Yeah, first thing I noticed too. Design wise makes no sense, like designed by someone who has no concept of firing arc. Would make sense to put a missile launcher there that fires missiles straight up, not a turret. If anything, the missile launcher and the Main gun need to be swapped.
For such a large ship it feels: A) Undergunned B) Whatever guns it has, half of them have unreasonably limited firing arcs in a game that embraces the 3D playing field.
This is actually something carried over from HW2. The Vaygr and Hiigeran battlecruisers were freaking huge and yet had far fewer weapons than you'd think with the amount of hull real estate on display. Whereas the Kushan and Taiidan heavy cruisers from HW1 packed the same punch into a package almost half as large as the battlecruisers.
there were some modders who fixed this and made it a hell of a lot more convincing... the players would go apeshit if you configured these like WW2 battleships
@@SpartanChief01 Think most players would love it. Having superpositioned turrets makes more sense than stuffing turrets into recesses that limit the turret's firing arc.
@@Servellion At least the Vaygr and Hiigaran battlecruisers were designed with strong weapons that could all fire forward without giving a huge target profile if approached from the front.
Shame they seemed really determined to abandon the awesome old ion cannon sound effects from the original game as the years went by. Also the lingering beam/trail at 2:57 looks rather bad. Also the ship design in general seems to be really inefficient. Why such a massively wide hull, with like 3 guns strapped to the middle with bad lines of sight?
Honestly I dont care about any of the stats, those are not final anyway. I just think it looks kinda small.. the homeworld 2 BC felt just as imposing as the mothership in its scale. and it dwarfed any other combat ship, to the point that it could solo a whole navy if they were not ready for it. This feels more like what the destroyer should be tbh
I'm glad we get the same vibe, looks like someone over-inflated a Hiigaran Destroyer. Even the most interesting part of it to me visually, the mass of lighted windows on the sides just underneath the armored overhang closer towards the bow, seems to be taken directly from a HW2 Destroyer, so your brain guestimates that they should have the same amount of crew and be around the same size, but they aren't. It's terribly nitpicky but it's like the HW3 designers were just copying the visual language but don't understand how to really speak it.
@@quazarKiragonNow for HW3 no shipyard, the battlecruiser launch from the mothership ala hw1, liked the shipyard in addition to be the capable ship to construct and launch a bc, also was a valid base once you loss a mothership in a skirmish, i'll really miss the shipyard was like an space station.
@@taerkasten5090 wdym "like" a space station, it is one! And it would be crazy cool if we had more (you'd be hard pressed to find to find a reason to add them in but). It would be like base building, but since these colossal stations can hyperspace, it wouldn't be too ridiculous! On second thought maybe one is enough.
@@quazarKiragonthis is what makes hw2 feels majestic in terms of size ratio. And logical too, it's like we're calling in a shipyard to build battecruiser.
8:00 it looks like only one of the ion turrets can hit the target at the time, but the ship just keep firing with both and have one missing the target all the time... It's so frustrating to watch. I don't understand why they have this problem, the BC from homeworld 2 doesn't seem to have the same issue, at least not to the same extent.
BC in HW2 make logical sense, flat platform with main turrets placed on the most raised points so they would had 180+ degree firing arcs with negative depression firing arcs. This thing is just dumb.
Its because the AI functionality on this game is dogshit. This game is really dumbed down mobile homeworld. It's actually sad, they can't even recreate the most basic things that have continued to exist in homeworld 1, 2, cata, RM but yet are non-existent in this game. The whole research combined into build tree is really the proof you need
@@soulessification Combining build and research tree isn’t a terrible idea. What concerns me is that the demo looks so unpolished… If that’s the latest build, you have to wonder did they have some screwups internally or something.
I'm pretty sure this isnt the final health, maybe the datamining got wrong because, in the video, the incarnate destroyer has more health than the battlecruiser. There's definitely something wrong.
That is terrible. at 4:30 there is only 3 fighters shooting it and its health is melting away. I really hope they balance the weapons damage and hull strength or else it is going to be a disaster. A HW battlecruiser should be able to take on a 3 destroyers and piss on them.
@@underlordd Yeah there are a lot of problems. I see why they delayed the launch. Unit selection is a mess, there is no fire and maneuver, unit health makes no sense, assigning battle groups seems bugged, healing ships just straight up miss with their heals.
It's ridiculous how fast it dies and how fast it's healed, also how capital ships have this unnatural mobility while strikecraft are paradoxically so lethargic
Yeah, gotta agree with most everyone here. Designed to restrict its weapons effectiveness as much as possible, and the durability of a Toyota Corolla with 1 inch steel plates bolted on in random locations.
Hey now, I've ridden in Corollas older than the game HW2 still rolling around surviving winter after winter. I don't think the comparison is apt, as there's a reason those things are #1 in compact car reliability. It's far more apt to compare this BC to one of them overpriced BMW SUV's: samey, inflated, and a repair and maintenance nightmare with a high cost.
They already failed.... HW3 is shit already... not worth the time of a dedicated fan... story is shit already! HOW THE FRELL is the MOST POWERFULL WARSHIP IN THIS UNIVERSE LOST PLS? THere cant be ANY explonation for this shit! None that would make sense by LORE in HW!
No, Bc's are way to squishy from generic fire, same for destroyers. TTC is too fast. That or t is this wonky battle mode where you get insane upgrades, like making scouts kill Destroyers in seconds.
100% agreed with this. How is it possible that 2 destroyers do more damage to a battlecruiser 🤦🏻♂️. Need to be at least 3 to destroy it. Bombers are a different story.
@@hades4438 The flat body makes sense. Since the ship's main cannons are on its dorsal and ventral, it wants to show its boards to the enemy, and the flat hull provides a smaller profile. Docking bays are clearly visible near its engine, so the hull design requires space to hold fighters inside (like HW2 Battlecruisers did). If it can't be high, it needs to be wide. Hence a long, flat hull. I'm not sure about the ramparts around turrets, though... What is paper thin, is its hull points. Man, how this ship melts under fire. What were they thinking, making the ships more brittle than ever, while taking the effort to put names on individual crew members?? Are we to care about them or just keep yeeting and producing new ones?
They should just use those ship designs from home world mobile and and give them proper weapons placement like ventral turrets. Those seems like hm3 ships already 😂. Like the tier 3 bc.
@@homeworld2evolution Indeed. Half of Incarnate vessels are Vaygr laser/missile corvettes and the other half are fledgeling Sajuuks. The campaign's story will probably explain the latter, but the Vaygr corvette style seems like a lost cause. Vaygr fighters and bombers? Cool, blady shapes! Vaygr Frigates? Right at home, Taiidan players! Blocky and roundy exactly where needed. Destroyers? Intriguing! I see what you did there with the diagonal boards, forming a frontal "V"! Carriers? Niiice! A breath of fresh air from all the carriers being always flat. Battlecruisers? Just marvelous!! *Smooch* ... Corvettes...? Eh? Are those pistols in space? Why are they shaped like that? ... And BBI chose these as inspiration for half of a new faction.
They better push this back an entire year, redesign UI, controls and gameplay. They can show as mush “pe pe peu” as they want, I am not falling for this.
Design wise it looks like they tried to mix the HW2 battlecruisers elongated plate-like shape and the HW1 heavy cruisers short stubby but chunky proportions. It also seems like the BC gets a hanger on its ventral size so maybe we can store fighters in it on full release?? My only complaints are the weird dorsal ion turret and gun turret position and its lackluster health.
When i think of a battlecruiser i think of a warship bristling with canons and other types of weapon projectiles of all types, not a few peashooters on an ironing board.
OK. First, the way the ion beam hangs in the air and breaks alignment with the actual turret. It is such a horrible bug that breaks immersion. Second, the models of the ships are too low detail. For example, the vector thrusters are not even modelled and instead we have a blue flame decal just appear on the ship surface, looks rubbish.
Visual and audio seems to be right, but the ships seem to move faster, lose health faster, and repair faster..? I guess they sped up the combat somewhat. I'm not entirely sure how to feel about that. I hated when Total War franchise did that to their games.
This is by far the worst BC design since Homeworld 1. Looks more like a shitty sports car than a Battlecruiser. And why the heck would you place one of your main turrets in a freaking pit that obstructs the line of fire? And the fact that this thing is literally melting from corvettes...
Given how fast the healing on it was, it seems like they have tried to speed up the gameplay ALOT compared to previous titles. I wouldn't be surprised in this build alot of the units feel like glass cannons. That's not necessarily a bad thing but definitely a departure from the previous games. Though personally i prefer the slower pace of the older games, it makes the space battles feel larger and cinematic.
Maybe the game mechanism detaches the particle emitter from the ship at the end of the firing. As a reason, the beam origin (the particle emitter) ceases to move along with the turret.
Not the fan of the new BC design. From design perspective seems would be so ineffective. Why the two main guns are in a dip instead of raised to have better firing arc. Hate how all ships became kinda just blocks. The HW2 BC design was fantastic. This just looks weird.
the HW2 BC design was my least favorite, the Higarran one especially is just wasteful. You have two ions and 4 guns on a ship that is three times the size of a destroyer, yet the destroyer comes in with 4 guns of similar size and torpedo tubes. Its simply wasteful the amount of space it takes up, I much prefer the HW1 Heavy Cruisers with their bulky design focused on as much firepower as possible onto a single capital ship.
Design is extremely counterintuitive. It's like they said "we need to do the exact opposite of good ship design" I am so sad to think that this game is Dead on Arrival.
There is no bloody way this is the final health. It has barely 4x the health of a frigate. Slightly more than that of a carrier. I get it, carriers aren't supposed to be struck, but a battlecruiser being that squishy is kinda ridiculous.
Well it is defense a Battlecruiser is supposed to be very mobile and well armed at the cost of armor... and that's more or less what this ship looks like.
@@Sonlirain lol why would a *DEFENSE* Battlecruiser be made with shitty armour and top speed? That goes against the whole principle of defense. If a capital ship is designed to be mobile and well armed, it's so it can get in and out of fights quickly, not provide static defense. The design is terrible (not to mention the awful, non-logical kinetic turret placement in the centre of a canyon that restricts it's field of fire?).
- Beams drift - turret placement looks badly thought out for the greebles - health is not good enough - fighters look slow/capitals are really fast? I don't hate the hull shape but the weapon locations don't work great with it. Maybe two weaker turrets on the ridges to emphasize the silhouette, and a wider graphical representation for the missile turret (making it a tube rack/vls with a tower?) in the middle
@@homeworld2evolution Don't gotta make anything up as it's already pretty well-established in supplementary lore. It's the same tech that HW1 Collectors (and even Salvagers in DoK!) use to suck resources from asteroid surfaces- the Phased Dissassembly Array. Support Frigates just use a PDA in reverse to plaster raw materials onto hull breaches like band-aids, and then finer repairs to the busted stuff underneath the raw metal blob are done by internal damage control teams. Presumably the tech to more precisely and quickly replicate broken hull stuff only got better in the hundred years to HW3, but there you go, healing beams. They only removed them in HW2 because they wanted to nerf healing by making you pay in easily destroyed Resource Collectors, but these "magic" green beams have been around since HW1 and Cata and the way they work is well understood.
@@kamu_yana a nice fairy tale for a teenagers... The Relic realized this in 2003 by making normal repairs on the hull of ships. Going back to 1999 only proves their inability to create new and interesting ideas for their game. You can see this in the design of ships, which are simply copied and modified versions from previous games. Incarnate all ships (frigates, destroyers, battlecruiser) - this is a modified sajuuk version, the new resource controller - is two combinated RU controllers from HW2, the new collector- is one ru controller from HW2, the new interceptor is the Taidan interceptor, etc. etc.
@@homeworld2evolution You've got some chip on your shoulder! Nobody was talking about any of these topics. Listen, a lot of people including me don't feel satisfied with how HW3 is coming out, but you shouldn't vent all of your grievances at once on a fellow fan like this. It accomplishes nothing. We all want the same thing: For this game to be worthy of all the time it took for us to wait for it, and to have as much thought put into the design as we fans have been imagining for over two decades.
Of the guns he does have, half of them have an unreasonably limited firing arc (especially at the top of the ship) in a game that embraces the 3D playing field. Thank you for the video!
This battlecruiser design is so bad. Ordered the collector's edition, but I really hope they will sort that stuff out. How can this ship struggle to focus both it's main turrets on one target? ... I am kinda dissapointed. 7:44
i'll saw that and am worried, how can be possible than the previous battlecruiser design was more effective, lethal, and even for his size more maneuverable, that can be corrected worked properly because how its move for firing is flawed, theres a moment when the mothership pass near the bc, is simple the ms going a little low and the battlecruiser going up for allow all guns for firing, and unfortunately one of the ion cannon hits and the other miss most of the time against a bigger ship or a medium sized as a frigate.
The only thing that bothered me was that the Hiagaran cruiser and the Vaigr battleehip, given their size, had too few weapons. In the Complex mods, of course, this was corrected, and there these ships perfectly characterize themselves as they should. I hope that someday we will see Complex mod for Homeworld 3!
They have similar gun count to all previous games, original. HW2 in ship icon shown how much space Ion cannon is taking, now include hangar for 5 squadrons. Complex slaps gun on a gun on top of a gun Only thing missing from vanilla capital ships is higher amount of point defense guns as 4-6 really dosent cut it
@@arczer2519 well for this bc it is missing 4 pulsar-guns comparad to the hw2 model and i think it even hat mg-slots. not shure on those though, maybe only on carriers and motherships.
A lot of the ship designs bug me. It's as if they made a silhouette first, then slapped some weapons on it and never really considered how it's supposed to work. The frigging battle-cruiser's dorsal main guns are not in a position where it has the clearance to fire 180 by 360 over the hull. It can only fire forwards and aft because of it's ridiculous recessed position. At least the ventral gun has clearance... The shipyard/MS has to detach it's entire bottom side to launch the battlecruiser. Yet the battlecruiser /at best/ fills about 1/3 of the volume. Shipyards in HW2 slid out BC from the side and the BC filled up about 3/4 of that shipyard's volume. How is the new design that much worse in regards to efficiency and practical use. Furthermore: have we regressed back to HW1: what with the silly mining and repair beams? HW had miners land on asteroids to harvest resources, or attach to debris to return for processing. Repairs involved the harvesters attaching to the hull and welding things.
"Mining and repair beams" are literally how mining and repair systems in this series work, and visually it was like this in every game other than HW2. As per the Homeworld manual, the Phased Disassembler Arrays essentially use fusion torches to disassemble the target material on an atomic level, sort the elements by atomic weight and store the material for later use. The specifics of how PDA-based construction works is not elaborated upon, but I imagine that it's a somewhat similar process in reverse - imagine a 3D printer, only far more energetic, with a far finer resolution and with an unlimited range of feedstock. As per the manual of the original Homeworld, rapid construction of ships is enabled by multiple production lines running in parallel, though. The "repair beams" are apparently modified PDAs, if the Homeworld: Cataclysm manual is anything to go by. I imagine that outside of game mechanics they are best used to patch hull breaches, and internal damage has to be dealt with by some other means. That said, the visuals of HW2 mining ships evoked the image of a somewhat more... streamlined process. To me, landing on an asteroid, tapping into an ore vein and running the extracted ore through a PDA onboard a ship seems to be more efficient in terms of energy and time spent, as well as yield, compared to stripping matter off the entire asteroid layer by layer and only then sorting and processing it.
Design wise this looks to be designed to circle enemies, while firing above and below itself. As long as no other BC can bring mor firepower to bear, I'm fine with it.
Man, they have Starcraftifide Homeworld 3! The gameplay and controls are not the same. Among other things! Too many to post here. In the moment you see “Wider audience” in your favorite franchise, beware!
As someone who plays Starcraft I don't see much, if any Starcraft in there. I would also recommend to play your "favorite franchise" game again, because you might have forgotten how it actually played. It definitely seems to be rather similar. Some starcraftization would possibly even help. This game looks very slow and noncerebral, just as its predecessor.
@@vornamenachname594 You are not a Homeworld fan definitely. StarCraft is a good franchise, I have played it. Stay over there and let us, the real Homeworld Fans, be the judges.
I disagree 100%. A battle cruiser is meant to be a huge ship. It should be almost stationary, while everything moves around it! Smaller ships should be able to use it as cover, both friendly and enemy fleets.
That literally how it worked in previous game@@termitreter6545 ship AI had different engagement routine dependent on theirs targets, sometime they would stay stationary.
It looks like a mix of HW2's Battlecruiser with HW3's Destroyer. I dig the design and it looks great with Sobani colors (Red and White, i've used that color scheme since i first discovered HW1 back in 2005) I worry a bit, but I hope the release comes out right. There's worries about the ships' squishiness and I don't want this game to be controversial like HW2 was for so long.
I'm hoping that it's only fragile for the demo so they can showcase the effects. Then developers said that your ships would carry scars between battles which seems to indicate that they will be very durable in the final version. There are a limited number of bodies on the mothership. If they die every few seconds that would be idiotic
It is definitely a ship which prefers speed over firepower. I would use it with fast ship support to get behind enemy lines quickly and hit em before they turn around.
There are so many lazy things about this game. Bullets don't inherit their parent's velocity, missiles don't lead their targets, and the ship designs leave a lot to be desired. Is this game being directed by the interns or something?
It's being made by the artists of Homeworld. They have none of the original game designers on the team and it really shows, as it already did in Deserts of Kharak. They know how to make very pretty games, but they know fuck all about RTS game design.
Indeed, that can do checklist of features, but have no idea how they're supposed to mesh gameplay wise. It might have worked in Deserts of Kharak with was their own thing, but now they're try to follow up on the old 2001 idea of Homeworld. Probably the worst is that game is still salvageable, questions is if they can acknowledge the gameplay issues and address them or remain ignorant and just let it fall
they became so evil they give pre exile higaran vibe where they behave like true warmongers ( fun fact this scenario here is a rewritten version of Dust war that was meant for homeworld2 and in it higaran were ture colonials invading a space cluster and beating the locals for their own glory and kinda same thing is still here + the sjet plot )
I don't think it ever left them even after exile, just the games didn't exactly expand on that. Only HW Cataclysm felt like showing more like how Hiigarians are actually like rather than just "good guy's"
Can someone tell me why almost every enemy ship looks like the cock blocker from hw2? ( Yes i am talking about sajuuk, they all look like sajuuk, even more the bigger ones)
Here i am trying to tell you that there is apparently already a mod coming for a different battlecruiser model but my comments keep getting deleted for no reason. I am not allowed to post a link or even describe how to find it, just unbelievable.
Lol, they kept the HW2's Hiigaran BC's weapon placement. Same 1 ion turret on top, 1 on bottom, 2 gun turrets on bottom to the sides and rear, and one more gun turret under nose.
Last night in my 1st playthrough, I regret dumping a whole bunch of my captured destroyers to make room in the capital ship quota for my BCs. This is the most underpowered BC in the WHOLE series. And I played all of them. Bad firing arcs, very slow speed. Keep your captured destroyers instead.
Kinda upset they still have problems with the ion turrets firing arcs and AI. Also disappointed there isn't a more interesting damage model and subcomponents. Also disappointed there isn't more interesting tactical gameplay for such large units.
ever since HW 2 it's always bugged me that the Hiigaran ship have so few guns, since they also lack missiles and torpedo's. More guns was one of the nicer things mods would add, as the Vaygr would have near equal number of guns and missiles/torps.
1 and 2 are majestic. Kharak is too, but it is more about sand battleships. Cataclysm is cool space horror, but it is hard to get and did not get a remaster.
Bwahahahah how it cant hit an other bc at point blank with both beams at 8:00. but it even still tries instead of at least tracking an other ship with the upper one.
so much wasted space only 2x ion beams 2x ballistic and PDS mounted such way 2:51 ship struggle to fire :( and gets almost pooped by corvette squadron what a waste :/ "look how they massacred my boy" loosing hope for this game every vid posted on YT and iam fcn angry
I love HW 1&2 But the developers is going to fail. They went silent and are deleting posts on reddit and thats a big red flag. They know its gonna fail, so they are going to do like alot of other companies now a days. Take the money and run.
Give us deflector shield please. They have it on defense frigate (I forgot what it called) in homeworld 2 that only last up a few seconds. I'm sure the tech is not lost. For over 100 years this sci-fi series should have bubble shields like many western sci-fi.
@@Darkgamerxp64 That is what actualy distinguished Homeworld from other scifies, it is more realistic and tries to operate with known weapon concepts. It inspiered Nebulous and Terra Invicta which push concept even further. But sadly there is no place for goofy gigant generation ships in their setting. And HW 3 feels more inspiered by deserts of Kharack in terms of sizes.
This prized Battlecruiser should be hard to kill and easy to destroy enemy ships. If it's a rare unit to field, then it should also be a rare unit to kill. Make this Battlecruiser meaningful to invest on specially on the battlefield. Make it worth the effort and also worth the risk to field this MF on the game. Make it a one feared ship that no one would like to encounter. Thank you Dev.
Falling-Frontier по динамике интересней будет - ударные волны и детонации, пуск ракет и торпед, а тут ничего нового. Разработчикам сериал "Пространство"посмотреть надо, там в реале выглядят космические бои - скорость и быстрота реакции! Кинетическое оружие просто выносит насквозь весь корабль, энергетическое оружие режет и плавит корпус, хлопки кислорода из отсеков корабля. Маневры на скорости по инерции где? Абордажные капсулы, гравитационное оружие, которое скручивает корпуса кораблей, где это всё? Пусть читают фантастические книги вначале.
хоспади чел. Всем давно было понятно что Хомыч 3 делают ради - изи бабки с настальгирующих. Странный угловатый дизайн гг фракции... Противники похожие на сплав предтеч и Вейгров (халтура) Простенький сюжет (ну тут как всегда) Да и в целом общая попкорновость всей серии без углубления в реализм и проработку... Тут надежда только на модеров и камунити...
@@3AnEKAHK0 да, модеры из чего угодно конфетку сделают. Кстати по Hom2 есть мод неплохой азиатский Yaodu_Mod. Дополнительные фракции у каждой свои особенности и корабли, есть супер корабли и супер оружие и т.п. Но на win10 не запускается, только Win7 Wista...
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
They put a gun on a turret and then put that turret in a hull-canyon that restricts its field of fire. Bugs me.
Oh god, I hadn't noticed at first... that's awful design. It seems to spend most of the fight ready to shoot its own hull.
That is utter stupidity, they should place the turrent way more forward!
Yeah, first thing I noticed too. Design wise makes no sense, like designed by someone who has no concept of firing arc. Would make sense to put a missile launcher there that fires missiles straight up, not a turret. If anything, the missile launcher and the Main gun need to be swapped.
The same design as the 2nd game, no improvements whatsoever.
@@withnoname31 No the HW2 design is better. None of its turrets have such poor line of sight as this one.
For such a large ship it feels:
A) Undergunned
B) Whatever guns it has, half of them have unreasonably limited firing arcs in a game that embraces the 3D playing field.
This is actually something carried over from HW2. The Vaygr and Hiigeran battlecruisers were freaking huge and yet had far fewer weapons than you'd think with the amount of hull real estate on display. Whereas the Kushan and Taiidan heavy cruisers from HW1 packed the same punch into a package almost half as large as the battlecruisers.
there were some modders who fixed this and made it a hell of a lot more convincing... the players would go apeshit if you configured these like WW2 battleships
@@SpartanChief01 Think most players would love it. Having superpositioned turrets makes more sense than stuffing turrets into recesses that limit the turret's firing arc.
@@Servellion just goes to show they haven't learned anything
@@Servellion At least the Vaygr and Hiigaran battlecruisers were designed with strong weapons that could all fire forward without giving a huge target profile if approached from the front.
Enemy corvette is apparently destroyed
x D
🤣🤣😂
Say again?
@@gregoryquint7653 CORVETTE DESTROYED.
@@Leenux Sorry could you repeat that
Shame they seemed really determined to abandon the awesome old ion cannon sound effects from the original game as the years went by. Also the lingering beam/trail at 2:57 looks rather bad.
Also the ship design in general seems to be really inefficient. Why such a massively wide hull, with like 3 guns strapped to the middle with bad lines of sight?
It would have worked well if the new icon cannon sound/visual effect actually feels powerful and impactful...
I think that's the common things in modern sci-fi on sfx. Sadly it's what it is 😢 to appeal new and fresh.
The devs didn't play the old games unfortunately
Honestly I dont care about any of the stats, those are not final anyway. I just think it looks kinda small.. the homeworld 2 BC felt just as imposing as the mothership in its scale. and it dwarfed any other combat ship, to the point that it could solo a whole navy if they were not ready for it. This feels more like what the destroyer should be tbh
I'm glad we get the same vibe, looks like someone over-inflated a Hiigaran Destroyer. Even the most interesting part of it to me visually, the mass of lighted windows on the sides just underneath the armored overhang closer towards the bow, seems to be taken directly from a HW2 Destroyer, so your brain guestimates that they should have the same amount of crew and be around the same size, but they aren't. It's terribly nitpicky but it's like the HW3 designers were just copying the visual language but don't understand how to really speak it.
The HW2 BC also required a shipyard to build it which you needed to hyperspace in because it was too big for the mothership
@@quazarKiragonNow for HW3 no shipyard, the battlecruiser launch from the mothership ala hw1, liked the shipyard in addition to be the capable ship to construct and launch a bc, also was a valid base once you loss a mothership in a skirmish, i'll really miss the shipyard was like an space station.
@@taerkasten5090 wdym "like" a space station, it is one! And it would be crazy cool if we had more (you'd be hard pressed to find to find a reason to add them in but). It would be like base building, but since these colossal stations can hyperspace, it wouldn't be too ridiculous!
On second thought maybe one is enough.
@@quazarKiragonthis is what makes hw2 feels majestic in terms of size ratio. And logical too, it's like we're calling in a shipyard to build battecruiser.
It is strange that the upper towers are recessed into the hull.. The firing range should be limited because of this.
8:00 it looks like only one of the ion turrets can hit the target at the time, but the ship just keep firing with both and have one missing the target all the time... It's so frustrating to watch. I don't understand why they have this problem, the BC from homeworld 2 doesn't seem to have the same issue, at least not to the same extent.
BC in HW2 make logical sense, flat platform with main turrets placed on the most raised points so they would had 180+ degree firing arcs with negative depression firing arcs. This thing is just dumb.
Its because the AI functionality on this game is dogshit. This game is really dumbed down mobile homeworld. It's actually sad, they can't even recreate the most basic things that have continued to exist in homeworld 1, 2, cata, RM but yet are non-existent in this game. The whole research combined into build tree is really the proof you need
@@soulessification Combining build and research tree isn’t a terrible idea. What concerns me is that the demo looks so unpolished… If that’s the latest build, you have to wonder did they have some screwups internally or something.
The HW3 BC is run by a learning AI... atm
Why is everything so fucking squishy in this game? Even the BC gets melted in seconds...
I'm pretty sure this isnt the final health, maybe the datamining got wrong because, in the video, the incarnate destroyer has more health than the battlecruiser. There's definitely something wrong.
That is terrible. at 4:30 there is only 3 fighters shooting it and its health is melting away. I really hope they balance the weapons damage and hull strength or else it is going to be a disaster. A HW battlecruiser should be able to take on a 3 destroyers and piss on them.
The ttk in this game make is feel like a mobile game. They need to slow these ships down and increase their health
@@underlordd Yeah there are a lot of problems. I see why they delayed the launch. Unit selection is a mess, there is no fire and maneuver, unit health makes no sense, assigning battle groups seems bugged, healing ships just straight up miss with their heals.
Giving them more hp and actual move fire orders would be a good start to start fixing some of the glaring issues for sure
It's ridiculous how fast it dies and how fast it's healed, also how capital ships have this unnatural mobility while strikecraft are paradoxically so lethargic
Yeah, gotta agree with most everyone here. Designed to restrict its weapons effectiveness as much as possible, and the durability of a Toyota Corolla with 1 inch steel plates bolted on in random locations.
Hey now, I've ridden in Corollas older than the game HW2 still rolling around surviving winter after winter. I don't think the comparison is apt, as there's a reason those things are #1 in compact car reliability. It's far more apt to compare this BC to one of them overpriced BMW SUV's: samey, inflated, and a repair and maintenance nightmare with a high cost.
@@kamu_yana we call them "granparollas" here for a reason. Damn things have been lasting almost as long as their owners.
My family is an multi generations of Corolla's. Have them over 850k of miles and still running strong.😂
@@kamu_yana Running long in a battlefield is another thing...
"durability of a Toyota Corolla" So indestructible then?
They will need to work really hard in the next 2 months....
They already failed.... HW3 is shit already... not worth the time of a dedicated fan... story is shit already! HOW THE FRELL is the MOST POWERFULL WARSHIP IN THIS UNIVERSE LOST PLS? THere cant be ANY explonation for this shit! None that would make sense by LORE in HW!
@@christianresel8051 Maybe wait for the game to be released before you start having a meltdown like a 5 year old
@@christianresel8051 You're such a petulant child. Shameful.
@@SolaxeThat would require them to have emotional maturity.
@@christianresel8051lol you're special as hell my guy.
time to kill needs to be increased across the board. I want Homeworld, not Starcraft. I will wait before dropping money on this.
No, Bc's are way to squishy from generic fire, same for destroyers. TTC is too fast. That or t is this wonky battle mode where you get insane upgrades, like making scouts kill Destroyers in seconds.
100% agreed with this. How is it possible that 2 destroyers do more damage to a battlecruiser 🤦🏻♂️. Need to be at least 3 to destroy it. Bombers are a different story.
20 buck... thats all this is worth. MAYBE modder will fix that shit but i doubt it.
@@Bloodyss69Because they are called "destroyer", maybe...
The top auto cannon is shooting thru the ship hull , Why did they recess the top turrets into the hull like that?
The BC looks a little too big to be so maneuverable. I'm glad they added more weapons this time around.
Exactly, it's so fast too. and it looks like a carrier with that flat body.. At least it's not paper thin anymore.
@@hades4438 The flat body makes sense.
Since the ship's main cannons are on its dorsal and ventral, it wants to show its boards to the enemy, and the flat hull provides a smaller profile.
Docking bays are clearly visible near its engine, so the hull design requires space to hold fighters inside (like HW2 Battlecruisers did). If it can't be high, it needs to be wide. Hence a long, flat hull.
I'm not sure about the ramparts around turrets, though...
What is paper thin, is its hull points. Man, how this ship melts under fire. What were they thinking, making the ships more brittle than ever, while taking the effort to put names on individual crew members?? Are we to care about them or just keep yeeting and producing new ones?
Shame u can no longer target engines or weapons anymore tho :/
@@NeedItForFacebook What? That was the best part of HW2.
@@shadows.82 yeah, HW3 is dead on arrival. they failed at everything that made HW great
The fact the Battlecruiser is based on the HW2 one makes me happy, EXCEPT THEY RUINED IT
Unfortunately, they don't have their own ideas, most of their HW3 ships are modified copies of ships from old games. I am shocked by such a shame...
@@homeworld2evolutionyeah, at least have them be evolved versions of the HW2 ships.
They should just use those ship designs from home world mobile and and give them proper weapons placement like ventral turrets. Those seems like hm3 ships already 😂. Like the tier 3 bc.
They copied a lot of the mobile game into this pc release, thats going to be the problem with it.@@Darkgamerxp64
@@homeworld2evolution Indeed. Half of Incarnate vessels are Vaygr laser/missile corvettes and the other half are fledgeling Sajuuks. The campaign's story will probably explain the latter, but the Vaygr corvette style seems like a lost cause.
Vaygr fighters and bombers? Cool, blady shapes!
Vaygr Frigates? Right at home, Taiidan players! Blocky and roundy exactly where needed.
Destroyers? Intriguing! I see what you did there with the diagonal boards, forming a frontal "V"!
Carriers? Niiice! A breath of fresh air from all the carriers being always flat.
Battlecruisers? Just marvelous!! *Smooch*
...
Corvettes...? Eh? Are those pistols in space? Why are they shaped like that?
...
And BBI chose these as inspiration for half of a new faction.
They better push this back an entire year, redesign UI, controls and gameplay. They can show as mush “pe pe peu” as they want, I am not falling for this.
Design wise it looks like they tried to mix the HW2 battlecruisers elongated plate-like shape and the HW1 heavy cruisers short stubby but chunky proportions. It also seems like the BC gets a hanger on its ventral size so maybe we can store fighters in it on full release?? My only complaints are the weird dorsal ion turret and gun turret position and its lackluster health.
When i think of a battlecruiser i think of a warship bristling with canons and other types of weapon projectiles of all types, not a few peashooters on an ironing board.
OK. First, the way the ion beam hangs in the air and breaks alignment with the actual turret. It is such a horrible bug that breaks immersion. Second, the models of the ships are too low detail. For example, the vector thrusters are not even modelled and instead we have a blue flame decal just appear on the ship surface, looks rubbish.
Visual and audio seems to be right, but the ships seem to move faster, lose health faster, and repair faster..? I guess they sped up the combat somewhat. I'm not entirely sure how to feel about that. I hated when Total War franchise did that to their games.
This is by far the worst BC design since Homeworld 1. Looks more like a shitty sports car than a Battlecruiser. And why the heck would you place one of your main turrets in a freaking pit that obstructs the line of fire? And the fact that this thing is literally melting from corvettes...
Given how fast the healing on it was, it seems like they have tried to speed up the gameplay ALOT compared to previous titles.
I wouldn't be surprised in this build alot of the units feel like glass cannons.
That's not necessarily a bad thing but definitely a departure from the previous games.
Though personally i prefer the slower pace of the older games, it makes the space battles feel larger and cinematic.
Nice to see that you dont need a shipyard to build the battle cruiser and the mothership builds it like in HW1 and Cataclysm
....why does the turret beam point of origin move away from the actual turret during firing?!? It's really noticable @ 1:30
Maybe the game mechanism detaches the particle emitter from the ship at the end of the firing. As a reason, the beam origin (the particle emitter) ceases to move along with the turret.
@@haihuynh8337They should REALLY fix that!
Not the fan of the new BC design. From design perspective seems would be so ineffective. Why the two main guns are in a dip instead of raised to have better firing arc. Hate how all ships became kinda just blocks. The HW2 BC design was fantastic. This just looks weird.
the HW2 BC design was my least favorite, the Higarran one especially is just wasteful. You have two ions and 4 guns on a ship that is three times the size of a destroyer, yet the destroyer comes in with 4 guns of similar size and torpedo tubes. Its simply wasteful the amount of space it takes up, I much prefer the HW1 Heavy Cruisers with their bulky design focused on as much firepower as possible onto a single capital ship.
The fact the top and bottom guns can never realistically fire on the same target annoys me to no end.
i hope the devs dont try to pull a "Dawn of War 3" on us.
Never was a HW played but was very interested in this one since it's new and fresh. I really hope they don't ruin this like DOW3 was ruined.
I think they alredy did...
From what I understand I think our fears might have come true.
somehow, dawn of war 3 has returned...@@redknight6077
There could be a bigger ship ?
Design is extremely counterintuitive. It's like they said "we need to do the exact opposite of good ship design"
I am so sad to think that this game is Dead on Arrival.
From what I played and seen, healthbars on this game seem to have lost a zero at the end ...
I'm afraid we might have a Dawn of War 3 situation here 😢
There is no bloody way this is the final health. It has barely 4x the health of a frigate. Slightly more than that of a carrier. I get it, carriers aren't supposed to be struck, but a battlecruiser being that squishy is kinda ridiculous.
Unfortuantely, they did.
Moves like a corvette… I‘m terribly worried about this game.
Well it is defense a Battlecruiser is supposed to be very mobile and well armed at the cost of armor... and that's more or less what this ship looks like.
@@Sonlirain lol why would a *DEFENSE* Battlecruiser be made with shitty armour and top speed? That goes against the whole principle of defense. If a capital ship is designed to be mobile and well armed, it's so it can get in and out of fights quickly, not provide static defense. The design is terrible (not to mention the awful, non-logical kinetic turret placement in the centre of a canyon that restricts it's field of fire?).
@@jake7824 I meant to write "In its defense".
It's not classified as a "defense battlecruiser" in the game itself.
@@Sonlirain No worries mate - easy mistake to make. And your reasoning is correct (Much like BCs in WW1).
something is really wrong with this bloody ship. i hope they have dreadnoughts
The wild population of enemy Corvette fell faster than a former millionaire in 1920.
I hope there's a "voice chatter" level setting (I think HW2 had it) - because after 2 mins, I'm already sick to death of hearing "corvette destroyed"
I bought it, corvette was destroyed, corvette was destroyed :)
- Beams drift
- turret placement looks badly thought out for the greebles
- health is not good enough
- fighters look slow/capitals are really fast?
I don't hate the hull shape but the weapon locations don't work great with it. Maybe two weaker turrets on the ridges to emphasize the silhouette, and a wider graphical representation for the missile turret (making it a tube rack/vls with a tower?) in the middle
I love Complex Evo for homeworld Remastered. The Battleship and the insane weapon slots it has makes it a force to be reckoned with.
these repair ships looked way to op
It's the hull point values that need to go up.
if you explain to yourself how you can repair another ship using a beam
@@homeworld2evolution Don't gotta make anything up as it's already pretty well-established in supplementary lore. It's the same tech that HW1 Collectors (and even Salvagers in DoK!) use to suck resources from asteroid surfaces- the Phased Dissassembly Array. Support Frigates just use a PDA in reverse to plaster raw materials onto hull breaches like band-aids, and then finer repairs to the busted stuff underneath the raw metal blob are done by internal damage control teams. Presumably the tech to more precisely and quickly replicate broken hull stuff only got better in the hundred years to HW3, but there you go, healing beams.
They only removed them in HW2 because they wanted to nerf healing by making you pay in easily destroyed Resource Collectors, but these "magic" green beams have been around since HW1 and Cata and the way they work is well understood.
@@kamu_yana a nice fairy tale for a teenagers... The Relic realized this in 2003 by making normal repairs on the hull of ships. Going back to 1999 only proves their inability to create new and interesting ideas for their game. You can see this in the design of ships, which are simply copied and modified versions from previous games.
Incarnate all ships (frigates, destroyers, battlecruiser) - this is a modified sajuuk version, the new resource controller - is two combinated RU controllers from HW2, the new collector- is one ru controller from HW2, the new interceptor is the Taidan interceptor, etc. etc.
@@homeworld2evolution You've got some chip on your shoulder! Nobody was talking about any of these topics. Listen, a lot of people including me don't feel satisfied with how HW3 is coming out, but you shouldn't vent all of your grievances at once on a fellow fan like this. It accomplishes nothing. We all want the same thing: For this game to be worthy of all the time it took for us to wait for it, and to have as much thought put into the design as we fans have been imagining for over two decades.
What’s with the weird bobbing like a ship in waves on the ocean? It’s really weird how much movement there is.
How did you even get the mothership into the WG mode?
This dude must have the hook ups because i wondered the same.
The beam trail from ion weapons appears to 'disconnect' from the turret as it dies down.
Of the guns he does have, half of them have an unreasonably limited firing arc (especially at the top of the ship) in a game that embraces the 3D playing field.
Thank you for the video!
This battlecruiser design is so bad. Ordered the collector's edition, but I really hope they will sort that stuff out. How can this ship struggle to focus both it's main turrets on one target? ... I am kinda dissapointed. 7:44
i'll saw that and am worried, how can be possible than the previous battlecruiser design was more effective, lethal, and even for his size more maneuverable, that can be corrected worked properly because how its move for firing is flawed, theres a moment when the mothership pass near the bc, is simple the ms going a little low and the battlecruiser going up for allow all guns for firing, and unfortunately one of the ion cannon hits and the other miss most of the time against a bigger ship or a medium sized as a frigate.
Yick, that lingering ion cannon beam is kind of iffy.
The only thing that bothered me was that the Hiagaran cruiser and the Vaigr battleehip, given their size, had too few weapons. In the Complex mods, of course, this was corrected, and there these ships perfectly characterize themselves as they should. I hope that someday we will see Complex mod for Homeworld 3!
Me 2!
They have similar gun count to all previous games, original. HW2 in ship icon shown how much space Ion cannon is taking, now include hangar for 5 squadrons.
Complex slaps gun on a gun on top of a gun
Only thing missing from vanilla capital ships is higher amount of point defense guns as 4-6 really dosent cut it
@@arczer2519 well for this bc it is missing 4 pulsar-guns comparad to the hw2 model and i think it even hat mg-slots. not shure on those though, maybe only on carriers and motherships.
@@Xayl42 ye
Mg-slots were only on Vaygr DD and BC
overall:
Hiigarian BC: 4 pulse beamers
Vaygr BC: 4 laser lances + 5 hull defense gun (MG's)
A lot of the ship designs bug me. It's as if they made a silhouette first, then slapped some weapons on it and never really considered how it's supposed to work. The frigging battle-cruiser's dorsal main guns are not in a position where it has the clearance to fire 180 by 360 over the hull. It can only fire forwards and aft because of it's ridiculous recessed position.
At least the ventral gun has clearance...
The shipyard/MS has to detach it's entire bottom side to launch the battlecruiser. Yet the battlecruiser /at best/ fills about 1/3 of the volume. Shipyards in HW2 slid out BC from the side and the BC filled up about 3/4 of that shipyard's volume. How is the new design that much worse in regards to efficiency and practical use.
Furthermore: have we regressed back to HW1: what with the silly mining and repair beams?
HW had miners land on asteroids to harvest resources, or attach to debris to return for processing. Repairs involved the harvesters attaching to the hull and welding things.
"Mining and repair beams" are literally how mining and repair systems in this series work, and visually it was like this in every game other than HW2.
As per the Homeworld manual, the Phased Disassembler Arrays essentially use fusion torches to disassemble the target material on an atomic level, sort the elements by atomic weight and store the material for later use. The specifics of how PDA-based construction works is not elaborated upon, but I imagine that it's a somewhat similar process in reverse - imagine a 3D printer, only far more energetic, with a far finer resolution and with an unlimited range of feedstock. As per the manual of the original Homeworld, rapid construction of ships is enabled by multiple production lines running in parallel, though.
The "repair beams" are apparently modified PDAs, if the Homeworld: Cataclysm manual is anything to go by. I imagine that outside of game mechanics they are best used to patch hull breaches, and internal damage has to be dealt with by some other means.
That said, the visuals of HW2 mining ships evoked the image of a somewhat more... streamlined process. To me, landing on an asteroid, tapping into an ore vein and running the extracted ore through a PDA onboard a ship seems to be more efficient in terms of energy and time spent, as well as yield, compared to stripping matter off the entire asteroid layer by layer and only then sorting and processing it.
@@SV5195RSo you agree? It's a step back?
that ion cannon was apparently nerfed to a searchlight
Design wise this looks to be designed to circle enemies, while firing above and below itself. As long as no other BC can bring mor firepower to bear, I'm fine with it.
Man, they have Starcraftifide Homeworld 3!
The gameplay and controls are not the same.
Among other things! Too many to post here.
In the moment you see “Wider audience” in your favorite franchise, beware!
As someone who plays Starcraft I don't see much, if any Starcraft in there.
I would also recommend to play your "favorite franchise" game again, because you might have forgotten how it actually played. It definitely seems to be rather similar.
Some starcraftization would possibly even help. This game looks very slow and noncerebral, just as its predecessor.
@@vornamenachname594 You are not a Homeworld fan definitely. StarCraft is a good franchise, I have played it. Stay over there and let us, the real Homeworld Fans, be the judges.
@@Guelo6891 I'm a long time Homeworld fan and I'm mostly fine with the game, barring a few UI issues.
I do like how much the BC moves around while fighting vs. flying in a straight line or being static.
I disagree 100%. A battle cruiser is meant to be a huge ship. It should be almost stationary, while everything moves around it! Smaller ships should be able to use it as cover, both friendly and enemy fleets.
@@ChristopherVickers That doesnt work in an RTS like Homeworld.
That literally how it worked in previous game@@termitreter6545 ship AI had different engagement routine dependent on theirs targets, sometime they would stay stationary.
3:14 What game mode is this? Looks like war games but in war games you only get carrier
Ohhh the torpedos can switch targets mid flight! That’s awesome
It looks like a mix of HW2's Battlecruiser with HW3's Destroyer. I dig the design and it looks great with Sobani colors (Red and White, i've used that color scheme since i first discovered HW1 back in 2005)
I worry a bit, but I hope the release comes out right. There's worries about the ships' squishiness and I don't want this game to be controversial like HW2 was for so long.
It's like a marriage between the Kushan heavy cruiser's mass and the Hiigaran battlecruiser's elongated shape.
love to see laser beams stay in place while turrets (with the rest of the bc) are calmly flying away
Homeworld RIP 1999-2003 🙏🏼🫡
Wan tto buy a space game, Homeworld 2 or Homeworld 3?
The HW3 battleship is just the OG HW Destroyers
I'm hoping that it's only fragile for the demo so they can showcase the effects. Then developers said that your ships would carry scars between battles which seems to indicate that they will be very durable in the final version.
There are a limited number of bodies on the mothership. If they die every few seconds that would be idiotic
needs more and bigger turrets!
Is it me or is the classic Ion Cannon SFX missing here? It's a Homeworld staple sound. I see blue flashies, but no appropriate sound effect!
Hmm, I still like the BS from HW2 more. Gun placements and shape seem a little odd in here.
It is definitely a ship which prefers speed over firepower. I would use it with fast ship support to get behind enemy lines quickly and hit em before they turn around.
What is that huge structure on the background?
Missiles should have extreme damage capability, but able to be intercepted by point defence guns, Expanse style!
Is it me or was the HW2 BC way cooler?
There are so many lazy things about this game. Bullets don't inherit their parent's velocity, missiles don't lead their targets, and the ship designs leave a lot to be desired.
Is this game being directed by the interns or something?
It's being made by the artists of Homeworld. They have none of the original game designers on the team and it really shows, as it already did in Deserts of Kharak. They know how to make very pretty games, but they know fuck all about RTS game design.
Indeed, that can do checklist of features, but have no idea how they're supposed to mesh gameplay wise.
It might have worked in Deserts of Kharak with was their own thing, but now they're try to follow up on the old 2001 idea of Homeworld.
Probably the worst is that game is still salvageable, questions is if they can acknowledge the gameplay issues and address them or remain ignorant and just let it fall
That's a lot of corvettes.
Oh god, it looks more like an friggn "esport" game... . FFS... . I waited so long. I am devastated. Frigg man
they became so evil they give pre exile higaran vibe where they behave like true warmongers ( fun fact this scenario here is a rewritten version of Dust war that was meant for homeworld2 and in it higaran were ture colonials invading a space cluster and beating the locals for their own glory and kinda same thing is still here + the sjet plot )
I don't think it ever left them even after exile, just the games didn't exactly expand on that.
Only HW Cataclysm felt like showing more like how Hiigarians are actually like rather than just "good guy's"
Can someone tell me why almost every enemy ship looks like the cock blocker from hw2? ( Yes i am talking about sajuuk, they all look like sajuuk, even more the bigger ones)
star wars empire at war space bettle still takes the cake
Here i am trying to tell you that there is apparently already a mod coming for a different battlecruiser model but my comments keep getting deleted for no reason. I am not allowed to post a link or even describe how to find it, just unbelievable.
and here I hopes the hiigaran trend of putting the bridge at the end of an exposed strut on the side of the ship would end...
Lol, they kept the HW2's Hiigaran BC's weapon placement. Same 1 ion turret on top, 1 on bottom, 2 gun turrets on bottom to the sides and rear, and one more gun turret under nose.
Last night in my 1st playthrough, I regret dumping a whole bunch of my captured destroyers to make room in the capital ship quota for my BCs. This is the most underpowered BC in the WHOLE series. And I played all of them. Bad firing arcs, very slow speed. Keep your captured destroyers instead.
Oh, I didn't have time to play)how did I lose sight of that)
Ship HP should be at the very least tripled
Kinda upset they still have problems with the ion turrets firing arcs and AI.
Also disappointed there isn't a more interesting damage model and subcomponents.
Also disappointed there isn't more interesting tactical gameplay for such large units.
So much unused space on top und the top gun tower firing arc seems limited by the ship itself.
after the 2nd game's ship desihns i think these are pretty standard. i am sad to see homeworld took a step back.
ever since HW 2 it's always bugged me that the Hiigaran ship have so few guns, since they also lack missiles and torpedo's. More guns was one of the nicer things mods would add, as the Vaygr would have near equal number of guns and missiles/torps.
think im gonna just get back into hw2 multiplayer, they have fallen short here
It needs more guns tbh looks so bare.
If i I was going to give this series a try which one should I play?
1 and 2 are majestic. Kharak is too, but it is more about sand battleships. Cataclysm is cool space horror, but it is hard to get and did not get a remaster.
Just how the heck did you get the mothership and BC's on wargame??
Почему у него лучи после выстрела остаются на месте. это что за бред?
Bwahahahah how it cant hit an other bc at point blank with both beams at 8:00. but it even still tries instead of at least tracking an other ship with the upper one.
I love turrets.. want more ships with turrets
so much wasted space only 2x ion beams 2x ballistic and PDS mounted such way 2:51 ship struggle to fire :( and gets almost pooped by corvette squadron what a waste :/
"look how they massacred my boy"
loosing hope for this game every vid posted on YT and iam fcn angry
Enemy BC looks like a squished Sajuk. Look at them side by side.
I think that's intended to show they are some kind of Sajuuk-class vessel
Can’t wait for modders to introduce the Qwaar-Jet into this. A proper super cap.
That BC is paper thin. It needs healing to deal with a couple of enemy frigates. What are they thinking?
So it has 6 Turrets, 4 of which are on the underside which also includes both "point defense" Turrets? And the firing arcs look atrocious.
This ship looks like a cable vision remote
I love HW 1&2 But the developers is going to fail.
They went silent and are deleting posts on reddit and thats a big red flag.
They know its gonna fail, so they are going to do like alot of other companies now a days. Take the money and run.
The incarnate beam mechanics are better done than the hiigaran ones.
Something you have a gun on the body that shoots through textures)). The one in front of the laser turret. Not a logical placement.
I wish HM3 introduced force-field - like proper force-field around capital ships with a nice animation
Homeworld: Cataclysm
Sentinels were cool. I miss those little guys.
Give us deflector shield please. They have it on defense frigate (I forgot what it called) in homeworld 2 that only last up a few seconds. I'm sure the tech is not lost. For over 100 years this sci-fi series should have bubble shields like many western sci-fi.
@@Darkgamerxp64 That is what actualy distinguished Homeworld from other scifies, it is more realistic and tries to operate with known weapon concepts. It inspiered Nebulous and Terra Invicta which push concept even further. But sadly there is no place for goofy gigant generation ships in their setting. And HW 3 feels more inspiered by deserts of Kharack in terms of sizes.
@@EtherialofNowhere I was just saying as you can see this battlecruiser is being criticized hard under these comments. But I do see what you mean.
This prized Battlecruiser should be hard to kill and easy to destroy enemy ships. If it's a rare unit to field, then it should also be a rare unit to kill. Make this Battlecruiser meaningful to invest on specially on the battlefield. Make it worth the effort and also worth the risk to field this MF on the game. Make it a one feared ship that no one would like to encounter. Thank you Dev.
"Battle" cruiser. Looks more like a lightly armed luxury liner.
Falling-Frontier по динамике интересней будет - ударные волны и детонации, пуск ракет и торпед, а тут ничего нового. Разработчикам сериал "Пространство"посмотреть надо, там в реале выглядят космические бои - скорость и быстрота реакции! Кинетическое оружие просто выносит насквозь весь корабль, энергетическое оружие режет и плавит корпус, хлопки кислорода из отсеков корабля. Маневры на скорости по инерции где? Абордажные капсулы, гравитационное оружие, которое скручивает корпуса кораблей, где это всё? Пусть читают фантастические книги вначале.
хоспади чел. Всем давно было понятно что Хомыч 3 делают ради - изи бабки с настальгирующих. Странный угловатый дизайн гг фракции... Противники похожие на сплав предтеч и Вейгров (халтура) Простенький сюжет (ну тут как всегда) Да и в целом общая попкорновость всей серии без углубления в реализм и проработку... Тут надежда только на модеров и камунити...
@@3AnEKAHK0 да, модеры из чего угодно конфетку сделают. Кстати по Hom2 есть мод неплохой азиатский Yaodu_Mod. Дополнительные фракции у каждой свои особенности и корабли, есть супер корабли и супер оружие и т.п. Но на win10 не запускается, только Win7 Wista...
I LOVE hove it has manoeuvring thrusters across the hull 💛
This Battlecruiser is gorgeous. It has the potential to damage ships from both of its flank. Well put.