Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

Hi all.
A question that had been bugging me for a while already. Both SEIII and SEIV have the same "feature" - tractor and repulser weapons affect only ships/objects of same-or-less tonnage that the firing ship.
Is there any way to bend this rule?
Increasing the weapon mount does not fix that, only increases the effect (massive mount repulsers are fun).
So, any answer to the question?

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

Hmm. Make all ships the same size, and just require them to have space-wasting components in order to adjust the useful space?

EG:
remove MCs.
All ships are 1500 KT.
Lifesupport becomes a Lifesupport/Crewquarters combo for play purposes. Size is 20KT.
Crew quarters are 50KT, and free, and 1 hitpoint (zero if you can).
Escort requires 27 Crew Quarters. After adding the required crewquarters, you are left with 150KT, which is escort size!

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

Well, you could do that a little more efficiently by having higher levels of ship construction provide smaller but more expensive basic systems.

This seems like a pretty drastic solution just to be able to use tractor/repulsors against larger targets, but the only other way I can think of is to bug Malfador to make it an optional ability. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

PvK

P.S.: This would also break the size limits on mounts, too.

[ 15 April 2002: Message edited by: PvK ]</p>

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

Well, what I do not understand is why the smaller ship is not moved? If they make it so that you can only move ships smaller than you, then you should be able to use a repulser beam against a baseship to move your ship out of the way. That would be cool.

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

Bman,

I like that idea. Just think if one of your smaller ships takes a beating and loses its engines, you might be able to push it out of harms way. It wouldn't take much work on Malfador's part to change that either.

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

SJ the idea is good but i do not mod the game to fit my needs, i fit my needs to the game. I never mod or play some of the wierd mods.

BMan - great idea. But this does already "exist" - the wormhole weapon. It realy does move the target away. Im more interested in the tractor beam.
When you put it on larger mounts the 'damage' increases, but whats the use of pulling a ship say 6 range (i think thats the range) with the power of 12 when it will anyway move 6?

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Taera:
When you put it on larger mounts the 'damage' increases, but whats the use of pulling a ship say 6 range (i think thats the range) with the power of 12 when it will anyway move 6?<hr></blockquote>

BTW, the damage listed in the tractor/repulser beam info is real damage, not only the amount of squares the target is moved. It doesn't change much, but... Don't use special mounts for tractor beams (you'll just waste space and resources).

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Taera:
&lt;snip&gt;
Im more interested in the tractor beam.
When you put it on larger mounts the 'damage' increases, but whats the use of pulling a ship say 6 range (i think thats the range) with the power of 12 when it will anyway move 6?<hr></blockquote>

For ships, you're right; there's no reason to use larger mount tractor beams. But for weapon platform and base mounts that also extend range, the heavier mount tractor beams serve a purpose.

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Taera:
BMan - great idea. But this does already "exist" - the wormhole weapon. It realy does move the target away. Im more interested in the tractor beam.
<hr></blockquote>

The wormhole weapon moves the target randomly. What I was suggesting was what *should* happen with a tractor/repulser weapon against bigger ships given the logic Malfador is using. This would still allow them to be useful in combat on small ships. The disadvantage is the tractor beam would move *your* ship close to the enemy (and thus the enemy fleet) and the repulsor beam would move *your* ship further from the enemy (and back into your fleet).

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

Well, I know what I would do if tractor and repulser beams worked the way you want. I would put them on ships one size smaller than my enemy was using and would fit them out with a short-range high-damage weapon. Tractor yourself in, fire, repulse yourself out. You don't even need MP. And you thought the missile dance was bad. Would also be great for kamikazes, boarders, drones, and troop transports.

OTOH, bigger ships can do that now, in reverse, to smaller and same-size ships. So it can't be terribly unbalancing. At least, I haven't heard anyone complain. Can anyone think of a reason why this is less unbalancing than the above would be?

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

If a repulser beam can target an enemy ship 6 squares away and toss it 12 squares, then the corresponding tractor beam should have a range of 18. EXCEPT, that they have to "lock on," which involves aiming, so obviously it should be harder to lock on with a tractor at range 18 than to lock on with a repulser at range 6. UNLESS, the push/pull effect is impulsive (i.e., the momentum transfer happens all at once in a single burst), in which case the current range rules make sense. But then the damage levels ought to be a lot higher, because the target is being shoved/yanked very roughly. You could argue that the weapons work by warping space so the damage is correct, but then you've got no argument for having relative size matter. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by dmm:
OTOH, bigger ships can do that now, in reverse, to smaller and same-size ships. So it can't be terribly unbalancing. At least, I haven't heard anyone complain. Can anyone think of a reason why this is less unbalancing than the above would be?<hr></blockquote>

Well, if you could T/R your own ship, you'd be moving relative to the entire enemy fleet, whereas if you just T/R an enemy ship, only one enemy ship is affected. Very often, there is more than one enemy ship, so you embarass one of them, and then his pals come stomp you. If you could T/R yourself in and out, you could embarass the whole enemy fleet, until you got stuck on the map edge and they nailed you.

Of course, if you miss, you embarass yourself... and get stomped. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

PvK

Re: Tractor & Repulser weapons
 

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by PvK:
Of course, if you miss, you embarass yourself... and get stomped. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif <hr></blockquote>
Hmmm...If you T/R yourself and miss the R, then you are stuck in the midst of the enemy fleet. But if you T/R the enemy and miss the R, then you are stuck next to only one ship. Looked at this way, T/R of an enemy is _more_ unbalancing than T/R of yourself (because it is less risky).

Plus, if you T/R an enemy ship, you can pull him into the midst of your fleet and all your buddies can kick his butt. (Just like high school.) Then you all run away before his buddies can catch you. Repeat as needed. Of course that would only work in tactical combat; the AI is too stupid (too noble?) to use gang tactics in strategic combat.

But, suppose you are trying to remain at a distance from the enemy fleet. If you are outnumbered then it would be better to be able to T/R yourself. If you outnumber the enemy, it would be better to T/R them (but then it's probably not so impt since you outnumber and outweigh them).

I really like the idea of T/R on yourself. It lets you make a hard-to-kill scout. On the whole, it doesn't seem unbalancing or illogical to me.

[ 17 April 2002: Message edited by: dmm ]</p>