quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
unless the game its self is edited (not just text files) tonnage available for components is directly related to the ammount of space it consumes in storage. possibly there is an undocumented ability called 'reduce storage space required for this unit' but thats rather fancifull.
Hmmm, yes, that may be an idea-killer.
quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
if you change the hull type of a starbase to a different designation that can be stored as cargo, it will have to end up like a fighter or sat (there are only so many documented hull types to choose from, take your pick) that can be stored (lets pretend that you can even store it for free) but now its in cargo and it cant fire until it is launched.
As satellites they'd have the same problems that they have now. But hey, fighters wouldn't be so bad! A fighter-spacestation (FSS)! Fighters automatically don't have strategic movement, right? Unfortunately FSSs could have engines and a huge number of ion boosters (or whatever the extra fighter engines are called), which would allow them to go zipping all over the tactical map. And they could be loaded into carriers and launched during combat! Pretty hilarious unintended consequences. Not what anyone had in mind.
quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
unless you make it a weapon platform, which wont require a spaceyard (sorry, no require spaceyard flag - its built into the hull type) keep in mind that when you change the hull type, you are changing the class of mounts that can be used.
Yeah, WP was the original idea. It gets around the problem of overly-movable fighter-spacestations. And changing the class of mounts is a bonus, IMHO. Spacestations should get mount bonuses over ships of the same size.
quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
the only possible workarrounds (that have not been mentioned) that I can think of, is to give a space station one tactical movement point, and somehow keep it from haveing any strategic movement. this is very doubtfull, but has the highest odds of working. it still wont 'orbit' a planet or anything, but it might be enough to get it into range if someone is pounding a planet from the far side.
I certainly don't see why modders (or MM, anyway) couldn't do this. Here are three ways:
1) They already give fighters combat movement but no strategic movement. (I don't know if this is true in the latest Versions, but it is for the old demo I'm fooling with, so I know they can do it.)
Just do the same for bases. (But limit the number of engines!)
2) Allow bases to have emergency propulsion units, but allow EPs on bases to work only in combat. This would be really sweet because it would introduce a lot of strategy into the use of the limited number of EPs. Actually, I don't see why EPs can't be used during combat for all ships.
3) Allow ships to fire on their fellow ships during combat. In particular, allow tractor and repulsor beams to do this. This would allow players to put attractor/repulsor beams on ships and/or WPs that they could use to maneuver their bases and/or satellites into position during tactical combat. You could repulse it out to within weapons range, fire, then attract it back close to the planet. Gives new meaning to the concept of shoot-and-scoot, eh?
[This message has been edited by dmm (edited 11 January 2001).]