[Mobius]

I played another campaign yesterday(I won't reveal its name for anti-spoiling purposes) and found an extremely unoriginal thing. Place your bets on what it is... 

There's a wide tendence nowadays. Every single time a Ravana appears, it starts moving towards allied ships and the player is tasked to destroy its forward beam cannons. Always? Most of the times, at least. I really want to say that it's becoming boring.

I for one believe that there are much more interesting ways to use Ravana destroyers. I wouldn't treat them as incoming, oversized and dumb mobile beam cannons...I'd rather try to find original ideas. I wouldn't forbid the usage of their beam cannons, of course, but I surely wouldn't base a mission on taking down two LReds and possibly 3 SReds, only, and always with the same modus operandi.

Someone might say, "The Ravana IS supposed to use its main beam cannons and friendlies ARE supposed to take them down", but I'd reply by claiming that this philosophy is becoming boring and I guess most of you would agree with me. It makes the Shivans look stupid and helps building the myth of Alpha 1(two idiotic things).

The Great Hunt featured the Ravana's main beam cannons, but the mission wasn't centered on taking them down and/or watching them taking down allied ships. In Slaying Ravana they weren't used at all and the mission was focused on a bombing run.

[captain-custard]

i eagerly await your self made and fredded mission containing the Ravana, with its new and unused game play ideas........

[Mobius]

The Ravana launches spacecraft wings from safe distance. This is original.

Happy?

[captain-custard]

no 

original is that it launches lava coated elephants

[Mobius]

That'd be stupid. Original, but stupid.

[Snail]

The Ravana launches spacecraft wings from safe distance. This is original.

Not really...

[Dilmah G]

I have a strong feeling I'm very guilty of this.

I'll write it down and redo it even if you weren't referring to it. Ravana's are really just a set-piece you can throw around and get the player to do something about while you cook up something else to surprise him with.

Actually regardless it gives me a better idea for its use. But really, the Ravana is an offensive, capship killer, and using it as a mobile fighter launch platform probably wasn't what it was intended to do.

[Mobius]

The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.

I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.

It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.

[Dilmah G]

The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.

I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.

It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.

I agree with that. But off the top of my head I can only think of

- Having the Ravana stay at some distance and launch fighters at the player or whatever he's protecting
- The Ravana be launched in the middle of a large dogfight and be used in a fighter-suppression role
- Having the Ravana head for a node and have the player tasked to disable it and neutralise it's navigation subsystem so it can't jump out (I'm using this one )

[Narvi]

That sounds boring and against how Ravanas were used in FS2; where they basically jump in close and bombard their target with their primary cannons. If you want to be original, try making a campaign where the main objective is hunting down a souped-up Ravana; throughout the campaign, the destroyer would be destroying ships in your battle group left and right, and jumping out before you can attack it using modified jump engines. The final mission would be an attempt to destroy its flight subsystems before it escapes from the remnants of your battlegroup.

I don't mean just disabling it; you'd have to blow up its nav subsystem to prevent it from jumping out before you can take out its engines. If you want to be even more "original", you could have no heavy ordnance on your bombers, just Stilletos, making you dependent on the battlegroup taking the ship out with their heavy guns. You'd support them by... oh my, taking out beam cannons! Possibly the forward ones!

Sometimes the formula is good.

[Dilmah G]

I don't mean just disabling it; you'd have to blow up its nav subsystem to prevent it from jumping out before you can take out its engines. If you want to be even more "original", you could have no heavy ordnance on your bombers, just Stilletos, making you dependent on the battlegroup taking the ship out with their heavy guns. You'd support them by... oh my, taking out beam cannons! Possibly the forward ones!

Sometimes the formula is good.

I was thinking of having the player's fighter wing being worn thin, the Ravana's fighters and bombers making a run on the ship the player is escorting, and then have the player assigned to neutralise it's nav and engines before it gets in range because

"I'm getting some unusual readings...It looks like the armor on it's forward beam cannons has been reinforced (OMG! SHIVANS EXHIBITING PATTERN RECOGNITION! RUN!), we'll have to take out it's engines instead. Then go for the comms so the son-of-a-***** can't call for backup."

[Snail]

The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.

I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.

It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.

The way I see it, destroying the Ravana's beam cannons is just the same thing as gunning down a wing of Maras. More of a filler thing to get the action going rather than a real mission point.

I don't really see the harm in using this particular cliche, though I do understand it can be very repetitive since it's used in many user-made campaigns.

The only other way a player can interact with a Ravana or whatever is if he's flying a bomber.

[Dilmah G]

The point is that there are too many campaigns in which the player is tasked to destroy the fragile main beam cannons. The concept itself may not be that pathetic...it's the way campaign creators handle it that makes it look poor.

I do agree, the Ravana is primarily tasked to annihilate opposing ships, but setting all missions featuring a Ravana around the destruction of its beams is pretty idiotic, if you ask me.

It's a matter of originality, you know...every time I see a Ravana, I know it's about to go berserk and I have to take its beams down. It's predictable, and without original ideas to make it look more interesting it's quite boring as well.

The way I see it, destroying the Ravana's beam cannons is just the same thing as gunning down a wing of Maras. More of a filler thing to get the action going rather than a real mission point.

I don't really see the harm in using this particular cliche, though I do understand it can be very repetitive since it's used in many user-made campaigns.

The only other way a player can interact with a Ravana or whatever is if he's flying a bomber.

Covering the inbound wing is also a good idea. Since that IS gunning down another wing of Maras en route for your slow, lumbering Ursas

[Mobius]

I agree with that. But off the top of my head I can only think of

- Having the Ravana stay at some distance and launch fighters at the player or whatever he's protecting
- The Ravana be launched in the middle of a large dogfight and be used in a fighter-suppression role
- Having the Ravana head for a node and have the player tasked to disable it and neutralise it's navigation subsystem so it can't jump out (I'm using this one )

I'd add:

- The Ravana departs if it has sustained too much damage. No one said that the Shivans are supposed to sit and wait until they're destroyed(it happens in certain missions, though);

That sounds boring and against how Ravanas were used in FS2; where they basically jump in close and bombard their target with their primary cannons. If you want to be original, try making a campaign where the main objective is hunting down a souped-up Ravana; throughout the campaign, the destroyer would be destroying ships in your battle group left and right, and jumping out before you can attack it using modified jump engines. The final mission would be an attempt to destroy its flight subsystems before it escapes from the remnants of your battlegroup.

I don't mean just disabling it; you'd have to blow up its nav subsystem to prevent it from jumping out before you can take out its engines. If you want to be even more "original", you could have no heavy ordnance on your bombers, just Stilletos, making you dependent on the battlegroup taking the ship out with their heavy guns. You'd support them by... oh my, taking out beam cannons! Possibly the forward ones!

Sometimes the formula is good.

The point is that custom missions have to be original if designers want to attract some attention. There are so many custom campaigns so original ideas are a must.

Even many missions coming straight from the main FS1 and FS2 campaigns would look poor without voice acting and such.

[Rodo]

well if only shivans would talk to humans... then you could pretend that those beams horns where antennas?

It's true, the theme on how to use a Ravana is getting old... but for what matters all FS universe is getting old, all you do is shoot down ships, so it's not really something that can be helped.

[Mobius]

There's stuff like navpoints, scripting and cutscenes which is yet to be widely used. Also, as several members stated, the Ravana might still be used in an original way.

[Lucika]

I might make a mission in Syrk (cough, cough, Dilmah and the others... still remember what it is? ) where the Ravana makes a kamikaze run on an Orion. Tho the Terrans have absolutely 0 chance against the Shivans (pre-FS1 but not contradicting canon), so it isn't such a big deal. I'd love to see it in an FS2-era campaign tho.

[Mongoose]

I don't see how a certain objective becoming somewhat of a trope makes it automatically "unoriginal" or invalidates its use by a campaign designer.  Mobius, if you'd care to share with us some logical reason as to why the Shivans wouldn't use a powerful weapon like the Ravana to destroy GTVA capital ships, or why the player and his wingmates wouldn't immediately rush a newly-arrived Ravana to prevent it from doing so, I'm all ears.

[Droid803]

Mobius, by your thinking...
Since most people breathe through their nose:
- Breathing through the nose is unoriginal
- Breathing should not be done through the nose
- People should think of different ways (such as cutting holes into their trachea to breathe) so that they are different.


Nice logic there.

The fact that something is overused shouldn't be an argument for why it shouldn't be used further.
Especially in this case, where the usage is likely the most effective usage, and the common response is the most efficient as well.
If it were something nonsensical, I would understand, but something equating to telling people not to breathe through their nose because everyone else does it and that people should be 'different' is just strange.

I believe that we should promote originality in campaign writing, but should not invalidate the 'overused' usage of certain elements. After all, there can only be so much variation that still makes sense.

[Mobius]

Someone has misenterpreted my point.

I'm considering the cliché factor. Too many campaigns feature the classic run-to-disable-some-beam-cannons on a Ravana, Blue Planet included.

I don't find your examples valid, Mongoose and Droid803. I'm not criticizing the deployment of Ravana destroyer.

Droid803, for instance, claims that the seen and re-seen usage is the most efficient. Are you sure about that? I don't think so. Why don't you show, for example, the Ravana's anti-fighter capabilities? Why don't you use it to deploy Shivan transports and such?

A classic run to disable its beams would work only if the mission designer is capable of making it epic and different from the others. If you pretend to handle it with a couple of message and a single directive then I'm afraid your concept isn't efficient at all.

Mongoose misenterpreted my point like no one ever before and made my opinion look silly. I never said that I'm against the deployment of Ravanas - I said that it should be, overall, handled in a better way.

We know from in-Universe points of view that destroyers aren't always supposed to join battlefields. Doing so would be a tactical error since allowing the enemy to damage ships of the importance of a destroyer is not good. The Shivans are likely to be an exception, but they're not stupid.


Also, valid or not, the total lack of originality is more than sufficient to change the tendence. Why would a FREDder keep doing something that is becoming much more obvious than Briefings and Command Briefings?