targ collective wrote:I don't know how to put range attenuation in game but it would help keep the long range weapons from getting too overpowered if it were given to them at a punishing rate.
That should be "stability=" in the weapons list. Never tested it, though. But it makes sense for the tractor beam has a much longer stability (until the beam implodes) than e.g. lasers.
targ collective wrote:I strongly disagree with removing the hard limits and substituting upgrade space for them.
No problem - it was just a suggestion in case we didn't find another way.
targ collective wrote:That's why hard limiters are better as a system.
Personally, I agree. I had strong objections including Zool's Rebalance, but when I saw that 90% of all PU users downloaded it, I felt convinced. Still, if there's a better way for turret placement, use that one of course.
targ collective wrote:Having space for just three is pretty silly.
The concept rather pointed to having max. 3 heavy turrets, and fill up the rest with medium ones.
targ collective wrote:Instead give the different turret ratings within a class different ratings in terms of upgrade space, and force the user to use pure mediums or a few heavies and mostly lights or something between the two.
Oh, ok.
targ collective wrote:Don't use silly 10,000 values; instead balance it so they have what they need rather than too much or too little.
This was an example - I fully agree that it'd need a better balance.
targ collective wrote:New weapon mounts can be created via weapons_list.xml. New turret mounts are another matter, and I have no idea where these are stored.
Although I never experimented with turrets, I have a theory that you don't need an entry at all... just create your turret and it's mount issue, than give the template ship a mount for that. E.g. give paradigm.template a mount called "turret_targcollective" and create a "turret_targcollective_laser", something like that. Gonna try it out.
targ collective wrote:The problems... Ah, our poor ships. We can't reload missiles; we can't buy different weapons for our weapon mounts; we can't get the correct images to display on the ships screen (that last applies to your Galaxy Gunship by the way). Our variants are not used ingame by the enemy. Yet. But if you'd educate us we'd be grateful!
Are those ships milspec or blank? Not being able to reload missiles can happen by not having free upgrade space.
Mounts need to be clearly described by what they can mount. An example from a mount of centurion.blank which already has a tachyon:
Code: Select all
{Tachyon;;;Light Medium Heavy;-0.118499;-2.34212e-2;0.103703;.12;.12;0.00000e+0;0.00000e+0;0.124000;0.00000e+0;6.20000e-2;0.00000e+0;1;1}
Note that this mount can carry weapons of type Light, Medium and Heavy (and Steltek).
The GGs HUD works fine by this time, at least in the ship dealer - I spent my early times on HUDs and now feel annoyed. I have a theory though, that like with bfxm and png files, the HUD spr and png files need to have clear names with maximum 8 chars, character sensitive. You should try that out... we had big trouble with just hanging mk2 behind a name.
If you want to get your ships into AI flightgroups, open /modules/faction_ships.py. You'll see something like this:
Code: Select all
fighters = (("stiletto","ferret","ferret","gladius","sabre","broadsword",), #confed
("sartha","sartha","sartha","dralthi","dralthi","grikath","gothri",), #kilrathi
("steltek_fighter",), #nephilim
("tarsus","tarsus","tarsusMk2","tarsusMk2","galaxyhk","galaxy","orion","orionMk2",), #merchant
("talon","talon","krant","sparrowhawk"), #retro
("talon","talon","talon","talon","talon","sparrowhawk"), #pirates
("demon","demon","fireblade","orionMk2b","orionMk2h","centurion","galaxygs"), #hunter
("talon","talon","sparrowhawk","scimitar","gladius","hornet","hornet","kukhri","raptor",), #militia
("salthi","salthi.particle"), #unknown
("tarsus","gladius","talon","talon","talon","drayman",),#landreich
("tarsus","gladius","talon","talon","talon","drayman",),#border_worlds
("stiletto",), #firekkan
("stiletto",), #AWACS
)
isBomber = {"broadsword":2,"gladius":4,"gothri":6,"grikath":8}
capitals = (("paradigm",), #confed
("kamekh",), #kilrathi
("done",), #nephilim
("drayman",), #merchant
("drayman",), #retro
("drayman",), #pirates
("drayman",), #hunter
("draymanCVL",), #militia
("kamekh",), #unknown
("drayman",),#landreich
("paradigm",),#border_worlds
("drayman",), #firekkan
("paradigm","drayman","drayman","drayman",), #AWACS
Replace stock ships with your variants and you're done.
chuck wrote:Taking out a capship should be a lot harder even at equal armor and shield levels
I simply agree, but this'd mean that you need to fight the capship longer - so you need to survive longer - so the capships turrets need to be weaker. Otherwised, it doesn't matter if you destroy the capship or the escorts first - you're dead anyway.
Indeed, cargo volumes were arrived at by tossing dice. If that's where the idea comes from that a drayman can fit ten cents, I'd urge all parties involved to take a look of the dimensions of the crafts; NOT the cargo volume numbers...
You mean to resize the ships?
targ collective wrote:Waiting on the go-ahead from Dilloh before I release it.
Uh... I don't know when I'll be through it, maybe you'd post a beta for all so we'd have more opinions.