|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
OK, in next Version I'll reduce number of OA and increase number of internal armour. Or should I put a second SSD on big ships ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif Hmmm, let's see what would you do then ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Aloofim, there is a link in the first message in this thread. I also posted it in the Mods List sticky topic. Adding it to my sig is a good idea though.
Oleg, at least if he's gutting your ships down to the armor before capturing them, he's not gaining any tech - just resources. I've been fighting the Drushocka too, in Fryon's PBW game Adamant 0006, which uses his Quadrant Mod too, so even though the AI is given a bonus, they need it because the AI doesn't do remote mining, and there are asteroids everywhere, so human players get nearly unlimited resources. They were doing pretty well, and had captured several planets and built some major cities and fancy organic facilities. They had some strong fleets with a good mix of troop transports, carriers, warships and minesweepers, and their ships were quite effective (I won't spoil the surprise of the weapons mix here, for those who haven't fought them before). We had some really enormous battles where I lost scores of ships and fighters but eventually wore them back, mainly by throwing heaps of ships at them. They're still kicking, though, and are now capturing and smashing the colonies of one of my human allies. I managed to capture one of their colony ships - I don't think those have SDD's. PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Yeah, colony ships are completely undefended. They don't even try to ram.
As for the Druk warships... internal armour would make a difference, although to be honest it's only ppl with weapons that skip armour AND shields fighting in tactical that can capture Druk ships in this way. Anyone with regular weapons or using simultaneous is going to get their arse handed to them. Some internal armour might be good, but I don't think a second SDD would make much difference. Something wierd I did notice though: They've just started using battleships, and some of them have 2 master computers. Is that normal? Anyway, just got my first temporal spaceyard IIIs Online, I can now throw out anti-druk battlecruisers in 3 turns=-) Now we'll see some real action... [ February 14, 2003, 09:41: Message edited by: dogscoff ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
There is still a problem with Jraenar AI - it uses DUC 1 as a primary weapon on Attack Light Cruisers. I think I mentioned this before and was under impression that PvK fixed it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
Jraenar' major weapon is MB, it never research APB or high level DUC, but attack light cruiser design has weapon selection "1" (APB) and "25" (DUC). It _must_ be changed to "3". I think there are few more AIs with this bug. |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
I thought I'd fixed that too - evidently not. Ok, thanks Oleg.
PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Update for several Proportions 2.5.3 AIs. AI uses new carrier classes. It may cause problems with pre- 2.5.3 It also contains 5 new ship pictures for Pequeninos race. Please let me know how good is this modified AI. I especially interested if new specialised anti-fighter AI ship design works.
1045316333.zip |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
Granted, this might be caused by some special feature of the proportions mod (using non-standard ablities) but it seems equally likely that the AI is grabbing the MC twice in the basic design process. Where are they located in the design? Right at the beginning? Or are they mixed in with the other components? I haven't seen it do this yet, but I've not been playing very much. I hope it's an artifact of Proportions. One MC is expensive enough. Two would make ships outrageously expensive. [ February 16, 2003, 00:57: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
The second MC was one of the Last components on the design, if I remember correctly. perhaps 5 or 6 spaces from the end. |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Which file do I have to tinker so I get 19 Cultural centers and a shipyard in the starting planet instead of 16 Cultural Centers, a shipyard, an Spaceport, a resuply and a Rad complex?
Is it there any graphic for a mega Spaceport-resuply-shipyard-cargo facility that can be set for inaccesible tech and avaliable only for the starting planet? |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
You don't realy need them.
Research computers and build robotoid factory and the building that boosts research (forget the name) instaed of spaceport and resuply depot. You will get more from existing centers than having two more http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif seriously though, it is not easy to do, you will need to rework facilities.txt file in /data folder. |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
But where exactly it says which building make it to the Homeworld? I just want a mega space-yard-port that can't be replicated it in a colony. I love the Homeworld concept in Proportions... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ February 17, 2003, 14:07: Message edited by: Aloofim ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
I think you can achieve what you want by moving Cultural centers from their own Category into the same Category as spaceports and/or resupply depot. Then SE may chose them in the begining of the game. As to radioactive magaplex - it happens only at full tech start. As PvK mentioned many times, he never intended Proportions to be played that way. It should always be played with low/medium tech.
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
It never happened before. I usually get 17 Cultural centers, the Spaceport, resuply and Shipyard. I'm gonna try what you told me of building the robofactory. Still, i would like to have a unique Mega Spaceport-shipyard for the homeworld. Its not just a problem of production, but of unique looks. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
I think the closest image I made was the combo spaceport & resupply depot. All you'd have to do is find an image you like, and then add spaceyard abilities to that facility, and give it only tech requirements that you will start the game with. You might want to make it pretty expensive (it should cost more than the cost of a combo spaceport/resupply AND a shipyard combined). There will also be an issue in that if you have three tech levels, it will be more expensive to upgrade than a plain shipyard, but I guess that's a tradeoff with combining them in one.
Sounds like you actually want two things - a different-looking spaceyard for the homeworld, and a triple-combo facility for colonies. Since cultural centers include supply and spaceports, there's no real reason to use the combo SY on the homeworld. Edit/PS: Tje Rads complex (not megaplex) with numeral IV is (IIRC) available with the Industrial starting tech given by a Medium Tech start. It's a TL 1 extraction complex - industry lets you build complexes rather than just facilities. Higher tech will let you build the megaplexes. The Minerals extraction tech will let you build higher levels of whatever size you choose. So there are 9 levels of conventional minerals extraction. If you research Minerals extraction to level 2 from a medium tech start, you'd get Min Fac 2 (II) and Min Complex 2 (V) - you then have a choice of speed and quick return on investment, versus higher investment for higher eventual returns. Edit/PS 2: Although there is a file for homeworld RE-construction, the only way to change what starts on a homeworld is to understand how the computer chooses, and then give it things that it will choose. I.E., more or less, first it builds the most constructive spaceyard fac, then a resupply depot and spaceyard (with some details I'm forgetting), then it fills about half the remaining planet with the most productive minerals facs, then it fills the rest with the most productive research facs, except for one of the most productive organics facs, and one of the most productive rads facs. In Proportions 2.5.x, a Rads megaplex is the only production facility that actually out-produces a cultural center, in its one Category. PvK [ February 17, 2003, 20:09: Message edited by: PvK ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
PvK, you got me lost.
How do you make it appear in a homeworld? What is the trick to make it an starting facility? I just want the Huge mega Space port-resuply-shipyard in the homeworld, not the colonies. Its just like your Cultural Centers, to simulate a developed homeworld as oppouse to a colony. I mean, a homeworld will always have a shipyard, but then why to have the same shipyard that we can build in the colonies? why not have a unique huge shipyard that represents years (or centuries) of investments from the first day a rocket made it to orbit? |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Is this for Proportions 2, or for a new mod which won't have cultural centers? Because, cultural centers already include spaceports and resupply depots. It'd be odd to be able to somehow lose the ability of a spacefaring homeworld with intact industrial civilizations, to resupply ships, or to act as a space port.
PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
Ok, you are right, its an overkill, I'll forget about the spaceport-resuply part. I just want a regular Shipyard facility but with a diferent graphic that its only avaliable for the Homeworld as an starting facility. Is that possible? [ February 19, 2003, 14:47: Message edited by: Aloof ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Ya, gotta watch out for the AI. I'm not sure, but it might work to (do either of the things Fryon suggested) or to give it no Roman numeral, and put it before the other Space Yards.
BTW, yes, of course, I'm glad people apply tweaks to Proportions to suit their own tastes, and it's very interesting to hear about them. If you come up with a neat new image and a way to get this to work, I might try to include it in some later Version. PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Hello Mr. PvK:
I would like to know something about the armor platings present in Proportions Mod: What are the pros and cons of using them instead of the normal small armor components. Has something to do with hit probability (I suppose that as the plating is the bigger component installed in a ship, it will probably take the majority of shots?) Are there any other purpose for it? I would thank you alot if you drop a line about this topic. By the way, the scale mount concept is a very clever one. It accuartely represents some components wich are directly related to the ship hull size in which they are used. I adapted it to make a cargo/supplies external pod mounting, but it is being tested at the moment. If someone is interested in seeing what is all about. I can upload the CompEnh.txt and Components.txt file fragments (to copy an paste in any mod folder). I also like Proportions because it makes homeworlds different from new colonies, as a long time inhabited world has to be more developed in facilities that a colony. Real good mod. Keep the good work! |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Thanks leo1434!
I'm currently teasing Fryon about not being able to figure out the armor choices, so I'll reply in private and post publically later after he guesses the answer. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Well, let's see.
Armored Structure III: 12 HP/kT. 3 emmissive ability. Armor Plating II: 2.6 HP/kT. 11 emmissive. Hmm... do I want 182 HP, or 840. Tough decision. 11 emmissive is not enough to justify losing 658 hit points. Advanced Armored Structure III: 18 HP/kT. 5 emmissive ability. Advanced Armor Plating II: 4 HP/kT. 13 emmissive. Still has the same problems that normal armored structure does compared to armor plating. So does Ultra armor. As 120 is more hit points than nearly anything else (that isn't armor), normal Armored Structure components provide just as good coverage as those Plating components (esp. since there are 7x as many of them). What is so good about these Armor Plating components? [ February 20, 2003, 06:42: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
leo1434 wrote:
"What are the pros and cons of using them instead of the normal small armor components. Has something to do with hit probability (I suppose that as the plating is the bigger component installed in a ship, it will probably take the majority of shots?) Are there any other purpose for it? ..." There are several tradeoffs involved, which I really like about the armored platings. It's also interesting that the situation changes with different ship sizes. For the specialized platings like stealth and scattering types, it makes it economical to apply these to small ships, while larger ships will have to make major investments both in resources and in component size to cover themselves. The main thing to consider about armored plating compared to armored structure, is that they have different purposes. Armored structure's main purpose is to add lots of structure to the whole ship, and to absorb damage that penetrates "hit first" armor - it makes the whole ship take more to destroy, and for the lower tech levels, is very cost-effective. Armored plating has some of the same effect, but its main purpose is different - it's purpose is to reduce damage before it gets to internal components, and to reduce the total damage actually sustained, by deflecting as much as possible, rather than absorbing it. This is a natural consequence of covering the entire outside of the ship (as opposed to general armoring of the interior, or uneven armoring, which is what the armored structure represents). In game terms, the armored plating has a higher emissive effect than the structure, which subtracts from every hit on the ship until the component is destroyed. Because plating isn't "hit first," and often has less damage resistance than the armored structure (especially if there are several armored structure components), the armored plating often isn't destroyed until the ship has been heavily bLasted. You actually DON'T want the armored plating to take damage itself, because if it gets shot off, you lose its superior emissive effect, which causes all subsequent hits to do more damage (this represents a major breach in the external armor, through which more hits can bypass the shell protection). For this reason, you might want to have more than one armored plating component on some very heavily armored ships. The strongest armored ship design will probably have a mix of armor types, because their effects are complementary. The power of the opponents' weapons also makes a big difference - armored shells are great against non-armor-piercing light-to-medium hits, especially when backed by a lot of armored structure. Armored shells are not so important against really powerful-per-shot weapons, or anything that "skips armor". Fryon: The idea is not use the plating to replace structure - you usually just take one (or maybe two) levels of plating, and then get a bunch of structure to back it up. The more structure you get, the more you get out of your one unit of plating, because: 1) The structure makes your ship absorb many more hits, and the plating multiplies the number of hits your structure can take, by reducing the damage per hit. and 2) The structure makes the plating much less likely to be hit and shot off, which you don't want to happen. Plating has fairly high structure, but that's not what its for, and can actually be a disadvantage because it makes it more likely to get hit, losing the emissive effect. The fact that the structure varies with the ship size due to the scale mount also makes some sense, because it is more likely that a large ship will develop a major armor breach before being devastated, than on a small ship. PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
11-15 emmissive points doesn't matter much with fighter stacks and weapon mounts. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Oh no, I do 165 damage instead of 180! Not that! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Yesterday one of my BattleCruisers got pounded to death by 15 Drushocka Destroyers, and by the end the only thing left in my ship was the armored structure. It looked like an empty egg shell.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
is it that way how its suppose to work? By the way, do the AI always build the latest avaliable hull or the most cost efficient, or maybe a balanced mix? I'm worry cause I added to the price of larger hulls..... Maybe I should have added maintenance penalties instead of price...... |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
What AI builds is dictated by interplay of Construction_vehicles.txt and design_creation.txt files
Several Proportions' AI are programmed to build a mixture of hulls. |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
Dam, I hate being a newbie.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
I installed the new AI files posted recently and the Druks have started sending new-generation Dreadnoughts against me. They are ridiculously hard to kill now.
PvK, I have noticed that on the design screen some obselete components still show up even when better Versions have been researched. So far I have noticed this with solar collectors and temporal weapons. Is this deliberate or is it an error? |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
As to obsolete components - it is an artefact of PvK' desire to keep existing games compatiable with new Versions: If you insert a new component into old components.txt file, it will srew up existing designs completely. But if you add the new component at the end of file, SE does not group it with old but now separated components. I sincerely hope that very soon PvK will release a brand new Version (3.0 ?)that will clean up this mess http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ February 20, 2003, 15:21: Message edited by: oleg ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
There are also a few things that aren't really obsolete, which are that way on purpose, but ya, the order is a little mixed up to allow upgrading old games.
PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
As for massive fighter stacks (unfortunately not moddable away) and large weapon mounts, yes as I said, these are good against armored shells. For the large weapons it's intentional, and makes perfect sense. But even for the fighter stacks, it's not really a balance problem except perhaps against the AI, which isn't programmed to realize how to counter it.
100 fighters in a stack may be able to dwarf the emissive ability of an armored shell, but it also forces the fighters to fire one giant shot at once. This will be a disadvantage if the enemy has fighters in smaller Groups, because the 100-stack will only be able to fire at one enemy group per turn, wasting any excess firepower, while incoming fire against the stack won't waste any firepower until the very end. Moreover, as oleg mentioned, small ships remain viable throughout the game - a squadron of smaller ships with lighter weapons can often evade the less accurate big-mounted capital ship weapons. Which is not to say that every ship should have an armored shell against all opponents. The whole point is that there are choices with trade-offs, and not just "X is better than anything else in all ways", moreso, I think, than in the unmodded game. As for hulks with only structure remaining, that can certainly happen, tough it's pretty varied how ships take damage, and depends on the armor and the weapons used and, with armored structure, a lot on chance. Usually the armor pretty effectively protects the useful components, but sometimes the components get nailed before armor. Usually it's a mix. PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Hey PvK, et al:
I've been using a modified Version of Proportions 2.5.3. So far, I like it a lot. You've put a lot of time and effort into this mod and it really shows. I had been hunting for a mod to use as basis for a mod of my own and Proportions seems to work out really well for it. For my mod, I've sped up colonization a little and I've added in some components and whatnot from a few other mods (mostly from Devnull). I've also added in a number of 'human-only' items that we can use in multiplayer games, but that I dont want to have to worry about the AI getting tripped up by. One thing that I've noticed in Proportions is how good of a buy the Torpedo Techs are. They are cheap to research and do a lot of 'up front' damage which, in keeping with your discussion below, seems key. Given the way the tech cost progression increases geometrically and how the bulk of an empire's research points are coming from the Homeworld (and thus, available at start), it seems that the 10000 point cost makes Torps an obvious choice. You can have Torpedo IV (a powerful weapon) for less cost that of level III in a number of other weapons and the progression only gets worse the higher it goes. The lower 'startup costs' seem key in this mod because your research points arent increasing at the same rate as the costs for higher level techs (ie, a lot of the research points are 'front-loaded'). I've modded in a negative on the Torp's accuracy to compensate. This leaves them with the feeling of capital ship killers (along with their high damage numbers which is good for punching through emissive effects) but prevents them from being the obvious choice in the early game. Has anyone else noticed Torps as a good buy or is everyone just used to them being useless in the basic tech set and not really bothered with them? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Is there some updated listing of how emissive armor works now? I remember threads on it ages ago, but I'm sure they are outdated with the newer patches. Do emissive effects stack or is it only the highest...ie, if I have 2 Armored Hulls (11 Emissive each), do I have 22 total? Does it stack from different component (ie, 1 Armored Structure giving 1 + the Hull giving 11 = 12?)? I also wasnt aware that Emissive effects were 'global'. I was under the impression that the Emissive component had to be 'hit' for the damage reduction to apply. Has this been thoroughly tested and confirmed? Thanx for any input/answers on the above! Talenn |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
So don't wait for nobody. I have become a faithful follower of your mod. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif By the way, do you think its ok that Sats are actualy bigger than fighters? |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Yes!
Great idea! How it didn't occurred to me before? I'll erase the Ice and Gas planets with Oxigen to simulate that Rock people need Domes in those planets. Since I always play Rock/Oxigen it'll be perfect. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Humm, I have to check first that none of the existing races is Ice or Gas/Oxigen.......... And as a side effect any AI race that is "Rock/ none Oxigen" will still capable of fully colonizing Ice and Gas as a bonus. |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
Second, these are not like satellites we have launched into space. They are more like small automated space stations. So, being larger than fighters makes some sense. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [ February 21, 2003, 00:43: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
[quote]Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Well, kT are not changed much in Proportions, so they are as meaningless there as in the normal game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Hello:
So, I understand it better now they are complementary. Ok. In that case, what percentage of a given hull size (say, 700 kT in example) would you use for armor (plating + armor components). In the balance of mobility, protection and firepower, I like to favour: 1) Mobility (you cannot be hit if you are not there) It is best used in Master of Orion 2 battles, I miss those weapon firing arcs! 2) Armor: If you can withstand the enemy fire one more turn, may be you will outLast him. 3) Well, and Last firepower... I would really thank you for your opinion about ship protection. Other topic: I was thinking about modeling a "light" Version of the armour platings (which will take less space) and keeping the "standard" ones, of course. So, suppose I make a plating wich takes half the space of the current ones, What would be a proportional protection value? Should structure tonnage and emisive ability be reduced to half, too? Or would you suggest another structure/tonnage/ability ratio? (Is this question clear enough?) Thank you very much to all for this and previous advice... |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Thanks for the kind feedback, Talenn!
Gosh, heaps of questions to try to cover in everyone's Messages. Torpedoes are a good weapon in Proportions, and yes one advantage is the relatively low research cost. I had originally thought to reduce their accuracy, but then I might make them a little more hard-hitting. The research cost may be sort of a bargain I suppose. Investing in other heavy anti-ship weapons can yield even more effective weapons, though, eventually. Remember too that torpedoes can't target fighters, drones, or satellites. But yeah, they are good weapons in Proportions. I think most weapons have gotten better, though. The Emissive Armor discussion from patch 2's release is still correct in patch 3. Emissive armor effects never stack. The highest emissive rating on any undestroyed component on the ship subtracts from the damage done by each weapon hit that gets past shields, unless the damage type is one that skips armor. It does not matter which component is hit. It has been tested and confirmed. kT in Proportions aren't meaningless, but they are abstract, and not to be taken literally. Of course, the have meaning in that they have game effects. They are almost never actual kiloTons (thousand tons). No fighter is 15-25,000 TONS, and the smallest scout ship is not going to be 100,000 TONS, or a small satellite 80,000 TONS - that's just silly. You could imagine each fighter unit were a squadron or more, and the mass included all the personnel, supplies, and equipment required to keep them operating in space. Mainly though Proportions sticks to the same base values for most things, except population size, cargo capacities, and colony ship size. That satellites are larger than fighters I think does make sense, given what they do in the game. I have been thinking for a long time though that it would make sense to have dinky satellites, down to 1 kT, although they wouldn't do much, and the main use for them would be recon, and there's no way to mod away their built-in ability to give full system spotting info, so maybe it does make sense to have a minimum 80 kT, to get the minimum abilities. Smaller satellites would be possible, but also would be kind of beneath the scope of the game, sort of like the assumption of small invisible "civilian" ships. My opinion on ship protection, is that there are many valid choices, which all can be effective. You can go for unmodded-style ships with little or no armor and shields, and they may succeed because they will have a lot more firepower and ability than ships with a signifigant portion of armor. However, they will also be a lot more expensive and may get destroyed or crippled by a hit or two from a powerful weapon. Armor can add a lot of staying power to a ship, and can also make opponents who use a high "damage until" or "target most damaged" tactic waste firepower while healthy ships bLast them. The tricky thing is, there are now many different types of armor, with different trade-offs, and a major one is expense. The best-protected ship may have a bunch of Ultra Armor Structure, redundant plating, and specialized armors, but it will cost as much as a whole squadron, and may have a lot less ability, except at taking damage, and taking lots of hits may not be your main purpose for building ships. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif It may be a good idea to deploy a variety of designs, too. I don't have a favorite formula, but I do have quite a few designs I like a lot. Usually it's hard for me to decide how much armor and shields to put on, and what types, versus abilties. I usually end up exploring several different designs in every empire. A "light" armor plating at 50%... I'd probably give half structure compared to full plating, and half cost and size, but would probably not be more than half the emissive value of full plate, and not more than or +2 more than the emissive ability (or defense bonus) of the structure of the same tech level - whichever value is lower. Thinning plating tends to defeat the purpose, but for designs that don't have the tonnage to spare, could be better than all structure and no plating. PvK |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Horrible! Terrible!
How can this happen? Why I can't retrive fighters with 1.84 if they don't have full movement points? Please somebody help me....I can't live with this, how can I fix this? Its like: -"Control tower, this is British Airways fly 408 to Heathrow Airport requesting permission to land" -"Fly 408, you can't land until tomorrow when you have your full movement points. Sorry about that, but its company policy. Keep flying in circles until tomorrow, and have a great evening." |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Where its the file about the ruins?
I'm trying to find it to understand how ruins work in Proportions but the only thing I saw its in the Abilities.txt .......... |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Torpedos are very good weapon in Proportions but I think Meson BLaster is still better choice in early game.
Does anybody have an example of fighting against Soul Hunters? They use Torpedoes as a main weapon. |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
*falls on the ground crying and starts pulling out his hair* Somebody please bring me back my fighters....my precious.... It was so cool before. Fighters could fly to a planet, refuel and rearm, and then continue and intercep an evil alien fleet. They were real interceptors. And since I always play without protecting Warp points, interceptors were a must. Now I can't even keep my own in-house rule of never having a fighter in space at the end of a turn. Now they have to stay in space more than one turn, and that its so unrealistic! The poor pilots have to be in space for over 30 days in a cockpit! As long as I was able to use launch them and retrieve them in the same turn I could have argued that they only expended a couple days in an intercepting mission. But 30 days! This is nuts! I want my SE4 back! *starts crying and screaming loudly while the neigbours call 911 to accuse him of domestic violence* |
Re: Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.