Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I wonder if putting the spaceyard ability on mines would work...

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

It is possible to put the spaceyard ability on a mine, but you wouldn't want to do such a thing because the user would be able to build anything with it and Last time I checked - mines didn't build ships.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Well, you can always use the "zero organics build rate" trick on the mines http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

It would be nice if there was a space yard that could only build units. Perhaps half the size of a normal one.

[ November 16, 2002, 00:47: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

You could use the organics ability trick.

Simply make it so that mines require no organics to build, then make a spaceyard that only builds minerals and radioactives.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

You could of course limit things even more. You could make all mine parts out of just radioactives or just minerals (heck, they're 9/10ths explosives, how about just radioactives). Then give mines a space yard that only builds in radioactives - now you won't have mines building fighters, sats, or troops either.

Hmm.. never thought of this. Maybe this is the way we could make "fighter only" space yards for the cross-over mod - just have yards that are limited to minerals and organics...

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Hello? Captain Kwok? ZeroAdunn?
Was the font on my post too small or something?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

SJ:

What I was saying was I wish there was "Space Yard Build Units" ability rather than using a workaround.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

The workaround is the only thing available; either that, make the spaceyard rate extremely low so that you won't even try to build a ship on it...

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

The problem is that the AI would run into all sorts of difficulty with that!

[ November 17, 2002, 01:39: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

that is a good point....

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Greetings!

I'm hoping to make a big update to the TNG mod website later on this week. It's been almost a month since it was Last officially updated since I've been so burdened by academic pursuits.

However, some of the things I have been working on for the site include:
</font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Catalogue of TNG mod Components and Facilities complete with indicators showing which ones are finished.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> New Starship section containing images and notes on ships from the mod.</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Detailed Race information included biology, society, and history.
  </font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You can see some of the stuff I have been working on in the imageMod thread, such as new planet images.
Also, to avoid confusion, Atrocities' Star Trek mod is a separate, but welcomed entity, from the TNG mod.

That's all for now.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I will be updating the site sometime in the afternoon on Saturday!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Greetings!

I have updated the TNG mod site as promised. There are several new sections up included a starship section, more race information (partially completed), and I html-ed the TNG components and facilities list with little indicators showing what items are done.

Let me know if you encounter any problems.

[ November 23, 2002, 20:54: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Ok. I fixed up the race section so that when you click the logo to find out more info, the info box opens at the top of the frame. No more scrolling down.

I'll try to finish off the rest of the race info soon.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I notice that the Vulcan Captain provides much of the benefit of the Freighter Captain but without the combat penalties... perhaps the Vulcan Captain's ability should be toned down some? Or is he significantly more expensive than the Freighter Captain?

And when you say +/- to Combat perhaps you should say to Attack? Combat implies both Attack and Defense.

What if a player chooses to put NO captains on his ship? Surely there should be some sort of penalty... (This could be beneficial for Ferengi military ships!) Perhaps give all ship hulls a -50 to attack/defense and all captains a +50 plus their regular bonuses/penalties?

You misspelled "nacelle" in "nacelle engine"...

If you're using QNP you really shouldn't use bonus movement points as they're tacked on directly to the ship's movement after you divide by engines per move...

I *think* "Bussard" is spelled with two s's

If Cloaking Device VI-X is an addon to I-V, shouldn't it have a different name?

Isn't the Sovereign class bigger than the Galaxy class?

The description for the Scout Cube says it's a sphere...

mmm new graphics, and the tech lists in html format!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif (I like the O2 ice world with the cratered glaciers!)

Can't wait to see this mod in action! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif (Of course I'll get everything confused with Atrocities' Star Trek mod!)

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I have made some adjustments to Captain attributes for each race. I noticed some of the same problems that were mentioned. If you have ideas for more Captains - let me know!

Also corrected the spelling mistakes. I had fixed them in the data files, but forgot to fix them on the website!

The TNG mod pseudo-QNP works fine. Example for Nacelle Engine X:

Escort> 5 Engines / 1 Engines/move = 5 Std + 5 Bonus = 10 spaces

Dreadnought> 15 Engines / 3 Engines/move = 5 Std + 5 Bonus = 10 spaces

What's the problem? Both ships use approximately the same proportion of size dedicated to engines and move at the same speed as intended.

In regards to Cloaks, levels VI-X just employ a different method of cloaking, but are essentially the same item, so why use another name?

The Galaxy Class is much larger in volume than the Sovereign Class. However, the Sovereign's special weapons mount will give it more firepower.

I have already made 40 planets with many more to be added!

[ November 25, 2002, 05:43: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Go Captain Kwok! Keep up the good work!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Is the dreadnaught only 3x bigger than the escort, or are the dreadnaught engines larger?

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Is the dreadnaught only 3x bigger than the escort, or are the dreadnaught engines larger?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Neither. The Dreadnought is about 4-5x bigger depending on the race. It's just an approximation!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I guess what's bothering me about the bonus movement is that what if you design a ship without its full complement of engines? (Will there be limits on engines or can you just fill three quarters of the hull with them and go at insane speeds like in P&N? I think P&N ships are slower for their engine/tonnage ratios to make up for that...)

Anyway, so you've got an Escort with 1 engine and an Escort with 6 engines.

1 engine / 1 eng/move = 1 move + 5 bonus = 6
5 engines / 1 eng/move = 5 moves + 5 bonus = 10

The ship with 1 engine, while devoting only 1/5 the space to engines, is getting over half the movement of the 5-engine ship! Maybe it's just me, but this seems to go contrary to the principle of QNP (Force = Mass * Velocity)... I don't want to tell you how to make your mod and I won't whine and complain if you don't do it this way, but how about giving each engine an increasing number of standard moves (say 3,4,5,6, to borrow from P&N, or 2,3,5,8, using Fibonacci numbers to get a relatively constant ratio between any two classes of engine, as well as a BIG jump between tech levels) and give an Escort 3 engines per move (or 2 in the Fibonacci example) instead of 1?

Another way to look at it is this:

200kT Frigate, 1 eng/move:
With basic engine, no bonus: 5 moves with 50kT of engines = 5% of space per move
With advanced engine, +5 bonus: 10 moves with 50kT of engines = 2.5% of space per move

OK, you say... Well look at this:

1000kT Dreadnought, 5 eng/move:
With basic engine, no bonus: 1 move with 50kT of engines = 5% of space per move
With advanced engine, +5 bonus: 6 moves with 50kT of engines = 0.83% of space per move

Why should more advanced engines be less efficient with larger ships??? I guess you could come up with some technobabble reason why this would be the case ("the lower-energy warp fields are more easily spread across the volume of a large ship due to their low subspace tension ratio") - and I'd buy it! - but on the face of it it just doesn't seem to make sense.

Just my 0.02 tons of mineral ore... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

(Come to think of it, don't most Star Trek ships have only 1-4 engines? At least the Federation ones... can't really tell with some of the alien ships. Maybe you could use the engine mount system that someone (forget who) proposed so that each ship has only a few engines, but scaled appropriately to fit the hull size?)

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Ed:

Let's address some issues.

The engines in the TNG mod are not engines in the traditional SE4 sense, but engine ("warp") coils within a ship's nacelle or structure. This was done for two reasons. The first reason was to eliminate problems with equating ship nacelles (not all ships got 'em) to engines and secondly, to avoid using mounts and additional engine sizes, which are troublesome for the AI and confusing for some players.

The propulsion model is only pseudo-QNP and is intended to roughly equivalate the amount of space engines take up on a given ship. I used movement bonuses instead of standard movement for good reason. It keeps the number of engines constant on each ship, while increasing performance with improving tech levels. For example:

Low Tech Engine Coil:

Bonus: Ship with 5 Level I engines (1 Std + 1 Bonus) has 6 moves.

Standard: Ship with 5 Level I engines (1 Std) has 5 moves.

Improved Tech Engine Coil:

Bonus: Ship with 5 Level II engines (1 Std + 2 Bonus) has 7 moves.

Standard: Ship 5 Level II engines (2 Std) has 10 moves!

You see the problem? Using standard moves increases performance too much! It also limits the variety of speeds available!

Why does more engine coils result in lower engine efficiency? Here is a reasonable explanation: The amount of power needed for increased "warp" speeds is not proportional, but exponential. In order to attain higher velocities, it requires exponentially more power and therefore many more engine coils. Make sense?

I think that sums it up.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

"You see the problem? Using standard moves increases performance too much! It also limits the variety of speeds available!"

You can negate this effect by using larger numbers..

Ship with 4 engines per move, standard engine gives 3 move
1 engine: 0
2 engines: 1
3 engines: 2
4 engines: 3

Level 2 engine, 4 move
1 engine:1
2 engines: 2
3 engines: 3
4 engines: 4

Look at P&N for more examples. Just as an FYI..

Phoenix-D

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

The current / planned Kwok-Coil system does have its own advantages.

For one, damage to the engines will slowly reduce your speed, until they get down to a critical point, whereupon they go offline.
At higher tech, you still get a decent speed while the engines are starting to break up.

Q:
Where is the engine supply use modded in?
It would be nice if the engines used just as many supplies per movement no matter how many coils you have.
(Since we can't have it decrease with more coils)

If you set all ships to require 2 engines per move, and then set all engines to give 2 standard movement points, you could give the WarpCore 1 standard movement point, and a large supply usage.
That way, the core would not provide any speed without having intact engines, and the power used to travel would not decrease as you take damage to the engines!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I always assumed that it was all or nothing with the "engines per move", I didn't know that it allowed for partial move points!!! I guess I should have played more P&N!

Hmm. I could easily duplicate my current system under this method - let me crunch some numbers and I will post again later.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Technically, all races have only 2 engines; sublight impulse and warp; what they have are engine ports, nacelles, and maneuvering thrusters.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You mean like:
5 engines per move
+ 50 engines with 4 movement points
= zero movement
?

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

No.

I thought for 5 engines/move, you needed at least 5 engines (+2 Std MovePts) to get 2 movement points. If you had 4, it was zero, but Phoenix tells me it's 1!

[ November 27, 2002, 04:18: Message edited by: Captain Kwok ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Ah, the tragic mistake of applying common sense http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

"I thought for 5 engines/move, you needed at least 5 engines (+2 Std MovePts) to get 2 movement points. If you had 4, it was zero, but Phoenix tells me it's 1!"

Just from reading the files, this makes sense..except that "engines per move" is mislabeled. It's really THRUST per move.

It works like so:
-add up the "standard movement" given by all the engines
-divide by the ship's "engines per move" value
-round down

Phoenix-D

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Thanks Phoenix!

For now, I'm going to stick with the original TNG propulsion model.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

SJ:

In regards to supplies, it's expected that larger ships will expend more fuel to move than the smaller ones, so I suppose they'll just have to tack on a few anti-matter pods.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

"Thanks Phoenix!

For now, I'm going to stick with the original TNG propulsion model."

No problem. As I said, just an FYI.

Oh, here's another one. If at any time the standard movement given by the engines goes over 255, SE4 does one of two things:
1- Range Check Error
2- Sets the standard move to 0.

This only really comes into play if you've got REALLY big ships in QNP. Ex I have a ship that takes 50 move to get going one space (hey, the thing is 8000kt). It cannot go more than 5 spaces per turn because of the 255 cap.

Phoenix-D

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Also, I believe that Extra Movement, and Bonus Movement do make your engines spend supply for the additional spaces moved, and that Extra Movement will only add to standard movement if standard movement propels your vessel at least one space per turn already... no free rides.

CombatSquirrel

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh, I like that... clever and Trekkie at the same time.

CombatSquirrel

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Greetings!

I have made a minor update to the site including more race descriptions and some new entries on the tech list. Plus a new spiffy browsing effect.

That's All for now.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Very nice browsing effect! Thumbs up!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">See Fyron - I told you!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Different people like different things. I still think it is annoying enough to stop going to the site. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif If you like it that much, maybe you should make 2 Versions of the site: one with the annoying fade effect, and one without. You don't have to duplicate the images, just the html files. So, it wouldn't increase disk space usage by too much.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

FYI Fyron if you're using IE you can turn page transitions off.

Tools-Internet Options-Advanced tab-Browsing-uncheck enable page transitions.

Phoenix-D

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Really. Hmm... that would solve the problem. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Edit:
Woohoo! No more cheesey page transitions! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ December 01, 2002, 19:35: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

I compromised. I changed the transition effect to 0.5 seconds instead of 1. I also added some links from race descriptions to each race's respective technologies and ships for convenience.

I'm working on some new events - so some suggestions would be nice!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You can have an encounter with a "Q" - ANY tech can be given by such an entity! To any race!

An encounter with a rogue device, like that one in the original series, could give you a planet destroyer tech. You can just state that your fleet encountered the rogue and defeated it.

Abandoned outPosts can be found...

Abandoned Mines with mining tech...

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">How about some disconnected Borg, derelict alien spacecraft with special technologies, and early warp developement species?

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Events, people, Events!

Events include things like spatial anomalies, fuel leaks, plagues, planets exploding, etc.

Tech cannot be gained through events. That can only be done through ruins!

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Thinking back to around the 30 years of Star Trek (all combined there were about 30 years of star trek, eh?) here are some ideas... (some of which probably cannot be done within the limitations of SEIV).

#1. Ripping off Voyager... How about an event that transports ships across the galaxy?

#2. From TOS, there was one episode where there were peaceloving omnipotent beings who forced peace between Klingons and Federation (think they were the Organians or something...). How about encountering a race that immediately makes peace between two warring empires.

#3. Return of the Doomsday device. An event that has this ship appear in the Galaxy, kicking even the butt of the Borg (there was a cool book written years ago about another Doomsday Device appearing in the universe).

#4. Renegade friendly vessels ambush other starships (ala Wrath of Khan).

#5. Stable wormholes appearing (ala DS9).

#6. Alternate dimension invasion (ala Starfleet Command I). An evil Federation (or alternate Versions of other empires) appear in order to cause trouble.

#7. A spaceship that did something in the past is mysteriously thrown into the future, resulting in a major rift between two peaceful empires causing instant war (ala "Yesterday's Enterprise").

#8. A defector comes to your side, gives you information, but results in poor relations between two empires.

#9. A rogue commander attacks a peaceful empire due to personal reasons (i.e., "The Wounded"). If this ship is not disabled/destroyed war will erupt.

#10. A conspiracy between two radical factions of two empires conspire to maintain the status quo in lieu of the emergence of peaceful negotiations (i.e., "Star Trek VI"). One or both nations must root out the conspiracy (destroy a base, or a ship) before they make relations sour.

#11. A boobytrap (technological relic) destroyes one of your ships (TNG "Boobytrap)

#12. Civil War (battle between two factions to gain power in one Empire), (TNG "Redemption I", "Redemption II")

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Type := Research - Delete Project
Severity := High
Effect Amount := 1
Message To := Owner
Num Messages := 1
Message Title 1 := Research is lost!
Message 1 := A scientist has &quot;misplaced&quot; the data for the [%TechName] project.
Picture := ResearchDamaged
Time Till Completion := 0
Num Start Messages := 0 </pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ha! If only he spent more time researching and less time playing Space Empires.

Major Tom:

Some good ideas there.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">When I read this first, I thought it said "Delete Planet", not "Delete Project", which gave me an idea. Maybe certain research/industrial growth can cause actual damage to a planet or a system? This could be a trigger for a specific region of research (i.e., if you choose to research metagenic weapons there is a chance that you will get an event that results in a planet destroyed by a leak at the research plant).

Or, if you have a planet that has maxed out its industry, above and beyond, maybe there is a chance that a global catastrophy occurs (like Star Trek VI has a Klingon moon blowing up because of over mining).

I like events that are a little less random, and more controlled due to the actions of the player. If they are maxing out industry, or researching deatly and 'inhumane/dangerous' weaponry then possibly events could be made to make these risky.

[ December 03, 2002, 13:09: Message edited by: Major Tom ]

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Major Tom:

The best way you can simulate your idea is by giving industries the ability "Change Bad Event Chance - System" with a positive value. This will increase the chances of a bad event happening in the system. You could assigned different values based on the facilities possible risks.

Re: *** Star Trek Mod Discussion ***
 

Damn, I mean Double Damn! A lot of my event ideas are being used! How dare great minds like yours think simularly to mine! You must stop this now!