.com.unity Forums - New Mod: The Art of War Mod

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - New Mod: The Art of War Mod (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=5831)

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Quote:

Originally posted by geoschmo:
More details to follow. If you have any suggestions by all means feel free. I wont promise I will use them, but I will listen.

Geoschmo

Well, if you'd like, I'll gladly write up a mQNP mount package, if you want to use that system for movement (yes, this is essentially a shameless plug for my idea, heh). Obviously you'd have to let me know if you plan to change any ship sizes, and, let me know what sort of WNP mass:propulsion ratio you might want.

I also suggest looking at the mount ideas in Deathstalker's mount mod, many of them are IMO quite fun.

Quote:

From later int eh thread, also posted by Geo
What I have planed, and this may end up getting modified or scrapped altogether, is a system similer to what was used for SEIII. As the ships get larger, the Engines per move goes up, but not as quickly as with QNP. And engines will always have one standard movemnet point, but with the higher level ones getting the bonus movement as is the current stock system. My idea is that the escort with level 1 engines to go a speed of 6 has 6 engines, and has 40% of it's mass dedicated to engines. That's percentage for a movement of 6 I want to remain steady as the ships get larger.

And, what's better, mQNP can do this.

The concept is, each engine produces an increasing numbr of movement points (for my own Exodus mod, I'm planning on 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, for each successive level of propulsion). No engine produces bonus movement points.

You then decide what % of a ships mass will be needed to produce that speed form a single engine; with the engine component itself godawfully huge (Exodus will have engines massing 1,000kT each!), you then use MOUNTS to bring the final engine size down to what a given ship size needs to have.

For example, if you chose 10%, and used 1,000kT engiens ... a 200kT Frigate would use a mount that reducesthe engine size, cost, supplies used, and so on ... by 98%. The mount would specify 200kT as both the maximum AND minimum size of ship that could utilise that mount; each ship size would therefor have it's very own mount for engines.

The only trick is, the beginning escort would need to be reduced to 100kT in size, as I don't believe mounts can use fractional % reductions ...

Also, you can have multiple mounts -- an armored Version, or a normal Version. Each variation of engine you want to model with a mount, simply requires another "Set" of engine mounts. For example, taken from Exodus:

(Note, the Comp Family entry is blank as I haven't yet assigned specific family numbers to the various engine types).

A normal engine mount, intended for the 100kT Escort hull:
<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Long Name := A Series Engine Mount
Short Name := A Series
Description := Engine mount for 100kT hulls
Code := A
Cost Percent := 1
Tonnage Percent := 1
Tonnage Structure Percent := 1
Damage Percent := 0
Supply Percent := 1
Range Modifier := 0
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 0
Vehicle Size Minimum := 100
Vehicle Size Maximum := 100
Comp Family Requirement :=
Weapon Type Requirement := none
Vehicle Type := Ship</pre><hr /></blockquote>An armored mount, intended for the same hull:
<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Long Name := Armored A Series Engine Mount
Short Name := Armored A Series
Description := Armored Engine mount for 100kT hulls; +100% cost/structure.
Code := ArA
Cost Percent := 2
Tonnage Percent := 1
Tonnage Structure Percent := 2
Damage Percent := 0
Supply Percent := 1
Range Modifier := 0
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 0
Vehicle Size Minimum := 100
Vehicle Size Maximum := 100
Comp Family Requirement :=
Weapon Type Requirement := none
Vehicle Type := Ship</pre><hr /></blockquote>That shows the smallest mount available (resulting in 10kT engines, so engines in use at the game's start will be a familiar size to SE4 players ... as the ships get bigger, the engines get bigger but the speeds remain the same).

At the other end of the scale are the M-class engines:
<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Long Name := M Series Engine Mount
Short Name := M Series
Description := Engine mount for 2500kT hulls
Code := M
Cost Percent := 25
Tonnage Percent := 25
Tonnage Structure Percent := 25
Damage Percent := 0
Supply Percent := 25
Range Modifier := 0
Weapon To Hit Modifier := 0
Vehicle Size Minimum := 2500
Vehicle Size Maximum := 2500
Comp Family Requirement :=
Weapon Type Requirement := none
Vehicle Type := Ship</pre><hr /></blockquote>Now you might wonder why M-Class engiens don't simply form the basic size; the intent is to pretty much force players to use the mounts, either through sheer unusable size (originally, Exodus was to use 4,000kT engines, which would NEVER fit un-mounted, in any mobile hull), or through costliness.

Now, the thing is (and thanks for the idea), one can now make an armor component that is also a 0-movement ENGINE. It can have -both- properties, serving as normal armor, and as an engine, to absorb engine-destroying weapons fire (call it Polarised Armor or whatever). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif No move-bonus conflicts whatsoever, but still the "feel" of QNP-style movement ... with minimal player installing-gobs-of-engines just to move speed 1 (P&N's Battlemoons are -annoying- ... 30+ engines for speed 1 ... sheesh!).

Say the word, give me a list of ship sizes and mass ratios, I'll write up similar style mounts for you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Quote:

Posted yet LATER in the thread, still by Geo:
I will have to work on that. Perhaps the master comp will have tech reqs in computers and ship construction, and the higher levels of ships construciton, you will get a master comp with a better maint reduction. Keep it equal to the same level of engineering section. That could work. Of course then you'd have people using master computers on small ships and getting free maint. Maybe I don't want to do that afterall.

Or, a parallel to the Master Computer -- "Automated Maintenance System" or "Automated Engineering" ... no control-component abilities, but a maintenance reduction, based on similar techs to the Master Computer ... ?

[EDIT]
Had some more to put in, andonly now realised how old the thread is, and that Dumbluck is looking to resurrect it. Oh well, the offer still stands. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
[/EDIT]

[ November 03, 2002, 11:13: Message edited by: Pax ]

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Yes, I would be interested (that's just less work for me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ), but I am just starting and so haven't gotten any kind of firm #'s yet... I'll let ya know.

[ November 03, 2002, 10:43: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Good luck Dumbluck, I really like the idea of this mod. Hope you can get it of the ground. If you need any help with pictures or numbercrunching, give me yell.

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Dumluck, If you scroll back through this thread, I always posted the current Version of what ever I had done. I haven't touched it in quite a while. Feel free to do whatever you want with it. I obviously will never get around to it.

Geoschmo

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Dumbluck, I am indeeeed willing to take on the hull/propulsion work; I've had a few more ideas, in fact.

I've been thinking of the ship sizes; I think dropping the 150kT hull off the bottomof the scale, and shifting every military ship-hull name] and image one step "up" woudl work nicely. Thus, you would have:

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">200kT ... Escort; each engine 20kT
300kT ... Frigate; each engine 30kT
400kT ... Destroyer; each engine 40kT
500kT ... Light Cruiser; each engine 50kT
600kT ... Cruiser; each engine 60kT
800kT ... Battlecruiser; each engine 80kT
1000kT ... Battleship; each engine 100kT
1600kT ... Dreadnought; each engine 150kT</pre><hr /></blockquote>(the 1600kT size for the dreadnought is for mQNP purposes, see below)

Alternately, what about shifting them like so:

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">(Light ships; +100kT per increase)
200kT ... Escort; each engine 20kT
300kT ... Frigate; each engine 30kT
400kT ... Destroyer; each engie 40kT

(Medium ships; +200kT per increase)
600kT ... Light Cruiser; each engine 60kT
800kT ... Cruiser; each engine 80kT
1000kT ... Battlecruiser; each engine 100kT

(Heavy ships; +400kT per increase)
1400kT ... Battleship; each engine 140kT
1800kT ... Dreadnought; each engine 180kT</pre><hr /></blockquote>The second one allows for roughly the same range of sizes (only +300kT at the highest end). either one would allow for a 2000kT base engine size, preventing use of un-mounted engines entirely (making the mQNP usage "idiot-proof"). Just divide the tonnage of each ship hull by 200, and you would have the size/cost % for each engine, from 1% for the Escort, up to 8% or 9% for the Dreadnought (depending on which size set you wanted).

Designing an escort for early scouting, presuming most other components remained Stock SE4-ish, would give us a 200kT hull. Bridge, LS, Crew, that's 30kT. 5 engines (the max) is 100kT more, total of 130kT. If Supply Bays come in 10kT increments, there's now room for 7 of them -- or 4 of them, and an early APB for dealing with other hostile scouts; in either case, teh supply capacity woudl be the same as 3.5 or 2 current supply bays.

Currently, 6 engines, bridge, quarters, life support, and three supply containers makes a 150kT escort; one less supply bay allows mounting a meson bLaster.

So the two would be reasonably comparable, IMO.

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

For pictures, I've got the imagemod. For the numbercrunching, I'll let you know. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Pax:I like the second Version of your ship sizes. But what about the baseship/worldship/whatever the proper name for it is (I never use em...)
Edit: PS. I am planning on stealing your idea for engine tech you described to me, if you don't mind... And I'm planning on stealing a lot of stuff from SJ, too... If he doesn't mind, of coarse...

And Pax, did you extend your engine mounts down into the fighters, too?

second edit: I should have read your post more closely. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

[ November 04, 2002, 10:32: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Geo: I could only find one Version listed in this thread: AoW Beta Version .70. Is that the most current Version?

Here is a { link } to that Version...

[ November 04, 2002, 09:43: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Ok. Here's my first real contribution to this mod. Tell me what you think. I'm expanding on Geo's idea of a maintenance reducing component, called Engineering. First off, I must admit that I didn't like his engineering replacing Life support; I thought it fit much better as a Crew Quarter. Yes, I know, it makes no difference to the program. But I'm just picky that way. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Anyway, his setup was that research into Ship construction gave Engineering components with progressively higher maintenance reductions. But what if instead, hulls get progressively worse Maint. penalties, in 10% increments, starting with the escort. Then, by researching Ship Construction, maintenence reduction components become available (1 per level). Each component gives a 10% reduction, and should be about 5kt. Make them count as crew quarters, and limited to 1 per ship. There are 9 levels of ship const., so 9 components are needed.

So, an escort gets a 10% Maintenance penalty, but also needs 2 CQ. (1 regular CQ (10kt) + 1 maint. reducer(5kt and 10%maint. Reduction), both available from the start.) A frigate gets a 20% penalty, but needs 3CQ (1 regular and 2 maint.reducers). A Destroyer gets a 30% penalty, and needs 4 CQ (1 normal, 3 special). Etc. Etc. Etc.

This also gives the benefit that ships smaller than the currently largest available get an additional 10% maint. reduction by replacing the regular CQ with a maint. reducing comp.! And there is the added benefit that there is no longer that hump at the L.Cruiser/Cruiser switchover...

Names for maintenance reducers:

Aux. Bridge ((available with Computers 1 and ShipCon 3) acts as bridge if bridge is destroyed, reduced to 5kt.
Engineering Department
Crew Mess
Officer's Mess
First Aid Station (available with biology + ship const. )
Maintenance Access Tube
Recreation room (available with Psychology + ship const.)
Small arms locker (available with AdvMilSci + ship const 6.) (grants small Boarding Party defense)
Automated Repair Drone (available with Repair 3 + ship const. 7)(repairs 1 per turn)

Of coarse, now I have to figure out how all the other ships (Lrg Transport, Starbase, Heavy Carrier, etc.) fit into all this... Any Ideas? Also, if you have any suggestions about crossover maint. reducers, let me know. It is important, however, that we have not many more than 9 components total (a few extra wouldn't hurt, though). I don't want any maintenance free battleships running around!!!
And one other thing for all you modding gurus out there: Will this work? If I've got a ship hull with (for example) an inherant +60% maintenance modifier, will it be cancelled out by 6 components each with a -10% maintenance modifier?
PS. I know there is a modding tool out there, but I can't find it... Any pointers would be appreciated...

[ November 04, 2002, 11:50: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

Re: New Mod: The Art of War Mod

Quote:

Originally posted by dumbluck:
Pax:I like the second Version of your ship sizes. But what about the baseship/worldship/whatever the proper name for it is (I never use em...)

Exctly: many folks never use 'em. The images for them are usually just "flying starbase". Excise them, or, put them in at a 2000kT size (or better, 2200kT, so that they can be used for SW and RW construction? Hmmm ...). Only catch is, of course, someone could accidentally (?) install an egine without a mount at all on the baseship if it's over 2000kT in size (planning on 2,000kT engines, after all)

Quote:

Edit: PS. I am planning on stealing your idea for engine tech you described to me, if you don't mind... And I'm planning on stealing a lot of stuff from SJ, too... If he doesn't mind, of coarse...

No problem at all. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Quote:

And Pax, did you extend your engine mounts down into the fighters, too?

Fighters will require their own engine, and series of mounts, to preserve the mQNP process there (the Excort already has a 1%-size mount, I don't believe SE4 will LET you get smaller). But with, say, 10kT/20kT/30kT for Small/Medium/Large, it's child's play to set up a mount for mQNP fighters. 40kT Fighter engine, with small/medium/large getting 4%/8%/12% engines, respectively.

Quote:

second edit: I should have read your post more closely. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif