Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

I think that more than twice the stock number of normal ships is ovekill.
But if we're going to add so many maybe it's a good idea to add one in between each pair of stock pics, to have a better gradient (you can then name pics however you like).

We cannot worry aobut every detail in every mod. Do you need one or two more fighters in the 5 fighters scale (the smallers can have one role and the bigger other), or need another familily of special fighters.

And pictures for almost all SE3 troops, why not up to the apocalypse tanks? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

About the name of the larger infantry, I think we should keep the same naming convention we're using now.
Remember I had suggested it to use just "Infantry" Last time, and I was already using that name in my mods, but you insisted that it should start with "troop" to be easier to find when ordering names alphabetically.

I never liked the use of the name "Civilian" meaning a hull that cannot be used as a warship.
All ships in SE4 are part of a military force commanded by the emperor/player.
A civilian ship should be something else used by civilan members of the population an empire's population and not under direct control of the player, something that cannot be modded into the game, unless you turn its ministers on and pretend that it's controled by civilans.

That said I like the idea of adding a series of small/med/large "NonCombat" ships and stations.
Those pics can be used for the starliners in proportions, but
Perhaps even the Barge can be changed to the massive noncombat ship.

Another detail I think we should emphasize more in the site is that that we like variety in hull sizes and names. If for example we refuse to add a picture called "cutter" that does not mean that we don't like the idea of mods adding a hull named cutter, perhaps it should use the "scout" pic.

Timstone
The even if we minimize the new inclusions NS pictures will be nearly as many as the stock ones. Perhaps it'd be better to start a 2nd shipset instead of making twice as many pictures for one.

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

That is a good point. Change "civilian" to "noncombatant" in my Posts and/or suggestions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

Personally, I think we should have more base hulls... seems kind of silly to have 8 ships (plus all the "special purpose" ships like carriers, transports, and colony ships) but only 3 bases... surely you can construct bases in a variety of sizes as well? I guess it's just that bases aren't all that important in SE4 with the introduction of Units - weapons platforms and satellites take over much of the work that bases performed in SE2/3 - but still, I do like the idea in MOO3 where there are 14 ship sizes and 14 base sizes, the bases simply having more space available...

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

I agree with Andr&eacutes Lescano. I think that we should to images in sets of three. IE, Small/Medium/Large and Light/Stock/Heavy were it is applicable. Would consider adding 'apocalypse tanks' as he suggest, as well.

I agree with fyron as well. I would also add that the fighter catagorey should be like this:

Fighter Small/Med/large
Fighter Attack
Fighter Bomber Light
Fighter Bomber Heavy
Fighter Bomber Regular
Fighter Huge
Fighter Interceptor Light
Fighter Interceptor Heavy
Fighter Interceptor Regular
Fighter Massive
Fighter Orbital

Troops:

Troop Small/Med/Large
Troop Apocalypse tank S/M/L or L/H/Regular
Troop Huge
Troop Infantry
Troop Infantry Elite
Troop Mechanized Heavy
Troop Mechanized Light
Troop Mechanized Regular
Troop Mechanized Battle Large
Troop Mechanized Battle Medium
Troop Mechanized Battle Small

Normal ships:

All with 3 'Grades'

Non-Combatant Starliner Large
Non-Combatant Starliner Medium
Non-Combatant Starliner Small
Non-Combatant/what ever?

Bases:

Non-Combatant/what ever ?

SpaceFortress Large
SpaceFortress Medium
SpaceFortress Small
OR
SpaceFortress Heavy
SpaceFortress Light
SpaceFortress Regular

I don't feel the modder who isn't an artist should be penalized for that. It seems unfair (IMHO) to make the modder use images that already exits, because of that. He has every right to ask for the images he wants for his mod to be different. If I was a modder I sure the heck would. I know I got in on the end of this. I don't want to piss anyone off. You all asks for opinions. So, I supplied mine.

I know that some shipset artists are going to be annoyed at me. OK!! I am a shipset artist as well. I just think that this is the right thing to do. Even if it means 3x more work for me to put out a Shipset.

I am now getting off the 'box'!

<font color=purple>mlmbd http://www.shrapnelgames.com//ubb/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif </font>

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

Regarding the small/ medium/ large sats/ mines/ drones: I've just mailed malfador and asked to have distinct pics added as an option to the standard vehiclesize.txt

I know moddable changes don't tend to take a high priority in patches but this doesn't affect game balance and it won't require any testing of any sort, so I thought it might make it in.

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But what about mods needing both? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

There is absolutely no reason why you can't call for more images than the neostandard suggests.

That's what the secondary image name is for http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

Of course not! But I can still try to get them added to the neostandard so that they will be used! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

Fyron how many "normal" ships you have?
I think it will be more reasonalbe to add another pic between some larger ones than another below the escort. The only thing that really matters for the standard is the final number of pics, and I think you artists can balance pics better that way.

Ed, Adding more bases doesn't sound like a bad idea.
We're actually talking about 13 ship pictures and only 4 base pics.
But so far modders have not requested many more base pictures.

The neo-standard is not a mod to add new hull sizes. It is not even a mod by itself.
It is a tool, based on existing and projected mods designed to help "modders" and "artists" use the same picture names in mods.
And also help minimize the number of those extra pictures by dictating common pictures names
The fact that many mods copy the vehicle names from the pic name, is an unwanted side effect.
It's so boring that all mods add the same vehicle sizes.
I wish we would have used a code or number for the pic names.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I like this, if they are officially added into the stock vehiclesizes file, then those pics will become optional stock files like the baseship is now.
Should we all insit?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Did I say that?
Actually I don't really like that idea.
Different shipsets have troops that look like infantry, atmospheric fighters, hover vehicles, tanks, war-beasts, other type of mechas, ect. Do you want to remove all that by forcing all shipsets to have first infantry, then mechanized troops, then mechas and finally finish with massive tanks would be against the originality of different shipsets.
But if you're gonna add SEIII troop categories into SEIV you should go all the way.
BTW IIRC their names were "Blight Tanks" "Eradication Tanks" and "Apocalypse Tanks"
Perhaps the best way would be 2 or 3 infantry and then just many "normal" troops (including stock ones) shaped like the ground attack vehicle of each race.

I agree that the current 5 fighter pics may be too little (but better than only the 3 stock). But I'm still not sure what is the best way to handle fighter pics.
A long gradient of 10+ fighters?
2 or 3 different looking "families" with 3 or 4 sizes each?

Re: The neo-standard thread- Standardising additional hull sizes.
 

Here is the *VehicleSizes.txt* of the mod I am making. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">My goal was not to add the troop types from se3. That is more of a coincidence than anything.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The familes sounds good to me. 3 families of 5 sounds good. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 16, 2003, 00:37: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]