Bulk Cruisers - any point?

[RogueIce]

If there's a seemingly useless ship in this game, it is the Rebel Bulk Cruiser. Looking at the stats it seems rather expensive for what it does. The Dreadnaught is more expensive by 14 resources, but it has double the guns and can field a fighter squadron and haul troops. I'd say, overall, one Dreadnaught is better than two Bulk Cruisers, with the only real advantage falling to the "one ship can't be in two places at once" principle.

 

It also has the lowest Damage Control rating - on a level with transports and the Escort Carriers. Probably not a big deal but it just seems sad that this "combat warship" has such a low stat.

 

Anyway, what are they good for? I usually build 'em for flavor but realistically I can't imagine them doing anything more than scaring away Carrack Cruisers; hardly an impressive feat. And the Carracks can at least be anti-fighter platforms, plus the 60 hyperdrive doesn't hurt.

[Slocket]

I would have to agree.

 

30 to construct Bulk Cruiser and 44 for the Alliance Dreadnought. Being 50% cheaper is its only saving grace. It has almost the same maintance cost, with only half the guns. It does get a tractor beam, but big deal. Oh, it is twice as fast sublight 6 compare to Dreadnaught's 3.

 

I definetly find the Imperial Carracks much better in the early game. In groups it can really tear things up.

 

So that is what the Alliance gets in place of the Carrack Cruiser's equivelant for the Empire.

 

I suppose it should out gun a Carrack one to one, but a Carrack Cruiser is more versital with lasers and some turbos. With its higher damage control rating and maneuvering speed, I can blow an Alliance Bulk Cruiser away toe to toe with some fancy maneuvering against the AI. Though it has the same speed as the Alliance Bulk Cruiser. I think it was meant to counter the Carrack Cruiser. If it had a higher damage control rating, then it would make the Bulk Cruiser more worth while.

 

EDIT:

Maybe for balance change, the Carrack Cruiser should cost more ( presently 26) or have a higher maintenance. To me, I think it is way too good of a ship early on, and is always good in group attacks throughout the game. Or lower its damage control rating from 30 to something lower. With the Bulk Cruiser only at 5, it seems that is where the Carrack really shines. It can fix itself pretty fast in game in tactical battles.

 

I guess they figure the superior Alliance fighters would support the Bulk Cruisers and make up for the Empires punny TIE fighters. Combined arms may be the balance.

 

Another ship that does not seem to live up to its name is the Imperial Strike Cruisers. The list says it is to be built fast and cheap sacrificing hull and shields durability. But for the cost, it does not live up to its role. Check out its stats compared to a Victory II Star Destroyer, and tell me how for the same cost, the Strike Cruiser is "a good deal".

[nordwindranger]

The strike cruiser has stronger ion cannons (max of 60 vs max of 40 for the VicII), and the cruiser has a longer range on its ion cannons. It also has a slightly better weapon recharge rate, but has a worse repair rate. Overall I think it might have a advantage in quick fights, but looses its advantage in long fights do to its lower repair rate. They have one more tractor beam than the VicII, but can carry one less fighter. I usually end up building them because I think they look cool.

[Slocket]

Yes a good point, the Strike has 60 over 40 only for its front ion cannons, plus longer range and tractor beam to get in the fight quicker. I see that the Vic II has the same ion cannons for its port and starboard, but has double at 80 turbo lasers over the Strike.

 

So if a Vic II can get itself close enough to turn a broadside, it is quite more powerful.

 

It would seem that the Strike should be much faster to get into the fighter and nail the enemy before they could flee it would seem in theory. Maybe if the Strike was speed up more, and lower its cost; then it would play its role as a quick cheap but heavy hitting front line ship to get in there and get the first hits off.

 

What do you think about the OP position on those Rebel Bulk Cruisers? Do you think it is a balance issue with the alliances better fighters in the begin phase of the game? Bulk Cruisers do seem 'worthless' on paper stats.

 

I take interest in this, since I am still trying to make a remake, it would be nice to balance a few things out for default values. If I ever finish it.

[nordwindranger]

the bulk cruiser does seem worthless. It definitely pales in comparison to the dreadnaught, which is not much more expensive. I think early game rebels should mostly rely on fighters and carriers anyways, and probably wouldn't bother building any capital ships (dreadnaught, or bulk cruiser). If you gave it a weak ion cannon as well it might become a more viable option, as the first ion cannon equipped ship the rebs get is the nebulon b frigate

[DarthTex]

The poor ol' bulk cruiser is a left over of days gone by, showing that the Rebels don't just yet have access to potent capital ships. But, it definitely needs a tweak to make it playable. I usually skip over it and build corvettes until the Neb-B becomes available. Even the Alliance Dreadnaught is not much of an investment considering the first ships to be researched.

[Darth_Rob]

That is a very good point Tex. Its not tactically the best ship, but its the best of what the Rebels have available at the time. If memory serves me well, the only capital starships the Alliance starts with is the Corvette, Bulk Cruiser, Dreadnought, and Carrier. The Bulk Cruiser is better than the Corvette, but can be built faster than the Dreadnought.

[Darth_Gonzo]

Bulks, ugh! What are they good for? Absolutely nothing!

 

Sorry, had to

[OldFan]

I'll use Bulk Cruisers in my fleet if I start with one or two, but I never build them. By the time I build up my initial fighters and Corvettes/Carriers, the Neb-B is available which is far superior to the Bulk in every way. I rarely have big shipyards to build lots of capital ships before the Neb-B is researched, so I go fighters over capitals early on if I need to make a choice. I never build Dreadnoughts either, for the same reason (Neb-Bs are more flexible).

 

For Strike Cruisers, I never build them in vanilla. Using RebEd, I make the Strike Cruisers more comparable to the Neb-B capabilities (turbolasers and ion cannon, no lasers), so that the Empire has a decent mid-level capital ship escort. 3-4 modified Strikes for every ImpStar Deuce and 2-3 Lancers, and that fleet is good to go!

[AwesomeAckbar]

The only use for a bulk cruiser is that it can be built quicker than a Dreadnaught, but this is only helpful in the first 100 days of the game. If you are good with missions, you should have the Neb-b frigate around 125 and then Mon Cal cruiser by 225. I've gotten Mon Cal on 212 as my quickest. I diverge.

If intelligence lets you know that your system will be attacked by a fleet of 2Carriers and 1 Carrack cruiser and you have 20 days to prepare, you can even the playing field with 1 bulk Cruiser if you have 12 x-wings. It would still be a tough fight, but the carrack cruiser is going down, and that's all that matters since carriers have no bombardment capability. Without the bulk, the likelihood of creating 4 more x-wings or y/wings wouldn't be as good. This is assuming you have 4 shipyards at 1 system and someone making a mistake by moving str8 to a combat system that takes a long time to get there(move to your closest system, then engage and sometimes its good to take steps to get to your own system). Granted this is a far fetched scenairio, but that would be my thoughts on it. As far as late game is concerned, it's useless.

Someone made the comment that bulk is better than a correlian corvette. I disagree. The correlian corvette(besides the corellian gunship) is the best capital ship on the rebel side for killing starfighters per maintenance point, and there is a bonus. Corelian corvettes can bombard planets equal to a bulk cruiser's bombardment. I would much rather have many correlian corvettes, then bulk cruisers.

[Slocket]

It would seem a ship that almost never really gets built in a game, needs to be changed or else just dropped out completely. I would advocate making it more useful somehow just so a person would use it in game.

[Eagle]

Never underestimate a Bulk Cruiser. The ship itself may seem unefficiant, but in combination with Corvettes, Carriers and X-Wings in a small fleet they are a deadly opponent for Victory- and Imperator Class Star Destroyers which operate on their own. Even if they have a small escort of Carrack Cruisers they are lost. Ive just experienced that some months ago while playing imp side. I had a Victory and two Carracks in orbit of one of my planets and there was a small rebel fleet of the above mentioned combination about to arrive. I felt that this rebel fleet was rather weak an so Ive decided to leave my ships where they were to face them in a battle. I was fatally wrong. Ive lost all my ships. And no it wasn´t because of the X-Wings. They have been taken out immediately. It was these Bulk Cruisers which gave me hell.

[DarthTofu]

Bulks can be more helpful than you'd think- in attacking Coruscant (when the AI is playing you) Carracks can soak up enemy firepower, leaving your actual potent capital ships free to blast the living daylights out of the Empire's potent capital ships.