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)

Poll

Increase OP on some frigates (counterparts of vanilla frigates)

Yes, please up the OP
- 85 (75.2%)
No, leave it as it is now
- 23 (20.4%)
No, other...
- 5 (4.4%)

Total Members Voted: 113


Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 48

Author Topic: [0.8.1a] Tore Up Plenty - Vanilla Friendly Mod - Campaign+Nexerelin  (Read 396623 times)

Erick Doe

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • "Pretty cunning, don't you think?"
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #255 on: July 08, 2013, 04:42:12 AM »

From working with planets I've deducted that the second value = size. The third value = distance to sun. The fourth value is orbital speed (clockwise). I still don't know what the first value is, however.

Can anyone inform me, please?

[edit]
Oh, hold on. It must be the position along the rotation axis, right?


[edit]
Okay, I figured out the planets. Now how about those asteroid belts?

      system.addAsteroidBelt(star, 500, 900, 700, 150, 300);

This creates a belt around the entity "star" (in this case the centre of my system).
500 = the amount of asteroids within the belt?
900 = distance from the star (confirmed)
700 = the width of the asteroid belt (confirmed)
150 = ???
300 = ??? possibly orbital rotation speed?
« Last Edit: July 08, 2013, 04:55:10 AM by Erick Doe »
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #256 on: July 08, 2013, 08:52:20 AM »

From api/campaign/StarSystemAPI:

Code
        SectorEntityToken addPlanet(SectorEntityToken focus, String name, String type, float angle, float radius, float orbitRadius, float orbitDays);

void addAsteroidBelt(SectorEntityToken focus, int numAsteroids, float orbitRadius, float width, float minOrbitDays, float maxOrbitDays);

SectorEntityToken addOrbitalStation(SectorEntityToken focus, float angle, float orbitRadius, float orbitDays, String name, String factionId);

So, if the variable names are inot misleeding, the last two numbers in the addAsteroidBelt correspond to the minimum and maximum length of the asteroid orbital periods. I would guess that the asteroids have a period that is selected from a distribution between the two. (At least the belts look that way to me, with some going fast and others slow).
Logged

Gotcha!

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
    • View Profile
    • Welcome to New Hiigara
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #257 on: July 08, 2013, 08:53:33 AM »

Hi, take a look here:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6359.0

Silentstormpt has it all explained.
Logged
  

Erick Doe

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • "Pretty cunning, don't you think?"
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #258 on: July 08, 2013, 10:24:50 AM »

Thank you.  :)

Been a while since I tinkered with the campaign files.
Logged

Nanostrike

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #259 on: July 08, 2013, 01:44:40 PM »

I like it so far, but I have one minor gripe.

Please change the upgraded Brawler's name from "Wrestler" to something like "Slugger" or "Pugilist".  Having a ship called the "Wrestler" just feels weird.

I like Pugilist. I was at the time also considering 'Rowdy', 'Scrapper' or 'Bantam'. Romper also comes to mind.

I like any of those alternate names.  They'd all work for a Gunship.

I just wish the default Brawler wasn't so terrible.  This upgraded one pretty much fixed it's weaknesses with just a couple of PD turrets...  And it looks like a beast, too!
« Last Edit: July 08, 2013, 01:50:11 PM by Nanostrike »
Logged

legion

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
    • Total Annihilation Papercraft
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #260 on: July 09, 2013, 04:52:18 AM »

I want to like the lance, but I just can't. The sheer length of it, the trashy shields and that goddamn useless hypervelocity cannon just ruin it for me. Maybe you could consider making a carrier-convert out of a falcon? Or hell, just seeing any sort of core epoch midline carrier with two runways and a vanilla feel would be cool.

I made a carrier out of the Falcon, the Rook:

Spoiler
[close]

Erick Doe

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • "Pretty cunning, don't you think?"
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #261 on: July 09, 2013, 05:03:04 AM »

Nicely done Legion.


I found this bit of 'feedback' on the internet:

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,167782.225.html
Quote
I have tested Foxhound and Timberwolf so far.

Timberwolf update is pretty disappointing, as it changes agile phase skimmer craft into a missile focused craft with fast missile racks (wtf!?!) and doesn't even give it to medium missile slots, instead of 3 small slots to put missiles. It also manages to ruin Wolfs nice wide area weapon slot by giving you more slots, but with crappy shooting arcs, so you can't use your weapon slots effectively. It could had worked if he would had given some extra ordnance points to support them, BUT instead he actually CUTS down Wolfs base ordnance points capacity making it clumsy and useless craft which can't support it's own weapon slots or add any hull upgrades into it. Bollocks!


At first I raged at Foxhound too since it does the similar stupidity by nerfing it's base strong areas: dropping -10 speed which is pretty essential to nonshielded ship, plus adding more weapon slots with bad arcs, then cutting ordnance points to support them. However, after testing it in battle simulation, it has it moments, because those defence drones which replace flare launhcer saves a lot, but that as long as you don't face laser/point defence craft, because then they die instantly. It doesn't afford to support hull mods and you are probably better leaving two side turrets empty which has too bad arcs to hit anything.

Final nails to it's coffin are that it's AI pilot behaves idiotically in battle even you would equip it with good long range guns, it doesn't know how to use them usefully and tries all the time flank enemy, but does it without understanding that it isn't anymore fast agile craft AND does it in the range of enemy weapons slowly killing itself because of lack of shields. Finally, it fleet cost doubles from hounds cheap 3 points to 6 points, making it useless in grande scale, since it isn't good enough to keep itself out of trouble in battle, and it slightly improved cargo capacity would be better done with two faster basic hounds which can actually keep themselves alive in battle prolonged times and do more damage, as well as they can be specialized with different hull mods since they have more ordnance points.


Having high level character specialized to extra ordnance points would be only thing to make them barely functional, but at that point also base frigate models would had be further improved because of their base higher ordnance points, and at that point of game you probably don't have any need of them since you are already rich enough to be cruising around with the best crafts.

Grades:

Timberwolf: Terrible
Foxhound: Bad

I wouldn't hold much hope to rest of the so called "advanced crafts" based on these examples, they will probably suffer from the same silliness by having less ordnance points with more baddly arced weapon slots, in addition the occasional ruination of their base strong key characteristics.


I wish the person who posted this posted here instead. How am I supposed to change things if I'm not given feedback?

Thinking about it, I probably should move the side weapon arcs on the Foxhound 45 degrees or so forward. I also made it slightly slower because it is bigger and has more mass than an average hound. But now I'm thinking since it also has bigger engines, why not give it a slight upgrade in the speed department? The person missed the point on the idea behind these ships though: they aren't 'advanced' crafts. They are tweaked, altered and sometimes upgraded. Mostly just 'customised'. And yes, they do become better as your OP goes up.

About the Timberwolf, most critisism seems to stem from people expecting it to pretty much have the same role as a normal Wolf. Which it doesn't. It is a low-tech rig with a big fat forward facing gun. I could improve on its shield arc a little, though.
Logged

HELMUT

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #262 on: July 09, 2013, 05:37:32 AM »

That's funny, i was just about to report the Timberwolf fast missile rack problem.

However that dude is pretty harsh with your ships. Sure they got some pretty weird firing arc, but it should be remembered that this mod is about some retro-engineered ship (in the case of the wolf) with some random guns strapped on it. They aren't improved by any mean, just some more "bling" added by some random mercenary/pirate/adventurer.
 
In the case of wolf/timberwolf. The timber is a direct downgrade from the original, while it got more raw punch with 3 harpoon pods it also lack the high tech shield and the phase shift. Which is not surprising since only Try tachyons (i think) can maintain high tech systems.

Yet i agree with him that your ships should overall have more ordnance points. I know that in your mind you want the player to "level" his ship with each successful battle (correct me if i'm wrong) but doing it this way might not be the best. If you still want to go with leveling idea, you should check out this modular ship mod:

http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=5873.0

For the foxhound, i love it. Of course the ship is slower than the original. But you can mount a frickin' reaper on it! Also, PD drones. He still have a point though, 6 FP is a lot for a "slightly better" hound.

Logged

Nanostrike

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #263 on: July 09, 2013, 06:33:14 PM »

Well, since you want criticism and feedback, I'll give you my two-cents on the "Wrestler", since I love gunships.


First and foremost, I love the look and the fact that it's just so forward-focused that you can tell it's a killer ship.  The engines are also rather spread out which can minimize damage to them from missiles that get through.  So, here are my pros, cons, and advice on possible improvement.

PROS:
+The rear turret is a godsend for taking out Salamanders.  This, coupled with the wider engine spacing helps you avoid flameouts.
+Armor and maneuverability of the Brawler, two of it's best features are preserved.
+Kept the 2 Medium, 2 Small Ballistic hardpoint and Ammo Feeder setup, allowing for ridiculously good forward firepower.


CONS:
-Still really slow.  At 90 speed, even though it's an improvement, it can still be outrun easily by even Cruisers/Destroyers.  This makes it really necessary to put Augmented Engines/Unstable Accellerator in it, making it's rear-engine vulnerability more serious and potentially crippling.
-The front shield's arc is a bit small for as wide as the ship is.  Lots of things will clip your flanks as you turn.
-OP is somewhat low for something expected to mount so much firepower.  Especially when the Brawler tends to need a bunch of hull mods to make it viable as anything but an escort.
-Flux cap/vent rate is a bit low for something with so much firepower as well.
-This is the most important con, BY FAR.  It reverses one of the key features of the Brawler: Instead of having it's two powerful weapon mounts close together and right up front, with the weaker ones off to the side, it has it's two weaker mounts up front and it's powerful mounts off to the side.  While this looks incredibly cool, for practical purposes, it tends to space out the projectiles and make it very, very hard to hit smaller targets.  Coupled with the inaccuracy of a lot of Medium Ballistics, this hits it very hard.
-That Universal Turret with the 360 Arc just feels...off.  Aside from maybe an LR PD Laser, nothing you put there will have a long enough range to really do good PD work.  And you don't really have the OP on the ship to mount something really powerful like an Antimatter Blaster there.



Suggestions:
-Do something about the wide arc of the two Medium Mounts.  Perhaps swap them with the two Small Mounts and see how the ship looks/acts.  Maybe change their arc too, so that they arc IN more and OUT less, allowing them to hit smaller targets close up.
-Slightly widen shield arcs so they cover a bit of the flanks while you spin around (Which you do a LOT in this ship)
-Possibly increase speed.  Not too much, as it's still a variant of the slow-as-molasses Brawler, but at least a bit.
-Possible OP increase on the ship to allow for some better weapon mountings.
-Possible minor widening of the Rear Small Ballistic hardpoint's Arc so it can better hit missiles.  ESPECIALLY since it has a very short range.  This would be optional, however, as if you know what you're doing, you can get the Vulcan to take out Salamanders fairly well as it is.
-Possible tweaks to Flux Capacity/Flux Venting to help support it's weapons loadout.
-Maybe a name change to something more starship-ish?


Other than that, I'm loving it.  If these things were in Excelerin, I'd have a perfect mod setup for Starsector.
Logged

Grug

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #264 on: July 09, 2013, 07:39:48 PM »

I want to like the lance, but I just can't. The sheer length of it, the trashy shields and that goddamn useless hypervelocity cannon just ruin it for me. Maybe you could consider making a carrier-convert out of a falcon? Or hell, just seeing any sort of core epoch midline carrier with two runways and a vanilla feel would be cool.

I made a carrier out of the Falcon, the Rook:

Spoiler
[close]
Unf. 7.8/10 would tap.
Logged

Erick Doe

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • "Pretty cunning, don't you think?"
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #265 on: July 27, 2013, 06:28:32 AM »

Nanostrike, your feedback was very useful. Thank you.  :)

I'm currently working on improving a few of the existing ships. Mainly the vanilla based frigates. I'm also still working on the new starsystem (based on the story-driven missions).

Also, I just noticed that at 1337 posts it said this:



Unfortunately, I'm now at 1338.  :-X
« Last Edit: July 27, 2013, 06:31:03 AM by Erick Doe »
Logged

Erick Doe

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • "Pretty cunning, don't you think?"
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #266 on: July 27, 2013, 07:57:39 AM »

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Moose:



Work in progress. She's a ramming ship. Which means she'll do little good in the hands of the AI, but a player could use this extremely heavy ship (it can push an onslaught out of the way) to burn drive right into other vessels and then engage them with built-in close range mining lasers (I'm thinking 6x mining laser and 1x mining blaster). I'm not dead set on the name yet. I was also considering Stag, Antler, Stampede. Any more ideas?
« Last Edit: July 27, 2013, 08:02:06 AM by Erick Doe »
Logged

Gotcha!

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1124
    • View Profile
    • Welcome to New Hiigara
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #267 on: July 27, 2013, 08:09:03 AM »

Stomper!
Logged
  

Uomoz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2663
  • 'womo'dz
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #268 on: July 27, 2013, 08:53:26 AM »

Very good sprite, not a fan of the difference you put between pc and npcs.
Logged

Erick Doe

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • "Pretty cunning, don't you think?"
    • View Profile
Re: Tore Up Plenty - Alternate Starting Ships
« Reply #269 on: July 27, 2013, 09:14:17 AM »

Very good sprite, not a fan of the difference you put between pc and npcs.

Actually, I just tested the ship and the AI on autopilot performs quite well. It just treats it as a forward facing cruiser and uses its 1x intensity laser, 2x mining blasters, 4x mining lasers and 3x misc small energy turrets quite well.  :D The shields are also in a forward locked position.

The only thing it doesn't do is ram the enemy head on. But that doesn't make much difference.

I've finished the sprite:
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 48