|
|
|
|
 |
June 21st, 2003, 11:19 AM
|
 |
Private
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
I've have looked at the data files for Proportions mod, but I have never played in it. I'll have to study it's Ship vs. Fighter combat in detail.
Chef Engineer Erax: If PDGs were kept as they are in unmodded SE IV, how strong would this Torpedo have to be to make a difference?
Wanderer: I've been leaning toward Fighter vs. Fighter as the ideal counter-fighter solution. Probably because I've seen enough of PDG vs. Fighter in unmodded SE IV.
__________________
Soulfisher
|
June 21st, 2003, 12:40 PM
|
 |
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion *DELETED*
Post deleted by Arkcon
|
June 21st, 2003, 12:41 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion *DELETED*
Post deleted by Arkcon
|
June 21st, 2003, 12:41 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion *DELETED*
Post deleted by Arkcon
|
June 21st, 2003, 12:41 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion *DELETED*
Post deleted by Arkcon
|
June 21st, 2003, 12:41 PM
|
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,518
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
Quote:
Originally posted by TerranC:
And the Hood didn't sink from shell fire. It was sunk by a powerful explosion in the Hood's ammo hold, caused by the shell from the bismark, which was an extremely lucky shot.
|
Hmm, perhaps the most important thing that the SE4 combat model lacks is "lucky" shots that rip through a ship causing a chain reaction of massive damage. Sort of a rare, but not impossible, equalizer for large ships that would otherwise be nearly impossible to destroy with a small ship.
On the other hand, a few small ships can whittle down a large ship given enough opprotunity -- I suppose it's just a model anyway.
[EDIT]
WTH? How did that quadruple post happen? Sorry guys.
[ June 23, 2003, 16:56: Message edited by: Arkcon ] |
June 21st, 2003, 02:55 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 2,592
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
Quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
quote:
Proportions does a marveliuos job in balancing fighters and antifighter weapons. Check my proportions AIs for "anti-fighter destroyer"
|
Not really. It makes fighters too powerful, so much that they overpower ships in the same way that ships overpower fighters in the unmodded game.
Point defence beams (not point defence cannons !) is a nice anti-fighter weapon. Also, did you try point-defence mounts if enemy using fighters ?
__________________
It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. - Voltaire
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode