Babylon 5 Mod

[pathfinder]

Naw, I already have it. Maybe post or link it so Grumbler can get/use it.

[pathfinder]

Timstone: No anger or hurt here. Tired, yes. Weapons are the biggest muddle/imbalance, I think most, if not all, will agree with that. Not sure what approach will get "biggest bang for the buck" and not take another year to implement. But SOMETHING sure needs to be done with them.

BTW I have gotten the biggest bugs fixed and now have a "tarnished" Gold conVersion of what I have on the MOD. Should be fairly up-to-date (based on latest [I hope] TDM AI).

Now to figure out how to zip it so the rest of ya can test it...all I have is the basic/non-registered winzip (lost registration data during format of HDD).

This what I am going to do. just be patient since I can't auto-exe the zip file, so you folks will have to manually place them. I will make the folder structure like the MOD so it shouldn't be TOO painful. I will upload just the data and AI files I changed to make a Gold Version.

[ January 26, 2003, 20:30: Message edited by: pathfinder ]

[grumbler]

PF: I have tried a little experiment with the weapons. I simply made a rule: all light weapons have a basic range of 2, medium of 4, long of 6. Lasers get +1 range but reduced damage, seekers +2.

Level 1 weapons lost 1 range, level 6 (the highest I went in a short game) got +1. Medium ship mounts got +2 (large would get +4 and massive +6, but again I didn't go that far).

In the short game, things seemed to work out a bit better. Obviously, the low ROF weapons weren't any good - I will try to come up with a reasonable compromise between ROF and range. However, the smaller ships didn't prove as dominating as in the earlier games. In particular, Shadow escorts could no longer zap enemy light cruisers with impunity.

I am working on a cost-benefit calculation for range, hitting power, and ROF. It will have to be empirical, though, since the tradeoffs are not necessarily strictly numerical, and they definately change based on strategic vs tactical combat (since the human player can shoot and scoot and the computer cannot).

Hopefully, such a formula will allow us to more cogently talk about weapons.

ALL: I don't like the idea of abandoning weapons mounts, for somewhat personal "stylistic" reasons. If you get rid of them, especially with the rules as is on reactive armor, then capital ships become a losing game.

Take the example of 800 tons of warships in two cases: one battleship and two light cruisers.

The battleship has 50 tons locked up in required components, the 2 CLs 60 tons. It will take the BB 245 tons of standard fusion engines to get a speed of 16, while it will take the 2 CLs 250 tons to do the same.

At first blush, the BB looks like the better deal, as it has 505 tons to devote to weaponry, armor, and sensor/ECM, while the 2 CLs have only 490 tons. However, when you add in the fact that the 2 CLs can have 2 sets of reactive armor, they seem the better deal. Smaller ships get the advantage of additional reactive armor protection, even if they have to carry more sensors et al to get it.

I don't think we want games where hordes of small ships fight it out. Capital ships should be distinctly different, and more powerful, and more expensive on a ton for ton basis. It should take a capital ship to match a capital ship.

The way to make that happen it with the weapons mounts. I see a triple-cost/double- tonnage/double-damage/increased-range formula as working better than the double-cost/double- tonnage/triple-damage formula used now. that way, capital ships get range as their primary benefit, and pay for it in cost.

thoughts?

[pathfinder]

Grumbler: hehe, I'll ley you and whoever else wants that headache (weapons) to work on it all you want

I don't care if one race has a small advantage, as long as there is another with a different advantage so they balance out. I agree on the need for cap ships..it is much more satisfying to see one of them blow

[Jamorobo]

You have to remember that range is only good if you've got a chance of hitting the enemy. No point wasting a heavy laser at med/long range with 25% chance to hit as you will have to wait 4 turns for it to reload.

The problem with B5 (which also makes it good) is the fact that there are so many different weapons and it's going to be damn hard to work out a ballace for all (that is if we keep all the weapons. i my self want to keep all) What you need first is a list of all the weapons, firstly general weapons everyone can have and then race specific weapons. Then we can all decide on how each weapons will be different and how it progresses, this allows us in the end to make sure that all the weapons are ballanced before plowing through the component file.

Capital ship battles are a must as the main ships in combat, the main thing about Capital ships is there large enought to effectivly hold fighters. my test on the current Version (fighters my be a big unbalanced but bare with me) my EA battle cruiser with 12 heavy fighters ( 4 cobra bay 3's) and assorted laser weapons could take out two EA battle cruisers that don't have fighter bays but more weapons.

[Fyron]

Right click on the B5 Mod folder, and use the winzip button to make a zip file out of it.

The unregistered Version of winzip only gives a registration message. It still has the same functionality as the registered Version.

Shadow ships should be able to zap other race's ships easily (except Vorlons), because they can not colonize. If their ships are the same as other races, they have no chance of survival. The same goes for the Vorlons.

[ January 27, 2003, 00:04: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Timstone]

Sorry guys for not replying that fast.
Okay we don't all agree on what needs to be done. I can see PF's problem with the whole situation. But Grumbler made a very useable reply. My idea was to revise not to completely remake the mod. If we would do that, we would be wiping out half a year of work. That would be a shame. The basis of our mod is very good, the feel and atmosphere is very good. No complaints here. Only the imbalance of some weapons and the total choas in the files is something worthwhile to improve. That is what I wanted to remake.
Since I began on TAInT King (The Ancients In The maKing), I was introduced to the mayhem in the components file. It's a real mess in there. When I started with the basic design of the 8 remaining Ancients, I had to choose which techfamilies I had to include for every weapon. That made me realise it all had to be simple.
Example: I gave the Triad Combined Aspects a AntMatter Wave. Although this is a AntiMatter powered weapon, I gave it requirements in the fields of Triad Light Weapons and Plasma Weapons. Why? Well, The Triad Combined Aspects use primarily Plasma based weapons and to keep it simple, I gave the requirement to all their weapons.
Also I gave every Ancient 8 weapons [tiny (Fighter/Troop), light (Ship), light (PDF), medium (Torpedo), Heavy (Ship), Mega (Ship) and Ultra (Ship, One Per Vehicle)]. This really makes the making of each race very much less complicated. Again the principle of simplicity; don't give each race too many weapons. You won't be able to use them all anyway. And I you do want more weapons, just add them later on.
All this simplicity has one big downside though. The diversity is not a big as it could be. Each race has more or less the same weaponstructure. To play each race to it's limits, you just have to master the different weapons (some fire faster, some use them to reder the opponent unable to fight back, etc...), the rest of the tactics behind a specific race is more or less the same as with any other race.

So the main question stays. What shall we do? Shall we re-evaluate things and start making repairs to our precious mod? Or shall we mud on with the concept we have before us?

PF: In no way I'm angry or something. I just had some thoughts about the way we're handling things at this time. And above all, I think you're currently the most valuable member of our ModCrew. If I offended you of hurt you, I appologise.

[pathfinder]

Intersting: Drazi just did a GROPOS on an EA planet....

Seen this happen quite a few in the standard game (this is in current Gold test game)...

[Shadow Master]

On the topic of fighter ships..
All my large (Drazi) ships have 1 launch catapult.
The fighters are more a distraction than a threat unless I can get some good weaps for them. Found those few extra fighters can turn the tide.

I have found with weapons:
Shadows have long range strong weaps but 1 group has better fighter weap (electrical thingy)

Torvalus have long range strong weaps comparible with Shadows but the power laser has longer reload

Streib have a nice reload increase fighter weapon

Vorlons have stronger fighter and similar ship weapons to Shadows

Drazi have big fighters that hold more (less potent) weapons than others

Also many weapons have pased damage but no sheilds exist AT ALL! (oh wait emissive armor creates sheilds, are those phased or normal?)

[pathfinder]

ShadowMaster: Not sure if the passive armors are normal or phased, methinks normal shields...