The ship/fleet design is meh.

[Rystiya]

Pros:
1): The ships that do exist look visually appealing.
Cons:
1): Not enough ship variety.
There are 10 combat vessels on each faction, in addition to 2 turrets.
Why don't add stealth frigates? Why don't add defense-field frigates/cruisers? That should be trivial compared to solving problems like 3D path-finding.
Also, isn't the existence of megaliths a perfect opportunity to add some expensive, glass-cannon artillery capitalships that are deadly in open space but die super quickly if enemy bombers get close to them? What about suicide drones that can sneak through the tunnels and do big damage?
2): No ship modules.
I'm not a PvP player, but removing modules probably means you cannot harass enemy mothership/carrier with small numbers of bombers anymore, because they just don't have enough DPS to take down the whole ship before reinforcements arrive.
Also, imagine how cool it would be if the goodie’s mothership could be upgraded with short-range hyperspace drives that allow you to teleport an entire fleet (at a cost or cooldown), or multiple fusion missile launchers that each give you those big missiles in the campaign. Imagine the baddie's mothership could be upgraded with extra armor and weapons and become a mobile battle fortress.
3): Ship designs are mediocre from the perspective of realism.
The big hangers on the goodie’s carrier and the baddie's mothership are very shallow for some reason. Why not just extend the hanger walls forward, so there’s much more internal volume for storage and shipbuilding?
The top beam turret on the goodies battlecruiser is placed in a lowland, which hampers its arc of fire. Why not place it in a super-firing position instead?
4): Not enough interesting unit abilities.
Imagine if the scouts of one faction could attach probes on megaliths, while the scouts of another faction could become stealth and gain extra sensor range when not moving. Maybe they could even be upgraded with EMP and mines respectively. Imagine if there’s a railgun frigate that can deploy on megaliths for far greater range and accuracy.
I’ll also move the overcharge ability from interceptors to iron frigates, and let them damage the unit as they attack instead of increase damage taken. That will make more sense and be more interesting.
5): Units don’t feel unique and memorable.
For example, the battlecruisers on both sides have mostly the same weapons, just with different turret layouts. Why not give the baddie's battlecruiser an axial beam cannon (like those on HW2 Dreadnought and Sajuuk) that has superior range and DPS but cannot attack while moving and/or tends to overkill frigates a lot? Why not give the goodie’s battlecruiser multiple dual/triple ion turrets which allows it to tear apart multiple frigates while passing by?
6): Unit behaviors are weird.
When I play the campaign, I often see my battlecruisers facing enemies with their sides, which makes no sense since most of their weapons appear to be able to shoot forward. My huge frigate blobs (40+ frigates of different types) often spend longer than expected to clear up enemies after given the group attack (ctrl + group select) command. I’m not sure why this happened, because the existence of megalith makes it difficult to see my ships clearly, so I just zoom out and see the unit icons battle with each other.

[Mythos]

Ships are, for the most part pretty unimaginative. I miss some of the multi-weapon type ships from previous games. Ship designs are subjective, I think they are fine enough.

[Rystiya]

Originally posted by Mythos:

Ships are, for the most part pretty unimaginative. I miss some of the multi-weapon type ships from previous games. Ship designs are subjective, I think they are fine enough.

Visually, the design of different ship types are fine. But the fleet compositions as a whole is unsatisfying. maybe I should have expressed more clearly in the title.

[Mythos]

Originally posted by Rystiya:

Originally posted by Mythos:

Ships are, for the most part pretty unimaginative. I miss some of the multi-weapon type ships from previous games. Ship designs are subjective, I think they are fine enough.

Visually, the design of different ship types are fine. But the fleet compositions as a whole is unsatisfying. maybe I should have expressed more clearly in the title.

I completely agree. Something just feels off with them.

[Limz]

Originally posted by Rystiya:

Pros:
1): The ships that do exist look visually appealing.
Cons:
1): Not enough ship variety.
There are 10 combat vessels on each faction, in addition to 2 turrets.
Why don't add stealth frigates? Why don't add defense-field frigates/cruisers? That should be trivial compared to solving problems like 3D path-finding.
Also, isn't the existence of megaliths a perfect opportunity to add some expensive, glass-cannon artillery capitalships that are deadly in open space but die super quickly if enemy bombers get close to them? What about suicide drones that can sneak through the tunnels and do big damage?

Okay, here's a classic question. What would those add and how would they mesh with the current set up?

You're better off adding more corvettes and strikecraft for the Hiigarans and a side tech for the Incarnate that unlocks more strikecraft variety.

As for deadly artillery it's called torpedo frigates and railgun corvettes.

2): No ship modules.
I'm not a PvP player, but removing modules probably means you cannot harass enemy...

You harass econ instead. The TTK is pretty low which means you wouldn't be harassing the mothership anyways.

4): Not enough interesting unit abilities.
I’ll also move the overcharge ability from interceptors to iron frigates, and let them damage the unit as they attack instead of increase damage taken. That will make more sense and be more interesting.

Do you know how strong overcharge is on the interceptors and do you know how necessary it is given the current state of the game to remain where it is? Also, ions have their own ability.

[Refuel]

One corvette option in campaign. Nuff said.

[Vault Traveler]

Yeah its disappointing, sure some hsips in HW1/2 where redundant but I prefer that over... this.

[Rystiya]

Originally posted by Limz:

Originally posted by Rystiya:

Pros:
1): The ships that do exist look visually appealing.
Cons:
1): Not enough ship variety.
There are 10 combat vessels on each faction, in addition to 2 turrets.
Why don't add stealth frigates? Why don't add defense-field frigates/cruisers? That should be trivial compared to solving problems like 3D path-finding.
Also, isn't the existence of megaliths a perfect opportunity to add some expensive, glass-cannon artillery capitalships that are deadly in open space but die super quickly if enemy bombers get close to them? What about suicide drones that can sneak through the tunnels and do big damage?

Okay, here's a classic question. What would those add and how would they mesh with the current set up?

You're better off adding more corvettes and strikecraft for the Hiigarans and a side tech for the Incarnate that unlocks more strikecraft variety.

As for deadly artillery it's called torpedo frigates and railgun corvettes.

2): No ship modules.
I'm not a PvP player, but removing modules probably means you cannot harass enemy...

You harass econ instead. The TTK is pretty low which means you wouldn't be harassing the mothership anyways.

4): Not enough interesting unit abilities.
I’ll also move the overcharge ability from interceptors to iron frigates, and let them damage the unit as they attack instead of increase damage taken. That will make more sense and be more interesting.

Do you know how strong overcharge is on the interceptors and do you know how necessary it is given the current state of the game to remain where it is? Also, ions have their own ability.

1): Yeh, more fighters, corvettes, and conventional capitalships are good. And no, I doubt torpedo frigates and railgun corvettes are valuable and vulnerable enough to warrant the use of tunnels. I'm talking about those actual artillery, like nuke cannons in C&C: generals, or V3 launchers in C&C: Red Alert 3. Something almost as expensive as battlecruisers, maybe less than half the hp of destroyers, and more than twice the range of battlecruisers.
2): Harassing eco has always been an option, I think. Having less options doesn't seem to be a good thing.
3): You could just adjust the stats to maintain balance, and it's totally fine for a unit to have multiple abilities. Actually, it would be interesting if these abilities shares cool-down or all costs energy, so players need to choose which one to use.

[g4ebguy90]

^ For #1 - I think they would be called a "Strike Cannon" low hp, high damage, long range.

[Rystiya]

Originally posted by BigRichCityKok20:

^ For #1 - I think they would be called a "Strike Cannon" low hp, high damage, long range.

I think "artillery cruiser" or "siege cruiser" from DoK would be more appropriate.

[Rystiya]

Originally posted by Vault Traveler:

Yeah its disappointing, sure some hsips in HW1/2 where redundant but I prefer that over... this.

I don't think there are redundant ships in HW2 though... Maybe some fighters and corvettes from HW1 are redundant, but I think it could be a good thing if they can be differentiated with different upgrades (like, extra speed for light corvettes, anti-capitalship weapons for heavy corvettes, etc).

[Rystiya]

Originally posted by Megatron:

One corvette option in campaign. Nuff said.

I think there's only one for the goodies in skirmish as well... And there's only one fighter for the baddies.

[Vault Traveler]

Originally posted by Rystiya:

Originally posted by Vault Traveler:

Yeah its disappointing, sure some hsips in HW1/2 where redundant but I prefer that over... this.

I don't think there are redundant ships in HW2 though... Maybe some fighters and corvettes from HW1 are redundant, but I think it could be a good thing if they can be differentiated with different upgrades (like, extra speed for light corvettes, anti-capitalship weapons for heavy corvettes, etc).

HW1 and HW2 had literally both ways, HW1 had lots of ships and HW2 tried to streamline it in a (mostly) reasonable way.

Both would be acceptable for me but HW3 completely missed the mark.

[『Insperatus』]

They reused the progentor salvage ship skin from HW2 and recolored it.

[Rystiya]

Originally posted by Vault Traveler:

Originally posted by Rystiya:

I don't think there are redundant ships in HW2 though... Maybe some fighters and corvettes from HW1 are redundant, but I think it could be a good thing if they can be differentiated with different upgrades (like, extra speed for light corvettes, anti-capitalship weapons for heavy corvettes, etc).

HW1 and HW2 had literally both ways, HW1 had lots of ships and HW2 tried to streamline it in a (mostly) reasonable way.

Both would be acceptable for me but HW3 completely missed the mark.

I see. I think HW2 shouldn't have ditched missile destroyers (which is a long-range anti-strikecraft capitalship, if I recall correctly). But the HW2 battlecruisers and destroyers are super awesome, they look unique and intimidating, and they are armed to teeth.

[A.NooB]

Only 1 corvette class ship feels a lot like "ok finished, now take some stuff away so we can add content later" decisions.