A practical deep dive into the Aegis Dynamics Retaliator: Size 9 torpedoes, modular bays, turret coverage, crew setups, PvE/PvP workflows.

Introduction

The Aegis Dynamics Retaliator is Star Citizen’s classic answer to a single problem: how do you delete a “big” target fast without flying a capital ship? In Aegis’ own framing, it’s a multicrew heavy bomber that doubles as a modular combat platform—a hull built around swappable center sections, so the same ship can lean into Retaliator Bomber torpedo work or pivot into other roles as Retaliator modules mature.

Here’s the positioning in one line: carry a torpedo package that can launch six Size 9 torpedoes at large targets, then use a turret “net” to keep smaller threats honest—if you can staff it. The torpedo layout is intentionally asymmetric in practice: the front torpedo module carries 4× S9, and the rear adds 2× S9, for the well-known 6× Size 9 punch.

What makes the Retaliator worth discussing in 2026 isn’t just raw ordnance—it’s team efficiency:

• In our team testing (repeatable combat drills, same target profiles, same approach angles), the Retaliator’s best results came when we treated it like a job rather than a ship: pilot focuses on positioning and survival, gunners build a defensive bubble, torps are reserved for high-value commits.
• When we forced “solo bomber” behavior, outcomes were far less consistent—because the Retaliator’s power curve is designed around coordination, not independence (a common community pain point).

If you’re deciding fast: buy/earn the Retaliator when you can reliably crew it and you want Size 9 torpedo authority; skip it if you need a true solo daily-driver.

1️⃣ Aegis Retaliator Worth It in Star Citizen?

Verdict (one sentence): The Aegis Retaliator (Retaliator Bomber) is worth it when you can reliably crew it and want Size 9 torpedo kill pressure on large targets—but it’s a poor choice if your playstyle is mostly solo, you care about “pilot guns = main DPS,” or you want a ship that feels great with zero coordination.

If you’re deciding whether you should buy / grind it, think in terms of certainty you gain. In our team testing (repeatable runs with the same crew count, same target types, same approach profiles), the Retaliator’s biggest “guaranteed payoff” was a consistent win condition: when your group commits, big hulls can be ended early through a coordinated torpedo strike, and the ship’s turret coverage helps reduce sustained pressure while you reposition and reset. That’s why retaliator worth it usually maps to a specific player type: you have a fixed small squad, you enjoy fleet coordination, and you want to focus on ERT-style or other large-target scenarios where torps actually decide the fight. In that setup, the Retaliator becomes a role, not a vibe—large-target deletion + defensive bubble.

If you’re leaning “no,” the Retaliator also comes with certainty you must pay. It’s not a pilot-expression ship. Your pilot-forward damage isn’t the core loop, and without gunners the Retaliator turns into a high-maintenance platform that doesn’t deliver the “I can handle anything alone” feeling. In our tests, the solo Retaliator problem wasn’t only raw damage—it was workload compression: flying, lining up, threat management, and survival timing all stack onto one person. If your priority is handling, pilot guns, or a ship that stays rewarding with minimal crew, that’s a predictable mismatch.

If your goal is to “bomb occasionally” rather than build your sessions around a bomber, this is where retaliator vs eclipse becomes the cleanest decision point. The Eclipse is usually the lower-friction path: fewer people to coordinate, simpler execution, and faster “log in, strike, leave” rhythm. The Retaliator can outperform in organized play, but the Eclipse often wins on convenience per session—which matters when crew availability is inconsistent.

2️⃣ Patch Context: Why the Retaliator Is Back in the Conversation Again

If you’ve noticed a sudden rise in Retaliator review videos, Reddit threads, and “is this ship finally back?” takes, it’s not random. The Retaliator has always had the same core identity—multi-turret coverage + heavy payload + modularity—but the reason people are talking about it right now is that those pillars are finally being treated like a real product cycle again, not a forgotten legacy hull. CIG explicitly called out the Retaliator gold standard update and the introduction of modular rooms on the roadmap, including torpedo and cargo rooms.

From a market/community-observation angle, three debates keep repeating—often with nearly identical phrasing across comments and video titles:

• “Pilot guns are weak, it needs gunners.” This is the most common friction point because it’s not a balance nitpick—it’s a design tax. Many recent reviews and threads frame the Retaliator as a ship that “demands a crew,” with the lack of pilot-forward DPS being called out as a major downside.
• “Torpedoes in PvE have a very high efficiency ceiling… but the workflow is strict.” When the torp loop works, it’s one of the most time-efficient ways to end large-target fights. But the community keeps circling back to the same operational constraints: lock windows, approach discipline, and the “between fights” friction (rearm/resupply and re-staging). You can see this in the trend of guide content that’s less about “damage” and more about process—how to fire, swap, and keep the loop consistent.
• “Gold standard + modularity will pull it back into the mainstream.” Even skeptical takes tend to concede the same point: once the ship is treated as a modern modular platform (not just a bomber museum piece), it re-enters the “fleet utility” conversation. That’s why you’re seeing a pattern of titles like “Gold Standard First Look” and “Modularity + Gold Pass Update,” and recurring threads reacting specifically to the Retaliator base gold standard state and the modular bays.

So in plain terms: the Retaliator is being “re-litigated” because retaliator modularity and retaliator gold standard progress signals future relevance, while the current debate is still anchored in the same trade: huge payoff with crew coordination, high friction if you’re trying to make it behave like a solo gunship.

3️⃣ Role Breakdown: Is the Retaliator a Bomber, a Gunship, or a “Multirole Shell”?

The honest answer is: the Retaliator is a multirole shell that earns its keep in two specific shapes—Bomber first, escort/gunship second. The ship’s DNA never changed: it’s built around (1) heavy payload, (2) five crewed turrets for coverage, and (3) modular bays that swap the ship’s “job.” That’s why arguments about “what it is” usually end up being arguments about how you plan to crew it and which module state you’re committing to.

Bomber core form: six Size 9 torpedoes (4 + 2) and a very specific target list

When players say “Retaliator Bomber,” they’re talking about the torpedo identity: a front torpedo bay plus a rear torpedo bay, totaling six Size 9 torpedoes—4 in the bow module + 2 in the stern module.

That matters because Size 9 torps aren’t “damage,” they’re a decision tool. The bomber loop is strongest when you treat torps as a commit button used on targets that justify the cost and workflow:

• Who you hit: large, slow, high-value hulls (or “anchor” ships in an encounter) where a torpedo strike can end the fight early instead of grinding down shields and HP over time.
• How you hit: you win by creating a clean lock + launch window, then disengaging or repositioning while your turrets discourage pursuit.
• Why it’s strong: it compresses time-to-kill on the right targets. If your squad is organized, torps can turn a long multi-ship problem into a short “one execution” problem.

This is why the Retaliator is often described as a torpedo boat more than a “fighter.” Your goal isn’t to outfly anyone—it’s to solve specific threats with ordnance, then survive the reset.

Gunship/escort form: five crewed turrets and a defensive “coverage net”

The second identity is what creates the “Retaliator gunship” argument: the ship mounts five manned turrets, each typically described as twin Size 3 mounts, positioned to provide surrounding coverage rather than a single forward killing cone.

That distinction—coverage vs. dogfighting—is is the key to understanding the escort role:

• What it’s good at: protecting itself and nearby friendlies from light/medium threats through angles, not through turning performance. In a convoy or fleet screen, you’re trying to deny easy approaches, punish tailing ships, and make it expensive for small craft to stay close.
• What it’s not good at: it’s not a nimble brawler that wins by pilot aim and high-G merges. Community complaints about weak pilot guns exist because the Retaliator’s gunship value is distributed across the crew, not concentrated in the cockpit.

So yes, it can behave like an escort gunship—but only if you staff it. A turret ship without turret operators is just an under-realized concept.

The real meaning of modularity: changing “jobs” to reduce fleet pressure

Modularity is the part that turns the Retaliator into a platform rather than a single-purpose bomber. RSI’s own module write-ups frame the idea plainly: swap the internal bays and you can pivot into other roles—like adding cargo bays (front and/or rear) rather than torpedo rooms.

In practical fleet terms, that’s the payoff:

• Instead of owning multiple ships to cover “bombing day” vs “hauling day,” one hull can change professions by changing modules.
• That reduces asset pressure (fewer separate ships to store, maintain, and plan around) and increases “session flexibility” for orgs and small groups.

4️⃣ Retaliator Core Specs Explained: How the Numbers Change Gameplay

The Retaliator is one of those ships where the headline numbers aren’t trivia—they’re rules that reshape your session. If you treat them like a brochure checklist, you miss the point. If you treat them like gameplay constraints, the ship suddenly makes sense.

6× Size 9 torpedoes = target selection, timing discipline, and a real operating budget

A Retaliator Bomber configuration is defined by its six Size 9 torpedoes (split 4 + 2 across the front and rear torpedo modules). That doesn’t just mean “big damage.” It forces a specific decision flow.

• Target filtering becomes mandatory. You don’t throw S9 torps at anything that moves. You start thinking in categories: What is worth a torp? What will survive long enough to justify the lock? What outcome am I buying with this shot? That’s why Retaliator crews talk about “value targets” the way cargo haulers talk about “high margin runs.”
• Lock window and approach geometry matter more than raw aim. Torpedo play is about creating a clean window: stable approach, minimized line-of-sight breaks, and spacing that gives your ordnance the best chance to do its job.
• Launch rhythm becomes part of your tactics. With six torps, you can either “spike” (commit multiple torps to increase certainty) or “pace” (use one or two, reassess, and keep a reserve). That rhythm changes how long you can stay on station before rearm becomes non-negotiable.
• Resupply cost and downtime become the hidden stat. Every bomber pilot eventually realizes the limiting factor isn’t only firepower—it’s the loop between fights: staging, rearming, and re-engaging. The Retaliator’s torpedo capacity creates a high ceiling for PvE efficiency, but it also creates a real operating cost in time and logistics.

5× manned turrets (2× Size 3) = staffing, roles, and sector management

The Retaliator’s second defining number is its five manned turrets, commonly listed as twin Size 3 mounts. This is the real reason retaliator crew size is always part of any serious review: these turrets aren’t optional flavor—they’re the ship’s defensive system.

• You need people, not just seats. A turret ship doesn’t scale smoothly from 1→2 players. It scales in chunks: every additional gunner changes your survivability and your ability to hold space.
• You need division of labor. The pilot isn’t “the damage dealer.” The pilot is the positioning and survival manager: keep the ship stable, present favorable angles, protect the lock window, and choose when to disengage. Gunners are the threat control layer: deny approaches, punish tailing ships, and create breathing room for torp runs.
• You need fire-sector management. With multiple turrets, the skill isn’t “everyone shoot whatever.” The skill is coverage: calling targets, managing arcs, and preventing blind-side pressure. When crews do this well, the Retaliator feels like a moving defensive perimeter.

Front + rear module bays = one hull, multiple workflows

Finally, the Retaliator’s modular design—front and rear bays—isn’t just future-proofing. It’s a way to turn one ship into different session plans: torpedo-focused sorties, cargo-oriented workflows, or hybrid setups as retaliator modules expand. That’s why “retaliator loadout” discussions often start with modules, not guns.

So the “core specs” aren’t stats to memorize. They’re the three levers that decide whether this ship fits your life: torpedo discipline, crew reality, and modular flexibility.

5️⃣Retaliator Modules Explained: How the Two-Bay (Bow + Stern) System Actually Works

The Retaliator’s modularity isn’t a vague marketing promise—it’s a two-slot build system that changes what your ship does in a session. Think of the hull as a chassis with two interchangeable “career blocks”:

• Bow module (front bay)
• Stern module (rear bay)

You pick one module for each bay, and that combination becomes your workflow: pure bombing, mixed daily utility, or transport-focused. RSI has described these bays and their module options directly (including torpedo, cargo, dropship seating, and long-term habitation concepts).

1. Module positions: Bow vs Stern (why it matters)

The Retaliator’s modules aren’t cosmetic. Each bay is a distinct slot, so your “build” is always two decisions, not one:

• Bow (front): where the ship can become the “main identity” (e.g., the bow torpedo bay is the big four-torpedo punch).
• Stern (rear): where you either double down on that identity (more torps / more cargo) or add flexibility (hybrid setups).

That’s why people search retaliator modules rather than “best guns” first: you don’t tune this ship from the cockpit outward—you tune it from the bays outward.

2. What modules are actually usable right now (in-game reality)

A lot of Retaliator module talk gets messy because RSI has concept-era module vision and current in-game availability. The clean way to phrase it:

• Currently available in-game modules: Unladen, Torpedo, Cargo
• Other modules (vision / concept / not fully usable yet): things like Living and Dropship appear in official module listings and descriptions, but may not be fully implemented as an end-to-end gameplay loop depending on patch state.

So when someone asks “Can I run the retaliator living module or retaliator dropship module today?” the practical answer is: you can plan around them as part of the platform’s roadmap/vision, but don’t build your fleet strategy assuming they’re fully mature loops.

The three “here-and-now” modules (quick meaning)

• Unladen: effectively “empty bays.” It’s the baseline configuration (often what you see when modules aren’t installed).
• Torpedo module: the bomber identity—bow module supports up to 4× Size 9 torpedoes, and the stern supports 2× Size 9, giving the famous 6× S9 loadout when doubled.
• Cargo module: turns the bays into functional cargo space (RSI lists the Bow Cargo Module at 38 SCU; stern cargo exists as the paired counterpart).

3. How to “build” it (clear, executable logic)

Instead of asking “Which module is best?”, use this decision chain:

1. Are you committing to torpedo gameplay this session?

- If yes, at least one bay should be Torpedo.

2. Do you have crew for turret coverage and torp workflow?

- If your crew is thin or inconsistent, prefer hybrid rather than pure bomber, so your ship still “does something” between torp runs.

3. Do you want flexibility or specialization?

- Specialization = double the same module (Torp+Torp, Cargo+Cargo)

- Flex = mix (Torp+Cargo)

4. Are you waiting on future loops / don’t want to buy modules yet?

- Unladen is your “pause button” build.

This keeps your retaliator loadout choice grounded in what you can reliably execute, not what looks best on paper.

4. Combination checklist (pick the workflow that matches your reality)

✅ Torpedo + Torpedo (Pure Bomber)

Best for: organized small squads, fleet ops, large-target hunting nights.

What you get: the cleanest Retaliator Bomber identity—maximum “commit power” via the full torpedo package (the famous 6× S9).

What it costs: you’re signing up for torpedo workflow discipline (lock windows, approach planning, rearm cycles). This setup is incredible when your team is “on,” and frustrating when you’re half-crewed.

✅ Cargo + Cargo (Squad Transport / Utility Hauler)

Best for: small group logistics, moving loot/gear, flexible non-bomber sessions.

What you get: the Retaliator becomes a “well-armed utility mover”—still turret-based, still crew-centric, but no longer dependent on torpedo resupply cadence. RSI lists the Bow Cargo Module at 38 SCU, making it clear the cargo identity is a real intended configuration.

What it costs: you give up the “big target delete button.” Your value becomes persistence + coverage, not burst.

✅ Torpedo + Cargo (Mixed Daily Driver)

Best for: players who want bombing capability without making every session a torp-only commitment.

What you get: one bay gives you real bomber threat, the other keeps the ship useful between strikes—more forgiving when the night turns into “a little of everything.”

What it costs: you won’t match pure bomber spike potential, but you gain consistency in short sessions.

✅ Unladen (Waiting Build / Minimal Commitment)

Best for: players who just picked up the hull, are waiting on module economy/availability, or are planning around future modularity updates. Community discussions commonly mention the base ship showing as “Unladen” when modules aren’t present/installed.

What you get: lowest commitment, easiest to live with while you decide.

What it costs: you’re not using the Retaliator’s headline identity—this is a placeholder, not an endgame configuration.

---

Retaliator modularity is a fleet-pressure reducer. Instead of owning separate ships for “bombing night” and “utility night,” you’re meant to refit the same hull by swapping Bow + Stern modules—today with Unladen/Torpedo/Cargo, and eventually with broader options like Living and Dropship as the platform vision continues to mature.

6️⃣Retaliator Torpedo Modules Deep Dive: The Ship’s Soul, and a Repeatable Strike SOP

If the Retaliator is a platform, the Torpedo Modules are the reason the platform matters. This is the configuration that turns the ship into a true retaliator torpedo boat—not a “big missile ship,” but a bomber that trades convenience for a brutally clear win condition: commit ordnance, end the right target fast, leave alive, rearm, repeat. The part most new owners miss is that the Retaliator isn’t balanced around “how many torps you have.” It’s balanced around how the torps are split and how that split forces a tempo.

5. The 4 + 2 structure is not cosmetic—it sets your strike rhythm

The Retaliator’s torpedo load is famous for a reason: Bow Torpedo Module = 4× Size 9, Stern Torpedo Module = 2× Size 9, total 6× Size 9 torpedoes when you run Torpedo + Torpedo.

That 4+2 structure matters because it naturally pushes you into one of two “clean” patterns:

• Primary punch + insurance: The front 4 becomes your main strike bank. The rear 2 becomes your “finish/insurance” bank—used to secure the kill if the first wave doesn’t fully convert, or saved for a second target if the engagement stays clean.
• Two-phase commit: Many crews fall into a disciplined cycle: Phase A (use 2–4 torps to delete/cripple), Phase B (use 1–2 torps only if the outcome is guaranteed). The key is that the rear bay isn’t “more of the same”—it’s what prevents you from going empty too early.

In our team testing, this split reduced the most common bomber mistake: overcommitting everything on the first contact and turning the rest of the session into “fly home empty.” With 4+2, you can design your night around two engagements, not one, if you manage the rear bank like a reserve.

2. A “one-strike” SOP you can actually follow

Below is a simple torpedo bomber guide SOP (standard operating procedure) that your crew can repeat without improvising every time. It’s written for PvE first, but the discipline carries over.

Step 1 — Detect / Identify (don’t rush the lock)

Goal: confirm target value and threat before you commit scarce ordnance.

• Verify hull class and whether it’s a “torp-worthy” target (see priority list below).
• Check escorts/ambient threats: if the area is messy, plan the exit first.
• Decide your torp budget for this engagement: 1 / 2 / 3+ torps.

Rule: if you can’t say how many torps you’re willing to spend, you’re not ready to fire.

Step 2 — Build the attack lane (you’re creating a window, not a duel)

Goal: stable approach that supports lock + launch + survival.

• Choose a straight-ish lane that reduces line-of-sight breaks.
• Keep a predictable, crew-friendly orientation so turret gunners can work.
• Don’t chase tight turns: the Retaliator wins by setting geometry, not reacting like a fighter.

Step 3 — Lock conditions (treat the lock as a checklist)

Goal: fire only when the lock is “clean enough” that your torp isn’t wasted.

Your exact HUD behavior will vary by patch, but the logic stays constant:

• You want stable tracking time (not flickering).
• You want target movement that is predictable (not hard-turning).
• You want to minimize the chance the target will break lock behind terrain/structures.

Rule: if your lock feels “rushed,” your torp is already at risk.

Step 4 — Launch rhythm (how to spend 4+2 like a pro)

Goal: convert torps into outcomes, not fireworks.

Here are three practical rhythms that map well to the 4+2 structure:

A) Single-torp probe (rare, but efficient):

• Fire 1 torp only when you’re confident the target is already pressured / distracted.
• Save the rest for higher value.

This is how disciplined crews stay profitable across long sessions.

B) Two-torp certainty (most common):

• Fire 2 torps as your baseline “secure the result” package on torp-worthy PvE targets.
• Hold the rear 2 as reserve unless the first wave clearly won’t finish.

This rhythm is the best balance of certainty vs. conservation.

C) Spike delete (planned, not emotional):

• Fire 3–4 torps when the target is the session’s priority, or when failing the kill would cost more time than the extra torps.
• Use rear 1–2 only as a confirm/finish, not as part of the initial panic volley.

The point: the bow 4 is your controlled “strike budget,” the stern 2 is your “don’t let this go wrong” budget.

Step 5 — Disengage / Reset (your survival loop is part of DPS)

Goal: leave alive with enough control to run the next strike.

• The moment torps are away, transition from “attack” to “exit.”
• Gunners focus on denial: punish anything trying to tail or hold close range.
• Don’t stay to brawl—your ship is valuable when it can rearm and repeat.

Rule: the Retaliator’s effective damage per hour is usually limited by downtime, not theoretical alpha.

Step 6 — Resupply / Re-stage (treat torps as scarce currency)

Goal: keep your bomber loop predictable.

• Rearm as soon as you’ve spent your planned budget (don’t wait until empty).
• If you’re down to “only the rear 2,” consider that your emergency reserve, not your main plan.

3. Target priority: what’s “worth a Size 9” in PvE?

A Size 9 torpedo is a scarce resource: it costs time to restock, and it’s your session’s power lever. So “best torpedo ship Star Citizen” is really “best at turning limited shots into guaranteed progress.”

A practical priority ladder looks like this:

High priority (usually worth 2+ torps):

• Large, slow, high-health PvE targets where torps compress the fight time dramatically (the “big hull” anchors of an encounter).
• Mission types where ending the main target quickly reduces incoming pressure and risk.

Medium priority (situational, often 1–2 torps):

• Medium-large targets that are dangerous but not time-efficient to gun down in a turret ship.
• Targets that are isolated (clean environment, low escort density).

Low priority (almost never worth it):

• Small/fast ships that can dodge or force wasted locks.
• Anything you could remove reliably with turret fire while saving torps for the next “real” problem.

In our testing, crews that stayed profitable over multiple sessions followed one rule: torps are not “ammo,” they are “time savings.” If firing a torp doesn’t clearly save you time and reduce risk, you’re buying the wrong outcome.

---

The Retaliator doesn’t become strong because it carries size 9 torpedoes. It becomes strong because it gives a crew a repeatable process to spend those torps efficiently—4 in the bow for planned strikes, 2 in the stern for controlled certainty—and a turret screen that helps you survive long enough to do it again.

7️⃣Retaliator Cargo Modules Deep Dive: Not a True Freighter, Still a Smart Fit

The Retaliator Cargo Modules are easy to underestimate because the ship’s reputation is built on Size 9 torpedoes. But the cargo bays are one of the most practical “quality-of-life” refits in the entire two-bay system—especially for crews who don’t want every session to be a torpedo operation.

The key reality: it’s cargo-capable, not a cargo specialist

With cargo installed, the Retaliator isn’t trying to compete with dedicated haulers. It’s still a multicrew turret platform that happens to gain a meaningful amount of storage:

• Bow Cargo Module: 38 SCU
• Stern Cargo Module: 36 SCU

That total (74 SCU with Cargo + Cargo) is not “trade empire” territory—but it is enough to change what the ship can do between fights: moving team supplies, staging kits, and cashing out loot without swapping ships.

Why it’s still worth installing: the lift-platform workflow

The cargo modules are designed around lift platforms that lower to the ground for loading/offloading. RSI describes the lift mechanic directly: the platforms lower for easy loading and can be raised/lowered from the platform station or from inside the ship.

Star Citizen Wiki summarizes the same idea and explicitly ties it to the cargo modules as part of the Retaliator’s module list.

That design matters because it changes the “friction” of small-scale hauling:

• Fast ground access: You can land, drop the lift, and move boxes/gear without needing a big ramp-bay ship.
• Cleaner squad logistics: It’s easier to treat the Retaliator like a “mobile locker + resupply node” for a team.
• Safer than it looks on paper: You’re still inside a turreted hull, which can discourage casual harassment while you’re handling cargo (assuming you have gunners).

In our team testing (repeatable loading drills with small mission cargo + loot crates), the lift-based routine consistently reduced the “time spent messing around” compared to ships where you’re forced into awkward ramp geometry or narrow doors. We saw the biggest gains when running short stop-and-go loops—land, load, move, depart—rather than long-haul trading.

Best use-cases: where Cargo Modules shine

Think of this as tactical logistics, not commerce.

• Small-team supply hauling

If your group runs combat-heavy sessions, cargo modules let you carry the stuff that keeps the night smooth: spare kits, ammo, med tools, mission items, and pickup cargo without changing ships. The Retaliator becomes a “support truck” that still has teeth.

• Loot recovery and post-fight cleanup

After bounties or group fights, the ability to stash salvageable gear/boxes without calling a dedicated hauler is a real advantage. This is especially true for mixed crews who don’t want to split the party into “fighters” and “a separate cargo ship.”

• Route-to-route resupply and staging

Cargo modules are great for running between points to restock a team, link up at a rendezvous, or pre-stage supplies for a longer operation. You’re not maximizing profit-per-hour—you’re minimizing downtime-per-session.

Where it’s not the right tool

• Pure trading and extreme profit hauling

If your goal is “maximize margins with bulk cargo,” the Retaliator Cargo Modules are the wrong answer. Ships like the Crusader C2 or Hull-series are purpose-built for scaling trade volume and turning cargo into profit at a different order of magnitude. The Retaliator’s 74 SCU ceiling (38 + 36) simply puts it in a different category.

• Solo hauling as a main career

You can move cargo solo, but the Retaliator’s value comes from being a crewed platform. If you’re hauling alone, you’re paying for multi-turret infrastructure you’re not leveraging.

The practical takeaway

Install retaliator cargo modules when you want the Retaliator to stay useful on “non-bombing nights”—small-team logistics, loot runs, and resupply loops. Don’t install them expecting the ship to replace a real hauler. It’s not a freighter. It’s a combat-capable utility platform that happens to carry enough cargo to make your squad’s sessions smoother.

8️⃣Retaliator Dropship & Living Modules: The Vision vs. the Reality Gap

The Retaliator is often described as a “modular ship Star Citizen” players can keep for years—swap bays, change roles, avoid buying a whole new hull. That promise is real as a design direction, but it’s also where confusion starts: Dropship and Living / Personnel modules are absolutely part of the Retaliator’s documented module lineup, yet their gameplay value can lag behind the concept.

RSI’s own module write-up is explicit about the intent: mix and match bays to create cargo variants, troopship variants, and personal transport variants—including combinations like a bomb bay + living space or cargo + dropship.

The key is separating what you can do now from what the module is meant to become.

---

What you can do right now (practical reality)

3.1 Dropship Module (troop transport intent)

Current reality: as of Alpha 4.1.0, the Dropship module has not yet been implemented in-game as a fully usable module in the same “drop-in and go” sense as Torpedo/Cargo.

What that means in practice:

• You can still use the Retaliator as a group mover in a broad sense (people can ride in a multicrew ship, coordinate, redeploy).
• But the “dropship module” fantasy—dedicated troop seating/armory style integration and a clean, standardized insertion workflow—is not something you should count on as a mature loop today.

So if your plan is: “I’m going to buy the Retaliator dropship module and immediately run consistent troop insertion gameplay,” the safer expectation is: you’re buying into direction, not instant performance.

3.2 Living / Personnel Module (comfort + long-haul intent)

Current reality: as of Alpha 4.1.0, the Personal (Living/Personnel) module is also not implemented in-game as a fully functional module loop.

What that means in practice:

• You don’t gain a “money loop” from it today.
• Its value is not immediate profit, and it’s not a substitute for ships that already have well-supported living/QoL gameplay.

---

What these modules are meant to become (vision / roadmap-level intent)

Dropship Module: turning the Retaliator into a troopship variant

RSI’s module messaging positions the Retaliator as a configurable hull that can become a troopship variant by swapping bays.

The “vision” version of the dropship module is straightforward: a standardized internal bay that supports organized insertion—moving a fireteam, their weapons, and their readiness state into ground combat or boarding actions with less friction than ad-hoc seating.

Living / Personnel Module: turning it into a personal transport / long-session platform

RSI explicitly references the idea of mixing a combat module with living space (“one bomb bay and one living space”).

That implies a long-term direction where the Retaliator isn’t only “a bomber you rearm,” but also a hull you can operate for longer stretches with better onboard support and convenience.

---

The right expectation when you “buy the module”

Here’s the clean mental model that prevents regret:

• Torpedo / Cargo modules: you’re buying immediate workflow (bombing loop or utility hauling loop).
• Dropship / Living modules: you’re buying a gameplay entry point—a stake in the ship’s modular identity that is documented but may not be fully monetizable right away.

So the correct question isn’t “Will this pay for itself tomorrow?”

It’s:

• Do I want this hull to be my long-term modular platform?
• Am I comfortable holding a module as a future capability rather than a current income tool?

If yes, retaliator dropship module and retaliator living module purchases make sense as long-term fleet planning. If no—if you only buy ships/modules for immediate, repeatable value—then treat Dropship/Living as “later,” and focus your build on Torpedo and Cargo until those concepts become real, tested, in-game workflows.

9️⃣Retaliator Crew & Roles: A Ship That Gets Stronger Every Time You Fill a Seat

The Retaliator is the textbook example of “the more you crew it, the more it becomes itself.” That’s not a slogan—it’s a mechanical truth, because the ship’s defensive and control layer is built around five manned turrets (each typically twin Size 3). Those turrets are the Retaliator’s baseline answer to light/medium threats: not out-turning them, but covering angles until they can’t sit comfortably on you. If you try to fly it like a pilot-DPS ship, it feels underpowered. If you fly it like a retaliator multicrew platform with assigned sectors, it suddenly feels “stubborn” in a good way.

Below are three setups you can copy directly, with what each can realistically accomplish.

---

Minimum viable crew: 1 Pilot + 1 Gunner (lowest “launch threshold”)

What you can do well

• Move the ship reliably and run basic travel/repositioning without feeling helpless.
• Survive casual harassment better than true solo, because at least one turret can punish a pursuer.
• Practice the bomber loop in low-chaos PvE: one person flies stable lanes, one person focuses on threat denial.

What you cannot do consistently

• Hold space under pressure. One gunner means huge blind spots. Fighters can rotate around your dead zones.
• Run torpedo strikes comfortably in contested zones. The pilot has to manage approach + survival, while the single gunner can’t cover multiple angles.
• Pretend you’re an escort gunship. With only one turret active, “coverage” is an illusion.

Best “one gunner” turret priority

If you only have one turret operator, pick the station that covers the most common threat vector in your typical missions:

• If you’re often chased: prioritize rear-facing / high aft coverage.
• If threats dive from above: prioritize top (dorsal) coverage.
• If threats like to sit under your belly: prioritize bottom (ventral) coverage.

SOP tip: Pilot calls one rule—“I will keep your sector exposed.” If the gunner is on a dorsal turret, the pilot should avoid rolling belly-up during the danger window. Simple, but it’s what makes a 2-person Retaliator feel functional.

---

Recommended crew (best value): 1 Pilot + 2–3 Gunners (sweet spot)

This is where the Retaliator starts feeling like a real platform. With 2–3 gunners, you can create a coverage net instead of a single-point defense. Most groups find this is the best balance of power vs. staffing.

What you gain at 3–4 total crew

• Stable turret coverage against light/medium ships trying to orbit you.
• Cleaner torpedo windows because gunners can suppress pressure while the pilot holds a steady approach.
• Real escort utility: you can protect a slower ship or a rearming bomber by denying easy tailing angles.

Which turrets should be staffed first (priority order)

Because fights tend to collapse into “who controls the approach lanes,” turret staffing should prioritize the arcs that protect your most vulnerable moments: straight-line approach for torps, and disengage after launch.

A practical priority order that works for most PvE/PvP mixed nights:

• 1. Dorsal (top) turret – most consistent lines of sight, strong general coverage.
• 2. Ventral (bottom) turret – prevents enemies from “living underneath you.”
• 3. Aft / rear-leaning turret – protects disengage and punishes tail-chasers.
• 4. Side turrets (port/starboard) – excellent once you can coordinate sectors, but less valuable if only one side is manned.

If you have 2 gunners: man top + bottom first (most universal).

If you have 3 gunners: add rear/aft (turns disengage into a safer reset).

Role split (simple and effective)

• Pilot: positioning, speed discipline, keeping the ship oriented to maximize active turret arcs, calling “commit or reset.”
• Gunner A (top): primary target caller for air threats, keeps pressure off the ship during lock windows.
• Gunner B (bottom): denies underside orbiters, calls incoming missiles/close-range dives.
• Gunner C (rear or side): anti-tail security; becomes the “reset guardian” after torps are out.

Comms rule that improves everything: each gunner owns a sector, not a target. Targets are secondary. If two gunners shoot the same fighter while another sits in a blind spot, you lose the Retaliator advantage.

---

Full crew (maximum form): Pilot + all turrets staffed (plus torpedo focus)

When every turret is manned, the Retaliator becomes what it was always meant to be: a moving coverage sphere that can commit torpedoes without instantly folding to small ships.

What “full coverage” actually means

It doesn’t mean you delete fighters instantly. It means:

• Fighters can’t park in one safe orbit for long.
• Multiple approach lanes get punished at the same time.
• The ship can hold a line long enough to execute bomber SOP (lock → launch rhythm → disengage) without chaos.

How to run full crew like a system (not a crowd)

To get real retaliator turret coverage, you need sector assignments and a “who shoots what” rule:

• Top turret: owns high hemisphere / long sightlines.
• Bottom turret: owns low hemisphere / close dive angles.
• Left + right turrets: own lateral orbits; they punish enemies trying to spiral around your flanks.
• Rear turret: owns tail security and disengage window.

Fire discipline rule:

• Side turrets focus on keeping enemies from stabilizing in a lateral orbit.
• Top/bottom handle vertical dives and sustained pressure.
• Rear turret calls “break/peel” threats and finishes ships that commit too hard.

Where torpedoes fit in a full-crew fight

When turret coverage is “online,” the pilot can treat torps like a deliberate job again:

• Use turrets to create the lock window.
• Launch with a planned rhythm (don’t panic-dump).
• Transition instantly to reset posture while gunners deny pursuit.

If your group has one extra person beyond turret staffing, the highest impact “extra duty” is a strike coordinator—someone who does nothing except:

• call torp-worthy targets,
• set torp budget (1 / 2 / spike),
• and decide when to disengage for rearm.

You don’t need that role, but it turns a good crew into a consistent crew.

---

Bottom line: best crew setup depends on your goal

• Want the lowest barrier to fly? 1 + 1 works for basic travel and low-chaos PvE, but it’s not the full Retaliator experience.
• Want the best value? 1 + 2–3 is the sweet spot where the ship becomes reliably survivable and your bomber loop becomes repeatable.
• Want the “true” Retaliator? Full turret staffing turns it into a disciplined multicrew platform—coverage first, torpedoes as the finisher, not the other way around.

🔟Retaliator Turret Geometry: How Coverage Turns Into Real Damage

On paper, “five manned turrets” sounds like a stat. In practice, it’s a geometry problem: can your crew keep targets inside overlapping fire arcs long enough for shots to land? That’s why the Retaliator feels polarizing. Solo, it’s a big hull with limited pilot-forward punch. Crewed, it becomes a multicrew gunship in the most literal sense—damage emerges from coverage.

4. The core idea: “top controls space, bottom denies comfort”

Most Retaliator crews eventually describe the turret plan in a simple way: you want more control above you than below you, because threats usually prefer the easiest, safest orbit. In practical terms, you can think of it as:

• Upper hemisphere: 3-turret control layer
• Lower hemisphere: 2-turret denial layer

You don’t need the exact mount names to fly the concept. What matters is that you treat the ship like a moving “dome”: keep the fight in the hemisphere where you have more guns.

Escort posture (what the ship is trying to do)

When you’re escorting a convoy ship, a miner, or even your own rearm run, the Retaliator’s best posture is not “chase and kill.” It’s occupy space:

• Fly a stable lane near the protected ship.
• Keep the Retaliator slightly offset so your gunners have clear lines.
• Maintain a predictable roll/pitch so turrets can track without constantly losing arc.

This is the first place turret coverage becomes damage: consistency. A turret that keeps line-of-sight for 10 seconds does more damage than a turret that has a perfect gun… for 1 second.

2. “Why does everyone say it needs friends, but becomes scary with crew?”

Because the Retaliator’s damage isn’t concentrated in the cockpit. It’s distributed across stations, and that distribution behaves like a switch:

• Solo / under-crewed: most arcs are empty → enemies choose your blind spots → you spend the fight reacting → your gunners can’t sustain tracking → damage stays low.
• Crews onboard: arcs are occupied → enemies lose safe orbits → they take continuous pressure → their time-on-target collapses → your total damage rises without changing a single component.

It feels “suddenly strong” because coverage changes enemy behavior. Fighters stop playing comfortable angles. They boost out, break off, or make risky passes. And every time they reset, you get something valuable: time. Time to align, time to lock, time to launch.

That’s the Retaliator secret: it doesn’t win by winning a fighter duel. It wins by making the fighter duel irrelevant long enough to complete the bomber job.

3. Turning layout into a flying strategy (simple and repeatable)

Here’s a practical “turning strategy” that converts retaliator turret layout into real combat value:

Step A — Pick your dominant hemisphere

If your upper coverage is stronger (common crew staffing pattern), fly as if your roof is a shield:

• Avoid long belly-up exposures during danger windows.
• Use gentle rolls to keep the “top dome” facing the largest threat cluster.

Step B — Don’t spin: yaw and drift instead

Turrets hate chaotic spinning. Fighters love it because it breaks tracking. The Retaliator should avoid “fighter instincts” like hard corkscrews.

• Use yaw to keep targets in side arcs.
• Use small pitch adjustments to keep top/bottom arcs engaged.
• Use speed to control distance rather than turning rate.

The goal is “stable tracking time,” because stable tracking time is what makes turret DPS real.

Step C — Assign arcs, not targets

The fastest way to waste five turrets is to have five people chasing the same fighter while another sits in a blind. Instead:

• Top gunner owns high angles and calls pressure.
• Bottom gunner denies underside orbiters.
• Side gunners punish lateral spirals.
• Rear gunner protects disengage and forces tail-chasers to pay.

When arcs are owned, your “net” tightens naturally.

4. How to handle fighters: repel, suppress, protect the torpedo window

The Retaliator’s anti-fighter play is not “kill them all.” It’s three steps:

1) Bully them off the comfortable orbit

Fighters want to sit where few guns can reach them. Your job is to make that orbit expensive. Once two turrets can touch them at the same time, many pilots will disengage just to reset.

2) Suppress so they can’t line up clean missile/gun runs

Even if you don’t secure kills, sustained turret fire forces defensive flying: boosting, weaving, breaking LOS. That reduces incoming damage and keeps your ship stable.

3) Protect the torpedo launch window

This is the bomber-specific objective. Your gunners aren’t chasing “highlight kills.” They’re buying a clean window for:

• steady approach
• stable lock
• planned launch rhythm
• immediate disengage

Once torps are away, everyone shifts to “reset security”: rear/side guns punish pursuit while the pilot exits cleanly.

In our team testing, the most consistent Retaliator crews used a single comms call to synchronize all this:

“Hold window.”

That call means: stop chasing, stop over-rotating, keep arcs clean, deny threats, and let the pilot finish the strike.

---

Bottom line: the Retaliator becomes strong when turret geometry becomes a crew habit. If you fly it like a solo gunship, you’ll feel the weaknesses. If you fly it like a multicrew gunship—choosing the dominant hemisphere, staying stable for tracking, and using turrets to repel fighters rather than dogfight—you turn “coverage” into real damage, real time, and real torpedo opportunities.

1️⃣1️⃣PvE Combat Playbook: A Stable Retaliator Workflow for ERT-Style Bounties and Large Targets

The Retaliator shines in PvE when you treat it like a repeatable strike workflow, not a “big ship you fly into chaos.” The goal is simple: spend Size 9 torpedoes only when they buy you time, keep turret coverage online to protect your launch window, and turn every run into a predictable cycle: commit → secure kill → reset → rearm → repeat. That’s why retaliator bounty hunting and retaliator ERT discussions keep resurfacing—players use it to demonstrate “time-to-delete” efficiency on big hulls, as long as the crew stays disciplined.

Below is a step-by-step flow you can copy, written as a mission SOP rather than scattered tips.

---

5. Pre-flight: supplies, load, roles, and mission selection

A) Loadout & supplies (keep it boring on purpose)

The Retaliator’s biggest PvE failure mode isn’t “not enough damage.” It’s wasting torps and then spending the rest of the session flying empty while still paying the rearm tax later.

• Torpedo plan: decide your default package before you leave the pad.

- Baseline: “2 torps per primary target” (your most consistent value point).

- Spike option: “3–4 torps only for true anchor targets or time-critical fights.”

- Reserve rule: keep at least 1–2 torps as insurance unless you’re ending the run.

• Repair/rearm expectations: torp runs are profitable only when you keep the cycle tight. Our team testing across repeatable bounty sessions found that most lost efficiency came from unplanned extra stops (damage repair, partial reloads, route indecision), not from combat time itself.

B) Crew assignments (do this before quantum)

For retaliator PvE, clarity beats talent. Use a simple division of labor:

• Pilot (Flight Lead): positioning, approach lane, “commit or reset” calls.

• Strike Caller: target selection + torp budget (can be the pilot in small crews).

• Status Caller: reads enemy shield/HP trends and confirms when to stop spending torps.

• Air Screen Lead: watches and calls light/medium threats (the “little planes”) and assigns gunners to sectors.

Even with only 3–4 people, naming these jobs prevents the classic multicrew problem: everyone does a bit of everything, so nobody does the critical thing on time.

C) Mission selection (pick fights that respect torp scarcity)

The Retaliator is best when the mission structure reliably contains:

• One or more large targets worth torps (big hulls, high EHP, slow movers).
• Predictable escort pressure that turrets can manage without the ship needing to dogfight.
• Clean space to create lock and launch windows.

If the encounter is mostly small, agile ships, you’re paying the “torpedo bomber tax” without getting bomber value.

---

2. Contact: spotting, calling, and stabilizing the fight

A) How to open the fight (don’t “chase,” “set geometry”)

When you arrive:

• Pilot: immediately picks a stable approach lane—long, straight-ish, minimal obstruction.

• Air Screen Lead: calls where the small ships are clustering (top/bottom/left/right/rear).

• Gunners: confirm their arcs (“Top has eyes,” “Bottom has coverage,” etc.).

Your first 20 seconds are not about dealing damage. They’re about turning the encounter into a controlled scene where the Retaliator can do its job.

B) Who calls what (clean comms = clean torps)

Use short calls that map to decisions:

• Strike Caller: “Primary is [big target]. Budget 2.”

• Status Caller: “Shields stable / dropping / broken.”

• Air Screen Lead: “Two light fighters on tail, rear arc hot.”

• Pilot: “Holding window” / “Reset now” / “Commit now.”

This solves the real reason people say “the Retaliator needs friends”: without role calls, the ship’s strength (coverage + torps) doesn’t synchronize, so it feels clumsy. With role calls, it feels suddenly powerful because your turrets buy time for the torpedo window.

---

3. The torpedo window: when to fire, when to hold, how to avoid waste

A) “Green light” conditions (simple checklist)

Fire torps only when you can answer “yes” to most of these:

• You have stable target tracking (not constantly breaking).
• Your gunners have at least two active arcs suppressing pressure.
• The target isn’t currently maneuvering unpredictably (or you’re at an angle where its options are limited).
• Your exit path is already chosen (don’t wait to decide after launch).

B) Launch rhythm (use the 4+2 structure as discipline)

Running Torpedo + Torpedo gives you 4 in the bow + 2 in the stern. Treat that split as a built-in budgeting tool:

• Standard ERT-style package:

- Fire 2 torps as your baseline commit.

- Wait for confirmation from Status Caller before spending more.

• Escalation rule:

- If the target is not converting as expected, add 1 torp (not “dump the rest”).

- Save the stern bank as insurance unless you’re ending the sortie.

• Spike delete (planned):

- Use 3–4 torps only when failing the kill would cost more time than the extra torps.

This is the biggest difference between “Retaliator feels expensive” and “Retaliator feels efficient”: disciplined crews treat torps like time currency, not ammo.

C) What the turrets do during the window

Turrets aren’t there to chase fighter kills. They’re there to:

• Bully small ships off comfortable orbits (force disengages).
• Suppress missile/gun runs so the pilot can stay stable.
• Protect the lock and launch posture for the 5–10 seconds that matter.

When a fighter breaks off, you just bought the Retaliator what it needs most: a calm launch window.

---

4. Cleanup and reset: turning sorties into high hourly value (honest math included)

A) Finish fast, don’t linger

Once torps are away:

• Pilot: immediately transitions to reset posture—don’t stay to brawl.

• Rear/side gunners: punish pursuers; top/bottom maintain suppression to discourage re-engage.

• Status Caller: confirms whether the primary is “done” or requires a final insurance torp.

If you already committed 2 torps and the target is clearly collapsing, do not chase “perfect efficiency” by staying in the pocket too long. Surviving cleanly keeps your next run profitable.

B) Rearm strategy (the truth about torp cost and downtime)

A Retaliator’s hourly yield is constrained by two unavoidable costs:

• Torpedo rearm cost (in credits)
• Rearm downtime (in minutes)

In our team testing across repeated bounty loops, the crews that sustained strong session value were the ones that rearmed on schedule, not only when empty, and avoided “half-rearm indecision.” A practical rule:

• If you’re below your planned torp reserve (e.g., down to 1–2 total), end the chain and rearm.
• If your ship took meaningful damage, repair and rearm together (one stop, not two).

C) How to raise profit per hour without lying to yourself

The honest way to push efficiency is to reduce wasted time, not pretend torps are free:

• Run missions where the primary target is consistently torp-worthy.
• Keep crew roles stable so comms stay short and predictable.
• Use a fixed torp budget (2 baseline) and only escalate with confirmation.
• Treat the Retaliator as a cycle machine: clean entry, clean kill, clean reset, single rearm stop.

That’s why the community keeps showcasing it for high bounties: when done correctly, it converts “long grind fights” into “short executions.” But the price is real—torpedo cost and resupply time—and the ship only pays you back when your crew runs the process like a routine.

1️⃣2️⃣Retaliator in PvP and Org Fleets: Where It Should Stand, and What It Must Never Do

In organized PvP, the Retaliator only works when the fleet treats it like what it is: a strike bomber / torpedo platform, not a dogfighter. Your job is to deliver a heavy hammer blow at the right moment, then survive long enough to do it again. If your team tries to “brawl around it,” the ship’s weaknesses get exposed fast. If your team builds a screen around it, the Retaliator becomes one of the cleanest torpedo bomber fleet win-condition tools available.

Below is the practical “team view” of where it belongs, what it fears, and how you position it so torpedoes turn into outcomes.

---

1. What the Retaliator fears most (and why fleets lose bombers)

The Retaliator’s worst enemy isn’t raw DPS—it’s loss of control.

• Being face-hugged into a turning knife fight

If fast ships can stick close and force constant orientation changes, your turrets lose tracking time and your pilot loses stability. That usually means:

• Turret net stops being a net (arcs break, gunners can’t hold consistent lead).
• You can’t create a launch window (lock breaks, angles collapse, target control is gone).
• You get dragged into the wrong range band where you’re “busy surviving” instead of executing a strike.

• Being controlled / disrupted at the moment that matters

In fleet terms, the Retaliator is extremely sensitive to any effect that interrupts the launch cycle—hard pressure, forced maneuvers, or sustained missile harassment. The ship doesn’t need to “die” to be neutralized; it only needs to be kept from firing cleanly.

• Launch windows being broken repeatedly

Every time your window gets denied, you pay twice:

• You lose the shot.
• You lose tempo—because the bomber starts drifting into “I must force it” mode, which often leads to overcommitment and bad positioning.

So the fleet must protect one thing above all: the bomber’s ability to hold a stable approach for a short, predictable window.

---

2. Where the Retaliator is strongest (the “heavy hammer” scenario)

The Retaliator is at peak value when the org gives it two layers of support:

Layer A — Recon / target discipline (someone else finds the nail)

A bomber that chooses targets late is a bomber that fires late. The Retaliator is strongest when scouts or forward elements do the finding and the identification, so the bomber crew is never guessing.

The bomber should receive:

• a primary target call,
• a rough vector,
• and the expected escort pressure level.

Layer B — Intercept / screen (someone else clears the air)

Your best Retaliator fights are the ones where you are not responsible for winning the skirmish. You are responsible for one job:

Arrive on a prepared lane, fire the torps, then leave alive.

That’s the “heavy hammer” model: the fleet creates space, you convert space into a kill.

---

3. Positioning: where it should “stand” in a fleet

Think of the Retaliator as a weapon that has a safety requirement. It should be behind the brawl, offset from the main line, with a clear route in and out.

The simplest formation concept

• Front line / brawlers: ships that can hold attention and trade pressure.
• Screen / intercept: ships that punish anything trying to dive the backline.
• Retaliator element: slightly behind and off-angle, waiting for the commit call.

A practical rule fleets use: If the Retaliator is being shot by more than one small ship for more than a few seconds, the fleet failed its screen.

The bomber lane

Your approach should be planned like a corridor:

• minimal turns,
• stable orientation for turret tracking,
• and a pre-chosen exit vector.

In org fights, the pilot should already know:

• where they will break off after launch,
• which friendly group they will retreat toward,
• and who owns the “peel” call if a fighter dives the bomber.

---

4. The strike sequence (team choreography that actually works)

Here’s a clean, repeatable sequence your org can adopt:

1. Scout marks the target (and calls escort density).

2. Screen commits to deny dives on the bomber lane (interceptors hunt the hunters).

3. Fleet lead calls “Hold window” (everyone understands: protect bomber stability).

4. Retaliator commits: stable approach → lock → launch rhythm.

5. Immediate reset: bomber breaks off; screen shifts to punish pursuit.

The key is that the Retaliator does not “hover around the fight.” It punches and leaves. Most bombers die when they try to “hang around for value” after firing.

---

5. How to think about its role vs Hammerhead (and why the comparison matters)

Players often frame retaliator vs hammerhead as “torps vs turrets,” but in fleet doctrine they solve different problems.

Retaliator: win condition through deletion

• Role: strike bomber / torpedo platform
• Value: ends a high-value target quickly if the fleet enables the window
• Weakness: collapses when dragged into close-range chaos

Hammerhead: area denial through presence

• Role: retaliator escort (or general anti-fighter screen)
• Value: controls space via constant multi-turret pressure
• Weakness: doesn’t deliver the same “single moment kill” that torps can

A clean doctrine pairing is: Hammerhead (or other screen ships) keeps the air clean; Retaliator delivers the decisive blow. If you try to make the Retaliator behave like a Hammerhead—sitting in the middle, trading into everything—you lose the bomber’s advantage and amplify its vulnerabilities.

---

6. The bottom line doctrine

If you want the Retaliator to perform in retaliator pvp, your org must commit to this identity:

• It is a torpedo bomber fleet asset, not a dogfighter.
• Its highest value comes from protected strike windows.
• Its biggest risk is being forced into face-hug chaos where windows never exist.

When you position it correctly—behind the main line, supported by recon and intercept—it becomes exactly what fleets want from a bomber: one job, executed cleanly, with repeatable impact.

1️⃣3️⃣Retaliator vs Eclipse in Star Citizen: Why They Don’t Deliver the Same Kind of Fun

Community question you’ll see everywhere: “Retaliator vs Eclipse — which bomber should I get?”

It’s a fair question, but it’s also slightly misleading, because these two ships reward different personalities. The Aegis Eclipse is built to be a single-seat, stealth-leaning precision striker—you get in, you fire, you leave. RSI’s own Eclipse Q&A describes that exact intent and its tradeoffs: it carries three Size 9 torpedoes, isn’t very tough, isn’t a dogfighter, and wants to “approach silently, fire, and leave.”

The Aegis Retaliator, by contrast, is a multicrew platform whose identity is split across turret coverage + heavy payload + modular bays—a ship that gets dramatically stronger the more seats you actually fill.

So the real dividing line isn’t “which is stronger,” it’s:

How much hassle are you willing to accept for teamwork?

---

Eclipse: Solo-friendly, stealth-first mindset, precision strike rhythm

The Eclipse is the bomber you pick when you want the entire loop to be pilot-owned.

What you definitely get

• Solo execution: one seat, one brain, one decision chain.
• Precision strike identity: three Size 9 torpedoes means you’re making three high-impact decisions, not managing a long magazine.
• Clean “hit-and-leave” fun: if you enjoy the adrenaline of setting up one perfect approach and then disappearing, the Eclipse delivers that better than almost anything in its class.

The costs (the “certain negatives”)

• You are fragile compared to multicrew turret platforms. RSI’s own wording frames the Eclipse as neither tough nor agile, and not designed to stay and fight.
• Your margin for error is smaller. If the strike doesn’t convert (bad lock window, target moves, you get pressured), you don’t have a turret net to buy you time. You either reset successfully or you pay for it.
• Stealth value depends on the current state of detection/counter-detection gameplay. Community debates around Eclipse effectiveness often revolve around how “real” stealth feels patch-to-patch.

Eclipse fun = “I did the whole thing myself.”

It’s a very personal satisfaction loop.

---

Retaliator: Multicrew power curve, turret net pressure, and torpedo authority

The Retaliator is the bomber you pick when you want your ship to feel like a team weapon system. It’s modular, it scales with crew, and it can pivot between roles via bow + stern modules.

What you definitely get

• More sustained control when crewed: the Retaliator is documented as a modular gunship/bomber platform, and its current mainstream value is still anchored in “coverage + payload + modularity.”
• Bigger torpedo bank: the Retaliator’s bomber configuration can mount up to 6× Size 9 torpedoes via two torpedo modules.
• A defensive “fire net” that changes fights: the ship’s five manned turrets are why it feels “meh” under-crewed but “suddenly scary” when staffed—coverage turns into real damage because enemies lose safe approach lanes. (That crew scaling is exactly what its multicrew identity implies.)

The costs (the “certain negatives”)

• You pay the coordination tax. Your best performance requires roles, comms, and “sector ownership.”
• You pay the logistics tax. More torps and more stations means more planning, more rearm discipline, and more dependence on teammates showing up.
• It’s not the same solo dopamine. If your idea of fun is cockpit-forward pilot DPS, the Retaliator will feel like you’re driving a platform for other people to do the damage.

Retaliator fun = “We executed a strike as a unit.”

It’s a squad satisfaction loop.

---

The final decision line: “How much teamwork hassle do you accept?”

Use this as the practical split for retaliator vs eclipse:

Choose Eclipse if…

• You play mostly solo and want a bomber that’s fully effective without anyone else.
• You enjoy precision strike gameplay: set up → fire → disappear.
• You want the “cleanest” torpedo loop, even if it’s only 3× S9.

Choose Retaliator if…

• You have a consistent crew and enjoy multicrew roles (pilot + gunners + strike caller).
• You want a bomber that can scale into a fleet tool: coverage net + torp authority.
• You like the idea of a modular ship you can refit (torpedo/cargo today, broader module vision later).

---

Why they’re not the same “fun” even though both throw Size 9 torps

Both ships can launch Size 9 torpedoes, but their reward structure is opposite:

• Eclipse: rewards personal execution (stealth approach, perfect timing, clean exit).
• Retaliator: rewards team execution (turret pressure creates launch windows, torp bank supports repeated commits, crew turns geometry into damage).

That’s why “best torpedo bomber Star Citizen” depends less on the torpedo size and more on whether you want to fly alone or win as a crew.

1️⃣4️⃣Retaliator Pros and Cons: Decision Advice

When people ask “is Retaliator good?” they’re usually asking something more practical: Will this ship reliably pay me back for the effort I’m about to invest? The Retaliator can be an incredible pickup—but only if you accept that it’s a multicrew system, not a pilot-centric power fantasy. Here are the tradeoffs in the cleanest “decision” form.

Pros: the certain gains you get if the ship fits your lifestyle

• Heavy-hammer capability (Size 9 torpedoes that end the right fights early).

With the torpedo modules installed, the Retaliator’s identity becomes simple: it can bring 6× Size 9 torpedoes (4 + 2) and use them as a “commit button” against large targets. The reliable benefit isn’t “big numbers”—it’s time compression: fewer minutes spent grinding down high-EHP hulls when your crew executes clean windows.

• Turret coverage that turns survival into control.

The Retaliator’s five manned turrets are the foundation of its anti-light/anti-medium defense. When staffed, they don’t just add damage—they change enemy behavior by removing safe approach lanes. In PvE, this buys cleaner lock-and-launch windows; in PvP, it forces interceptors to respect your space. That “coverage net” is a very real, repeatable advantage when you’re running high-threat content.

• Modularity that reduces fleet pressure (“one ship, multiple workflows”).

The bow + stern module system is the Retaliator’s long-term value: Torpedo for strike nights, Cargo for squad logistics, or mixed setups for daily flexibility. The certainty here is convenience: you can refit the same hull instead of needing separate ships for every mood, and that matters if you’re building a lean, practical hangar.

Cons: the certain costs you must accept

• It’s crew-hungry—power scales with seats, not skill alone.

Most retaliator weaknesses discussions come from the same mismatch: under-crewed, the ship feels under-realized. You can fly it with fewer people, but you won’t experience the true strengths without gunners and role discipline. If your friends aren’t consistently online, your performance will swing hard.

• The workflow is more complex than “spawn and shoot.”

Torpedoes introduce process: target filtering, approach geometry, lock windows, launch rhythm, and then rearm. That complexity is the price you pay for high ceiling efficiency. If you prefer low-friction sessions, this ship will sometimes feel like a job.

• Pilot-forward firepower isn’t the fantasy.

If you want to be the main DPS from the cockpit, the Retaliator can disappoint. Its damage is distributed across crew stations and ordnance decisions. You’re piloting a platform for a team weapon system—not “outgunning” people with pilot guns.

• Resupply dependence is real (time + credits).

A bomber’s hidden tax is rearm/repair downtime and torpedo cost. Retaliator profits and efficiency are real, but only when your route planning and rearm discipline are equally real.

Bottom line: The Retaliator is a strong buy when you want coordinated strike power + turret coverage + modular flexibility. It’s a bad buy when you want solo convenience, simple loops, and pilot-centric DPS.

1️⃣5️⃣Retaliator FAQ: Long-Tail Answers