Updated version of Zool's Rebalance

[Zool]

Now that Dilloh has the latest PU mod up and running I was thinking of updating Zool's Rebalance. As it stands now, if you use the old one over the top of canonHUDs1.4 or PU1.1b6DSE it's going to muck things up, so anyone running the latest mods, please don't use it.

As for the next version, I thought I'd first ask if anyone had any suggestions, criticisms or comments.

Dilloh, in the first version, one of the things I didn't like was that when I changed the prices of some ships, I had to add entries in the master_part_list and this resulted in making them available from the start of a new game, instead of remaining locked until certain stages of the game had been reached. Do you (or does anyone else) know how I can change the prices and other details of certain ships, NOT currently listed in the master_part_list, without making them available from game start

Also if anyone has ANY ideas how to make turrets draw power from your ships reactor please let me know. I know that the game considers turrets as "separate & individual ships" and that they are just attached to YOUR ship, so they have their own internal reactor. I'd like to change this if possible. I love my Galaxy GS but I think it's just a bit extreme that the turrets can rain continuous fire upon the enemy, whilst a couple of heavy guns can drain even a heavy reactor in a few salvos. All weapons on one ship should be powered from the main reactor, IMHO.

Can anyone tell me please if there are any other files for turrets than the units.csv and master_part_list??

OH, and how do I place a link to a particular post in another topic?

Cheers Everyone

[Shissui]

I love my Galaxy GS but I think it's just a bit extreme that the turrets can rain continuous fire upon the enemy, whilst a couple of heavy guns can drain even a heavy reactor in a few salvos. All weapons on one ship should be powered from the main reactor, IMHO.

Alternatively, my VegaStrike Franklin would have no reactor problem at all if I could use the surplus power from the turrets to power the shields.

I think that turrets should be permitted to have an independent power supply. This would allow the ship to keep firing its guns while somebody was attempting to board or if there was severe damage in the main hull. However, I think that such reactors should be an additional (expensive) charge so that they are only worthwhile for the heaviest guns on the biggest of ships.

Overall, I agree with you -- regardless if turrets have their own power or not, all power on the ship should be pooled.

[Zool]

I think that turrets should be permitted to have an independent power supply............I think that such reactors should be an additional (expensive) charge so that they are only worthwhile for the heaviest guns on the biggest of ships.

I had a similar thought myself, If you can't make the turrets run off the main reactor then would it be possible to be able to buy and fit "turret reactors". There could be several levels of upgrades available, just like main reactors. Could this be done Anyone

I'd still like to have them running off the main reactor though. It would give a reason for having the high end reactors. ATM there's virtually no use for level 6 and above reactors in the stock game. Only orions and cap ships can use level 7 or above (unless one has hacked their units.csv). If turret power could be supplied by the main reactor and turreted ships had their reactor level limit adjusted accordingly, then I think it would be a good balance between how much damage a ship like the galaxy gs or the orions can actually do. Hell, even a tarsus Mk2 with a couple of heavy guns and a heavy turret can be nasty, especially to ships with low end shields, which is most of them.

[Melonhead]

I know that the game considers turrets as "separate & individual ships" and that they are just attached to YOUR ship, so they have their own internal reactor. I'd like to change this if possible.

It seems that the code must define the "turret reactor" somewhere. Could its behavior be modified so it acts more like a ship reactor? For example, it sounds like the turret reactor is too large, or maybe it recharges too fast.

Not sure where to start looking, though.

Developers?

[Dilloh]

Now that Dilloh has the latest PU mod up and running I was thinking of updating Zool's Rebalance.

Great! Please use the units.csv from PU-DSE or the one I reposted in the PU thread as I found an error in the canonHUDs1.4 csv file.

this resulted in making them available from the start of a new game, instead of remaining locked until certain stages of the game had been reached. Do you (or does anyone else) know how I can change the prices and other details of certain ships, NOT currently listed in the master_part_list, without making them available from game start Question

Yes, I recently found that out. The ships locked in PR have their own masterpart-like entries in faction_ships.py, in a list showing them as "techs". There we have a lot of story-related possibilities btw, e.g. reenabling the cloaking device for all ships.

Also if anyone has ANY ideas how to make turrets draw power from your ships reactor please let me know.

I believe that's some sort of concept error, as it is hardcoded. I see no way to connect the turrets to the main reactor, but I'd also wish to do so. I'll make some experiments, copy some values from stock guns and see what happens.

Can anyone tell me please if there are any other files for turrets than the units.csv and master_part_list??

I'm pretty sure: nope.

OH, and how do I place a link to a particular post in another topic?

Code: Select all

http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8426&start=2

This links to your Invisible Orion Thread, starting with post number 3 (start=0 is the first post).

However, I think that such reactors should be an additional (expensive) charge so that they are only worthwhile for the heaviest guns on the biggest of ships.

I think the compromise was to buy turret, reactor and guns in one set - everybody who played the original remembers that you bought every single piece. But Shissuis suggestion points me to Zools rebalance - why not make turrets use one upgrade space for light gun turrets (laser, mass, meson), 2 for medium gun turrets (neutron, particle, tachyon), and 3 for heavy (ionic, plasma, fusion), something like that? This would represent the mass of equipment you fly around in your GS. Of course, all turretable ships would need more upgrade space then.

If you can't make the turrets run off the main reactor then would it be possible to be able to buy and fit "turret reactors". There could be several levels of upgrades available, just like main reactors. Could this be done Question Anyone Question

I don't think so... remember that you can only update a ship when you are currently piloting it? Since turrets are also ships, we can't update them. However, what would happen if you don't buy the turret reactor? Yes, they'd still work.

Could its behavior be modified so it acts more like a ship reactor? For example, it sounds like the turret reactor is too large, or maybe it recharges too fast.

Lowering those values is rather easy, look up units.csv. But that doesn't solve the problem at all, since the turret AI often shoots in rather strange directions, and then the firepower is gone. I still think it should be the players job to secure a stable energy supply. Another idea would be to make turrets use themselves up, like the missile turret did so, ammo-wise.

[Melonhead]

Melonhead wrote:
Could its behavior be modified so it acts more like a ship reactor? For example, it sounds like the turret reactor is too large, or maybe it recharges too fast.
Dilloh wrote: Lowering those values is rather easy, look up units.csv. But that doesn't solve the problem at all, since the turret AI often shoots in rather strange directions, and then the firepower is gone. I still think it should be the players job to secure a stable energy supply. Another idea would be to make turrets use themselves up, like the missile turret did so, ammo-wise.

But, isn't that effectively the same thing? If the AI is a bad shot (and it is!), then you would expect the turret to drain. You could almost think of the design as a safety feature--the ship keeps protection from the turrets, and the turrets can't drain the main (shield and afterburner) reactor.

I agree it would be better (read: more fun) if you had to start with a low-power turret reactor and upgrade.

[micheal_andreas_stahl]

Ai Turrets Bad shots + limited ammo + anti turret thing = a need to bring in a mod to be able to buy better turret AI. I rather favour being able to buy each peice seperatly.

[huzelbub]

I don't think the turret reactors are overpowered. I have a galaxy with two tachyon turrets. Though it's true that they can shoot continously, after a very short while (few seconds) I notice that the two tachyon "balls" of the respective turrets are not longer shot in pairs but shortly after another like it does if you keep shooting with depleted energy. I think somewhere in the manual it is mentioned that the energy level has influence on the inflicted damage, so I think there's no need to scale the turret reactors down (at least not the tachyon ones) as they actually seem too weak for continous fire.

Some of the upgrade prices I think they were a bit high for those not into vacuum cleaning or days of ever the same cargo runs. Especially afterburners and jumpdrive devices are too expensive. At least to me it's not very exciting to just trade in Troy and to wait till your Tarsus reaches docking range without AB. Unless trading gets less predictable I would suggest raising AB from original 3000 to 6000 (atm 20000!) and jumpdrive from 10000 to 15000 (atm 25000).

[Dilloh]

But, isn't that effectively the same thing? If the AI is a bad shot (and it is!), then you would expect the turret to drain. You could almost think of the design as a safety feature--the ship keeps protection from the turrets, and the turrets can't drain the main (shield and afterburner) reactor.

Talking of a TarsusMK2, yes it is effectively the same thing. But I once had a GGS with 5 Laser turrets. Hell, I felt like everything got damaged just because of coming into turret range. The point is: The more turrets you have, the higher the chance that the dumb AI hits your foe accidentally.

Ai Turrets Bad shots + limited ammo + anti turret thing = a need to bring in a mod to be able to buy better turret AI. I rather favour being able to buy each peice seperatly.

Good point. If we really want to rebalance the turrets, we'd take out a feature: Having energy-indepentent turrets. So I'd rather say we'd offer main reactor turrets and release a milspec GGS with lots of stock turrets as reward for a campaign.
A propos campaign, I've successfully created the first mission for the TarsusMK2 campaign. It was a lot of trial-and-error, but I've gained a deeper understanding for the python scripts and now feel capable enough to at least paste-and-copy enough for some simple campaigns. I'm planning to give the fixers PU contributors & friends names, so we have an ingame-easteregg-credit.

I notice that the two tachyon "balls" of the respective turrets are not longer shot in pairs but shortly after another like it does if you keep shooting with depleted energy.

This might be the result of a foe coming in range e.g. of the left gun first, so it starts shooting a few miliseconds earlier. Maybe.

I think there's no need to scale the turret reactors down (at least not the tachyon ones) as they actually seem too weak for continous fire.

I think I can hear out of both your and Andys posts that you are a bit wary we might make the turrets weaker. Be honest - do you favor the old turret concept the new one?

Unless trading gets less predictable I would suggest raising AB from original 3000 to 6000 (atm 20000!) and jumpdrive from 10000 to 15000 (atm 25000).

This would force the player to stay in Troy for a longer time. It would fit well into my first campaign concept. I like it! Since my first campaign is within Troy, I'd further say to lock the jump drive until the campaign is done. How about that?

[Zool]

Please use the units.csv from PU-DSE or the one I reposted in the PU thread as I found an error in the canonHUDs1.4 csv file.

Will Do I must be going blind, I didn't see this till sunday. I will make the necessary changes and repost it asap.

....why not make turrets use one upgrade space for light gun turrets (laser, mass, meson), 2 for medium gun turrets (neutron, particle, tachyon), and 3 for heavy (ionic, plasma, fusion), something like that?...

Great Idea. I can work that in.

....Another idea would be to make turrets use themselves up, like the missile turret did so, ammo-wise.

Interesting idea. how many rounds would you be able to carry? It would mean a lot of work creating ammo and putting it in everybase though. Anyway I have enough trouble remembering to restock my missiles when I land. lol

I agree it would be better (read: more fun) if you had to start with a low-power turret reactor and upgrade

This is where Dilloh's idea about having the turrets take up upgrade space would work. Lower powered turrets would take up less upgarde space and if that was limited then to some degree you would have control over it. Also maybe we could designate levels to the turrets, like reactors and shields, then limit the level on turret that can be used on each ship. eg: laser turret = level 1 turret, mass driver turret = level 2 turret..... and so on. It might be possible to place a limit in the ship for the turret level, like for reactors and shields. eg, My TarsusMk2 has level 3 shields and reactor, I would allow it to go to a level3 turret, maybe level 4, but no more. What do you all think? Can it be done?

Some of the upgrade prices I think they were a bit high for those not into vacuum cleaning or days of ever the same cargo runs. Especially afterburners and jumpdrive devices are too expensive. At least to me it's not very exciting to just trade in Troy and to wait till your Tarsus reaches docking range without AB. Unless trading gets less predictable I would suggest raising AB from original 3000 to 6000 (atm 20000!) and jumpdrive from 10000 to 15000 (atm 25000).

Good point. I had not considered that anyone would even try trading between the three bases in troy at game start. I remembered from the original that trying to make money trading cargo between bases was a waste of time. I have always taken patrol and bounty missions to get the money to upgrade. I'ts more dangerous but fun also. I just use HS missiles a lot. you can start a new game and get out of troy in a couple of hours.

The whole point of Zool's Rebalance is to extend gameplay by making is so that you HAVE to work harder and longer to get your next ship or piece of equipment. It was way too easy in the original and in PR I was halfway through the campaign in single day. And like all games, when the campaign(s) are over there's not much incentive to play anymore. It's absolutely fantastic that we all have a game that we love, and the ability to change it around and add to it more and more. That's what keeps it alive.

Is there a second on dropping the price on afterburners and jump engines?? I'll consider it if enough people think it's needful>

This might be the result of a foe coming in range e.g. of the left gun first, so it starts shooting a few miliseconds earlier. Maybe.

No, I don't think so. I have actually spent time in the turrets and they do have an energy meter, it does drain, and weapons fire is slowed the same as when you're in the cockpit and you drain your energy. What I was trying to get at with the turret issue was when you are in your cockpit this doesn't seen to happen.

This would force the player to stay in Troy for a longer time. It would fit well into my first campaign concept. I like it! Since my first campaign is within Troy, I'd further say to lock the jump drive until the campaign is done. How about that?

Sounds good to me!!

[micheal_andreas_stahl]

I might just use a word i don't like using about turrets.

Turrets are stupid, useless, not worth buying. Laser turrets are a little better because they can fire long enough to thinken the air to just accidently hit the foe. And if i'm being supported bya ship with tuurets i go destroy my supoort fist then my foe. I think make turret ai better and make them more expensive.

[Melonhead]

I once had a GGS with 5 Laser turrets. Hell, I felt like everything got damaged just because of coming into turret range. The point is: The more turrets you have, the higher the chance that the dumb AI hits your foe accidentally.

As it should be--whether it's turrets on a B-17 or the flak barrier from the Battlestar Galactica, more turrets equals more stuff flying through the sky, which discourages enemies from approaching. BUT, more turrets also means less space for other things, since every turret requires power, etc. Especially on a Galaxy GS, there shouldn't be much room for anything else. The GS is a gunship based on a merchant design, not a merchant itself, if I undertand the premise.

I like the idea of different turrets taking up more space--a heavier turret would take more upgrade spaces because it has a bigger reactor, probably inside the ship. (I don't recall--is the cargo space on a GS reduced? It should be, to account for the extra turret fittings.) Although it would be nice to have a choice about how turrets are powered (independently or off the main reactor), until/unless we can figure out how to do it, the simplest solution is to just say, "This is the standard design approach in 2669." If we figure out how to make the change to allow the main reactor to power turrets, perhaps that could become available after a certain point in the campaign, simulating a new design approach becoming popular.

[Melonhead]

I think make turret ai better and make them more expensive.

Or, make it possible buy a better turret AI in stages. The question is, what do you want "better" to be? Better aiming? Better use of power? More options for what targets to shoot?

My preference would be for a turret that's "stabilized"--that can rotate fast enought that it can keep tracking an enemy while I twist and turn. Since I fly a Galaxy, I shouldn't be able to outmaneuver a Kilrathi, but I sure ought to be jinking to stay out of their line of fire while I bravely run away. (Haven't used a Monte Python reference in a while.) My turrets need to be able to handle my evasive maneuvers and keep the cats off my six.

[Dilloh]

how many rounds would you be able to carry? It would mean a lot of work creating ammo and putting it in everybase though. Anyway I have enough trouble remembering to restock my missiles when I land. lol

Depends strongly on the price. I'd say regarding the actual price, 1000 shots would be okay. Afterwards you'd need to visit a ship dealer. Spices the game up, don't you think so? Didn't we have somewhere a units.csv for an ammo-related gun?

It might be possible to place a limit in the ship for the turret level, like for reactors and shields. eg, My TarsusMk2 has level 3 shields and reactor, I would allow it to go to a level3 turret, maybe level 4, but no more. What do you all think? Can it be done?

I must admit I even don't know how to change the max reactor since I haven't done that before - z30 would be able to answer the question instantly. Whereever he is.

Is there a second on dropping the price on afterburners and jump engines??

Yes, increase the prices.

I think make turret ai better and make them more expensive.

I currently don't want to spend time on learning how the AI works. I'll stick to the tools I know and focus my energy on learning campaign modding. Anyone else willing to alter AI behaviour, go ahead.

If we figure out how to make the change to allow the main reactor to power turrets, perhaps that could become available after a certain point in the campaign, simulating a new design approach becoming popular.

Yes, it is no problem to implement new stuff after some time. That's a good idea. At a later point of the campaign, you might also be able to afford energy-independent turrets. Before, upgrade-space related and ammo-related ones would be available.

The question is, what do you want "better" to be? Better aiming? Better use of power? More options for what targets to shoot?

That's a good question - maybe the AI is already maxed out. I think of additionally implementing autotrackers on the already moving turrets to improve their accuracy dramatically.

My turrets need to be able to handle my evasive maneuvers and keep the cats off my six.

And here I absolutely don't agree - If you were sitting in a turret, you'd hardly be able to hit your foe. Your computer knows how to. But your computer doesn't know, which move you'll make next. So I'd propose nothing less than a startrek-like phaserturret as the only superturret capable of keeping locked on the target.

[Zool]

Didn't we have somewhere a units.csv for an ammo-related gun?

I "borrowed" the stormfire cannon from WCU and implemented it in one of my unit.csv's. I had it working ok but there was no weapon showing up on my ship and there was a problem when buying ammo. Basically there was no ammo listed for sale, I just bought whatever supply of guns that was for sale at the time of landing and kept mounting them together. It acted like one gun with colossal amounts of ammo.

I must admit I even don't know how to change the max reactor since I haven't done that before

That's easy, just look for the [shipname.template] in the first column of the units.csv then scroll across till you find {shield_4_Level2;;}{reactor_level_1;;}{mult_general_upgrade;;}{add_general_upgrade;;}. (about3/4 of the way across). This sets the max limits for player ships. The [shipname] entry is the AI ships. The [shipname.blank] is the "blank" ships we buy at the dealer.

Is there a second on dropping the price on afterburners and jump engines??

Yes, increase the prices.

I was looking over the first Zools Rebalance text last night and was thinking that a few things could indeed have their price bumped up some.
That's one for lowering tha AB and JE prices, and one for raising them.

That's a good question - maybe the AI is already maxed out. I think of additionally implementing autotrackers on the already moving turrets to improve their accuracy dramatically.

That's all I'd ask for, A working autotracker on each turret. But purchased separately and added later, just like autotrackers for guns. Although, I know this has been a bit of a problem before, perhaps we could have a second version of each, an ADVANCED Turret. One that has the autotracking already built in. Just sell your BASIC turret and buy a much higher priced ADV turret.

If we figure out how to make the change to allow the main reactor to power turrets, perhaps that could become available after a certain point in the campaign, simulating a new design approach becoming popular.

Yes, it is no problem to implement new stuff after some time. That's a good idea. At a later point of the campaign, you might also be able to afford energy-independent turrets. Before, upgrade-space related and ammo-related ones would be available.

This sounds like a good idea to me.

[micheal_andreas_stahl]

Are you talking about the turret taking upgrade space or cargo space?

I would rather the prices of the AB and JE raised, there two for it raised one against, we win.

That's a good question - maybe the AI is already maxed out. I think of additionally implementing autotrackers on the already moving turrets to improve their accuracy dramatically.

Someone once said that the turret ai was better and could hit (shock horror) the ship!!! So you could sit and watch hordes of ships explodeing around you so it was lowered.

If i sit in a turret i can hit a foe if i have done it for a little while.

My preference would be for a turret that's "stabilized"--that can rotate fast enought that it can keep tracking an enemy while I twist and turn. Since I fly a Galaxy, I shouldn't be able to outmaneuver a Kilrathi, but I sure ought to be jinking to stay out of their line of fire while I bravely run away. (Haven't used a Monte Python reference in a while.) My turrets need to be able to handle my evasive maneuvers and keep the cats off my six.

I feel the same way.

I really do not like talking down turrets as they have their place but thay are usless

[huzelbub]

Just to be sure, Dilloh and Herr Stahl, do you want to raise the original price which is 3000 for AB and 10000 for JE or do you want to raise the prices of the current rebalance even further, as they are already set to 20000 for AB and 25000 for JE?
Price for JE at 25000 seems more or less OK to me (especially since you plan to implement a campaign), but AB really are essential, either to survive fights early on or to cut down unnecessary time in space while waiting to get in docking range

I think I can hear out of both your and Andys posts that you are a bit wary we might make the turrets weaker. Be honest - do you favor the old turret concept the new one?

If with new concept you mean to make turrets more customisable or even divide them into different parts, go for it. I just feared that with Zool saying

I love my Galaxy GS but I think it's just a bit extreme that the turrets can rain continuous fire upon the enemy, whilst a couple of heavy guns can drain even a heavy reactor in a few salvos.

he plans to power down turret reactors. If I sit in my tachyon turrets myself it takes up to 6 or 7 salvos and the energy is depleted. The firing continues but as described above. Back in the cockpit the AI turrets show exactly the same behavior. You can see and hear the difference in firing. Just let them fire for let's say 10s, switch them off for a while and then continue firing. Energy does deplete. While turrets can rain continous fire, after a very short time they are only half as effective as when they just started firing. And as long as the target is in range the AI keeps firing so there's no time for a recharge.

BTW: while flying the Fireblade from DSE I noticed that it (and therefore the demon, too) still keeps switching the information on borth VDUs. I adapted the changes Sligor made to the other crafts with two VDUs.

[Dilloh]

Just to be sure, Dilloh and Herr Stahl, do you want to raise the original price which is 3000 for AB and 10000 for JE or do you want to raise the prices of the current rebalance even further

I'd say double the original prices, maybe triple them.

AB really are essential

Yes they are, and I rather have the problem finding some in Troy when I start a new game. Another way would be to make a cheaper one (original prize) using jump fuel - that'd be easy to implement and as long as you don't have a Jump Drive, you don't need the Jump Fuel and from what I know, your ship posses it in any way. But I'd also raise AB prices as it is the most useful equipment IMO and shouldn't be discount.

I just feared that with Zool saying ... he plans to power down turret reactors.

Effectively spoken yes, but eventually it is rebalance. It is a big cause for me to not take out features, but to add new ones to PR. So I'd also say to implement the turrets as a reward for a confed campaign as newest high-tech turrets, only available at perry or a secret refinery, something like that.

Just let them fire for let's say 10s, switch them off for a while and then continue firing.

Problem: How do I tell them: now stop firing, time for a delay after multiple shots? I can change the delay between single shots, naturally. Maybe there's a relation to missiles which would be worth a look.

BTW: while flying the Fireblade from DSE I noticed that it (and therefore the demon, too) still keeps switching the information on borth VDUs. I adapted the changes Sligor made to the other crafts with two VDUs.

I assume you tested them? If this is the case, thanks alot, and if you're already on it and have some time, you might want to do the changes to the remaining PU ships. I'll take that into PU among with a credit

[Dilloh]

@Zool
I was wondering about the popularity of your rebalance. I would suggest that you launch a poll, something like "Would you want to see my rebalance in PU?", among with a list of changes and features you've done, not including the Orion Fix which surely is in. I think it is important that all ships can hold the same upgrade combinations like before, e.g. if the Demon can now only hold Lev1 r/s or even Lev3 r/s it would be unbalanced.

I think this poll is important, just before you do all the work. If the people don't want it in PU, you'd have to make it optional and this would mean you'd have to make a new version every time a new units.csv is released, or briefly: It would be in direct competition with PU/canonHUDs, and I think the spirit of PU has further transformed into melting the communitys work.

I'd propose to run the poll for 30 days and describe clearly what you're going to do, offering a discussion to take suggestions in. Afterwards, if enough people participated so we have a clear outcome, we can make a decision.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not wary that you might "take over" PU, but since I took over z30s work (at least he had no objections), I want to make sure that we only implement the stuff the users want to have, else they wouldn't want to use PU any more. And bringing out two versions is not a reasonable option for me - every time someone would invent a rebalance, we'd have to exponentiate the number of versions every time.

[Zool]

RE: Turrets.
It was never my intention to change anything for the worse. I think turrets, as they are ATM, are OK, not good, not bad, just OK. Their accuracy is reasonable. As soon as I can buy and equip one one, I like to fly a TarsusMk2. The turret is actually more accurate than I am without autotrackers. The turret also accounts for about 50% (give or take) of my kills. I personally don't bother sitting in a turret. I'm happy to let them do their own thing while I fly the ship. When I get my GGS and finish loading it up (my preference is for meson turrets, because they're cheap to start with, then tachyon turrets as I can afford them and finally a mix of tachyon and fusion turrets for RF), I have no problem flying into a huge horde of the enemy, and, by the time I have taken out two of the enemy with main guns, the turrets have knocked out another two or three. No problems there. Want to take out a Kamekh, just keep AB'ing past him and let the turrets do the work. GREAT!! I don't really think they need to be changed, though tweaking things is what we do, me especially.

The whole question of turret power was just a thought I had one day and whether or not it would be possible to change it, so I asked the forum. At the time there was no intention to change anything, although the discussions have resulted in some great ideas, and until we work out how to do the things we discuss I very much doubt anything will be changed in the turret dept. "Be tranquil and at peace my son"


RE:Zool's Rebalance.
ZR was created around my playing style, ie I like to work my butt off for a few weeks, saving my creds, buying and equipping the ships I want to use through the campaign, BEFORE I even start the campaign. I wanted this to take a long time (not forever though lol), so the simplest way for me was to make things more expensive, thus it takes longer to get enough money buy anything, and be willing to put up with low end equipment longer so that when you got the good stuff, it really was worth the effort.. The idea to make equipment use varying amounts of upgrade space was a bit of an after thought, but the more I thought about it, the better it seemed., after all, even slightly realistically, how can an ECM need the same amount of space as a reactor. How could a L2 shield gen be the same size as a L8 shield gen. It just didn't seem right to me. Then I figured, if I feel like this, then maybe others would agree and thus I decided to share my ideas with my fellow privateers.

Just for the record I certainly don't want another mod in competition with PU. My thought was only to enhance PU, to add something to it for those that wanted something the same, but with a little difference, something more. Dilloh, and everyone else who contributed to PU came up with a fantastic concept that has kept PR alive, bigger and better than ever. ZR was specifically designed to work with PU(I don't actually know how much of ZR will work if you install it without PU), and my goal in this is, if enough people liked what I did, then maybe some or all of it would find it's way into the PU mod itself, as my contribution. If not then it doesn't matter, as ZR can be a separate addon for those who want to use it. I'm happy either way. And If I have to do a separate update for ZR everytime PU gets updated then I'll just have to do it if enough people like it and want it. Of course this depends on whether or not some or all of ZR gets combined into PU anyway.

Oh, and a sneak warning for ZR1_1, YES I do plan on increasing some of the prices a bit. I am actually going through my list of changes and adjusting some things before I start the real work, AND, why I thought I'd ask my PR brothers and sisters for suggestions. Keep 'em coming

RE: ZR Poll

Don't get me wrong, I'm not wary that you might "take over" PU, but since I took over z30s work (at least he had no objections), I want to make sure that we only implement the stuff the users want to have, else they wouldn't want to use PU any more. And bringing out two versions is not a reasonable option for me - every time someone would invent a rebalance, we'd have to exponentiate the number of versions every time.

I couldn't agree more, I certainly don't want to "take over" anything, merely add something to the whole.

The poll, good idea, I'll set one up next week when I have finished compiling a draft of the new ZR changes for everyone to see. Personally, I am wondering if ZR should be kept separate, as an add on mod for PU, as there are probably a fair number of people who don't want the extensive changes, but like PU the way it is now. If anyone wants to see just what I did in the first ZR I would suggest they download the ZR1_0bReadMe (which contains a lot more information than the post)and check it out and post your comments by Friday 13/04/2007.
Thanks Z L

[Melonhead]

Melonhead said: My turrets need to be able to handle my evasive maneuvers and keep the cats off my six.

Dilloh said: And here I absolutely don't agree - If you were sitting in a turret, you'd hardly be able to hit your foe. Your computer knows how to. But your computer doesn't know, which move you'll make next.

But, it does. Knowing where I'm going next is trivial for the computer--when I make a control input from the cockpit, the computer can calculate where the ship is going to go long before it actually makes the maneuver and make a correction with the turret servos. It's no different than a vibration-reducing camera lens.

Autotracking is MUCH harder--the sensors must figure out the vector for the enemy ship in 3D and project a most likely course, based on rates of change, and then factor in lead angle for my "projectiles."

[micheal_andreas_stahl]

Before he reads the rest of the posts Herr Stahl think's AB should at least be between 6,000 - 9,000 credits whilst the Jump Drive should be between 15,000 & 25,000 credits. These are specalty units.

he plans to power down turret reactors. If I sit in my tachyon turrets myself it takes up to 6 or 7 salvos and the energy is depleted. The firing continues but as described above. Back in the cockpit the AI turrets show exactly the same behavior. You can see and hear the difference in firing. Just let them fire for let's say 10s, switch them off for a while and then continue firing. Energy does deplete. While turrets can rain continous fire, after a very short time they are only half as effective as when they just started firing. And as long as the target is in range the AI keeps firing so there's no time for a recharge.

You can do that by limiting the reacter size. I did it once one a ship before chucking him out in space. If the reacter is small enough it won't be able to fire the gun. You could also code it, ask Chuckstarchaser

For a Weapon (Missile or Torp) i think it would have to be coded, ask Chuck.

Another way would be to make a cheaper one (original prize) using jump fuel - that'd be easy to implement and as long as you don't have a Jump Drive, you don't need the Jump Fuel and from what I know, your ship posses it in any way. But I'd also raise AB prices as it is the most useful equipment IMO and shouldn't be discount.

I will say some thing chuck toldm, try not adding some meny adds. it's best to limit the amount of AB so that it is getable but not so cheap.

if the Demon can now only hold Lev1 r/s or even Lev3 r/s it would be unbalanced.

What This!? The Demon is a cap ship hunter and light fighter. Just because it is a light fighter doesnt mean that it has to have paper for shields. There was this before with Spaceman Spiff, Mamya, and several others. i was decided that the demons sheilds would be left the alone because the ship lost it's edge. It was turned into a fancy talon.

If your going to make upgrade space of equipment ouy will have to make the amount of upgrade space on the ship larger.

Ahh, read all posts.

[Dilloh]

I am wondering if ZR should be kept separate, as an add on mod for PU, as there are probably a fair number of people who don't want the extensive changes, but like PU the way it is now.

As I said, I'd have virtually any problem with ZR if it kept the ability to exactly combine the stock equipment without leaving more or less upgrade space than before.
Looking at your 1.0 downloads, I see 29 downloads. That is about the same download number that the canonHUD of that time had. So I at least can see a great interest in your rebalance, but I suggest we'll let the poll decide.

Autotracking is MUCH harder--the sensors must figure out the vector for the enemy ship in 3D and project a most likely course, based on rates of change, and then factor in lead angle for my "projectiles."

It is the same though. When autotracking came up in WC3, the guns were supposed to sit on small turrets and reacted without any delay. The PR autotracking rather reminds me of static guns able to shoot their bolts in strage angles. Those two abilities combined increases the accuracy as well as the shooting angles, which would e.g. give the GGS the ability to cover much more space with its 5 turrets.

You could also code it, ask Chuckstarchaser. For a Weapon (Missile or Torp) i think it would have to be coded, ask Chuck.

I doubt Chuck would do that much work for us; he has enough to do with WCU. I see ways to coop with him or even let him do some work we need, but only if he needs it for WCU at that time.

I will say some thing chuck toldm, try not adding some meny adds.

Why not? I like a great variety of ships and add-ons. People usually play standard PR or GG before they find out about PU, so the "confusion" is being kept minimal.

What This!? The Demon is a cap ship hunter and light fighter. Just because it is a light fighter doesnt mean that it has to have paper for shields. There was this before with Spaceman Spiff, Mamya, and several others. i was decided that the demons sheilds would be left the alone because the ship lost it's edge. It was turned into a fancy talon.

I think I have proven with the Fireblade that a nasty ship can have Lev1 shielding (Yes, the FB has Lev1!) if it is just fast enough. The Demon is considered to be the deadliest ship in PR, and we're not to change anything, just to offer new equipment combinations for it as well for any ships. Don't worry, Demon will be Demon again.

If your going to make upgrade space of equipment ouy will have to make the amount of upgrade space on the ship larger.

Isn't this topic all about that?

[huzelbub]

I fixed the remaining cockpits. They are: dralthi, gladius, salthi, stiletto and capship. The latter seems to be only for the draymanCVL and something called freetrader. Though I could hack one into my savegame I wasn't able to "buy" it from my fleet. The other capships are assigned to cockpit files that don't exist. Anyway, I did test the modified ones and they seem to work fine.

[Dilloh]

Thank you for doing this work.

And while you were busy, I was too - I'm happy to tell you all that I finally learned how to create simple story-related campaigns consisting of existing missions (like cargo, bounty, defend, cleansweep, scout, etc.). I've scripted a whole Troy-campaign unlocking the TarsusMK2 and will release it in combination with the OrionFix by Zool. The campaign will surely need some language-related correction (I'm german for those who didn't know), maybe as well as some balance comments. All I need to do is doing a beta for the last three missions, so maybe I'll release a beta tomorrow.