#Star citizen hammerhead plus

Once that burst deterrence is gone then you're left with a ship with half the firepower of a Hammerhead but 4x the tonnage making it likely slower and less maneuverable not to mention worse firing arcs. Missiles can be avoided in many ways as well. The torpedoes are very situational and can be easily shot down or avoided by smaller ships, thus you're forced to have the most optimal positioning possible to use them. It's value comes from deterrence and presence, not attack or defense. If you're reading ' flagship of militia operations' and thinking flagship in many types of operations then you're misunderstanding what it means to be a) a warship, and b) a militia. The Polaris as a patrol and picket ship is designed for scouting and first response which is a supporting role for much larger fleets. Versatility doesn't equate to usefulness in the most common scenarios, especially since the operating cost is likely to be way higher than a Hammerhead. So what are your thoughts? Is the Polaris a cap sniper or is it more varied than that? Which would be better in a larger range of scenarios? Meanwhile the Hammerhead uses mainly weapons, which don't have a per shot cost unless you are using ballistic but even then it will be less than capital class torpedos. My main concern for the Polaris is the cost of those Torpedos, with it being one of the main damage sources of the Polaris, per torpedo cost will likely be super expensive.

So, in that case, would the HH's 24s4 and 32 s3 missiles come out on top? It also has repair rearm and refuel abilities for a fighter which is awesome, and it also has longer range and facilities like med bays and such.īut how often will we be up against capital ships? I feel like the vast majority of opponents will be in fighters and meduim ships. However it has those 28 S10 torpedos which give it a big benefit against larger to capital size ships. It has less direct weaponry, 12s4 and 2s5 vs 24s4. However, when I look at the Polaris I see a lot of benefits. And I could see the HH being amazing at escort, fleet support, assault and defense. So, how I see it is that the Hammerhead will be much better against ships fighter to medium sized as it gives each Gunner access to 4 size 4 guns for a total of 24.

Ever since I've been comparing it to the Polaris and during this sale I got a HH to Polaris CCU but haven't applied it.įor some context I own a Mercenary org and intend to use the ship for that purpose. In short, if you want to be a large sturdy defensive platform for the Krakens and you're sure that the in-game upkeep justifies the added attack/defense power, then the Hammerhead wins by far over the Valkyrie, it's not even a contest.First if all I understand that they are both really cool ships and both have their places.Īnyway, back when the Hammerhead was announced I purchased a Warbond Hammerhead LTI. If you have two Krakens that stay relatively close to each other, I'd expect they also pack so much of a punch together that you would only have to worry about larger attacks to justify the need for a HH.

#Star citizen hammerhead plus

Second off, those Krakens will have quite a few turrets that need to be manned too, plus since they're carriers you'll always have the option to use the docked ships as defense force on top of the turrets already on the Krakens. The hammerhead is definitely the one you want to pick to protect a Kraken, however take two things into account:įirst off, currently Kraken owners already get a Hammerhead as loaner, so you shouldn't buy it for the present time but more to be ready for the future. The Hammerhead is the defender, whereas the Valkyrie should be seen as a ship that dives into a planet's atmosphere laying down fire and dropping off troops.