Adamant Mod Discussion Thread

[Fyron]

I have noticed that noone has as yet said anything bad about my mod or anything in it. Is it because everything I have done is perfect and there are no problems (esp. balance issues and such; is that comp way too powerful?) at all? I doubt it! I am sure there are some dumb things I have done. Point them out! Don't worry: egos are fictictious, so there is no possibility of crushing mine (or inflating it either).

[Ruatha]

About the Adamant mod:
I haven't tried it but I like the name

[StarBaseSweeper]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I have noticed that noone has as yet said anything bad about my mod or anything in it. Is it because everything I have done is perfect and there are no problems (esp. balance issues and such; is that comp way too powerful?) at all? I doubt it! I am sure there are some dumb things I have done. Point them out! Don't worry: egos are fictictious, so there is no possibility of crushing mine (or inflating it either).

To say something good:
I like the idea of leaky armor. I may one day ask you for permission of using the idea

To say something bad:
It seems from the file that there isn't such big difference between the 3 races. I means that you could imagine that the organic would not have big ships, only fighters and carrier. Or thing like this to make them really very different. Currently it seems you can "basically" do the same with all of them, just the name change and the caracteristic are a bit different, but no really big change (to take bad example, like in starcraft, when the 3 races seem a bit similar to your idea but are very different in strategy).

But of course as I currently cannot play, my opinion is not worth much...

I will trty as soon as I can play again...

[Fyron]

Ah, finally a real response!

My goal was to work up a basis for each race, and then differentiate them from there. Weaponry is going to be one area where they are quite different, though I have not gotten around to it yet.

A lot of things have to be looking like just duplicates of each other because that is necessary for the basics. How many ways can you make a ship bridge, after all?

Have you looked at the latest Versions? The races now have vastly differing ship sizes, so that is going to make a difference right there.

[Ruatha]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

A lot of things have to be looking like just duplicates of each other because that is necessary for the basics. How many ways can you make a ship bridge, after all?

Not very many, you can call them different things though.
A "Central Nest" for some kind of insectous creatures.
And perhaps some race wouldn't need a bridge, only "crew quarters" and "life support", a telepatic race that can oerate it's machinery from anywhere on the ship.
A race that doesn't need life support, I mean thake the Thermolians, they are dead, isn't life support wasted on them?

Small creatures could have many small bridges and crew quarters.
Making it easy to take out some but then some might survive, is it possible to make a ship have half movement points if half the bridge components are taken out?

(Not directly Adamant oriented but some ideas perhaps..)

[ May 15, 2003, 14:26: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

[Fyron]

You can only ever have 1 bridge on a ship. You can have as many "auxiliary control" components as you want though. You can not mod the effects of losing C&C components; they are hard-coded.

I have indeed given them very different names. But the complaint was that they still accomplish the same things.

How about sensors? ECM? There is really only one way to implement them. Sure, I could give the different kinds different rates, but they still boil down to the same thing with different names.

[Fyron]

Mephisto has given the go-ahead on using the TDM AIs as the base for the AI in the mod. So JLS, go ahead and start from the TDM AIs instead of the unmodded AIs.

[Suicide Junkie]

Originally posted by StarBaseSweeper:
Maybe I got it.
Do you think it could be for the following reason.
2 ships:
Ship A: 150kt total struct, including 10*5kt "armor" (not defined as armor, just as decoy).
Ship B: 150kt total struct, including 1*50kt "armor" (decoy as well, no armor ability).

On the first hit, let's say 5Kt damage, we have for each ship:
Ship A: each "armor" has 5/150 chance to be hit. As there is 10 such components, the chance that armor is hit is 10*5/150=1/3. If the armor is hit, then it loose one armor (9 armor left).
Ship B: 1 armor, has probability to be hit 50/150=1/3. It will loose 5kt struct, but then it will draw fire until destroyed!

Second shot: let's say the first shot damaged armor. 5kt damage for second shoot.
Ship A: each armor has 5/150 chance to be hit. 9 armor left, so 9*5/150 chance to be hit. If hit, one armor destroyed (8left). We can see the probability of armor being hit is decreasing. Moreover, it will redo the random targeting everytime an armor is destroyed, making it more likely to hit other components.

Ship B: 5kt to armor. No other componant can be hit as armor is already damaged.

Would that be the explanation for the test you did?

No, as I tried to note, the light-armored ship had 50% more hitpoints on its armor (6k vs 4k)
If the hits were chosen as you said, then the light-armored ship should have had a tougher armor, and have lost weapons slower than the heavy armored ship.

Rather, in this case, the ship with much FEWER armor hitpoints, but larger hitpoints per armor component had its armor hit MORE often.

[Ed Kolis]

Wasn't that Fyron's intent - the heavier armor provides fewer hitpoints of protection but still manages to absorb a higher percentage of hits? It does say so right in the component description

[Fyron]

Yes it was. SJ was supporting my components against the concerns raised that they might not work as intended.