Spartan Surprise

[Shadow Reaper]

When the Spartan appeared I was one of the underwhelmed. I didn't see an advantage over a pair of Ursas. Both had a pair of S1s in a turret and a place for the gunner, and a pilot. The Ursa carries 4 and the Spartan 8. Two Ursas take up the same space as a Spartan, so I reasoned the Spartan really had no advantage over two Ursas and in fact the Ursas offered twice the shield and firepower since both had a single shield and a single S1 turret. The second Ursa needed two more players (which come at a premium), but the Ursas seemed a better choice to me.

That was hasty.

Turns out the Spartan has 2 shields and an S2 turret. One supposes it has much more hull, and so hey. . . just saying. . .an S2 turret is actually a serious threat to a fighter where an S1 is not. Two shields on one vehicle is better because the threshold to take out the first vehicle is much higher.

Anyone know if it will fit in the back of a Carrack? I'm guessing not.

BTW, latest sighting on the Carrack was with 2 Arrows and a Pisces sitting atop the hangar.

So curious: say you were tasked with setting up ground defenses for a new UEE mining op on a Vanduul contested world and had a single Liberator to fill. Air support is separate. What would you stock the Lib with? Something like 2 Novas, 2 Ballista, 2 Spartan, and 10 X1 Force? That's 26 crew plus soldiers (though X1 pilots are both). Can't really make that number much higher.

 

[White Lando]

I like that vehicle lineup for the Liberator. Would be a nasty force!

I'm partial to the Ursa since it fits in my MSR but the Spartan is superior.

 

[Richard Bong]

4×S1 guns hit harder than 2×S2.

The two Ursas fit in spaces that a Spartan doesn't fit in. For example two Ursas fit in a Carrack, but one Spartan doesn't.

 

[Shadow Reaper]

Yup. Still a hard choice, but keep in mind 2 Ursas require 4 players crew for best effect, and a single Spartan requires just 2. Crew requirement is a huge issue in evaluating best methods. Most players would balk at being assigned an S1 turret, but feel useful with an S2 turret.

 

[Richard Bong]

Yup. Still a hard choice, but keep in mind 2 Ursas require 4 players crew for best effect, and a single Spartan requires just 2. Crew requirement is a huge issue in evaluating best methods. Most players would balk at being assigned an S1 turret, but feel useful with an S2 turret.

Two Ursas also can fire on the move, and bound.
You are now also taking a 6 man squad as a 4 man dismount team and a two man vehicle team.

The Spartan, as a former 11B (National Guard) and 97E (active duty), I find mostly useless. It is too big to be practical, the turret is operated by the driver, and difficult to transport.

If you have to use ground vehicles then my first choice is neither the Ursa nor the Spartan. Go with 9 man squads mounted on Cyclone TRs and go full Rat Patrol.

View: https://youtu.be/CBy6QSjvhjM

 

[Shadow Reaper]

I like that except I am still waiting for the definitive work exploring the use of the Nox and eventually the X1 Force. The latter is supposed to come with 2 shields, and a gimbled S1 hardpoint. To date i have never seen anyone put the Nox through its paces as a suppressing fire platform, and a single hit with a Bulldog will kill any character. So looking at them as an ultra-fast fire platform makes good sense.

What we do know from JT 2.0 is grav bikes are obscenely easy to spot and target from the air. The Cyclone MT is definitely more survivable against ships. 2-3 Cyclones together I think I'd steer away from.

 

[Richard Bong]

As a 97E (HUMINT Specialist) I spent lots of time with the MP's. They ran 9 man squads, 3 squads top a platoon, and with their Hummers, they were better armed than an infantry platoon on Bradleys.

CIG said the MT was top heavy. I know that isn't a thing yet, but something to consider, which is why I suggested the TR. You can carry some SAMs, or AT missiles, to go with the guns. (That is what the MP's did.)

 

[Shadow Reaper]

Personally, I would not want to be in any ground vehicle unless CIG makes it much, much harder to find, target and kill from the air. They probably need to introduce ground clutter. There are no ships that can't kill a dozen ground vehicles easily, except unless they have lots of missiles. The MT seems to provide a real solution, and still has a turret. A Ballista is an even better solution.

We don't know what kind of hull the Spartan has, but it probably holds up well to S1 fire. We'll need to see what we see.

I do love the Rat Patrol solution, and I was a fan of the original series, but they didn't have missiles, and even the tiny Razor or M50 seems more than a match for a pair of Cyclones without the missiles. Hell, you could kill them with a RAFT.

 

[Richard Bong]

Personally, I would not want to be in any ground vehicle unless CIG makes it much, much harder to find, target and kill from the air. They probably need to introduce ground clutter. There are no ships that can't kill a dozen ground vehicles easily, except unless they have lots of missiles. The MT seems to provide a real solution, and still has a turret. A Ballista is an even better solution.

We don't know what kind of hull the Spartan has, but it probably holds up well to S1 fire. We'll need to see what we see.

I do love the Rat Patrol solution, and I was a fan of the original series, but they didn't have missiles, and even the tiny Razor or M50 seems more than a match for a pair of Cyclones without the missiles. Hell, you could kill them with a RAFT.

Personally, I prefer a Hoplite to a Spartan, for the same reason.
For ground vehicles I have a Dragonfly, but see no use for ground vehicles in the current game.

 

[Sirus7264]

maybe you guys should test all this in a CFT scenario sometimes real world scenarios do not work the same as SC world scenarios. Also we just went from wanting a 2 man setup to a 9 man setup. I do not think it would be easy to set up a 9 man transport. last thing with the spartan and ursa is you can store a lot of stuff in both of them making them great transport units from one destination to another you can't really carry much with TR or Nox. so then you wonder what is the point in the 9 man if you are not transporting anything unless you are protecting a transport.(better be an important load for that many players to be protecting it.

 

[Richard Bong]

maybe you guys should test all this in a CFT scenario sometimes real world scenarios do not work the same as SC world scenarios. Also we just went from wanting a 2 man setup to a 9 man setup. I do not think it would be easy to set up a 9 man transport. last thing with the spartan and ursa is you can store a lot of stuff in both of them making them great transport units from one destination to another you can't really carry much with TR or Nox. so then you wonder what is the point in the 9 man if you are not transporting anything unless you are protecting a transport.(better be an important load for that many players to be protecting it.

The Spartan is 9. The 2 Ursas is 12 but if you run 3 man dismount teams, 10. 3 Cyclone TR or MT is 9.
True enough about cargo capacity.

A squad isn't generally used to transport cargo.
A raid, to scout an LZ, a patrol, etc.
If the mission is transport something, the Ursa is the only one with a cargo capacity.

Which vehicle, and loadout, is best depends on the mission.

 

[Shadow Reaper]

Until CIG nerfs the ability of ships to get where vehicles can go, or nerfs ship ability to target ground vehicles, I don't see a future for them. Just too vulnerable. While riding a boke flat out you might be hard to target due to relative speed, but otherwise, it's just a bullet magnet.

I do think there is room for a Ballista platform exploration vehicle. Give it an S2 turret, the S2 dual twin S2 missile launcher and the explorarion package of tghe 400i with kitchenette and scam facility and it could be workable, but I doubt we'll ever see that and as Richard noted, it doesn't fit the Carrack.

An explorer version of the Apollo would be interesting.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Until CIG nerfs the ability of ships to get where vehicles can go, or nerfs ship ability to target ground vehicles, I don't see a future for them. Just too vulnerable. While riding a boke flat out you might be hard to target due to relative speed, but otherwise, it's just a bullet magnet.

I do think there is room for a Ballista platform exploration vehicle. Give it an S2 turret, the S2 dual twin S2 missile launcher and the explorarion package of tghe 400i with kitchenette and scam facility and it could be workable, but I doubt we'll ever see that and as Richard noted, it doesn't fit the Carrack.

An explorer version of the Apollo would be interesting.

Tree cover would also be another thing which ships would not be able to counter...

Also if the vehicles were low signature enough (they damn well should be they are minimum energy ground dwellers) travelling under the cover of night will also be a viable tactic as well as out in the open in the day if they don't throw up much dust. Notwithstanding draw distance in the game a small slow moving target is going to be hard to visually see given enough distance.

Really, thinking about it, all that ground vehicles need is to be low signature for the ships to have a really tough time tracking them down unless they are camping out at a point of interest which will draw ships to it. Travel unshielded only throwing them up when you need to and you might just have a viable tactic for ground travel to be a preference over air in terms of approaching a target...?