|
mQNP
Are there any mods out there currently that use mQNP?
|
Re: mQNP
I don't think any released mods use it at this point.
|
Re: mQNP
Quote:
Art of War is going to include mQNP at present. My own Exodus will have mQNP in from the very start. I've made a private conVersion of Pirates and Nomads to mQNP, and handed copies of the files to SuicideJunkie, but P&N is his mod, so he'd have to decide wether or not to release that (as-is or modified) as a variant form of P&N http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif . If he doesn't like it, I keep the lid on it and use it only privately; maybe other mod-writers could get copies, to see the difference in how each Version works ... that'd also have to be be SJ's decision. Or maybe I'll just write a quickie mod, stock SE4 in all ways except the needed changes to go QNP or mQNP, to show the differences in how the two work ... hmm. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif At any rate ... any mod is more than free to use it, of course; I came up with the idea solely to share it with the comunity, after all! However, no new mods, or major revisions of existing mods, have really happened since the idea was born. Ergo, as Fyron said ... no mods use mQNP. Yet. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: mQNP
Grit Tech uses mQNP, but is not yet complete. you can test out a pre-release of the mod here:
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/newup...1041370616.zip or read about the mod here: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...;f=23;t=001946 I am still working on balancing the engines, I am thinking of making them indirectly porportional to vehicle mass, instead of directly porportional. |
Re: mQNP
See? No released mods use it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Pax, if you write a tutorial on how to make a mQNP system, I will include it in my Modding 101 Tutorial (with appropriate credit given, of course). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: mQNP
Oh, I will, Fyron -- once Exodus, AoW, and Grit-Tech have (between them) refined the concept a bit further, ironed out some of the bugs, and so on. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: mQNP
Quote:
[ January 05, 2003, 05:20: Message edited by: dumbluck ] |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
Basic engine = 1000kT "Light Engines"; 2% mount, or 20kT engines 100kT Escort ... 1epm 200kT Frigate ... 2epm 300kT Destroyer ... 3epm "Medium Engines"; 6% mount, or 60kT engines 500kT Light Cruiser ... 1epm 700kT Cruiser ... 2epm 900kT BattleCruiser ... 3epm "Heavy Engines"; 18% mount, or 180kT engines 1300kT Battleship ... 1epm 1700kT Dreadnought ... 2epm 2100kT Baseship ... 3epm Alternately, add +1epm to all the Medium-engine ships (for 2, 3, 4), and +2epm to all the Heavy-engine ships (for 3, 4, 5). Thus, only three mounts: Light for ships 1kT to 499kT Medium for ships 500kT to 1299kT Heavy for ships 1300kT+ |
Re: mQNP
whats mQNP?
|
Re: mQNP
Quote:
The discussion on it started somewhere in the middle of the AoW mod thread, I think. I only glanced at it, since I don't have much skill or interest in the area of mod creation at the moment http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
Actually, I know that -- IIRC the Battlemoon in P&N needs 200 engines per move, so ... sixty-seven (67) Ion Drives, generating a total of 201 move points, will do the deed. Quote:
|
Re: mQNP
The mQNP idea originated (from Pax) in the #se4 IRC channel. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif See what can come of hanging out in there? Maybe you all should come by sometime! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
|
Re: mQNP
Yep, and then I suggested a "Hybrid" system, such as pax describes: "Set the mQNP to use mounts for entie CLASSES of ship, and vary EPM within that class..."
I still need to figure out how to squeeze it into P&N while all of maintaining a reasonable amount of flexibility in number of engines, preventing unmounted engines from being used, and keeping a nice design ambiance. |
Re: mQNP
I know! Set up 2 tech areas, and have one of them be removed for each game. Have one be classic QNP, and the other be mQNP! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: mQNP
Can AIs use the system as it is intended?
|
Re: mQNP
Sure, if you set them up to use it. Though, I suppose my suggestion wouldn't work very well with the AIs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
|
Re: mQNP
They best thing IMHO about the mQNP that Pax originally proposed was that, at least in theory, the stock AI could work with it as normal. since the AI will automatically select mounts if they are available it should use them correctly. Of course since it's never actually been play tested there is always a chance of some unexpected glitch.
Geoschmo |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
I didn't bother to see how the AI took the changes, though. Heh. |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
Basic engine = 1000kT "Light Engines"; 2% mount, or 20kT engines 100kT Escort ... 1epm 200kT Frigate ... 2epm 300kT Destroyer ... 3epm "Medium Engines"; 6% mount, or 60kT engines 500kT Light Cruiser ... 1epm 700kT Cruiser ... 2epm 900kT BattleCruiser ... 3epm "Heavy Engines"; 18% mount, or 180kT engines 1300kT Battleship ... 1epm 1700kT Dreadnought ... 2epm 2100kT Baseship ... 3epm Alternately, add +1epm to all the Medium-engine ships (for 2, 3, 4), and +2epm to all the Heavy-engine ships (for 3, 4, 5). Thus, only three mounts: Light for ships 1kT to 499kT Medium for ships 500kT to 1299kT Heavy for ships 1300kT+</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh, sure, you'll let him fiddle with the EPM, but you throw a fit when I mention it... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif (j/k) |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
Standard QNP calculates this per ship hull by setting an engine-thrust:ship-mass ratio -- adjusting the EPM of that hull, so that you need more and more of the same engine components to achieve a given speed, as hulls get larger. mQNP does this instead, by setting an engine-mass:ship-mass ratio -- adjusting the size / mass of the engine, to fit the needs of each hull size. A hybrid system tries to balance between the two approaches; I'm not, personally, entirely satisfied with such an idea, but other mod writers may disagree. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: mQNP
Of course, you could always just change the tonnage used percentage in an unproportional way. A 500kt engine knocked down to 2% for a frigate and 5% for a light cruiser would result in 60/200=3/10 used for frigates and 150/400=3/8 used for light cruisers (proportional increase would be 2% and 4%).
|
Re: mQNP
Quote:
|
Re: mQNP
This sounds interesting, I will give it a try.
The main problem with standard QNP is that the maximun thrust is 255, that limits a lot the numbers you can play with doesn�t let you make a good contrast between many ship sizes. To use real QNP we'd need two changes, 1st increase the maximun thrust to somethijng like 65k and 2nd allow mounts that increase standard movements of engines, to avoid needing to have tens of componensts of different scales. Right now, mounts should allow a much better controled and a more detailed gradient from biggest to smallest engines. |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
|
Re: mQNP
Quote:
Ship sizes are just sizes of ship. The contrast comes in deciding how many engines you put on the ship. ...As well as the balance of weapons and defenses for the remaining space. Is it a Super-fast scout? Is it a lumbering assault ship? Is it a moderate ship of the line? Is it a quick interceptor? Is it a slow artillery ship? The size of the ship is not terribly important to these decisions, though the slow and heavy ones would probably be more effective as larger hulls. [ January 07, 2003, 18:20: Message edited by: Suicide Junkie ] |
Re: mQNP
[quote]Originally posted by Krsqk:
Quote:
standard dogma would have a 200kt hull needing 20kt of engines to move the same distance that a 500kt hull would need 50kt of engines for. I would advocate that a 200kt hull would need 10kt of engines to move at the same speed that a 500kt hull would require 50kt of engines to move. or something similar. this is because of the indirect relationship between size and engine efficency, the quasi nutonian properties of inertia, and techno-babble hand-waiving. blah. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: mQNP
Yes, but the point of QNP is having engines per move proportional to ship sizes.
For example you have many ships with engines per move going from 1 to 255 engines per move. You're right actual tonnage of the ship is irrelevant. That doesn't sound too bad, but the largest ships using whatever combination of engines to get 255 of thrust will move at 1, any attempt to make it faster will generate an error. If you want to make the fastest ship have a maximun of 4 movements, you'll need engines per move of 255/4 ~= 64 Then your largest ship can only be 64 times larger than the smallest one, you can't even make the contrast between standard escort and dreadnought, much less add extra sizes. |
Re: mQNP
In the latest patch, it won't generate an error, but you still won't go faster.
|
Re: mQNP
im not talking about changing engins per move to anything besides 1, im talking about changing the mounts so that..
...nevermind edit: no. pay attention. its not hard: (these numbers are arbitrary, and do not reflect game balance or realistic component sizes) 200kt ship. 1 engine per move. 500kt ship. 1 engine per move. 100kt engine. engine mount for 200kt ship, 2% size. 2kt engine for 1 move. engine mount for 500kt ship, 5% size. 5kt engine for 1 move. the above system reflects engines which are DIRECTLY PORPORTIONAL to hull size. that is the standard mQNP system. engines for 1 move are (hull size) / 10 engine mount for 200kt ship, 4% size. 4kt engine for 1 move. engine mount for 500kt ship, 14% size. 14kt engine for 1 move. the above system reflects engines which are INDIRECTLY PORPORTIONAL to hull size. this is still mQNP, but is slightly different from how most people use it. engines for 1 move are (hull size)^2 / 10000. this formula does not have to be used exactly, but you get the idea. this method allows ships of diferent sizes to be different speeds. smaller ships can be significantly faster than larger ships. using the standard mQNP system most people use, all ships will use x% of their space for one engine, meaning that they can all fit the same number of engines in them, if they dont have any other components. sure, if 60% of a big ship is free space, thats more than 60% of a small ship, but the concern is engines rather than available space. bigger ships are faster with a directly porportional system (the kind of mQNP you are used to), if anything, because they can afford to dedicate a greater percentage of their hull space to engines. an indirectly porportional system fixes that. [ January 08, 2003, 01:29: Message edited by: Puke ] |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
|
Re: mQNP
Argh!
I shouldn't do math so fast without even checking if results are logic, of course that with 1 engine per 150 kt you can have a nice logical scale for all standard sizes but you will not be able to have really large ships, in an order of 10000 and above and make them move at decent speeds. I also wanted to make normal motor have arond 10 standard movs, so more advandec engines could be sligtly better, not twice or three times better. A feature I cannot combine with QNM. And yes this are limitations of normal QNM that should be possible to solve with thie monts aproximation. [ January 08, 2003, 02:13: Message edited by: Andrés Lescano ] |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
For example -- the P&N mod; I love it, but I hate basic QNP (big ships = too many clicks, argh!). So I converted a local copy to mQNP; all the ships have 3epm. The Engines (which, ofc, I made MUCH larger) have 3 (ion), 4 (contra-terrene), 5 (jacketed photon), 6 (quantum), or 7 (gravitic) move points each. A single Ion engine will move any ship at a speed of 1. So will a single Contra-terrene or JAcketed Photon engine; those advanced engines are only of use if you use more. Specifically: ... three Contra-terrene engines would push as much as four Ion drives. 25% drop in total engine mass to maintain the same speed. ... four Jacketed Photon drives would do the work of five Contra Terrene engines. 20% drop in total engine mass, for the same speed. And so on. Ao an mQNP system, qwith EPM>1, can give you just what you seem to be looking for. Let's assume you want EMP of 5; start with the basic Ion engine giving 5 movement. Next is the Contra-terrene engine. Give it 7 movement points. Then the Jacketed Photon drive; give it 9 (notice we're counting by two's). Quantum engine, 11 movement. And so on. ... Of you can get really oddball: Ion 1 = 5mp Ion 2 = 6mp Ion 3 = 7mp C-T 1 = 9mp C-T 2 = 10mp C-T 3 = 11mp JPh 1 = 13mp JPh 2 = 14mp JPh 3 = 15mp Qua 1 = 17mp Qua 2 = 18mp Qua 3 = 19mp All ships have EPM = 5 Thus, even with in a single engine class, you start to get some benefits to speed, IF you have sufficient numbers of engines installed. The balance between EPM and engine movement points, in all honesty, is an issue SEPERATE from mQNP ... mQNP satisfies the quasinewtonian aspect by adjusting engine mass directly. Also, it's NOT an advantage for large ships. Supply USE goes up ... but not supply STORAGE (less and less of the engine, as a %, is represented by fuel tanks, if you will). An escort can get 5 engines and do fine, spending 50% of it's mass and having decent range,maybe with a single solar panel. OTOH, a 1500kT Baseship consumes TEN TIMES as much fuel per move as the 150kT escort ... so while the 50% "free space" is also ten times larger, much of it will be filled with fuel tanks, AND/OR ... those baseships won't operate far from supply bases and/or ships (say, Medium and Large transports packed with Supply Bay components, or a Quantum Reactor ship ...). So to an extent, the %-ship-mass used on engines-and-fuel-supply inherently goes up anyway ... but you can choose to make a short-range, more-heavily-armed ship if you wish (for self-defense purposes, for example). [ January 08, 2003, 03:01: Message edited by: Pax ] |
Re: mQNP
If you want even smaller improvements than the P&N ion = 3, CT = 4 jumps, then fiddle with the size of the engine components too.
Engine 1: 3 movement, 10kt = 0.3 per kt engine 2: 3 movement, 9kt = 0.33 per kt engine 3: 3 movement, 8kt = 0.375 per kt engine 4: 4 movement, 10kt = 0.4 per KT and so on. |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
|
Re: mQNP
I can also make mounted LS and CQ for large ones in large ships.
|
Re: mQNP
Director: this one.
Long Name := Large Ship Mount Short Name := Large Mount Description := Larger sized weapon mount which increases damage from the weapon by 2 times. Requires a vehicle size of at least 400kT. Can only be used on Direct Fire weapons. Code := L Cost Percent := 150 Tonnage Percent := 150 Tonnage Structure Percent := 200 Damage Percent := 200 Supply Percent := 200 Range Modifier := 0 Weapon To Hit Modifier := 0 Vehicle Size Minimum := 400 Weapon Type Requirement := Direct Fire Vehicle Type := Ship Phoenix-D |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
|
Re: mQNP
Quote:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">code:</font><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 Long Name := H Series Engine Mount Short Name := H Series Description := Engine mount for 1000kT hulls Code := H Cost Percent := 10 Tonnage Percent := 10 Tonnage Structure Percent := 10 Damage Percent := 0 Supply Percent := 10 Range Modifier := 0 Weapon To Hit Modifier := 0 Vehicle Size Minimum := 1000 Vehicle Size Maximum := 1000 Comp Family Requirement := Weapon Type Requirement := none Vehicle Type := Ship</pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The A-series is (as labelled) for 100kT ships -- Exodus will place Escorts at that size. The H-series is a mount for much larger ships ... in fact, ships 10x larger than the Escort, at 1,000kT. The A-series engine is 1% the base size, structure kT, and supply usage; the H series sets those at 10% ... ten times as much. Fuel consumption, like engine mass overall, is directly tied to ship mass in a linear fashion. Figure, if you broke that 1000kT ship up into 10 seperate parts (each with an equal share of the total engien mass) ... why should fuel consumption improve, or get worse? Twenty 100kT Escorts will burn exactly as much fuel per movement point expended, as two 1,000kT Cruiser ...or ten 200kT Frigates ... or one 2,000kT Dreadnought ... and so on. IOW, to move 2,000kT of ship, one sector, at a given total speed ... will cost the same fuel, regardless of how many "packets" that 2,000kT of ship is divided up into. However, unfortunately mounts do not allow me to adjust the amount of supplies STORED; an Escort can get away with relying on it's "sump" tanks, a Dreadnought can't. Essentially, as the engines get larger, the "fuel tank" aspect occupies a smaller and smaller percentage of the engine's total mass; more fuel tanks, or supply-generation components, or a combination of the two, will be required to move that big Dreadnought at any real speed (unles syou're satisfied with running it around on 0 supplies, at a speed of 1 and with no way to fire it's guns, forever ... heh). |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
For the P&N conVersion to mQNP, I set engine speed to be 500kT, and engine-mass::ship-mass at a 5% ratio. 500kT engines are EXACTLY 5% of a 10,000kT Battlemoon. I resized the Escort to 100kT (150kT is awkward for %-of-ship-mass issues, mQNP mods will likely NOT have ship sizes except in multiples of 100kT). So the largest ship (a battlemoon) is 100x the size of the smallest ship (an escort). Your shipsize range is limited by only that. If the escort gets a 1% mount, the biggest ship cannot be bigger than 100x that size. ... then again, it can. 8D That's where the split-class engine/mQNP "hybrid" comes in. If you want a 20,000kT engine, simply give IT a smallish % mount, give it a ludicrously huge engine, and set both the engines' movement points and the hull's EPM to ridiculously high levels. IE, for the P&N conVersion I keep citing ... a 20,oookT "Super BAttlemoon" would need 1,000kT engines, to maintain the 5% ratio. Make the engines 20,000kT, and set the mount to ... drum roll 5%. EPM for the hull would be set to 30, and the "superhuge" engines woudl get 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70 movement each. You physically cannot install the engine on anything smaller, yet you get the right mQNP ratio, and identical speed results per-engine. Now, to prevent using it in smaller ships, you give it it's own Component Family #; normal ship-engien mounts don't affect the super-engines, the "SuperBattlemoon" mount affects only those engines, and is only available for ships massing 20,000kT. And *poof* you've just jumped to a new scale of ship sizes, limited only by what the se4 executable can handle. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif |
Re: mQNP
Separate Supply Storage to different components. Have engines store a minimal amount of supplies. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: mQNP
I figured you modified the supply percent, but I was more interested in your scaling - i.e., say the engine is 100kT, and the escort mount has a structure percent value of 2. Are you also using a supply percent value of 2? And what is the "normal" engine supply usage set to? (standard, unmodded is 10; but if you're messing around with supply usage on each mount you probably had to set that higher so the mounts wouldn't reduce it to some weird fractional value)."
Heh, read the question wrong. Oops. Phoenix-D |
Re: mQNP
Quote:
As I said below ... I believe it should always take X supplies to move Y kT of ship one sector at Z number of engines ... regardless if Y is comprised on one ship, or a thousand ships. The scaling is based UPwards, not downwards (that way the final product works with/as a MULTIPLE, not a fractional http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ). Just like the basic engine::ship rati of mQNP or QNP, youpick a SUPPLY:ship-mass ratio, and work from there. For example, the final "base size" of the Exodus engines was based on reverse-engineering a 1% moun that gives the selected 10kT engine :: 100kT ship ratio. Cost is similarly alculated. And so will be the supply usage. |
Re: mQNP
Now it all looks clearer...
Keeping supply usage on the same linear progression as the engine size is perfectly logical; the first time I read the supply usage post, I thought the intent was to make supply usage increase faster than the engine size, which didn't necessarily make sense. I may have to incorporate mQNP into my games (although I've kinda been waiting until the next patch comes out before I start a new one; I like Temporal races, but it's hard to justify playing as a Temporal race with the current shield-damage bug). |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.