New Mod: The Art of War Mod - Page 4

geoschmo · #31 May 1st, 2002, 02:17 AM

"Scotty...we...need...more...speed!

Cap'n, I'm givin' her all she's got. She's comin' apart at the seams!"

Actually, the more I think about it though I may have the levels wrong. As it is the destroyer will ahve less room for stuff than the frigate. Not sure that's right. Have to play around iwht it some more I think.

jimbob · #32 May 1st, 2002, 03:10 AM

You probably know most of this already, but if this is of any help...

quote:
Weapons only works by making an armor component that has low damage (No damage?) weapon ability. Since it's a weapon it gets hit by the weapon only attacks, since it's armor it gets hit before all the other weapons.

I think that p&n has a lot of specialized armor types (engines, weapons, etc). The component is designated "armor" so it is damaged first, but then it has an ability too. So for example, the component can specifically protect against weapon destroying weapons because it is designated "armor" but has an attack capacity (damage 0 at all ranges) so it is also considered a weapon.

quote:
damage: 0 0 20 30 40 30 20 0 0 0 0 0

well, okay, not a direct quote, sort of a paraphrase... regardless, weapons that do no damage at close range but more damage at longer range do function quite well. Again, p&n (v2.6) and Ultimate (v?.?) both have weapons with increasing damage, out to a maximum range. Beyond that the damage starts to drop off again. I used the weapons, and had no problems. The weapons were successfully employed by AI, but I only saw them used by weapons platforms (stationary).

I look forward to this mod. Mods are great, it's like getting a new game every time a new one comes out. Keep up the good work!

Deathstalker · #33 May 1st, 2002, 06:38 AM

Geo,

I've got an old mod gathering dust in the download sections (the 'D-Mod'), you are welcome to use/incorporate/change any of it (new ship classes, anti boarding party weapons etc), as well as the Mount Mod.

The D-Mod had lots of 'extra' weapons as well as some funky facilities. (Decoy missiles to soak up PDC, shield skipping missiles, low damage weapons that can strike VERY far away, Shields that incorporate PDC, regenerating engines, solar engines, Knowledge shrines, etc, etc, etc,).

Cargus10 · #34 May 1st, 2002, 07:08 AM

Some ideas that may or may not have merit:

- All direct fire weapons have many penalties to hit (say, -50 or so base). Warships will need fire-control sensor arrays (low mass and damage absobtion, high cost) to offset this. Kill the firecon, and the ship is in trouble. Multiple levels are possible, plus hardening, etc. Alternatley, split this to hit bonus between the firecon sensors and the firecon computer (on the bridge). Gives the aux con a reason for being.

No limit on engines per hull. Go as as fast as you want, but if you are all engines, you have room for little else. Also, make engines powerful, but big. A frigate might have only one engine and still go speed 8. Once it's damaged, though....

As weapons improve, don't nessescarily make them longer-ranged or more damaging...lots of improvements are in miniaturization....The APB I is 30Kt, maybe the APB II has the exact same stats but is 25kT.

Wish there was a way to handle MIRVed warheads for missiles, but can't think of one off-hand.

Engines that have zero (or near zero) inherent supply. Requires supply to be put in as "fuel tanks".

I'm sure I'll come up with more, but sleep is overtaking me now <L>.

Phoenix-D · #35 May 1st, 2002, 08:57 AM

"Wish there was a way to handle MIRVed warheads for missiles"

Drone. It's pretty much the only way.. then again, drones launched in tactical have unlimited range and you can't pick the targets.

Phoenix-D

PDF · #36 May 1st, 2002, 11:48 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:

Well, my physics is not up to snuff at this time so it's hard to give the correct technical explanation. But this is a fact of armor and armaments from armor-piercing anti-tank weapons down to 'bullet-proof' vests and ordinary handgun bullets. The closer you are the LESS effective the round is in penetrating the armor. Granted, beyond a certain range there is a drop off in power due to loss of velocity to friction. But momentum is somehow related to the distance traveled before hitting the armor and it does make the weapon more powerful to travel a greater distance.

Definitely *not* true ... AP penetration is a game of energy, E=1/2 Mv�, M is given, v decreases with range (grav + air), so penetration too, always ! Only tweak is that "discarding sabot" rounds could have problems at point-blank range...
Where did you read that ?

PDF · #37 May 1st, 2002, 11:54 AM

And another idea : why not have "armored cargo/supply" comps, which will have more damage resistance but less free space ?
At the limit we will have "totally armored" comps which will just have damage resistance and no free space, sort of "damage soaking compartments", immune to armor-skipping.
So I'll go for 4 types of comps : normal/lt armored/hv armored/armored only.

This can be setup for any mod, perhaps armor tech requirements should be needed.

Feedback ?

geoschmo · #38 May 1st, 2002, 04:10 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Cargus10:
Engines that have zero (or near zero) inherent supply. Requires supply to be put in as "fuel tanks".

This is something I am considering. I need to be careful though as this will again put a strain on the smaller ship sizes to be useful later in the game. I may give the smaller ships some inherant fuel supply to counter this. Haven't decided yet.

I have done some more number crunching and I don't like making Destroyers need two engines per move. I am currently leaning towards following the levels of SEIII closely in that respect. i.e Cruiser, 2 per move, Drednaught, 3 per move. Basically the engines per move will match with the number of life support/crew comps currently.

This does make the Cruiser a little weak. Going from LC to Cruiser and keeping the same speed will only net you an additional 20Kt of space after the required comps. Add to this the reduction in defense bonus (Allthough that will be chonged a lot in this mod anyway) and you don't have much incentive to build cruisers. Honestly I am not sure this is much different in the current game, it woulld just be a little more pronounced. I rarely build cruisers in the stock game, prefering to wait for the Battle Cruisers before shanging hull sizes. I may try to come up with some things to counter that. Maybe giving the Cruiser extra fuel storage, or adding a mount for the 500kt design. Haven't decided yet.

I could also make the cruiser a little larger. Looking at the SEIII hull sizes compared to the SEIV ones the Light cruiser in SEIV is proprtionaly much larger than the Light Cruiser in SEIII and the Cruiser in SEIV is proportionally a little smaller. That accounts for the differance. Since I am modeling the propulsion system to SEIII it may make sense to tweak the hull sizes accordingly.

I am also strongly considering adding some "advanced" hull sizes, say for example when you get to Ship constructiuon lev 4 along with the 400Kt LC hull you also discover a new 150Kt ES hull, but that has an inherant speed of +1? That would make the smaller ships more usefull right? A little anyway.

Geoschmo

Bman · #39 May 1st, 2002, 04:24 PM

quote:
Originally posted by geoschmo:

I am also strongly considering adding some "advanced" hull sizes, say for example when you get to Ship constructiuon lev 4 along with the 400Kt LC hull you also discover a new 150Kt ES hull, but that has an inherant speed of +1? That would make the smaller ships more usefull right? A little anyway.

Geoschmo

Oh yes that would be sweet. You can do some very interesting hulls based on ideas I've seen floating around this board recently:

Reach Ship Construction-? and Propulsion-? and you get a FastEscort hull.
Reach Ship Construction-? and Cloaking-? and get a CloakedEscort hull.
Reach Ship Construction-? and Sensors-? and get a hull with increased accuracy.
Ship Construction-? + Shields-? gives hulls with builtin shield generators.

Higher levels of the required techs would give you the advanced Versions of the bigger hulls. This kind of thing would basically increase the usefulness of smaller-sized hulls later in the game since they would essentially get some "free" space.

I'm sure there are more interesting hull abilities that could be given also...maybe one with a built-in bridge.

Cylapse · #40 May 1st, 2002, 04:45 PM

quote:
Maybe giving the Cruiser extra fuel storage, or adding a mount for the 500kt design. Haven't decided yet.

I like the fuel storage idea... (SEIV has a major fuel problem. The reactor becomes a necessity, but Id rather not have to use it. Id rather just assume a ship has enough fuel for at least 50% more of what they give us now... the SEIV mentallity is fleet-based, which is cool and all, but I prefer individual ship superiority in smaller numbers than huge dependant fleets... ya might lose a vital supply ship and they are all screwed. Ugh. But I disagree with the mount, simply coz then its also available to Battle Cruiser, one more reason to hold off... I personally use BC for the flagship, usually supported by an optional fleet of sick-*** cruisers... Could be a better fleet if they were BCs, but its a matter of style. Adding a fuel incentive for each cruiser would make that battle cruiser much happier, coz it doesnt have to worry about a reactor as much, as each cruiser becomes a shaved-down Fuel Tanker with armor and weapons.

quote:
I am also strongly considering adding some "advanced" hull sizes,

I like this one too... I made a type of cruiser that comes with a certain racial trait, (man...adding a new one teaches you a lesson about emp files, I tell ya. I was freaked at first.).. a kind of streamlined (yea yea, no streamlining in space...I've heard the argument) Version that allowed for a more compact ship... Still smaller and weaker, but a lotta misc functionality... a small launch bay, etc, that kinda thing. It made coz my thoughts were along the same lines...
"What the hell is cruiser good for?" LOL
I like em though. Style is everything.