Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 25

Author Topic: Fighter Redesign  (Read 148474 times)

DeltaV_11.2

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #315 on: September 07, 2016, 12:25:58 AM »

WRT fighter control, couldn't we just have 2-3 groups of fighter controls? I can't see needing more than that in any practical situation, even with an Astral's 6 wings. At least to me it makes sense for fighters to work this way if they're conceptually part of the carrier's weapons fit. It'd probably take a bit longer to select a sixth/seventh "weapons" group than for the rest, but unless you need very close control of the fighters it shouldn't be too difficult.
Logged

Toxcity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #316 on: September 07, 2016, 02:27:04 PM »

Are the older carrier sprites going to get the red highlight for their hangars?
Logged

cjuicy

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Figuring out how the hell to wear heels (She/it)
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #317 on: September 07, 2016, 10:50:21 PM »

With the given info, a hangar for Sunder will cost 10 OP, a wing of Daggers will cost 20 OP, refit times are slower, and bombers may not get a bonus for returning in one piece for ships with a converted hangar.  That Sunder will pay a heavy price for a wing of bombers.

Ouch.. that would hurt.
Give me missile spam anyday.
Logged
It's been a long time, but I still love ya!

- Pfp done by Sleepyfish!

CrashToDesktop

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #318 on: September 07, 2016, 11:02:55 PM »

With the given info, a hangar for Sunder will cost 10 OP, a wing of Daggers will cost 20 OP, refit times are slower, and bombers may not get a bonus for returning in one piece for ships with a converted hangar.  That Sunder will pay a heavy price for a wing of bombers.

Ouch.. that would hurt.
Give me missile spam anyday.
Well, technically, that 30 OP goes a longer way than any missile weapon - infinity missiles. :D

Not saying it's necessarily a good idea though, heh.
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #319 on: September 08, 2016, 08:05:31 AM »

Are the older carrier sprites going to get the red highlight for their hangars?

The red highlight for some hangars (only the Odyssey, iirc?) is a holdover from when the idea of "munitions drones" was a thing, but it didn't go anywhere.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #320 on: September 08, 2016, 09:13:18 AM »

I think he meant the red lights on the Mora-class.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #321 on: September 08, 2016, 10:43:15 AM »

Ah - in that case, no idea, it's up to David :)
Logged

Psigun

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #322 on: September 11, 2016, 07:25:43 PM »

Fighter redesign sounds wonderful. Looking forward to the next update.
Logged

Linnis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #323 on: September 14, 2016, 02:55:51 PM »

Fighter redesign sounds wonderful. Looking forward to the next

BLOG
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #324 on: September 20, 2016, 01:14:31 PM »

A few questions on modding hooks for the new fighters; how easy would it be to add in the following hull mods:

Remote Operation Relay: Reduces crew losses for this carrier's fighters to zero, but also reduces the maximum range of fighters with crew requirements by 50%.

Miscalibrated Autofactory: Applies the "Ill-Advised Modifications" hull mod to this carrier's fighters, giving their weapons a chance to fail (with fighters with permanently broken weapons returning to carrier in the same way that bombers with expended ammunition would).  This hull mod is intended for D-class carriers.

Armored Fighters: +100 armor & -10% top speed / maneuverability & 10% increased fighter refit time for this carrier's fighters.

Kamikaze Charges: Disabled fighters (...and possibly fighters with disabled engines) detonate on impact for HE damage (and impact immediately rather than drifting with collision off for a bit), but crew losses from fighters are doubled.  This hull mod is intended for Pather carriers; the actual damage value might need to scale based on fighter "size" (perhaps as a percentage of fighter HP?), but probably shouldn't go higher than maybe 300 for heavy fighters.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #325 on: September 20, 2016, 05:27:14 PM »

I can't wait for the new blog post in 4 days!
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #326 on: September 21, 2016, 10:38:11 AM »

Sorry about the delayed response.

Remote Operation Relay: Reduces crew losses for this carrier's fighters to zero, but also reduces the maximum range of fighters with crew requirements by 50%.

Not currently possible, though it might be. I haven't done a final pass over "making these values tweakable", and the fighter range value is a prime candidate for such.

The "with crew requirements" part would be tricky, though.

Miscalibrated Autofactory: Applies the "Ill-Advised Modifications" hull mod to this carrier's fighters, giving their weapons a chance to fail (with fighters with permanently broken weapons returning to carrier in the same way that bombers with expended ammunition would).  This hull mod is intended for D-class carriers.

Probably not. Good point re: D carriers, though, they need something.

... well, maybe. A script making the stat changes necessary, and then manually telling the fighters to go back for a refit by setting the new "time before refit" ship member variable to 0.


Armored Fighters: +100 armor & -10% top speed / maneuverability & 10% increased fighter refit time for this carrier's fighters.

Could currently be done via skill but not via hullmod. The way stuff is hooked up, carrier stats don't affect fighter stats, aside from the carrier's CR (which is inherited by the fighters at the time of launch). I.E. A "+100 fighter armor" skill would specify that it either applies to the fighters of the ship the captain is on, or to all fighters in the fleet of an admiral with that skill, but there's no ship stat for "the armor of fighters launched by this ship". That would be kind of rough just due to how many stats there are; don't want to double the number of stats essentially.

Kamikaze Charges: Disabled fighters (...and possibly fighters with disabled engines) detonate on impact for HE damage (and impact immediately rather than drifting with collision off for a bit), but crew losses from fighters are doubled.  This hull mod is intended for Pather carriers; the actual damage value might need to scale based on fighter "size" (perhaps as a percentage of fighter HP?), but probably shouldn't go higher than maybe 300 for heavy fighters.

I think that could probably be done with a pretty involved combat script, detecting these collisions and applying the damage directly.

Logged

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #327 on: September 21, 2016, 11:06:29 AM »

Kamikaze hull mod somewhat increases fighter refit cost and applies a script that if a fighter takes collision damage it dies & generates an explosion at a strength of x*remaining time-till-refit. Much lighter script, rewards hostile, in-your-face carrier play but removes a lot of the fighter's survivability and forces the carrier to either engage targets it can disengage or be left in the fray without a screen.
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #328 on: September 21, 2016, 11:19:08 AM »

Hm... A suggestion, then: add a fighter creation hook - something that gets called when spawning a new fighter, so that carrier-attached code has a chance to modify the fighter before it gets out into the world.  This would solve most of the issues with my list of carrier mods; for example, the armored fighters hull mod could edit fighter stats just before launch, and the remote operations relay could test fighter stats before modifying them (or not modifying them, as the case may be).  Seems like a better solution than trying to add a carrier stat for each possible fighter stat.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #329 on: September 21, 2016, 11:33:17 AM »

Ahhh, great idea. Made a note.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 25