The Aegis Vanguard - Ship Talk Commentary #1

Did you get a Vanguard?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 27.3%
  • Yes, but I melted things for it

    Votes: 20 36.4%
  • No

    Votes: 9 16.4%
  • No, planning to get one later or in the PU

    Votes: 11 20.0%

  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .

Black Sunder

Rock Raiders
Officer
Jun 19, 2014
8,270
26,833
3,045
RSI Handle
Black_Sunder
The Aegis Vanguard - Ship Talk Commentary #1

Welcome to the first Ship Talk Commentary(STC) #1! This is a new kind of Talk just focusing on a single, presumably newly released concept ship. We're starting with the Aegis Vanguard and oh my Glorious Leader do we have things to talk about. There will not be any direct stat for stat comparisons to other ships in these STCs. They need to fly or crash on their own with what they are given. This will be much less formal than the normal Talks with pictures to illustrate points and my own feelings on things.



Initial Description

First of all lets look at the description and how it relates to the ship:

"Strike hard from a distance! The Vanguard, a recent design from Aegis, has quickly become Earth’s premier deep space fighter. Deep space fighters are typically used to pursue engagements in outlying areas when support from a carrier is not available. Vanguards are usually flown by ground- and station-based naval forces, and are widely used by militia squadrons. Specifically designed to operate from planetary bases and engage targets up to a star system’s distance, the fighter trades some maneuverability for an extended supply of fuel and munitions as well as basic survival accommodations for a pilot and radar operator. The Vanguard’s RIO operates a turret, the ship’s missile loadout (optionally) and its highly advanced sensor suite. This distinct scanning array gives the Vanguard a particular advantage when fighting in and around an obstacle such as an asteroid field or nebula! Finally, the Vanguard is known to be an extraordinarily sturdy spacecraft, with multiple backup systems not commonly found in single-seat ships; stories of Vanguards limping back to base with a single engine and half their fuselage exposed to vacuum have become common as the battle against the Vanduul has heated up."

So from this it reads like a great all-rounder able to carry out a multitude of assignments and have room to sleep on that long trip. Fly from planet to another system a few over? Check. Sleeping beds? Check. Sturdy and takes a hit? Check! Great weaponry? Check! Looking good so far. The addition of a dedicated and advanced sensor suite is something we really haven't seen before which gives it an additional edge over other similar ships. Overall it reads good and has several qualities that would appeal to anyone despite the 250 dollar price tag. Fairly sure people were expecting a starship version of him after reading that initial description:


Badass incarnate and able to take anything and anyone on.


...But We Didn't Really Get That

Instead we got something that looks like the cross between a modern day stealth fighter and an old WW2 aircraft. Admittedly this is what they were going for but I personally think they took it too far keeping it to a modern aircraft in style. Personally I was expecting something similar to the Halo Longsword Fighter. The Vanguard actually looks a bit like a Pelican drop ship though on the front at certain angles.



Now I have seen edits that bring the cockpit in and fill in and shorten the tail section and also do things with the wings and personally I like that more. I think working in several of these to the design would produce a more formidable look to the craft and give it a more distinct personality. No one said that it needs to look like a space plane and it shouldn't. It should look like its built for space combat with the bare minimum of surfaces needed to get off the planet and back down on one. Hell the Freelancer doesn't look like it could land planetside but it does.

Detailed Description

The detailed RSI Vanguard page can be found here.
Full Ship Spec picture here.



The Ship Specs description, kind of a downer compared to the above link

This gives a much better description than the 'sale version' seen above. The page lists the following as possible roles for the Vanguard: long range jump scout, extended duration patrol/reconnaissance ship, fighter-bomber (when equipped with torpedoes), tactical command and control ship, bomber interceptor and, in the proper hands, even a fighter-killer. Again this sounds awesome and if we ignore the look of it then it seems like it can fulfill all of these if customized for those specific roles. I would also expect many people to go exploring in it due to its survivability and advanced sensor suite. The next parts of the description go more into the roles and nuts and bolts of the ship. Its bigger than a Hornet, has good weapons and a lot of armor of the tungsten variety.

The description says that it has a great top speed due to the engines. ok. Not buying that because the Aurora has so little mass and a TR3 engine but goes so slow. This will be a 'wait and see' Again it does talk about the great survivability of the craft and I'm interested to see this point of it come through. The talk about 'weather conditions' gives me hope that in space we can fight in nebulas, gas clouds, and EM storms and you'll need to take appropriate measures whereas the Vanguard may be armored somewhat against these effects.

Engines, Weapons, Equipment




It has 2 TR4 engines which means some good speed(MAYBE!) and can still fly even if a single engine is destroyed. It features an amazing 11 TR2 thrusters. Thats cool. Power Plant size 2.....huh. Ok there is 2 of them but size 2 seems kinda low for the size of the ship. Moving on we come to shields Again size 2 but there are 2 of them which I still find to be rather low but most of the protection of this ship comes from its armor and not shield so it may be acceptable.



The weapons are amazing though. 4 fixed size 2 lasers along with a gimbal SIZE 5 Gatling cannon(A10 Warthog here). Jumping off these are 2 Size 2 missile racks and finally a turret carrying 2 Size 2 guns. Not bad for weapons. As far as equipment it isn't listed but we can draw some conclusions from the description. It obviously has a jump drive and expanded fuel tanks. More than that it has an advanced Electronic suite and may even be able to play an E-War role while in combat.

Worth it?

Is it worth it? Don't know really. I got one because I'm Ash Ketchum and have to catch myself some good ships to have options in the verse and rent them out to people for cash. Nice passive income there. If you want a long range ship you can't go wrong here. Beyond its primary role shown it has serious potential for many other things so even if you think its primary role is crap you can swap things out to make it how you want and still be happy and that is fine.



I know several people debated melting their Redeemers for this and that's fine too as long as you have a fleet you're personally happy with you can't go wrong. I would recommend getting this AND keeping the redeemer because they don't share any roles aside from the 'bring lots of guns to battle'. Hell just get it for the gatling death cannon. Its up to you to make up your own mind. When I started this I didn't like the ship but have warmed up to it some. Its price though as JBWill said gives me hope that they won't be super common, at least this mil-spec version.




And remember the choice is yours! And now because it came to me in a dream:

"Captain Montoya, he's our hero. Gonna take the Corporation down to zero. He's our drunk magnified and he's crashing on our starboard side."

"We're the TEST Squadron. You can be one too. Because drinking and crashing is the thing to do. Looting and drinking is fun they say. Here's what Montoya has to say:"

"'Burp'" Excuse me"
 

WarrenPeace

Space Marshal
Jul 17, 2014
4,209
8,451
2,920
RSI Handle
Shortspark
I've got one. I'm toying with the idea of taking it to Operation Pitchfork (or Yawspoon) and kinda maintaining it as my go-to trouble-making ship. In fact... *runs away briefly*

*returns* Ok, Troublemaker may end up being just one of my main cruising ships. I'll have to see how it handles and how much it costs to run, but I kinda love that it has a small crew requirement and is pretty tough. It's between this one and my Freelancer.

EDIT: Also, APOC Death Ballistic Gatling Cannon is the best name, it's like the CEOs 12 year old got to name it.

DOUBLE EDIT: Also, I'm like 70% in love with the way it looks. The nose could be beefed up a little, and the wings seem a little dinky. If they kept the swing wing action, and made the wings a little more chunky, it would be a contender for sexiest ship in the game.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Maxgerber5250

PhosphorusForFun

Space Marshal
Mar 14, 2015
342
323
2,200
RSI Handle
PhosphorusForFun
At the end of the day, I'm glad I grabbed it. If I was to end up with one ship for LTI I'd prefer it be a fighter (likely to die more than other types i suppose) with more freedom of range to it. No LTI? ... eeehhhh think I could get it in the PU without any heartbreak.

Just saiyan...
 

Statix

Commander
Dec 25, 2014
66
47
150
RSI Handle
Statix
It's growing on me and I'll likely add one to the fleet. Trying to pay more attention to the stated roles rather than ship specs. Also wonder if it has the potential to be a day one ship unlike all my other ships.
 

AntiSqueaker

Space Marshal
Apr 23, 2014
2,157
5,559
2,920
RSI Handle
Anti-Squeaker
I'm going to copy over my thoughts on the Vanguard here.

"Only problem I really forsee with the Vanguard is that, with its stock loadout, it may be a fighter that can't dogfight that well.

Hear me out. Any joystick player can tell you the woes of using fixed weaponry vs a nimbler target with gimbaled weapons. The Vanguard is shaping up to be a fairly non-maneuverable craft. (12x TR2 maneuvering thrusters on a ship almost 2x as long as a Gladius is NOT going to be doing loops around anything short of a Javelin). Even in the sale page, CIG is stressing its relative lack of nimbleness ("The Vanguard trades the maneuverability of the Hornet, Lightning and Gladius...", " In combat, the Vanguard’s roles are extensive...in the proper hands, even a fighter-killer.")

To me, it seems like CIG is stressing that it's NOT supposed to try and tango with a Super Hornet, Gladius, or Cutlass. From my reading, it's supposed to try and rip through em on the first pass, and rely on its ample defenses to make another swing around.

So we have 4 fixed weapons (and a very sexy looking gimbaled gun), which is not a very good combo for a non-agile fighter. The turret evens things up a bit, but honestly 2xS2 guns isn't much to write home about. Cutlass, Gladiator, and Hornet all mount that in their respective turrets.

To me, the Vanguard isn't something that's supposed to replace a Hornet. It's a heavy fighter, designed to waste anything in front of it, and take enough punishment to make it back home.

So for long range escorts, it's probably going to be the top choice due to the obvious range advantage. But I don't think it will, and definitely shouldn't be, the end all combat craft."


tl;dr Vanguard seems to be Star Citizens heavy fighter, for all the pros and cons that entails. Vanguard, as is, is probably going to play a lot more like an A-10 Warthog than an actual dogfighter. Which is great for people who want that, that role was supposed to be fulfilled by the Avenger, but that's another story. But I don't think the Vanguard will be dancing around with Gladius's.
 

JBWill

Vice Admiral
Donor
Nov 11, 2014
217
123
550
RSI Handle
JBWill
Alright, finally a ship discussion about something I have a strong opinion about. *cracks knuckles*

Fair warning, this post is probably going to wind up super rambly. I write things all day for work, so when I get home I tend to stop caring as much about what I write :p

I've been waiting for this ship to be revealed ever since I saw the first poll that it was included in; I voted for it in every poll that it was a part of (which I believe was 3 separate polls since it kept losing), and participated in a lot of arguments against the people who said things like "we don't need another combat ship". I had a lot of high expectations about this ship, and I have to say now that it's out, it has absolutely met or exceeded every expectation I had. I am absolutely in love with this ship, and I fully intend for it to be my primary ship in the PU. To demonstrate why I feel this is such a great ship, I'll start out by giving my thoughts on the common negatives I've seen attributed to it (and fully displaying my fanboyism):

"It's ugly"
Obviously this is entirely a matter of opinion, and I don't fault people theirs. I absolutely love how it looks personally; it's my second favorite looking ship next to the Gladiator. I've also seen the edits that shift various parts around and so far the only one that I've seen that I actually like more than the current implementation is the one that pretty much just shortens the nacelles a bit. I wouldn't complain if they did that, but I'd also be perfectly happy if it stays exactly how it looks now. I do also agree that the main cannon looks a bit awkward hanging off the way it does with only a small flimsy looking point of contact with the ship, but it doesn't bother me that much.

"Ermagerd space plane"
I'll be honest, this complaint annoys the crap out of me. "It flys through space it doesn't need to look like a plane." So? Just because it doesn't NEED to look like a plane doesn't mean that it CAN'T. Similarly, just because there are spaceships designed to land on planets that aren't aerodynamic doesn't mean it doesn't still help being aerodynamic. If you're on a ship that's designed to travel large distances without refueling, that little bit of fuel you save taking off could be the little bit of fuel that gets you home safely. It's one thing to just not like the look of it, but it annoys me when people call it stupid or "unrealistic" just because it has wings on it. The Space Shuttle operates primarily in space and it has wings. Yes, obviously, the Space Shuttle needs its wings to land, but the Vanguard is a ship that was designed from the ground up to be able to take a whole lot of damage and still come home. If you're limping back home to a planetside base with half an engine left, you're probably going to be thankful you have wings to help you get down to the ground safely.

In addition: in my opinion the assertion that being aerodynamic or generally plane shaped (meaning wide side-to-side but narrow top-to-bottom) is pointless in space combat is just plain wrong. From the placement of its weapons and its durable nature, the Vanguard appears to me to be a ship designed to do its damage by charging straight at the enemy guns blazing. In that situation, the front facing profile is extremely important as the smaller your profile is, the harder you are to hit. How do you give a fairly large ship a small cross section? You make it wide and flat, like a plane. In addition, people seem to ignore the fact that the same properties that make something aerodynamic also make it better armored. A projectile that hits a piece of armor at an angle is less likely to penetrate than a projectile hitting a piece of armor dead on. Yes, having a lot of angled bits makes it look unnecessarily aerodynamic, but it also makes it better able to survive those head-on strafing runs.

To clarify, I'm not saying that it's best for a spaceship to look like a plane. I'm just saying that it looking like a plane isn't inherently bad.

"Size 2 shield seems small, even if there are two of them"
Two things here. One, they're still working on rebalancing shield sizes across all of the ships, so we don't REALLY have a good frame of reference for the shield sizes and strengths of most ships. Two, it doesn't really sound like the Vanguard NEEDS a particularly strong shield. Pretty much every description they give of the thing talks about its rugged and compact construction that allows it to take a beating and keep going. It seems likely that even IF 2x s2 shields winds up being relatively weak, it's still going to be an extremely durable ship. I really don't think CIG is dumb enough to repeatedly advertise a ship as being incredibly durable and then release it as a glass cannon. It amuses me that people put a TON of trust in CIG to make this game into what we all know it can be, but as soon as a somewhat arbitrary subject-to-change stat number doesn't quite match up with their expectations, it's straight to the pitchforks.

"Size 2 power plant seems small, even if there are two of them"
More or less the same response as the last one. They're still rebalancing power plant sizes in the stats, so we don't really know for sure exactly how powerful a size 2 power plant is. Even more specifically, we don't really know for sure how power plants of different sizes compare to each other. It's entirely possible that 2 size 2 power plants put out more power than 1 size 4 power plant. We'll have to see.

"It's too big, it'll never be nimble enough to bring its guns to bear on fighters"
This is a statement that I've seen a lot, but I find pretty silly. That statement is basically based on the assumption that the Vanguard is designed to be fighting against the ships that we have now in AC, when honestly nothing I've seen suggests that. IMO people latched onto the word "fighter" in the original description and assumed that it meant "dogfighting", when that doesn't really seem to be the case. This ship to me is intended to fight against things around the size of a Freelancer or larger. It's designed for fighting in deep space. It's not likely to find very many M50s or Gladiuses or Scythes out in the middle of nowhere unless they have carrier support, in which case the Vanguard's job would be to destroy or disable the carrier then book it out before the smaller fighters can kill it. Yes, it is absolutely too large and sluggish to be able to reliably fight small fighters. Good. If it wasn't, it would probably be hilariously overpowered.


Crap, I think I had a couple others, but I forgot them. Oh well, I'll move on to the expectations I had of the ship following the initial description and how it compares to them now that it's released(ish):

1: I was expecting it to be fairly large. My guess based on the description they gave was around the size of a Freelancer. Obviously I was a bit off with it being 37m instead of around 32, and it being quite wide. Still, it was billed as a long range deep-space ship, so obviously it was going to need extra room for fuel and living arrangements. I was a bit perplexed how many people seemed to assume it was going to be not much bigger than a Hornet.

2: Lots of guns. Obviously, that's a big ol' check. Though, I will say that one thing about its armament that doesn't line up with my expectations is the placement of its turret. Given that I was figuring it was going to be relatively big, I thought that the turret was going to be an actual tail gun on the rear of the ship in order to keep smaller fighters from settling in behind it. The more dorsal placement of the turret seems less useful. However, if the guns on the turret can depress far enough to shoot at targets directly in front of the ship, then I suppose it makes some amount of sense, further increasing its forward firepower.

3: Durable. It's hard to call this one "confirmed" without being able to try it out, but the fact that they keep repeating how durable it is makes me pretty confident that it will be.

4: Long range. Another pretty obvious check. I wasn't particularly worried about being wrong on this one.

Since this has turned out long and, as advertised, rambly, I'll end with one final thought, which is an aspect of the ship that I WASN'T expecting: flexibility. Since it's a deep-space long range combat ship, I was figuring it would be pretty bare bones. Big engines, big fuel tanks, big guns, big armor, tiny living space, and that's pretty much it. While that's not entirely inaccurate, I was not expecting the Vanguard to be able to be outfitted for as wide a variety of roles as it sounds like it will be. Bomber, patrol ship, scout, C&C platform, bomber destroyer, EWAR platform, escort, explorer, bounty hunter, and probably any other number of niche roles that wind up existing in the PU. This ship seems to me as the most versatile combat ship we've seen yet, capable of pretty much any role other than dogfighting against small ships, and that is one of my favorite things about it. Yes, that's right, it's a ship that I've been looking forward to for months with a lot of high expectations, it met every one of those expectations, and the aspect that winds up being my favorite is the one aspect that I didn't expect at all. Who knew?

So yeah, I love this ship, and I definitely bought it without regret (though I melted a few things to pick it up, I'm not made of money). Between the long range, the multitude of roles, and the low crew requirement, this to me is the first ship that I've really felt I could use to go pretty much anywhere and do pretty much anything that interested me. I'm sure many will disagree with my viewpoints and think that it's a stupid ship and I'm a dumbass, and that's fine, to each their own. As Clock referenced I've said before, that just makes the ship all that more special to those of us who are in love with it.

/walloftext
 
Last edited:

WarrenPeace

Space Marshal
Jul 17, 2014
4,209
8,451
2,920
RSI Handle
Shortspark
The Command and Control platform role for this ship does interest me greatly. In larger combats, we will need ships that can help coordinate all of the combatants, but so far we've had few ships that seem to have that built in. I think the Constellation is supposed to be able to support this role (with some modification) and larger ships should be able to pack in the equipment fairly easily. For example, the Carrack (which already has everything in place for enhanced sensors and such) maybe be a good fit for CC roles... I can't help but think that the holotable that they've shown us in some pictures would be awesome for coordinating battles.



 

Lienna

Space Marshal
Feb 27, 2014
348
816
2,480
RSI Handle
Lienna
Similarly, just because there are spaceships designed to land on planets that aren't aerodynamic doesn't mean it doesn't still help being aerodynamic. If you're on a ship that's designed to travel large distances without refueling, that little bit of fuel you save taking off could be the little bit of fuel that gets you home safely.
Let's clarify something here... anyone played kerbal space program? Ever tried to make a spaceplane on it? No? I have. Here's the thing, space planes are vastly more economical with fuel when taking off, and you know the weird thing with space travel, taking off from earth requires like 90% of the fuel you'll be using. any planet with an atmosphere, the vanguard has a big advantage taking off. But hey, that's not what the big thing about having a space plane is.

The big thing is fuel when landing, guess how much fuel a space plane needs to go from breaking back into atmo to the landing pad?

ZERO!

They can use the vast amount of speed they have from being in orbit and they can conver it into lift and directional control due to thier wings and control surfaces and get to pretty much anywhere on the half of the planet they aimed for from orbit.

Now that's all things that make a spaceplane design make perfect sense for a ship that is long range, gives you the most bang for your buck on takeoff, and should you find yourself on fumes for landing, that's fine.

Of course this comes with thecaveat that SC isnt KSP and therefore such atmospheric concerns will likely be brushed over, but if anything it makes sense for the vanguard to be more plane shaped!
 

Liquor_and_ores

Space Marshal
Jun 22, 2014
745
1,007
2,500
RSI Handle
Liquor_and_Ores
I was going to write something, but JBWILL pretty much nailed it.

low crew reqs , long range, supposed heavy armor and extra systems sold it for me. People love stat whoring too much on the RSI forums, but really if the ship is insta win pwn mobile, it will get nerfed... if i can be out turned by a fully loaded Starfarer, it will be buffed/rebalanced
 

Nuke

Captain
Nov 22, 2014
75
35
200
RSI Handle
Nuke
can we get a "no but i'm getting one in the PU" or maybe a "i had to forcibly restrain myself from buying it" option?

because i would check both of those
 

Black Sunder

Rock Raiders
Officer
Jun 19, 2014
8,270
26,833
3,045
RSI Handle
Black_Sunder
can we get a "no but i'm getting one in the PU" or maybe a "i had to forcibly restrain myself from buying it" option?

because i would check both of those
It was presumed that "no" also meant "I may get one later or in the PU". added a poll option though for this and you can change your vote.
 

Semphis Rythorn

Rear Admiral
Aug 9, 2014
200
77
300
RSI Handle
Semphis_Rythorn
yeah i melted several ships to get the vanguard, why you ask?

already have a light fighter (gladius) and since i don't have a heavy fighter thought i get one myself.

Also since the reliant is going to have LTI might buy 3 of them just to become CCU fodder
 

Spyro

Vice Admiral
Mar 10, 2015
124
69
410
RSI Handle
SteadyK
aa the Vanguard! you love it or you hate it! To all the others who are complaining just stop and we shall see.. in the end its still to early to start throwing potatos to the Vanguard. For now Just Shhh
 

thanatos73

Space Marshal
Nov 21, 2014
1,376
1,406
2,510
RSI Handle
thanatos1973
The Vanguard, what can I say, its my 2 favorite airplanes(the P-38 and the A-10) smashed together in a super collider, and then thrown into space to grow-up. Its a really great ship, but I didn't get one. Maybe I will, I still have a few days to decide, but I can't seem to tear myself away from my Cutlass, and I want to see how it performs. I have a theory, for the time being, I am only going to have a few ships in AC, the one I am going to fly(so I can get some flight time in with it), a racing ship, and a dog fighting ship, for earning REC. Right now the other ships in my hanger are for CCU, or melt bait, and the total value of the those doesn't cover the cost of the Vanguard, so, it will have to wait.
 

Huegpaynis

Space Marshal
May 28, 2014
1,277
1,254
2,520
RSI Handle
Huegpaynis
To my eyes, it's a fairly straightforward boom-and-zoom heavy fighter. This is not a bad thing! I have one, I melted my anniversary 'tali for it, and it's definitely on the block once the 'tali CCU comes online since I still prefer the vanguard's big sister. That said, it may end up replacing my cutlass as my main runabout/dicking about ship, depending on how they implement it. I agree that some of its systems seem a bit anemic for a ship this size, but that may change (it often does), and it may be that the redundant systems are intended to work together instead of in rollover failsafe mode.

TL;DR: I got one, it's intended to be an LTI base for my 'tali because why the hell not. I don't intend to keep it, but I might.
 

Statix

Commander
Dec 25, 2014
66
47
150
RSI Handle
Statix
Two, it doesn't really sound like the Vanguard NEEDS a particularly strong shield. Pretty much every description they give of the thing talks about its rugged and compact construction that allows it to take a beating and keep going
It definitely doesn't sound like it'll need a strong shield but if I were to choose where my effective health came from it'd be something that auto regenerates... especially when I'll be in the middle of nowhere. Now there's supposed to be repair bots but will it be able to carry one? With their desire for realism would a repair bot require mats that the Vanguard can't carry because it has no cargo room?

Obviously it'll all be balanced so I'm not incredibly worried. Just wish we had a better idea of how everything is intended to work when making ship purchases.
 

Schattenjagger

Captain
Donor
Dec 5, 2014
37
27
225
RSI Handle
Schattenjagger
After reviewing the comments and re-visiting my thoughts and looking at its potential, I pulled the trigger and straight bought one. Even though I though about melting an MD50 and a Gladiator for it, I figured what the heck.
 
Forgot your password?