Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 [57] 58 59 ... 110

Author Topic: [0.97a] Arma Armatura v3.0.6 BETA [4/3/24]  (Read 673372 times)

speeder

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 364
    • View Profile

Request:

When reading the description of several vanilla ships, one thing became clear in the game backstory:

"Explorarium" had as one of its main jobs, enforce the "law" on frontier where the main navy wasn't present yet, or being more obvious: They would use AI fleets (that were technically, illegal), to crush any rebellious colonies until they could build a gate that would gate-in the navy.

Also several ships descriptions mentions rebels loved fighters, with Legion being invented to counter rebels inventing their own carriers, and a bunch of other random ships descriptions mentions how they were intended to counter the fighters the rebels spammed.

And then there is the fact that Explorarium was a company that you could legally sell AI ships to (for example Mbaye-Gogol had contracts to sell AI ships to them).



The request is: can you make some drone mech fighters and strikecrafts that were intended as "rebel killers"? They probably would look different than normal explorarium drones (ie: normal explorarium drones are defensive self-replicating drones intended to defend probes, these would be offensive drones intended to kill fighters, then land on planets and attack cities until they capiulate), probably they used the official color scheme (explorarium color is cyan, not green, you can check the "mothership" sprite for reference, it is the only vanilla sprite that use that color as far as I know. The "nebula" freighter use a similar color but I am not sure why, also explorarium own flag has a dark cyan part), and looked not too low tech I guess, explorarium drones we see on vanilla game are intended to be self-replicating cheap stuff made en-masse, the "rebel hunter" mechs probably were still cheap, but not THAT cheap, they probably looked "scary", since their job would be intimidate rebels in allowing Domain to build a gate on their system and bring in the main navy.

They could even be crewed too in a sense... Maybe have more of those "strikecraft carriers", you have a main mech  with a pilot that controls a small army of smaller AI mechs, the pilot being there more to tell the AI what to do, than fight, although obviously he would be able to defend himself since if such tactic was common rebels would quickly realize they could win by killing the pilots or something.
Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile

Hi speeder, thanks for the suggestion! I'll definitely look into that, though no promises!

Small bugfixes:
Quote
v2.084
-------------------
- Fixed Valkazard being locked in an invisible/uncontrollable state if docking while under player control

- Adusted refit logic so that ships with a loadout consisting ONLY of weapons with finite ammo will immediately attempt to resupply when exhausted instead of flying around uselessly

- Fixed ships with strikecraft_large && strikecraft_medium still being able to land on banned ship sizes

- Fixed some weirdness with the takeoff script
Logged

Brainwright

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile

I've seen the new Valken, and I noticed one severe problem :

You didn't put a sword on it.

Just shameful...
Logged

dk1332

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile

I've seen the new Valken, and I noticed one severe problem :

You didn't put a sword on it.

Just shameful...

This. Kinda wish its the same with the Aleste that you can swap the left arm for an energy blade.


A question though, Let's say someone makes a submod that creates vanilla faction variants of the mechs, are you gonna be against it?


Also, something has bothered me for a while. There are frigate sized carriers but you decided to block the ability to land strikecraft. If its the reason to avoid strikecrafts landing on each other, then I can understand that but why not make the strikecraft hullmod the thing that also blocks the ability to land on frigate sized carriers?
Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile

I've seen the new Valken, and I noticed one severe problem :

You didn't put a sword on it.

Just shameful...

leaving it would have been a bit too restrictive and repetitive (besides, aleste and valkazard already have sword options) and I didn't want to make the ship system revolve around using it either..sorry :'(

This. Kinda wish its the same with the Aleste that you can swap the left arm for an energy blade.


A question though, Let's say someone makes a submod that creates vanilla faction variants of the mechs, are you gonna be against it?


Also, something has bothered me for a while. There are frigate sized carriers but you decided to block the ability to land strikecraft. If its the reason to avoid strikecrafts landing on each other, then I can understand that but why not make the strikecraft hullmod the thing that also blocks the ability to land on frigate sized carriers?

To answer your first question, I dont mind at all.
As for the second, not sure I fully understand. The strikecraft hullmod is what blocks landing on frigate sized carriers. As for why, it was primarily to prevent cheesing with the ability to resupply at cheap low DP carriers that potentially could kite, and the second is that there are 'frigate sized carriers' that arent really carriers (see: Tempest), and the easiest thing to do is to just to block landing on all of them instead of trying to figure out if its a real carrier or not because im 100% sure there would be an exception to the logic one way or the other
Logged

speeder

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 364
    • View Profile

What you need is remove this restriction, and allow strikecraft carriers land on other strikecraft carriers, and have a carrierception, so you can build a huge fleet composed solely of strikecraft carriers with Wingcom, put cheated officers on all of them, and see how many people you can have as wingcom pilots until the game breaks with all of them :P
Logged

dk1332

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile



To answer your first question, I dont mind at all.
As for the second, not sure I fully understand. The strikecraft hullmod is what blocks landing on frigate sized carriers. As for why, it was primarily to prevent cheesing with the ability to resupply at cheap low DP carriers that potentially could kite, and the second is that there are 'frigate sized carriers' that arent really carriers (see: Tempest), and the easiest thing to do is to just to block landing on all of them instead of trying to figure out if its a real carrier or not because im 100% sure there would be an exception to the logic one way or the other

My apologies, What I meant is that some mods add Frigate sized carriers like the Luddic enhancement mod, There's also the vanilla Shepherd which is technically a micro carrier. For early games it should be no surprise that players can only access low cost ships. Being unable to use such ships to dock and fix one's strike craft forces players to invest on a destroyer-sized carrier. It could also open new tactics especially when chasing an escaping enemy.
Logged

miu

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile

Did something happened to the Valk? I can't seem to use the silversword anymore unless I let the AI do it first
Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile

Did something happened to the Valk? I can't seem to use the silversword anymore unless I let the AI do it first
try venting (press v) and see if it works then.
Someone had a similar issue, but i couldnt recreate it myself

EDIT: Actually what are the hullmods you had on valk?
« Last Edit: July 14, 2022, 06:36:55 PM by shoi »
Logged

miu

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile

Yeah seems like the problem happens when I launch from a carrier but not from the edges of the screen, venting seems to have fixed it though.

Did something happened to the Valk? I can't seem to use the silversword anymore unless I let the AI do it first
Actually what are the hullmods you had on valk?

Here's what I got other than the default built-in mods:
  • Hardened Shields
  • Heavy Armor
  • Extended shields (since the default for the counter armor one is too small)
  • Expanded Mag
  • Repair Unit
  • Aux Thrusters
  • High Scatter Amplifier
  • Efficiency Overhaul
Logged

Scourge

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile

I got a small question, are there any debug or dev commands to forcily remove a captain from a squad or disband a wingcom squad? I seem to have caused a bug by installing a Wing com suite into a ship that had no compatible ships and now my Commander is stuck as the Wing Squad captain.

Reassigning them to an actual squadron that exists and then unassigning them did not fix the issue and whenever I click on Manage Squad for this phantom squadron crashes the game.
Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile

can you pos the crash log, ship you used the hullmod on, and fighter wings assigned?
« Last Edit: July 16, 2022, 12:51:29 PM by shoi »
Logged

Scourge

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile

Of course.

Though to clarify with 'no compatible ships' i mean that it only had fighters in it that were not supported by Arma Armatura.

All of the ships, items, etc, are from the Star Wars mod.

Ship: Republic Star Destroyer
Fighter wings Installed: 2x Aggressive Recoinnessence Starfighter, 2x BTL-B Y Wing Bomber, 1x Low Altitude Transport Support

The entire Log file is 40 MB in size, so I am just posting the crash. The rest of the file is mostly busy with Nex and other mods loading.
I hope this helps, if not can I always upload the file to pastebin or something else if needed.


java.lang.NullPointerException
   at data.scripts.campaign.intel.armaa_squadManagerIntel.createSquadView(armaa_squadManagerIntel.java:233)
   at data.scripts.campaign.intel.armaa_squadManagerIntel.createLargeDescription(armaa_squadManagerIntel.java:534)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.comms.v2.EventsPanel.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.comms.v2.EventsPanel.updateUIForItem(Unknown Source)
   at data.scripts.campaign.intel.armaa_squadManagerIntel.buttonPressConfirmed(armaa_squadManagerIntel.java:574)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.comms.v2.EventsPanel.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OoO0.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooO.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.V.o00000(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(Thread.java:748)

Logged

shoi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile

Thanks! it looks like the script crashes when trying to access some data from the officer in question. I'm not 100% sure why that is  :o

Instead of uploading the crash log, could you upload your save to pastebin instead for me? I'm pretty sure I can fix it by removing some bits related to arma from it.
(it's campaign.xml under \saves\save_yourCharName_xxx\)

Logged

Troika

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
    • View Profile

You might want to increase the firing arc on the beam swords a bit. If for whatever reason range bonuses make the sword sufficiently long, it will miss targets a lot.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 [57] 58 59 ... 110