Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: The Pilgrim's Path (07/19/22)

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 63

Author Topic: [0.95.1a] Arma Armatura v2.1.2 - Playable Fighters, wings with personality  (Read 282571 times)

WiC2021

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #495 on: November 29, 2021, 04:20:26 PM »

Is it normal that no matter what small weapon I put on a Bihander's Pila I still see weapon effects (green laser) from tactical lasers?

These are on AI driven ships. I have tried a couple times in simulation with success, but when I play the game and play in fleet battles I see way more green lines flying about than should be.
Logged

CrimsonPhalanx

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #496 on: December 09, 2021, 11:03:31 AM »

Game crashes when mousing over one of the Hullmods with this in the Logs
Spoiler
272471 [Thread-3] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at data.hullmods.cataphract.addPostDescriptionSection(cataphract.java:140)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.StandardTooltipV2$12.createImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.StandardTooltipV2Expandable.create(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.StandardTooltipV2Expandable.beforeShown(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.showTooltip(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Objectsuper.oÒ0000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Objectsuper.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.e$Oo.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.e.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.coreui.refit.ModWidget.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.coreui.refit.F.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.class.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Oo0O.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.K.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Oo0O.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.Stringsuper.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
[close]


Any tips on how to resolve this?

I have a similar issue when mousing over the "Cataphract LSM" hullmod, just incase its limited to one, its on the Leynos for me
Logged

hydremajor

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 412
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #497 on: December 15, 2021, 02:12:06 AM »

yo

so whats up ?
Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #498 on: December 16, 2021, 05:10:01 PM »

Sorry for the delay and lack of responses, but I have been working on this still! among other things iI've been working on something that my OCD just would not slide, and that is the lack of legs. I've used a few models as references and once I saw that they should at least be partially visible from a top down perspective, I couldn'tlook at the mech I was working on without getting annoyed by the fact. Soooo I went and gave it some!


It probably can be better, but I think it gets the idea across well enough. For now i'm working on other things before I go back and tweak/refine the animaton.



Is it normal that no matter what small weapon I put on a Bihander's Pila I still see weapon effects (green laser) from tactical lasers?

These are on AI driven ships. I have tried a couple times in simulation with success, but when I play the game and play in fleet battles I see way more green lines flying about than should be.
It's a bug, will be fixed in the new version. I had to change the way the drone weapon being equipped was handled due to some unexpected behavior.

Game crashes when mousing over one of the Hullmods with this in the Logs
Spoiler
272471 [Thread-3] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at data.hullmods.cataphract.addPostDescriptionSection(cataphract.java:140)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.StandardTooltipV2$12.createImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.StandardTooltipV2Expandable.create(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.StandardTooltipV2Expandable.beforeShown(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.showTooltip(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Objectsuper.oÒ0000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Objectsuper.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.e$Oo.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.e.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.coreui.refit.ModWidget.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.coreui.refit.F.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.class.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Oo0O.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.K.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Oo0O.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.Stringsuper.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00O.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
[close]


Any tips on how to resolve this?
This happens to some people, but not everyone. I wasn't able to figure out why but was told it happens if you overwrite the mod folder instead of deleting and dragging in the newer version. Either way, it's fixed in dev. Sorry about that.

I hate to be that guy but uh....update?
You said that weekend you had one.
Did something break in code?

Sorry, that wasn't an update for armaa but for a how to on playable fighters. I'll probably refrain from giving any date for the next release, besides saying it should be soon™
« Last Edit: December 16, 2021, 05:17:41 PM by shoi »
Logged

A_Random_Dude

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #499 on: December 16, 2021, 11:01:32 PM »

Quote
Sorry for the delay and lack of responses, but I have been working on this still! among other things iI've been working on something that my OCD just would not slide, and that is the lack of legs.

YES! Not being able to see the mechs legs always made me feel like they were just regular ships with arms, so it was a bit annoying for me too. The legs in the gifs you posted look slight low resolution compared to the rest of the body though, but that could very well be just me. Either way, it looks promising!

Also, take your time. I think we can wait for a bit longer to get our hands on the update, the mod's definitely worth it!
Logged

Space_Lettuce_OG

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #500 on: December 17, 2021, 12:44:12 AM »

Nice job on the legs! I wouldn't call that an OCd(hehe) thing. I think we all wanted to see legs.

Can you tell us a bit more about the second gif? Is that the new sword attack animation? How would it affect DPS of laser blades?
Logged

hydremajor

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 412
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #501 on: December 17, 2021, 01:38:54 AM »

Nice job on the legs! I wouldn't call that an OCd(hehe) thing. I think we all wanted to see legs.

Can you tell us a bit more about the second gif? Is that the new sword attack animation? How would it affect DPS of laser blades?

now consider the fact every single mech in the mod needs to be overhauled individualy for this to take effect and now yeah its a lot more work...unless you'd settle for a single type of legs fitting all mechs that is
Logged

6chad.noirlee9

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 354
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #502 on: December 17, 2021, 05:14:27 PM »

Very cool!
Stoked about the legs!
I just upgraded my pc so it's perfect timing.
Very, very cool.
Logged
edit: edit: maybe were just falling with style LOL.  make a bubble, make the space in front of it smaller and just fall forward

Space_Lettuce_OG

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #503 on: December 17, 2021, 06:19:43 PM »

Very cool!
Stoked about the legs!
I just upgraded my pc so it's perfect timing.
Very, very cool.

How the hell did you afford to upgrade your PC in this global economy, and with graphics cards costing 5x as much as they did 5 years ago, cuz of *** BITCOIN! I hate the mfer who figured out how to mine crypto on graphics cards. They have stagnated graphics card development for nearly half a decade, and stunted the growth of the PC community.
Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #504 on: December 17, 2021, 07:06:45 PM »

YES! Not being able to see the mechs legs always made me feel like they were just regular ships with arms, so it was a bit annoying for me too. The legs in the gifs you posted look slight low resolution compared to the rest of the body though, but that could very well be just me. Either way, it looks promising!

Also, take your time. I think we can wait for a bit longer to get our hands on the update, the mod's definitely worth it!

They are pretty bare in terms of details at the moment (at least for the part of the animation when reversing/flying backwards) I couldn't find many good references so I just went with a basic shape without filling much else in, but i'll try to flesh it out more.

Nice job on the legs! I wouldn't call that an OCd(hehe) thing. I think we all wanted to see legs.

Can you tell us a bit more about the second gif? Is that the new sword attack animation? How would it affect DPS of laser blades?

It's the same animation, the after image fx is part of that mechs ship system

now consider the fact every single mech in the mod needs to be overhauled individualy for this to take effect and now yeah its a lot more work...unless you'd settle for a single type of legs fitting all mechs that is

I remember reading somewhere that lots of sprites are bad on vram so i'm trying to find a way to apply it to everything that won't lead to being an unnecessary burden on performance, like making a copy of the sprites that are colored white and hue shifting them to match the other mechs. Not 100% sure if that's what i'll do yet, gonna work on adding some other content first and probably will propogate legs as one of the last touches.
Logged

6chad.noirlee9

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 354
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #505 on: December 18, 2021, 08:07:49 AM »

Is there a way to use "invisible hues" sonthat technically it's the same sprite but the silhouette changes?
That could kill two birds with one stone if possible.
Logged
edit: edit: maybe were just falling with style LOL.  make a bubble, make the space in front of it smaller and just fall forward

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #506 on: December 19, 2021, 09:17:28 AM »

Is there a way to use "invisible hues" sonthat technically it's the same sprite but the silhouette changes?
That could kill two birds with one stone if possible.

Maybe? I haven't explored much as far as what I can do with that aspect of things, but it's something i'll def. look into
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021)
« Reply #507 on: December 19, 2021, 04:56:12 PM »

How the hell did you afford to upgrade your PC in this global economy, and with graphics cards costing 5x as much as they did 5 years ago, cuz of *** BITCOIN! I hate the mfer who figured out how to mine crypto on graphics cards. They have stagnated graphics card development for nearly half a decade, and stunted the growth of the PC community.

They didn't stagnate, you just too poor to afford the advances:

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/design-visualization/technologies/turing-architecture/

Bitcoin GPU mining not really as much of an issue now.  Now neural networks crunching data sets are the real issue.  But hey, at least a bunch of fabs will finally be online to deal with this issue by, 2025 maybe?  Just in time for the price of eGPUs to go back down!
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

sphr

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021): comments/ideas. and thanks!
« Reply #508 on: December 24, 2021, 11:00:14 PM »

tl;dr: Thanks! + mech fan blabbering

---

First of all, REALLY thank you for the mod.

Really got sick of Paragon spam, so trying out this mod brings a great refreshing change to game play.  Piloted mechs :)
Still going through a new game where the fleet is mech themed (atm, only carriers, mechs and freighters.  Going to see how far this can get).  What I liked most about this mod is that it is not a "faction mod" where everything is pre-designed (too well) to work together (and usually break apart when they don't).  This mod is pretty "stand-alone" which encourages me to experiment with each type of unit and a degree of customizability in the (piloted) mechs greatly satisfy the mech fan in me.

A few comments and suggestions re: wing commander (hull mod)
Spoiler
Think it costs too much (adding the wing itself also costs OP).  Basically, it kinda foil my wish for "wing/squad" for piloted mechs. And also. not all mechs can have a wing which is a shame.

What I would suggest is to maybe split wingcommander into 2 sets of hullmods: the core hull mod + wing-slot mods:

- wing commander core (which sort of enables the whole system across installed mechs, but DO NOT provide "fighter bays" by itself). It should be free (or have really low cost) as it does not do anything without fighters.  Maybe just inbuild into all mechs that can support it (and remove from being selectable).  Mainly, it allows all piloted mechs to have the "squad-info" thing (if they actually manage to have fighters) :)

- a series of wing-slots mod that requires wing commander core that adds a variable number of "fighter bays" to the mech.  E.g. a wing1 would add 1 fighter bay, a wing2 would add 2 fighter bays etc.  The cost of these should scale with the number of slots it adds if not 0 (remember that fighters requires OP themselves).  This allows customization of how big the "wing" needs to be.

So the design could create a single mech (wingcom mod was inbuilt, but no "wing-slot" mods added by player), a buddy team (1-wing mod), or a full squad (2-wing, 3-wing or more)

Also, would  be nice if the non strike-craft mechs are not left out of the fun. (altag-lead squad.  not really in the battle itself as units can be made to follow etc, but more the "squad-info". really wish all pilots(captains) can generate and maintain their own squad)

Here are some more ideas/suggestions regarding this (may not be appropriate as I only tested things by fiddling some of the data and do not know the whole system in-depth)

- in the script, when checking the wing-com related stuff, iterate through all the fighter bays for piloted wings instead of just taking the first one.  This will handle multiple fighter bays case (and workaround strange cases like trying to add wingcom to ein with inbuilt drone wings)

- when managing the interaction of fighters wrt wing-com, exclude "carriers" with wing-com mods (to avoid the strange thing of mechs launching from another mech with fighter bays added by wing-com/wing-slot mods.  yeah, I tried adding this to to altag and it unintentionally turn it into a launch platform for fighter mechs).  Also, special "fighters" (like the gun pods for ein) should be excluded from this handling (maybe have a tag?) to prevent them from launching from carriers half a mile away when the mech was deployed far away e.g. during pursuit).
[close]

And finally(?), a few ideas.... (really nice to have if achievable)

Spoiler
- make piloted strikecraft mechs launch from carriers at the start (if not deployed left/right in pursuit)?

- if there are carriers in the fleet (not wingcom), piloted mechs should be immune to environmental hazards like asteroids, hyperspace storms, solar flare etc. 

- if there are carriers in the fleet (not wingcom), they should either receive a really boosted CR recovery outside combat, with consideration to fighters (which are immediate)

- special mech based carriers?  minimal inherent offensive ability, more fighter bays but restricted to mechs (since most mech fighters are 1-wing).  would be nice if there are special launch systems (you know, like those catapult systems seen in animes :) ) which can launch fighter (wing) fast and far into the heat of battle.

- more defensive mechs (like macross destroids) which have really low engagement distance (or even o) and stays around the carrier

- variable fighters/piloted interceptor mechs which uses another mode to travel fast over long distance (yeah.. macross fan)

- mech-use "endurance" type hull-mods, which add limited-charge use systems that restores CR without returning to carrier at the upfront cost of OP.

- mech-use "firstaid" type hull-mods, which add limited-charged use systems that restores some hull without returning to carrier at the upfront cost of OP. should be cheaper (in OP) than mods that adds directly to hull wrt to amount of hull restored  (since it is temporary).

- mech-use "flux vent" type  hull-mod, which adds limited-charged use systems that "ejects" some (hard) flux just before the mech is about to get overloaded.  should be cheaper (in OP) to flux mods wrt flux capacity (since it is temporary)

- mech-use "prototype" type hull-mods, which adds OP (via negative OP cost?) at the expense of increased maintenance (null supply usage) and possibly lowered CR (max or efficiency).  May allow for some interesting experimental builds where the OP cost would normally be impossible, at the expense of the above-mentioned.

- cosmetic variations (e.g. possible to customize look of piloted mechs without affecting the performance).  Ideally, a framework can be made such that cosmetic-mods can be made by other creators (not just reskins, but each one adds more choices).  e.g. color/pattern, slight variation in looks of the parts etc.  would be even nicer if a (color) "theme" can be set on wing-com units such that all mech fighter wings under it would inherit that "theme" if supported.  E.g. if a "funky rainbow" theme skin mod is added to a wing-com leader, then mech wings under it would inherit that theme which changes their looks if available (or just revert to vanilla if not).  No, I don't want the actual "funky rainbow" mod. In fact, let's forget I mention that as example...

- also, this may be hard/impossible.  Instead of adding the mech to "fighter bays" in wing-com piloted mechs (which sort of increase the overall fighter capacity of the fleet), maybe use a "place-holder" for "fighters" of the wing-com mechs (that costs nothing by itself), and add a special "wing-com support" hull-mod to carriers (which also costs nothing) that when there are piloted wing-com mechs that requires wing members (which is not added automatically), it will "grab" them from the actual fighters added to bays for carriers fitted with the "wing-com support" mod.  So total number of fighters is always capped by the actual fighters carriers carry and launches from there.  Special case may be required for "pursuit" type combat though, where wing members should start near the wing-com mech (though the actual carriers that provide the mechs will still have to be deployed).  iow, if a wing-com capable piloted mech is deployed without enough support carriers that actually has that mech wing, it will have to fight alone.   This will also remove the strange OP thing involved with adding a wing to a piloted mech (the OP costs is borne by the carrier now).

too many ideas.... taking a break for now.. lol.
[close]

Please keep up the EXCELLENT work.


Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: [0.95a] Arma Armatura 1.5.2e (9/16/2021): comments/ideas. and thanks!
« Reply #509 on: December 25, 2021, 12:46:40 PM »

What I liked most about this mod is that it is not a "faction mod" where everything is pre-designed (too well) to work together (and usually break apart when they don't).  This mod is pretty "stand-alone" which encourages me to experiment with each type of unit and a degree of customizability in the (piloted) mechs greatly satisfy the mech fan in me.

Agreed, the fact that this mod basically enhances mostly Indies instead of adding another faction is one of many reasons I adore this mod.  Plus also MECHS!  IN!  SPACE!
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 63