SE V: Unique Abilities And Ideas

[shinigami]

The magic line in VehicleSizes.txt is Space Combat Maximum Speed Per Movement Point. In stock ships have a value of 0.001 and fighters have a value of 0.002. Playing with these values could easily give you whatever results you desire.

Another quick note, when working with vehicle speeds the engines per move value does not have to be a whole number, the game will happily use decimal values!

[Atrocities]

Nice idea but how would you attack the subs? I don’t see how depth charges could be made.

Electronic Warfare. Destroyers, perhaps even escorts and frigates, would have access to cloak detection technology. YOu can adjust the cloaking to be weak in say passive EM or weak in Gravitic. A weakness that can then be detected with the proper electronic counter measures. (Scanners)

Once a ship "detected" it can be targeted. Have the component that is able to detect a cloaked ship limited to a smaller hull like a destroyer will make destroyers that much more valuable for fleets.

You give only Destroyers a weapon with the abiltiy to fire standard shields while making all other shield generators have phase shielding so that the weapon is useless against them. Or give the Sub superior armor and the Destroy the only armor peircing weapon.

[Atrocities]

Speaking of fighters it would be a great assest to be able to set uses. For example, what is the advantage of an interceptor, a dog fighter, a fighter bomber, etc.

Interceptors are fast first strike fighters. Their strength is speed, their weakness is armament.

Dog Fighter, great in combat, but lacks long range.

I believe the US Crusader was one of the last truly inspired dog fighting fighters used by the military until the F-15 and 15 were developed. They were developed because the Phantoms were abysmall dog fighters and Vietnam proved the need to have a good solid dog fighting fighter again.

The F-16 is smaller than the F-15 thus more manuaverable but has a lessor range and less weapons. The F-15 is by far one of the best all purpose fighters ever made in the history of flight, but she is big, consumes a lot of fuel, and requires both a pilot and Rio. Her weakness is her size.

Then we have the F-111 stealth fighter. Can only be used effectively at night or else it can be shot down as was evident in Yugoslov wars. A great fighter BOMBER, but not a true fighter. They call it a fighter bomber because its small.

As to bombers, we have the B2, small fast and effective but limited overall range. Then the big bird the B-52, huge long range and deadly, but an easy target.

I guess what I am trying to say is that we need deversity in the fighter ranks. Not just bigger KT size, but decisive advantages and disadvantages.

Every ship in the game should have its own unique useable and desireable qualifications. Be it a slow moving transport with huge cargo capacity to a small elite dog fighting fighter, each should have its own advantages and disadvantages just like in the real world. Well as much as can be given with the games limitations and restrictions.

When I build a fighter, I want to say this fighter is an interceptor and know that it has its own advantages and disadvantages. Its great long range, its semi powerful, but it lacks armor and has weaker manuaverabilty.

I guess knowing what the advantages and disadvantages to real world fighters are would be a big help. Knowing their types and purposes would also be a huge insight. I mean what is the general purpose of an F-15 compared to that of an F-22? What would an F-16 be used for? (Planet defense)

How would one go about implamenting Bombers? Use small KT ship hulls or make them large fighters? I believe the ability for "Can Warp" is present in the game, so having them as large fighters hulls, but named bombers, would work.

Any thoughts?

[Suicide Junkie]

I firmly believe in letting the player's design and strategy determine whether a fighter is a dogfighter, an interceptor or a bomber.

Carrier Battles mod being the prime example of that...
I simply provide Basic fighter hulls, QNP propulsion, and a variety of guns.

If you design the fighter with a small engine, light defenses and a very big gun (or missile launcher), then it is good for anti-ship bombing, but weak vs fighters and useless vs missiles.
If you design the fighter with good speed, light defenses and a large variety of small weapons, then it is great for intercepting missiles, but mediocre at anti-fighter action and completely useless for anti-ship.
If you design the fighter with medium speed, heavy defenses and efficient weapons (as opposed to high damage-per-shot or many small shots) then it becomes great at anti-fighter action, weak vs missiles and weak vs ships.

The player is, of course, free to make a design with compromises between these main types, but since each type has conflicting requirements, the dual-role fighters will be less effective tactically.
(Which isn't to say they can't be effective strategically, due to the fact that having a combo interceptor/dogfighter design means that supply lines are simplified.)

[President_Elect_Shang]

If I wanted to create dedicated bombers I would adjust the hull size to be slightly different than the other fighters and create a mount with use for certain weapons; the bombs. I would create a range of bombs for different tasks too. Also you can use the Get_Design_Ability_Component_Count("Movement Standard") with an equals as I did so the fighters must have a certain speed and thus number of engines. This is how I managed to make one fighter size yet give it different weapon and component capacity from over 7 generations. I would make the dedicated interceptors small (i.e. 8kt) the duel role medium (i.e. 9kt) and dedicated bombers large (i.e. 10kt). Now if you really must have them all one size than create three vehicle types and then it is as simple as saying this component can work on all three, or just the bomber, etc.

I’m really starting to get hooked on this idea.

[Suicide Junkie]

May I inquire as to why you two guys seem to like the idea of iron-fist control over fighter designs?

You could give the player the freedom to do whatever they want, and let the separate fighter roles emerge naturally from the pressures of combat.

[President_Elect_Shang]

I wouldn’t call it iron fist; that seems rather harsh. I see it as a way to provide guidelines, not as a matter of micromanagement. The player would have the freedom to design an interceptor with the components for an interceptor. When you have one vehicle size which can use any set of weapons you tend to get a “middle-of-the-road” vehicle. To put another way in RL I can’t build a Harrier, strap twenty 1,000lb blockbusters on it, use vertical take off, and fly as fast as an F-15.