SE5, Tell Aaron what's on your Wish List

[Phoenix-D]

Open request:

If the leaders are left out due to art reasons, leave the code for them in and let the modders turn it on if they want. Some of us don't mind ugly leaders.

[Atrocities]

I would love to keep the hero's stuff too. (Especially if it is the concept I proposed. )

[tomk]

Weapon mount size increase reduces the probability of hitting for smaller targets.

Example: If a ship/base/etc. has a heavy mount and it is shooting at a target that can't have a heavy mount there would be a reduction in the hit chance. The below chart may better illustrate:

................................................Si ze
Mount.....ES......FG......DS......LC......CR...... BC......BB......BN......BA
Normal..-00
Large.....-15.....-10.....-05
Heavy....-30.....-25.....-20.....-15.....-10.....-05
Massive.-40.....-35.....-30.....-25.....-20.....-15.....-10.....-05


Rationale: currently there is no (or very little) downside to always having the largest mounts that the ship/base will allow. This suggestion should force more trade-offs in the design making process that should result in more balanced designs with a mix of smaller and larger mounts on each ship/base just as we find a mix of different weapon systems with the designs of current day navy vessels.

Comment: we may want to have an increased chance of hitting for smaller mounts shooting at larger targets but with the idea that we "never get something for nothing" there should be an offsetting consideration such as reduced damage per hit. For example, a 30% increase hit chance results in 30% reduction in damage done if there is a hit. An example of reduced damage applying in real life might be a single bullet having the real possibility of seriously damaging or destroying an airplane while a single bullet having the same size and velocity will have virtually zero chance of seriously damaging or sinking a battleship.

chart with smaller mounts getting bonus against larger targets:

................................................Si ze
Mount.....ES......FG......DS......LC......CR...... BC......BB......BN......BA
Normal..+00....+05....+10....+15....+20....+25.... +30....+35....+40
Large.....-15.....-10.....-05.....+00....+05....+10....+15....+20....+25
Heavy....-30.....-25.....-20.....-15.....-10.....-05.....+00....+05....+10
Massive.-40.....-35.....-30.....-25.....-20.....-15.....-10.....-05.....+00

[AMF]

Ok, I'm having a brain fart - I can't find your post on heroes.

As for me I absolutely think that the artwork shouldn;t be a factor, simply becuase it isn't needed - I would say that you just need a "hero" image for each race in the game, which would just be one of the portraits, but perhaps with a different coloured background to let you know it represents a hero. The potential heros would only be from existing races, and so you could just use extand portraits with a
slight change.

Now, the question is: do hero's only work for their races, or can they work for others? That's a design/game play issue, and I can think of good arguments on both sides, but it really depends on what sort of philosophy Aaron is thinking about heros as...are they "legendary
star-wandering mercenary types" or just "really really extraordinary members of your own race"?

In any case, the artwork, I would think, would'nt be relevant really.. .just a "filler" image. Preferably a small one.

But can you point me to your post AT?

Atrocities said:
I would love to keep the hero's stuff too. (Especially if it is the concept I proposed. )

[Naranek]

Iaen said:
I have some difficulty imagining what surface combat is going to be like, what with tactical combat being realtime 3d and all. If the surface combat from SE4 is used, you'll probably have to pause the tactical combat or otherwise things will get confusing. That means you'll just have conquered a planet in a matter of minutes.

Well, I was thinking on the "ground" tactical mode, of course. I was thinking in something like Imperium Galactica 2, in which surface combats are similar to space combats. The defenders have special buildings in the colony (fortresses, bunkers, ...), and the attackers with gained space superiority can have access to orbital bombing or quirurgical strikes from the fleet fighters.

[Atrocities]

Ground combat should be simple.

Make it like space combat in SE IV, except replace the star field with a terran map. The ships with top down troops images, and so on. Have tactics and strategies like in space combat, but for ground combat.

I proposed this over three years ago and it still stands as the best way to do it.

[Mayday]

Thats the IG2 method. Excepting of course that that was fully 3d and required all planet to space weapons be destroyed before landing.
Of course, this would limit the planetary takeover time to just that battle. Though in such a technological era, we can expect that the victorious force would have devastated the resisting military into surrender.
In order to make this a bit more balanced, I suggest that the population resist, ala Civ3, for a length of time decided by the population size (causing riot status), and that this would be offset by having the military presence there. This should obviously be a changeable setting.
Also, the demeanour of population in pop transports should be recorded so that one simply couldn't lift most of the population off a planet to shorten the time to sort out complete order. Indeed, putting the population back down should send them back to riot status, or at the very least Angry, with a military presence there, if the average happiness was lowered enough.

[AgentZero]

Components that increase the abilities of other components. ie:
Shield Booster: Increases shield generation by x%
High Energy Focus: Increases energy weapon damage by x%
Recycling Plant: Increases supply by x%

Another thing I'd like to see, which is something I've modded into my own SE4 game is that Base Space Yards have a higher construction rate than Planetary ones, however they can only be built onto Bases. Ships can carry Space Yards, but they have a significantly lower construction rate. This makes sense to me, since I would think that it'd be easier for a massive starbase to construct new ships than it would be for a planetary facility. The only thing I'm having trouble modding is that I want the Baseship to be able to carry a Base Space Yard.

Certain ships should have 'inherent abilities'. At the moment, I don't use many of the specialized hulls (ie: carriers, transports, colony ships) because of the restrictions on their construction. So, I suggest that these hulls have a certain advantages to outweigh the restrictions.
ie:
Colony Ships: Provide 10M colonists. So by using the colony ship hull instead of a LC or something, you basically get 10M 'free' population for your new colony. This would have to be coded so you only get the free 10M when creating a new colony, otherwise it'd be too easy to build loads of colonizers and fill a planet with free population.

Transports/Carriers: Get 50% extra cargo space per Cargo component. This way, a Transport/Carrier with 10 Cargo comps each with a capacity of 100kT would get 1500kT instead. Thus, using a Transport/Carrier hull would be more beneficial than using a 'normal' warship hull.

[Ed Kolis]

AgentZero said:
Colony Ships: Provide 10M colonists. So by using the colony ship hull instead of a LC or something, you basically get 10M 'free' population for your new colony. This would have to be coded so you only get the free 10M when creating a new colony, otherwise it'd be too easy to build loads of colonizers and fill a planet with free population.

There is a field in Settings.txt which controls this; it's called Automatic Colonization Population, IIRC. Not sure if it actually works because I've never tried it, though, and it would affect colonies created with any ship, not just a colony ship...

Transports/Carriers: Get 50% extra cargo space per Cargo component. This way, a Transport/Carrier with 10 Cargo comps each with a capacity of 100kT would get 1500kT instead. Thus, using a Transport/Carrier hull would be more beneficial than using a 'normal' warship hull.

Something similar is in Adamant Mod. Colony modules are 3000kT so they won't fit on any normal ship, but colony ships have a scale mount which allows them to fit. Also, fighter bays are 60kT rather than 30kT, unless you put them on carriers, in which case a mount is available to reduce them to 30kT.

[AgentZero]

Ed Kolis said:Something similar is in Adamant Mod. Colony modules are 3000kT so they won't fit on any normal ship, but colony ships have a scale mount which allows them to fit. Also, fighter bays are 60kT rather than 30kT, unless you put them on carriers, in which case a mount is available to reduce them to 30kT.

See, even that would do fine, except without having to fiddle around with mounts. Carriers/Transports would just get an automatic size reduction for Cargo/Fighter Bays, so the same sized hull could hold a lot more. I'd still like to see inherent abilities make it into SE5, just because it would make for all kinds of modding fun.