the fire system, even if this space elephant not manouver or turns fast enough, is just like the scimitar becomes a good ship, because it even manages to resist capital ship fire.

I just wanted to share my impressions of the spaceships inwc1 and 2, the games im already replaying, i should say the "torpedo" system and the fact that so many fighters have rear turrets in wc2 just turns the in basement, better gameplay of the second chapter, in just a frustrating experience in many moments... and in my opinion the "engine" of WC1 and WC2 is not good enough for "evade", in WC1 you can just manouver to be on the tail of the enemy, and adds some nice tactics, in WC2 if there are just few spacechips out there, ok you can attack from the side... but when things get tougher, it´s just a CHAOS with ships metling your hull from the front even if you tailing them... and their colleagues just blasting you from back... perfect sandwich that the Epee or the Sabre cannot manage... even if the Sabre has a rear turret too, the shields are not enough...

The game is great but if we turn "geek" and think about the humankind versus the Killrathi here, i just need to say if we were not allowed to repeat missions, humans were not seen WC3 ever, we just been DOOMED with that crappy spaceships!!!

(I didn´t talked much about WC1 fighters, because with the exception of the Scimitar all are really good)
From a story standpoint, I was under the impression that the humans were pretty much on the losing side for most of WC2. From a gameplay perspective, I think being constantly outgunned can add a lot of fun (Which is one of the things that made Freespace work so well, for that matter).
When I played WC2 on my 386DX33 as a kid it was really easy. WC1 was a lot harder and realistic, WC2 was very arcade like with the enemies dying really fast.

Just in case you need to play with a joystick. Anything else, just forget it.
avatar
amccour: From a story standpoint, I was under the impression that the humans were pretty much on the losing side for most of WC2. From a gameplay perspective, I think being constantly outgunned can add a lot of fun (Which is one of the things that made Freespace work so well, for that matter).
Yeah i totally agree, but the engine in Freespace it´s of course, better, (obvious) so it´s a total push for your reflexes, i don´t have Freespace fresh in my memory, i wanna reply the gOG.com version as soon as i can, so i will love to chat about the spaceships there too.

I already finished WC2 by now, last mission was easier than others, now im playing Beneath Steel Sky but after this one i wanna start Privateer.
avatar
Mau1wurf1977: When I played WC2 on my 386DX33 as a kid it was really easy. WC1 was a lot harder and realistic, WC2 was very arcade like with the enemies dying really fast.

Just in case you need to play with a joystick. Anything else, just forget it.
The funny thing is i had that same feeling the first time i played both, but it totally changed this time, i found WC1 very easy, and WC2 a pain.
Post edited November 06, 2011 by YaTEdiGo
avatar
Mau1wurf1977: WC1 was a lot harder and realistic, WC2 was very arcade like with the enemies dying really fast.
They're both pretty arcadey and not at all realistic.

Which is also what renders them actually playable and prevents them from turning into really obtuse Newtonian physics simulators.