Rapier in the making

Forum for discussing various mods for the VS-engine based upon Privateer. (Please play nice now, and extinguish all flaming materials.
Sincerely, The Management)

Rapier in the making

Postby z30 » Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:52 am

A bird's eye view of Chucks rendition of the WC1 Rapier for PU :

Image

It's a hell lot better than the current model we have. It may not be ready by the time of the basemod release but when it's finished - a mini-patch will be made available to all you Rapier lovers out there :)
Privateer Parallel Universe

http://pu.wcjunction.com
z30
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 808
Topics: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Share On:

Share on Facebook Facebook Share on Twitter Twitter Share on Digg Digg

Postby chuck_starchaser » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:11 am

Hahaha, thanks z30.

Speaking of the Rapier, we're having a debate among ourselves at the new forum about how a Rapier should stack aginst, say, a Centurion. I've argued that, a Confed fighter costing in the order of 50 million credits, according to the WC novels, should be on a complete different level from a civilian craft selling at retail for a quarter of a million. But that it should not have a jump drive. But others argue, quite convincingly, that a ship without a JD would be pretty useless to own by a privateer; and that if a Centurion can stand up to kilrathi military craft, it should be possible for it to stand up to a Confed military craft.

Opinions?
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby Zool » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:00 pm

I think the Centurion is more than a match for the Rapier, except when it comes down to running away (Rapiers top AB speed is about 1300 to Centurions 1000) You have:

Centurion Vs Rapier
Mediun fighter (though should be a heavy) vs medium fighter
180 mass units vs 20 mass units
4 x Guns (variable type) vs 4 x Guns (fixed type)
10 x HS + 6 x IR missiles vs 3 x HS + 2 x IR
500 cruise spd vs 450 cruise spd
1000 AB spd vs 1300 AB spd
Level 3 (AI ship) shields (level 4 player max) vs level 3 (AI ship)shields, (level 4 player max)
Very good handling vs Very good handling
Level 3 (AI)reactor (level 4 player max) vs level 3 (AI) reactor (level 4 player max)
16 upgrade space vs 12 upgrade space
Player purchased armour (isometal 40 cm's) vs fixed armour (4.5 cm's)

On the surface they appear to be fairly even ships, however;
- The Centurion has far better armour (options) whilst the Rapier has a speed advantage.
- The Centurion carries 3 x as many missiles as the Rapier
- The Centurion has player configurable guns whilst the Rapier has 2 x Laser + 2 x Neutron, no player choice.
- The Centurion has 33% more upgrade space than the Rapier.

Chucks figure of $50M for a Rapier (from the novels) and the Priv game figure of $250k for a Centurion seem like arbitary numbers. There is just no equating them. Most likely the novels did not exist when Priv was made. The cost of the Rapier (based on todays earthly monies) seems right, but that's based on our own perceptions of the costs of military aircraft today. The Centurion shloud be similarly priced but from a civilian perspective. Maybe we should have RL civilian fighter aircraft.

I think using the novels as a reference is ok but we should not take them completely as law. Most of us haven't read them and probably won't (and don't have access to them anyway) so that makes it difficult when introducing new ships, weapons etc to the game. I support the necessity of WC canon timeline but I think the final decision(s) must rest on common sense and general acclamation.

So YES, the Centurion is more than a match for the Rapier. But I really like both ships so it would be very hard for me to choose.

AND I still think the Centurion should be made a Heavy Fighter. (A poll perhaps??). Look at their respective masses; 180 and 20 The Centurion hasd 9 x the mass of the Rapier. This is not right.
Time is an Illusion..............Lunchtime doubly so!! -Ford Prefect-
Check out Privateer themed goodies!
http://www.cafepress.com/soulfulngifted/2889859
User avatar
Zool
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 230
Topics: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:29 pm
Location: Roaming the Gemini Sector looking for profit!!

Postby z30 » Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:46 pm

Zool wrote:
So YES, the Centurion is more than a match for the Rapier. But I really like both ships so it would be very hard for me to choose.

AND I still think the Centurion should be made a Heavy Fighter. (A poll perhaps??). Look at their respective masses; 180 and 20 The Centurion hasd 9 x the mass of the Rapier. This is not right.



The Centurion specs are off in PU if the weight is 180 tons, the Raptor is a heavy fighter and it tops out at 22. I tweaked the Rapier to be 18 tons btw,just 2 tons heavier than the Scimitar.

Say 20 tons for the Centurion? Two things on the to-do list now that I've got Blender :

* Proper scaling of the smaller ships according to their weight & type classification so the Ferret would be the smallest, then the Hornet, Scimitar, Rapier , Raptor etc

* Proper scaling of Kilrathis ships vs. Confeds

* Proper scaling of the merchants ships (Tarsus, Galaxy etc) vs. fighters

The capships I'm not going to touch, their sizes seems ok.

For what it's worth, the Rapier would be much heavier armed than an equivalent civilian fighter (assuming milspec), specially if it was the non-JD version.
Privateer Parallel Universe

http://pu.wcjunction.com
z30
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 808
Topics: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Postby chuck_starchaser » Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:03 pm

@Zool: Great job with that point by point comparison. I think that what it tells us, though, is that we need to do a thorough job of scaling Privateer ship stats by some factors to be determined, to bring them to sane levels vis a vis WC stats. The numbers are totally out of whack. Also, Zool, you say "you agree" that Centurions are more than a match for a rapier. Not sure if you meant you agree *with me*, but what I was trying to say was that the Centurion should NOT be a match for a Rapier by any stretch of the imagination. Just IMHO, but I thought I'd clarify my POV, as there seems to have been a misunderstanding. Also, yes, the salesman refers to the Cent as a "heavy fighter"; but I'm glad you called it a medium, because, to me, "heavy fighter" is a joke. Consider that 1) the guy is a salesman, and 2) Chris Roberts has a sense of humor. There's no way in hell the Cent is a "heavy" fighter, unless the 180 ton figure is right ... :D

And just to clarify, I'm joking. If that ship was 180 tons, the cockpit on it would be the size of a movie theater.

@z30: If you're going to rationalize sizes, please, for your own sanity, don't make the same mistake Fireskull made, when he was doing just that for WCU. I told him when he started, paraphrasing myself, "take the numerical/nominal length of each ship off the mesh, divide that into the official size figures, and use that number as the scaling factor in units.csv". He didn't listen to me; saying it would be "too much work", so he ended up adjusting scalings by eye. He worked on that like a friggin horse, never finished it, and was never right anyways.
By obtaining the scaling factor from dividing official length (in meters) by nominal mesh length, you end up having everything standardized to meter units. Guaranteed to be right to whatever extent official lengths are right, and you won't need to edit save files and boot up the game as 'the number of ships and bases, squared' -many times.

EDIT:
The official lengths and mesh lengts should be put into an excell sheet, so then the division can be done by just typing the formula once and pasting it into the third column. Then, the excell sheet can be kept together with units.csv (same folder) for documentation purposes. If we later find that some official sizes are out of whack, and need to adjust them, we can document it into the excell sheet. Otherwise, people in the future might start tweaking the figures without thinking they have a reason to be what they are.
Targ Collective might be very happy to help you with this work; I believe he's currently looking for stuff to do. (JC, keep your paws off him, ok? :))

EDIT2:
Coming back to the Rapier: My 50 million figure came from the novel Action Stations... Make that False Colors.... Make that Fleet Action (got a brown thumb after flipping pages through 2.5 books)... Damn! I still can't find it... What I did find is (traitor minister) Jamison saying to Tolwyn, in Fleet Action, page 37:
Forstchen wrote:You just don't get the whole picture, do you, Admiral? ... Do you know just how much it costs to build and launch one fleet carrier?
Seventy three billion and some change, ... A full compliment of fighters another ten billion.

That was in 2668, btw.
Ten billion over 100 = 100 million average, but bombers would be a lot more expensive than fighters, so I say 50 for a fighter, as a guess. But I still think it was in Action Stations, 2634, that the cost of producing a...

FOUND IT!
It was near the end of Action Stations, page 286, after (then a young ensign) Geoffrey Tolwyn crash-lands his Wildcat, one of the rescue personnel says to him,
Forstchen wrote:Well, Tolwyn, you just blew off an even fifty million.

The Wildat was the standard fighter in those days (2634).

So, the books are pretty self-consistent, and well researched --i.e.: Consistent with WC games and other literature.
But given the track record of Privateer within the WC continuum, I would say that Privateer's ship prices are totally out of whack. How about multiplying all credit figures by an even 100?
Last edited by chuck_starchaser on Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby z30 » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:00 pm

chuck_starchaser wrote:
EDIT:
The official lengths and mesh lengts should be put into an excell sheet, so then the division can be done by just typing the formula once and pasting it into the third column. Then, the excell sheet can be kept together with units.csv (same folder) for documentation purposes. If we later find that some official sizes are out of whack, and need to adjust them, we can document it into the excell sheet. Otherwise, people in the future might start tweaking the figures without thinking they have a reason to be what they are.
Targ Collective might be very happy to help you with this work; I believe he's currently looking for stuff to do. (JC, keep your paws off him, ok? :))


Agreed. We'll work on this after the basemod release - Targ seems to have a knack for this kind of thing.
Privateer Parallel Universe

http://pu.wcjunction.com
z30
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 808
Topics: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Postby chuck_starchaser » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:06 pm

I was heavily editing my post; a bad habit of mine... Luckily not the part you quoted; just added EDIT2.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby z30 » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:49 pm

chuck_starchaser wrote:That was in 2668, btw.
Ten billion over 100 = 100 million average, but bombers would be a lot more expensive than fighters, so I say 50 for a fighter, as a guess. But I still think it was in Action Stations, 2634, that the cost of producing a...

FOUND IT!
It was near the end of Action Stations, page 286, after (then a young ensign) Geoffrey Tolwyn crash-lands his Wildcat, one of the rescue personnel says to him,
Forstchen wrote:Well, Tolwyn, you just blew off an even fifty million.

The Wildat was the standard fighter in those days (2634).

So, the books are pretty self-consistent, and well researched --i.e.: Consistent with WC games and other literature.
But given the track record of Privateer within the WC continuum, I would say that Privateer's ship prices are totally out of whack. How about multiplying all credit figures by an even 100?


Tarsus (starting) = 18k x 100 = 1,8 M
Tarsus (blank) = 28k x 100 = 2.8 M
TarsusMk2 = 40k x 100 = 4 M
Orion = 125k x 100= 12.5 M
OrionMk2 = 150k x 100 = 15 M
Galaxy = 250k x100 = 25 M
Centurion = 300k x100 = 30 M

HornetCVL = 200k x100 = 20 M
Scimitar = 250kx100 = 25 M
Rapier = 350k x 100 = 35 M

Note that these prices means that regular trade runs (not from mission conputer or guilds) have to be made much more profitable than they are now. Even at the old ship prices , these runs were already not worthwhile.

How about equipment & weapons?
Privateer Parallel Universe

http://pu.wcjunction.com
z30
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 808
Topics: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Postby chuck_starchaser » Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:09 am

Exactly. Yeah, prices of commodities and mission worths and prices of upgrades too; --everything x100. That way, profits are also x100. Same difference, in the end, but it helps justify not having a huge gap between civilian and military craft in terms of fighting capabilities.

The prices of Hornet, Scimtar, Rapier, seem right to me. They may have cost 50M to build, but by 2669 they are like 15 years old. But repairs of military craft should be like 10x costlier than similar repairs to civilian craft.

I think that a JD should take a lot of upgrade space units.

Then there'd be a real incentive to get a minicarrier type ship. If you buy a non-jump-capable miltary fighter and carry it in your bigger ship, that fighter, fully upgraded, should be a very deadly machine, compared to anything civilian with a JD.

EDIT:
This is it: A JD could take a goodly number of upgrade space units, say half the upgrade space of a typical fighter. The difference is that a military fighter would be able to use the upgrade space you save if you relinquish the JD; whereas civilian craft would have lower max limits in terms of engines and shields and whatnot. So, removing a JD from a civilian ship doesn't get you too many benefits; but a military fighter is designed to have no JD, and therefore it allows other upgrades up to the equipment space limit. With mil fighters, avoiding a JD is a good idea, if you can.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby chuck_starchaser » Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:21 am

I'm thinking that perhaps 100 is a bit too much scaling. The cost of standard confed fighter is about 50 million credits fully equipped. So I'd say the cost of a Centurion fully equipped, as well, should be less than half that, say 20 million. The cost of a 15 year old, reconditioned Rapier F-44A could run around 25 million.

To someone who owned a Cent and just sold it and bought a Rapier, the difference in overall capabilities would be subtle and mixed at first. If you put in JD on it, you have just enough upgrade space left to slightly best a Cent. Your first infatuation would be with its superior afterburners speed.

But once you get smart and buy a modded Drayman with a launch bay, and take out the JD from the Rapier, you find that the upgrade space you've liberated, allows you to put much better engines, shields, and other stuff, and then you discover the Rapier's real superiority.

Just a passing idea; don't get jumpy.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby Zool » Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:06 pm

z30 wrote:Say 20 tons for the Centurion?
Sounds good to me.

Chuck wrote:Also, Zool, you say "you agree" that Centurions are more than a match for a rapier.
You're chinese whispering here old boy, I said,"So YES, the Centurion is more than a match for the Rapier" although I do tend to talk out loud and argue with myself when I'm doing this stuff. Maybe you heard me then......lol

OT Excerpt from Beast Wars
Black Arachnia, " Megatron, why do you always talk to yourself when we're right here?"
Megatron, "Because I have a penchant for intelligent conversation." :lol: :lol: :lol:
/OT

Chuck wrote:so he ended up adjusting scalings by eye. He worked on that like a friggin horse, never finished it, and was never right anyways.
NOW he tells me.........sigh

z30 wrote:Note that these prices means that regular trade runs (not from mission conputer or guilds) have to be made much more profitable than they are now. Even at the old ship prices , these runs were already not worthwhile.

How about equipment & weapons?
This is what I was aiming to fix in ZR2.0, without having to completely rework the entire mission pay area as well. I'll mail you the readme I did, it might be useful. This is what I'm playing with ATM (melded it into Dilloh's latest) and it's quite good (if I may say so myself....lol) With the bigger and higher level shields and reactors, (on all ships) playing on medium difficulty is a bit harder and more challenging without making the ai lethal to a player of average skill.

But once you get smart and buy a modded Drayman with a launch bay,
NO :!: , no, no, no, no. no :!: :!: This IS a good and logical idea, however on a personal level, for me, I will NEVER, EVER, EVER ( and then some) fly another capship again unless something is done about the manoeuvreability and acceleration/deceleration. Yes, they are cap ships and yes they should be slow and cumbersome but in PR (and PU) they are beyond ridiculous. And don't anyone get any ideas about a compulsory storyline mission involving the flying of one either :!: or else :!: Ha :!:

But it is a good idea Chuck. No, not jumpy.....me....jumpy!!....no...not me.....never.....jumpy.....me.....no....!
Time is an Illusion..............Lunchtime doubly so!! -Ford Prefect-
Check out Privateer themed goodies!
http://www.cafepress.com/soulfulngifted/2889859
User avatar
Zool
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 230
Topics: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:29 pm
Location: Roaming the Gemini Sector looking for profit!!

Postby chuck_starchaser » Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:27 pm

LOL, I don't know where I got the "I agree" idea, but was so convinced about it I went back to your post with the idea of quoting it, and then it wasn't there, and you hadn't edited it... I must be getting alzheimers...

True about capships and slowness. Maneuverability is not needed, for the most part, as capships fight with their turrets, but they are too slow for the game as is.

Some pics of the WIP:

Image

Image

Image

Trying to work on it 30 minutes, then read 30 minutes, and so on. Got through reading Forstchen's 6 WC novels and Gouin's Freedom Flight; 2 books to go; so got started on the first Peter Telep book. Day and night, though. Forstchen's books are a labor of love, and it shows; but not Telep's. What a terribly boring style this guy has. Oh my. I'm going to need anti-depressants to be able to finish this book.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby z30 » Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:19 pm

Zool wrote:This is what I was aiming to fix in ZR2.0, without having to completely rework the entire mission pay area as well. I'll mail you the readme I did, it might be useful. This is what I'm playing with ATM (melded it into Dilloh's latest) and it's quite good (if I may say so myself....lol) With the bigger and higher level shields and reactors, (on all ships) playing on medium difficulty is a bit harder and more challenging without making the ai lethal to a player of average skill.

But once you get smart and buy a modded Drayman with a launch bay,
NO :!: , no, no, no, no. no :!: :!: This IS a good and logical idea, however on a personal level, for me, I will NEVER, EVER, EVER ( and then some) fly another capship again unless something is done about the manoeuvreability and acceleration/deceleration. Yes, they are cap ships and yes they should be slow and cumbersome but in PR (and PU) they are beyond ridiculous. And don't anyone get any ideas about a compulsory storyline mission involving the flying of one either :!: or else :!: Ha :!:

But it is a good idea Chuck. No, not jumpy.....me....jumpy!!....no...not me.....never.....jumpy.....me.....no....!


I hope the new missile & turret rebalancing & faction center and ship redistribution meld with your own changes seamlessly. Just let me know if you guys need any help.

With capital ships a possible solution is capship radar with 25-30k range and 180 degrees scanning, tracking and locking. With multiple FF launchers & turrets a capship should have more of a chance.

When the FreeTrader comes up in the mod activity queue, I'll shape a variant with FF's , flak turrets & with the capacity to carry a single fighter. This will be the players entry level ship for capship operations, the Drayman requires a lot more handling.

Military capships will probably be very restricted in use, since we're sticking closer to WC lore.
Privateer Parallel Universe

http://pu.wcjunction.com
z30
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 808
Topics: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Postby micheal_andreas_stahl » Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:33 am

Sigh, the Katana vs. Rapier thing, It really depends on the person flying the ship.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/katanavs.htm

Now you have finished that think about what I said. Each ship has a different job. Stilleto is a Interceptor, Demons are light Bombers Medium Fighters (a fight here some where), Paradigm is a destroyer. Each has a different role, thus each is flown differently.

If you pitched a cent or a Rapiar to gether, each is well balanced, and thus capable of fighting each other. But the average civilian pilot has little training while the cofed pilot trains all the time. So put an exceptional pilot like Burrows behind the controls and the cent will win.

You would need to know each fighter fairly well and be able to exploit the others weakness.

Also, how much training would the average pilot have? When i fight i just can't go into battle swinging a sword madly. No. You have to think about what you are doing.

Take a normal fight between my brother and i.

i use a short single handed sword or a spear with a large shield capable of covering the whole torso. My brother uses a long two handed sword, or a large single handed axe with a large shield and a single handed broadsword for closer melee fighting.. He's armored, i am not.

Dieter has a heavy sword or heavy axe with a heavy shield. I heavy medium shield with a light sword. Dieter has a slow wide heavy swing and can strike from a distance while i have short quick thrusts but i have to get close to strike.

You would have to duck and thrust, duck and thrust. Dodge a blow, thrust, duck, thrust, block with shield. Dieters weakness is his slow reaction time, while i counter it with a quick reaction time. My weakness is my shield. His axe, and i will add that we can go though three or four shield in a round, can splinter my shield in a few hits so one wants to keep away from that axe.

So it's not about ship, it's about pilot.

Sorry guys. This is the rule between life and death.
"The bullets come out of the slim end, mate!"

Sniper after dominating another Sniper
Team Fortress 2
User avatar
micheal_andreas_stahl
Elite Hunter
Elite Hunter
 
Posts: 1030
Topics: 47
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:02 am
Location: Gemini, Troy, Helen

Postby chuck_starchaser » Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:39 am

That's very true, MAS; I'm converted.

One thing I really liked about the (strategy) game Masters of Orion was the great customizability of ships and weapons. You could design your ships to best fit your own style, strategy and tactics. I think that, with upgrade volumes as per Zool's rebalance, we have an opportunity to make the game much more interesting, simply by turning down available upgrade spaces down a notch or two, so that, no matter how much money you have, you can't install the highest upgrades available for everything. You have to make choices: so you can make your ship very tough, or have enormous firepower, or be very fast and agile, or have top notch sensors and computers, but you can't "have it all".
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby Zool » Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:29 pm

Chuck wrote:simply by turning down available upgrade spaces down a notch or two
Even simpler, just make the JD take up one or two more upgrade spaces. (If you really must).

The rapier's looking very good now. Are you going to keep the two huge wing cannons on the ingame model. I'm just wondering how it will look when the player buys and mounts weapons of their own. And yes, even if it comes out as another milspec with fixed weapons, the very first thing I will do when we get it is change that.
Time is an Illusion..............Lunchtime doubly so!! -Ford Prefect-
Check out Privateer themed goodies!
http://www.cafepress.com/soulfulngifted/2889859
User avatar
Zool
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 230
Topics: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:29 pm
Location: Roaming the Gemini Sector looking for profit!!

Postby chuck_starchaser » Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:37 pm

Well, for now I'll put all the weapons on it. I have a feeling the first thing MO will do with PR is have weapons as sub-objects, so that you see models of the actual weapons mounted on. My feeling comes from having seen he had done it already in some version of PR. Removing the weapons from the mesh is easy, so once we have that feature we can take the fixed weapons out.
For WC ships, missiles are carried under the wings, and we should lose them as we spend them. But the feature is not implemented yet, so similarly, I'll put fixed missiles there for now. And I'm not sure about landing gear. I think I'll put it in the blend file but not export it, until we have mesh animations.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby micheal_andreas_stahl » Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:27 am

Glad your converted now, chuck. :wink:

i like that strategy part. But i don't like the idea of making goods take up more space.
"The bullets come out of the slim end, mate!"

Sniper after dominating another Sniper
Team Fortress 2
User avatar
micheal_andreas_stahl
Elite Hunter
Elite Hunter
 
Posts: 1030
Topics: 47
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 3:02 am
Location: Gemini, Troy, Helen

Postby z30 » Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:49 am

chuck_starchaser wrote:Well, for now I'll put all the weapons on it. I have a feeling the first thing MO will do with PR is have weapons as sub-objects, so that you see models of the actual weapons mounted on. My feeling comes from having seen he had done it already in some version of PR. Removing the weapons from the mesh is easy, so once we have that feature we can take the fixed weapons out.
For WC ships, missiles are carried under the wings, and we should lose them as we spend them. But the feature is not implemented yet, so similarly, I'll put fixed missiles there for now. And I'm not sure about landing gear. I think I'll put it in the blend file but not export it, until we have mesh animations.


In PR 1.2, it's already like that :

Image

Those wingtips sprout whichever weapon image that particular gun has. Except for Turbo lasers, we still have a bug that prevents the laser gun images from appearing.
Privateer Parallel Universe

http://pu.wcjunction.com
z30
Expert Mercenary
Expert Mercenary
 
Posts: 808
Topics: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Postby chuck_starchaser » Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:27 am

Ah, okay, so what shall I do? Not put the guns in? But I see another problem: The front guns, under the little wings, are like normal size (Priv size) lasers; but the big guns under the main wings are BIG (mass drivers, IIRC). Do we have models for mil spec guns? I don't think Privateer-sized guns will do here. Same goes for the Hornet's guns: They are big MF's; on a different level from civilian guns, it would seem to me.
Well, I guess I could model them separately and you could add them to the weapons repertoire...
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby Zool » Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:45 pm

Wait, how about leaving the big "model guns" on and have the game guns mounted inside. You would not see them but they would be there. Is there a way that they could be rescaled when they are mounted so this would happen.

BTW the HUGE wing cannon on the Hornet were lasers, don't forget. As for the Rapier it had lasers and neutrons, and I think the lasers were the big wing mounted ones also. The Raptor had Mass drivers and neutrons. On both Rapier and Raptor the neutrons were the nose mounted guns.

Chuck wrote:I don't think Privateer-sized guns will do here. Same goes for the Hornet's guns: They are big MF's; on a different level from civilian guns, it would seem to me.
Well, I guess I could model them separately and you could add them to the weapons repertoire...
Now there's a good idea, bigger more powerful "Milspec" versions, but do we really want to go there?
Time is an Illusion..............Lunchtime doubly so!! -Ford Prefect-
Check out Privateer themed goodies!
http://www.cafepress.com/soulfulngifted/2889859
User avatar
Zool
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
 
Posts: 230
Topics: 15
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:29 pm
Location: Roaming the Gemini Sector looking for profit!!

Postby chuck_starchaser » Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:08 pm

I would think yes, we do. There's nothing wrong with having mil-spec things; and you can't even compare a civilian gun you buy at a gun shop with an M16.

A mistake was made in PR and/or WCU and/or PU that tarnished the tetrm "mil-spec". Mil-spec is not to blame. What's to blame is the misuse of the term and awful implementation we got of indistinct ships that have no advantages and can't be upgraded.

I was totally opposed to the milspec crap that was put into the mod, with "milspec" ships that were the same as regular ships but couldn't be upgraded. Why? Because there should be something to gain in exchange for the loss of upgradability. Those "milspec" ships didn't look milspec, didn't feel milspec, and they weren't milspec. But I'll take the loss of upgradeability any day, if you give me a REAL military craft, with real shields and real armor, and big MF guns that can take out 3 talons of one shot.

And it makes a lot of sense, I mean, if you buy a civilian vehicle, you have a standard 3.5 inch slot where you can put a car radio of any brand you want. That's what the free market does. But when the military design something, usually they plan well in advance what they are going to put on it in terms of weapons and whatnot, and it's mostly custom made. Military ships would have military sensors, and you'd probably not be able to remove the sensor and substitute a Hunter, Iris or BS sensor. And you wouldn't want to, either.

I want realism from a game: If I've been buying civilian crafts of all kinds, I want to feel the steep price change going to a military craft, and when I finally can get one, it should be like night and day. And the only thing upgradable, really, should be the electronics, and it should be very expensive and very hard to find better electronics for it.

This is a bit OT, but, in all the Forstchen novels there are the "scoops"...
What's the scoop?
Pseudoscience crap, but that would make the game more interesting, and should be very easy to implement.
According to forstchen, all ships have these conically shaped, invisible fields that extend for miles in front of them, and collect hydrogen from space, which they use as fuel. But they produce a lot of drag, limiting the maximum speed of the ships, to the standard speeds we're accustomed to. With the scoops closed, the speed can go up indefinitely, but they can run out of fuel. So, for instance, the escort carrier TCS Tarawa, in 2665 or wherabouts, "First to Kilrah", accelerated towards Kilrah with scoops closed, reaching something like 20,000 kps, then locked its tractor beams on the planet in order to do a fast slingshot around it and be on a fast route to a jump point. Unorthodox for its time, but by 2669 probably a well studied maneuvre.
Anyways, I was just thinking that perhaps military ships should have a button to toggle the scoops open or closed. Sort of like pressing Y in Vegastrike, but with the added twist that with the scoops open, your fuel is being replenished, whereas with the scoops closed, your fuel keeps going down. And then the Shelton slide could simply be identical with closing the scoops. So, whatever key we use for Shelton, I forget, could be used to toggle the scoops.

EDIT:
Says here that the F-44B had a "limited use" jump drive...
http://www.wcnews.com/ships2/wc1rapier.shtml
So, maybe that's what our model is, F-44B. Maybe instead of the standard 6 jumps it can only do two or four.
You were right about laser and neutron, but I seem to have read elsewhere that the main guns were not the lasers; that the lasers were just for the occassional long range barrage but the main guns were the short range ones, which would be the neutrons, I suppose?
Last edited by chuck_starchaser on Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby chuck_starchaser » Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:24 pm

Image

Image

First render. Got the green sarcophaguses welded to the wings, the stabilizers and the hull. Next is the back end; which is a mess right now; don't know what I'm doing there.
User avatar
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 8014
Topics: 195
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:03 pm
Location: Montreal

Postby MamiyaOtaru » Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:15 am

chuck_starchaser wrote:Ah, okay, so what shall I do? Not put the guns in? But I see another problem: The front guns, under the little wings, are like normal size (Priv size) lasers; but the big guns under the main wings are BIG (mass drivers, IIRC).


Gun position on a unit is controlled by several numbers: x, y, z (position), some rotational values (which direction it's pointing), and two numbers for the size. In other words, guns on certain mounts can be bigger than guns on other mounts. You can have small guns on the front and large guns on the wings, using the same gun meshes.

One of the size variables controls length, while the other controls width/height. So, you can have a long skinny gun, a short really fat gun, or one that looks just like normal only bigger.

example pic (click for full size to see the smaller gun):
Image

If you like the modelled gun but still want gun purchases to make a visual difference, you can do what PR does with the stiletto. Military and player owned are different models. The military ship that one encounters in the game has its guns modelled on, while if a player should ever get ahold of one, it uses a model with no guns modelled on (so it can show whatever guns he might choose to mount).
Last edited by MamiyaOtaru on Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
MamiyaOtaru
Privateer
 
Posts: 729
Topics: 20
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:32 am

Postby Dilloh » Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:37 am

:lol: Haha, good one! I'm wondering why everybody wants four steltek guns when you actually can dismantle the doom laser from the death star and create your own "Tarsus-from-hell"!
User avatar
Dilloh
Elite Hunter
Elite Hunter
 
Posts: 1149
Topics: 25
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:56 am
Location: Black Forest, Germany


Next

Return to Privateer Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron