All behemoths can become Obliterators Citadels or Juggernaughts your drug of choice. Your observations on the behemoth scientific and economic are indeed the same, as it will let you delete and create a new design of that sort.  The military Juggernaught unfortunatly is bound only to what design number it is (as per how many times you've changed it ect)

All in all there is no real need for a scientific and a economic design in the first place, there are there to tell you you can take route A) or B) and the automatic designs are catored to each of its catagory I believe.

Personally I delete the names of the science and econ behemoths and rename them for my own use.  But any behemoth of any type can be turned into citadel (turtle) obliterator (exterminate) and juggernaught (long drawn out wars also good as tactical devistation as a tank) but to each there own. 

Hi,

You both are correct. Early internal tests showed the need to have a slightly different version with more warfare slots for Military Behemoths. For multiple reasons we had to keep it to one design.

That mess with military behemoth being a separate disign really pisses me off sometimes. You basically can't have 2 different military behemoth designs at the same time. I think that this issue needs some kind of a fix. Jhell please consider creating a separate hull for that one or pls find another solution.

I think the reason is purely technical, like maybe the need not to count a special hull (military behemoth) as a separate hull that increses CP slots, for example.

TheBlueI wrote:

I still think that's strange. Why not have a military and a civilian Behemoth hull to explain the different slots?

If we change it that's the way we'd go indeed.

Like I said there were multiple reasons, the main ones being:

- Having two hulls meant having two names and two options when creating a new hull, on top of having the 3 pre-made designs. It was basically a potential for confusion when (we thought) none need to be

- Having two hulls might have implied that specializations were locked to one or the other (again, more potential confusion)

- We didn't want to encourage players to heavily use Behemoths militarily in early game

- We didn't find that the number of available Behemoths required this kind of granularity in ship design

- On the technical side of things the AI wouldn't know how to handle multiple military Behemoths designs (would use only the basic one, would break if the basic one is removed)

Now we understand your point, and this is something that could be changed if you all feel strongly about it. Do you really have (and use) multiple military behemoths in your games often?

I brought up the 3 hulls and three specializations thing early in beta...Honestly I called for having only ONE behemoth hull.  Having three specializations and three hulls, two of which were identical for modules, was very counterintuitive from the getgo.  If the military hull has different slots, one could argue that it's already specialized, when the intent was that it wasn't supposed to be until you specialized it.

There was a strong concept in behemoths, but the execution still feels a bit fiddly and counterintuitive to me.  The inability to have multiple military behemoth designs is a fairly chafing side effect with varying consequences depending on its extent of use, but I still think it's a solvable problem.

mamarider wrote:

I vote for a unified hull with universal slots as well! I used several designs a couple of times, not many for sure, but to be completely honest it is not my main concern. I just feel like this whole thing with devided behemoth designs feels out of place and a bit sloppy.

this

If this vote is still going on, I'd also like to vote for the Unified hull. It's more intuitive.

I've only had a couple of games with the expansion where I went all-in with Behemoths - in my first game as Hissho, I built only military behemoths; in the second I never built a single military behemoth, instead going for multiple science behemoths in order to take advantage of the abundant special nodes near my home system. 

If there is concern about using behemoths for military purposes in the early game, why not make it so that they are ineffective in combat (for their size) until you research the first military/empire behemoth techs?

I also still think that there should be 2 classes of hulls with distinct looks. Civilian (Scientific & Economic) and Military...

Additionally, I believe that - if you could free the resources - each faction should have their very own approach on the Behemoths. While they are massive constructions, each factions needs to find its way to make them space ready again (or build them after blueprints/reengineer). Yet, logically, every faction should be using it's own methods, tech, etc to get them ready again.

Thus, I believe for example the Craver's version should have those combustion engine propelling style with tubes running through. On the other side, the Unfallen should have vines holding pieces in place while Sophons would have some cool alien tech additions; because science!

I hope you know what I mean....

I think the civilian version could stay the way, we have them know, why the military version should look more like a flying battle station, ring, sphere. It doesn't make much sense to have such a massive object with such a massive engine (that's quite open to be fired at) with just weapons mounted to the front and sides

I vote for the 2 classes of hull, with the military being different from civil.

I like the idea that they should be different, and in character with the other ships, for each race, but don't want the devs spending lots of time on them that they could be using for something more important.

• I also agree with the idea of having one civilian (formerly scientific and economic) and one military behemoth type.
• The research tree should be streamlined accordingly with maybe one 'tree' each in the military and one in the system development quadrant.
• I would like a way to destroy/sell a behemoth if I no longer need it, please (I don't think there is at the moment, is there?).

+1 for having a separate Military chassis Behemoth and a Civilian one

I would like to through a vote out there for letting us select design and name the military behemoth just like the economic/scientific one.

It makes a lot of sense when fielding multiple behemoths to know which is what build.  So I vote for the stick to two, and let us select either to be named as we like on the drop down menu in ship design as research behemoth and military behemoth.  

The worry of them being used offensively given they lack manpower and don't hold there own very well to early game attackers it really seems like the least confusing option.  As it is now it is a bit confusing until you figure out there are only 2 seperate behemoths even though you see three when the technology is unlocked.  You have the ability to edit and rename both to aviod late game confusion. (instead of just the one civilian/scientific/economic one).

Cheers!

The detail I'm not sure on is this:  is a Juggernaut that started as a Military behemoth the same as a Juggernaut that began as an Economin/Scientific one?  I think it is, but I'm not sure.

The Juggernaught is something you can turn a Economic OR Military Behemoth into.  The juggernaught is a seperate entity like the Obliterator.  It is a mergable 10cc Monster ship with its own unique abilities that can be accessed further via research.

plutar wrote:

The Juggernaught is something you can turn a Economic OR Military Behemoth into.  The juggernaught is a seperate entity like the Obliterator.  It is a mergable 10cc Monster ship with its own unique abilities that can be accessed further via research.

I'm well aware that a Juggernaut is a separate identity, but, like the Obliterator and Citadel, it's based on civilian or military behemoths, which are upgraded to become them.  

Ok, so you're saying that the Juggernaut, Obliterator and Citadel models are the same, whether they began life as a civilian, or a military behemoth.  The civilian and military behemoths MUST therefore be very similar, if not identical frames for the conversions to be the same cost.  That would tend to indicate that the decision has already been made?