Fatterpillar: 6 crew members. Liberator: 2 crew members Transport personnel non included. The Lib wins hands down for vehicle transport, while the Fatty is more suited for cargo goods
assault variant exist btw also lib will prob move up in crew amount cause of engineering, you could say the same about both fatterpillars but they both have double the shields and likely way better armor/coverage so less damage in general.
Can fully repair ships, vehicles, and components? Lieberator ❌Ironass ✔ Can refuel ships and vehicles? Lieberator ❌Ironass ✔ Lieberator is a ferry, nothing more. And that pains me to say considering I'm an Anvil fanboy.
If the main thing that you want is just a ship transport, the Liberator seems the best choice. But the Ironclad, especially Assault, look like they'll be better multi-role ships. The Assualt having a massive life-support system for carrying its troops, plus a workshop that can fabricate parts and repair ships makes it really tempting. I can't see myself ever flying a ship that large, but it's really cool.
The recent CCUs of Invictus made it apparent I should upgrade my initial CCU chain for a C2 to the Ironclad. Once the Q & A came out for the Ironclad, I made the choice to get further CCUs to get the Assault Variant. As I already committed to a Liberator from last year's IAE, I don't have to choose: I have both. I acknowledge that there is clear overlap between the two, but I also see that each vessel has distinct advantages that the other cannot/doesn't address (i.e. dedicated intended launch pads for fighters on the Liberator vs. better armament via turrets on the Ironclad, difference in height clearance for internal storage of vehicle, among other differences) Thanks for all your content @Vici Deum 💯⚡🫡
When in doubt, both is always a good call; congrats on your pickups! And I agree, especially with the assault variant there seems to be a good amount of differentiation between the two of them to still give you plenty of unique utility!
I am blessed enought to have both and plan to use them in tandem. Bring mining vehicles/fighters to the area then bring the fatterpillar to store all the cargo
These 2 ships are not really comparable is what I’ve come too. 2 drastically different uses. More I find they actually are a pair. Used together to establish a base or accomplish a goal. Using the Ironclad as a carrier is dumb. If you store a ship…. You loose most of the cargo room. The Liberator is actually better used out of its roll. If you fill the 400CCU of cargo space you can still fill the garage area, which should fit a considerable amount. Sure no grave lockdown…. But that doesn’t stop the Reclaimer crews.
I bought a Liberator concept but was very tempted as a Drake fan to go with the Ironclad instead with the extra guns and repair fabricator. The Ironclad pic with the 4 tanks looked cool until you remember the front ramp is nearly half the width the cargo area and centered so getting 4 tanks in/out fast that tight will be more tedious. While the front door is well gunned on the combat version for cover, it's the single choke point to get in/out with 4 more crew needed in those turrets. The Liberator is a little smaller with max crew 2 plus seats for a bunch of ground troops and vehicle operators. but the doors and ramps are the same width as the main cargo area plus a full width rear ramp for 2 ways out or drive through on/off faster loading and unloading. The door to the middle drive through deck is the ramp off the top deck if you want more land vehicles that can add DPS turrets/launchers to the ship top. Internal deck can deploy out the rear while the top deck unload via the front at same time for faster in/out time.
Neither the Liberator nor the Iron Clads are meant to be in combat. I have the CCUs for both but I will probably go with the Liberator. As a pocket carrier and transport it just fills more potential roles IMO.
The issue with the Liberator, that I think CIG should address, and maybe walk back, is that the Liberator can NOT rearm, refuel, or repair ships and vehicles landed on it. While I get the repair and, to a lesser extent, rearm parts, it really should be able to at least refuel vehicles. What I think CIG should do, is if they don't want to give the Liberator fuel tanks to hold hydrogen and quantum fuel, it should at least be able to refuel ships and vehicles using the Libertor's own fuel.
Ironclad would do well as an industrial platform. A base of operations for mining and exploration planet side. In addition to cago hauling. Making it a versatile transport outside of combat.
im thinking a cat might sit on the top deck if the liberator i will try it. i will be able to test assault liberator and the basic ironclad i might daily drive an iron clad but i think my liberator will be my pride and joy when i need a few option close by
Both are a part of my fleet ill make a decision when both are in game if ic does everything i need it to and what i need in the liberator then my liberator will move up to a bmm ive got the ccu to it already
this is not a fair competition these ships are better suited for very different reasons... an ironclad is more of your all arounder an liberator can be a flag ship for for solo player
I'm going to be honest to you. I don't think that these two ships are in the same class. The ironclad is basically a Hercules on crack. With the base class being a C2 and the assault class being an M2. Obviously those are hard to compare to because the Drake ship is going to have more cargo and probably armor but maneuverability wise is going to be awful. It's clear from the diagrams that the ironclad isn't deep enough to hold anything but the smallest of ships and so it's not really supposed to be a ship carrier. It's more around ground vehicles and maybe a terrapin. Again. Think about whatever fits in an M2 or a C2 is going to be fitting into this ship.
2 ships we know little to nothing about, especially the Lib, try and make a vid with some substance, YT CC are some of the laziest, clickbait merchants going, second only to when their not pimping each others content, reading verbatim from CIG posts, or looking for handouts to finance sitting on their lazy arses.
The cold, dark, industrial look of the Ironclad. It called to me. 😎
It’s Drake, perfected!
Fatterpillar: 6 crew members.
Liberator: 2 crew members
Transport personnel non included.
The Lib wins hands down for vehicle transport, while the Fatty is more suited for cargo goods
Fatterpillar is also much more protected… unless you have exposed fighters on the deck.
assault variant exist btw also lib will prob move up in crew amount cause of engineering, you could say the same about both fatterpillars but they both have double the shields and likely way better armor/coverage so less damage in general.
Can fully repair ships, vehicles, and components? Lieberator ❌Ironass ✔
Can refuel ships and vehicles? Lieberator ❌Ironass ✔
Lieberator is a ferry, nothing more. And that pains me to say considering I'm an Anvil fanboy.
If the main thing that you want is just a ship transport, the Liberator seems the best choice. But the Ironclad, especially Assault, look like they'll be better multi-role ships. The Assualt having a massive life-support system for carrying its troops, plus a workshop that can fabricate parts and repair ships makes it really tempting. I can't see myself ever flying a ship that large, but it's really cool.
The recent CCUs of Invictus made it apparent I should upgrade my initial CCU chain for a C2 to the Ironclad. Once the Q & A came out for the Ironclad, I made the choice to get further CCUs to get the Assault Variant. As I already committed to a Liberator from last year's IAE, I don't have to choose: I have both. I acknowledge that there is clear overlap between the two, but I also see that each vessel has distinct advantages that the other cannot/doesn't address (i.e. dedicated intended launch pads for fighters on the Liberator vs. better armament via turrets on the Ironclad, difference in height clearance for internal storage of vehicle, among other differences) Thanks for all your content @Vici Deum 💯⚡🫡
When in doubt, both is always a good call; congrats on your pickups! And I agree, especially with the assault variant there seems to be a good amount of differentiation between the two of them to still give you plenty of unique utility!
I am blessed enought to have both and plan to use them in tandem. Bring mining vehicles/fighters to the area then bring the fatterpillar to store all the cargo
These 2 ships are not really comparable is what I’ve come too. 2 drastically different uses. More I find they actually are a pair. Used together to establish a base or accomplish a goal. Using the Ironclad as a carrier is dumb. If you store a ship…. You loose most of the cargo room. The Liberator is actually better used out of its roll. If you fill the 400CCU of cargo space you can still fill the garage area, which should fit a considerable amount. Sure no grave lockdown…. But that doesn’t stop the Reclaimer crews.
I bought a Liberator concept but was very tempted as a Drake fan to go with the Ironclad instead with the extra guns and repair fabricator. The Ironclad pic with the 4 tanks looked cool until you remember the front ramp is nearly half the width the cargo area and centered so getting 4 tanks in/out fast that tight will be more tedious. While the front door is well gunned on the combat version for cover, it's the single choke point to get in/out with 4 more crew needed in those turrets.
The Liberator is a little smaller with max crew 2 plus seats for a bunch of ground troops and vehicle operators. but the doors and ramps are the same width as the main cargo area plus a full width rear ramp for 2 ways out or drive through on/off faster loading and unloading. The door to the middle drive through deck is the ramp off the top deck if you want more land vehicles that can add DPS turrets/launchers to the ship top. Internal deck can deploy out the rear while the top deck unload via the front at same time for faster in/out time.
I just want to know if a vulture will fit in an iron clad. I could stay out salvaging for days.
Doesn’t according to height.
That’s a great question, although I suspect the Vulture is too tall!
Neither the Liberator nor the Iron Clads are meant to be in combat. I have the CCUs for both but I will probably go with the Liberator. As a pocket carrier and transport it just fills more potential roles IMO.
I got an Ironclad for heavy protected cargo and the Liberator for a mobile base/support base with myself and Org in mind.
The issue with the Liberator, that I think CIG should address, and maybe walk back, is that the Liberator can NOT rearm, refuel, or repair ships and vehicles landed on it.
While I get the repair and, to a lesser extent, rearm parts, it really should be able to at least refuel vehicles. What I think CIG should do, is if they don't want to give the Liberator fuel tanks to hold hydrogen and quantum fuel, it should at least be able to refuel ships and vehicles using the Libertor's own fuel.
Ironclad would do well as an industrial platform. A base of operations for mining and exploration planet side. In addition to cago hauling. Making it a versatile transport outside of combat.
im thinking a cat might sit on the top deck if the liberator i will try it. i will be able to test assault liberator and the basic ironclad i might daily drive an iron clad but i think my liberator will be my pride and joy when i need a few option close by
good format!
Thank you so much, I’m glad you enjoyed this!
The Liberator moving ships and vehicles without sacrificing cargo space is a big deal for me. Just to move cargo, I'd prefer the IC.
Both are a part of my fleet ill make a decision when both are in game if ic does everything i need it to and what i need in the liberator then my liberator will move up to a bmm ive got the ccu to it already
i have the ironclad just gona wait for that masterpeice
Congrats on your pickup, the Ironclad is a beast!
this is not a fair competition these ships are better suited for very different reasons...
an ironclad is more of your all arounder an liberator can be a flag ship for for solo player
Ironclad would look bad ass deploying Titan Suits...
I can’t wait till we get Titansuits and get some Halo jumps!
In the battle of the jpegs, no one wins.
Only time!
Speculation presented as facts. That is dangerous.
Dangerous is a bit of a reach. I doubt anyone will be harmed by my video.
Ironclad 💯%
Ironclad:450$
Liberator:575$
Neither, I got the Asssault variant of the Ironclad.
An equally excellent variant!
All of the above .
When in doubt, why not both!
The industrial look of the ironclad beats the ugly Anvil design.
I'm going to be honest to you. I don't think that these two ships are in the same class. The ironclad is basically a Hercules on crack. With the base class being a C2 and the assault class being an M2. Obviously those are hard to compare to because the Drake ship is going to have more cargo and probably armor but maneuverability wise is going to be awful.
It's clear from the diagrams that the ironclad isn't deep enough to hold anything but the smallest of ships and so it's not really supposed to be a ship carrier. It's more around ground vehicles and maybe a terrapin. Again. Think about whatever fits in an M2 or a C2 is going to be fitting into this ship.
Lib all day, every day
It’s a fantastic carrier; hard to go wrong with the Liberator!
They aren’t in the same class……..
I can use f7c mk ii like the cutter…. Doesn’t make them comparable
They’re both similar sized similarly priced with similar roles (hauling/transport). You’re comparing a $200 dogfighter with a $50 multi role starter.
2 ships we know little to nothing about, especially the Lib, try and make a vid with some substance, YT CC are some of the laziest, clickbait merchants going, second only to when their not pimping each others content, reading verbatim from CIG posts, or looking for handouts to finance sitting on their lazy arses.
Dont buy any , buy the Aurora and save up the money
Always a great idea, start with a starter!