[Updated on: Wed, 02 June 2010 22:27]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Marduk wrote on Thu, 03 June 2010 20:50

Hmm, armor could use some work, what with RS being so good. Up the dp a bit and spread them out a bit more evenly, say: Superlatanium 24 2000dp Valanium 20 1200dp Neutronium 16 800dp Kelarium 12 400dp Strobnium 8 250dp Crobmnium 4 150dp Tritanium 0 100dp

You have to be careful of overflow bugs.... consider the max value for armour on a specific starbase... if you overflow the value then you have effectively none

Report message to a moderator

donjon wrote on Fri, 04 June 2010 14:03

Marduk wrote on Thu, 03 June 2010 20:50 Hmm, armor could use some work, what with RS being so good. Up the dp a bit and spread them out a bit more evenly, say: You have to be careful of overflow bugs.... consider the max value for armour on a specific starbase... if you overflow the value then you have effectively none

I consider that a non-issue... I have never actually run into it in a real game, and it is easy enough to avoid when designing the base. By the time I could use superlatanium I generally don't waste minerals and resources on base defenses and weapons. They are too easy to kill anyway so I just include enough to deal with harassment.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Marduk wrote on Fri, 04 June 2010 12:58

I consider that a non-issue... I have never actually run into it in a real game, and it is easy enough to avoid when designing the base. By the time I could use superlatanium I generally don't waste minerals and resources on base defenses and weapons. They are too easy to kill anyway so I just include enough to deal with harassment.

Consider it a non-issue if you wish but I recall playing in a mod where it became a real problem

Report message to a moderator

mlaub wrote on Fri, 04 June 2010 21:44

it would be nice if the smaller and lighter hulls had a boost to their overall speed. Sort of a "nimble" factor.

You mean overall battle speed?

Perhaps add to them a base "Jamming" too, as they'd be more likely to skirt missiles.

Oh ho, chaff would become a leetle more complex!!

Report message to a moderator

m.a@stars wrote on Sat, 05 June 2010 09:56

mlaub wrote on Fri, 04 June 2010 21:44 it would be nice if the smaller and lighter hulls had a boost to their overall speed. Sort of a "nimble" factor. You mean overall battle speed? Perhaps add to them a base "Jamming" too, as they'd be more likely to skirt missiles. Oh ho, chaff would become a leetle more complex!!

Yes, battle speed.

I've thought about that, or making the jamming and Beam deflection (harder to target, effectively) on smaller hulls more effecient. That's one of those ideas that would need play testing in the new environment.

And yes, that would make chaff interesting. Although, if I were to do a game rewrite, I would program in more complex player targeting options. Something were you could define firing options against specific targets via ship class, weight, weapon, FP, DP, overall ship rating, movement speed, jamming, etc. Or, if I didn't do that, I'd fix it so the targeting algorithim didn't fire at chaff first.

-Matt

Report message to a moderator

mlaub wrote on Mon, 07 June 2010 15:51

I would program in more complex player targeting options. Something were you could define firing options against specific targets via ship class, weight, weapon, FP, DP, overall ship rating, movement speed, jamming, etc.

That would be cool!

Quote:

Or, if I didn't do that, I'd fix it so the targeting algorithim didn't fire at chaff first.

But chaff, in whatever incarnation, still has to exist.

Report message to a moderator

No it doesn't - boost jamming and/or make standard torps useable. The armor upgrade would help, but paired with a rearrange of starbase slots to prevent overflows.
I'd consider getting rid of the nubian altogether or making it into a lighter combat ship.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

16 is four bits allocated for design #...
8 is three bits for starbase design #...
unlimited would be tricky...
but mostly unlimited could be done

256 is 8 bits...

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Thu, 10 June 2010 07:30]

Report message to a moderator

iztok wrote on Thu, 10 June 2010 00:39

Hi! All armors: (but the first one) weight halved, cost cut by 1/3. All scoops: (but FM) cost and weight cut by 1/5. Tech requirements decreased by 1-2 levels. Remote miners: efficiency increased by 20%. Remote mining hulls: armor doubled, added 1*1-3 shield+armor slots. Maxi-miner hull tech decreased to con-8. "Miner" hull changed to warship, available at about con-21 as a super BB (BB with 3*2 all-purpose slots and one 3*elec slot changed to elec+mechanical). DN's hull gets one elec slot as elec+mechanical slot, "nose" slot increased to 3 items. Mini-Morph: only 1 engine. Meta-Morph: only 2 engines. Torps and missiles "swapped": all torps do double damage, but have low accuracy and initiative, shorter range and increased weight. Missiles would become "kill-through-shields-and-jamming" weapons. BR, Iztok

Actually, I'd consider moving the engine requirements up higher and decreasing the maximum safe speed for low-tech engines - so, say, the QJ5 risks explosion at warp 7 or above, or maybe simply can't hit warp 8 no matter how hard you push. If possible, higher tech engines could be added that go up to warp 12. This would make the Propulsion field worth researching all the way up.
Also, I would increase the weight of ramscoops to be over that of standard engines, to make players face a choice in what to outfit their warships with - efficient engines, or agile ones.
I don't think mining hulls need much work - maybe more fuel, that'd be a lot more useful than defenses. I'd get rid of some of the hulls too, maybe leave just Midget (ARM), Mini, and Miner(no OBRM). I do agree that mining bots should be better.
I don't think the Dreadnaught needs any work, especially if we use more useful armor items. Likewise, I think a smaller, lighter hull that can fight toe to toe with BB/DN hulls would be more useful than a super-BB, as it'd be better for counterdesigning if you can outmaneuver the enemy. Kinda like how nubians are now, but not ridiculous.
The torp/missile swap would be fine with me. Might be a little counter-intuitive if the graphics are the same, but yeah. I'd do some beam renaming/reimaging too, so say, "lasers/phasers" are range 1 weapons, "blasters" range 2 and "disruptors" range 3. The range zero weapons should have something done with them too.

[Updated on: Sat, 12 June 2010 14:33]

Report message to a moderator