Thrawn's Revenge

Imperial Civil War [Empire at War] => Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback => Topic started by: Revanchist on January 22, 2014, 09:05:49 PM

Title: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on January 22, 2014, 09:05:49 PM
There was one of these created for 2.0, now there is one for the 2.1 release.

Just installed it, haven't played yet, but will within the next few days. I will post my thoughts then.

That being said: I was looking through the files in the mod, and I found two files for Yuuzhan Vong Amphistaffs, last modified in 2012. What is the story behind this?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Augustus Lucius Flavius on January 23, 2014, 12:56:32 AM
Along the lines of the Amphistaffs, I found all the files for a Republic-Class Capital ship for the New Republic.  Where is this ship?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on January 23, 2014, 01:32:46 AM
Along the lines of the Amphistaffs, I found all the files for a Republic-Class Capital ship for the New Republic.  Where is this ship?

That was cut when 2.0 was released. It was redundant and inferior and ugly. I did notice that there were also still name lists for Wingless MC-80s (also cut upon the release of 2.0).
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on January 23, 2014, 02:23:58 AM
Along the lines of the Amphistaffs, I found all the files for a Republic-Class Capital ship for the New Republic.  Where is this ship?

Revanchist pretty much summed this one up. The ship's role and armament are almost identical to the Nebula, so there wasn't any point in keeping them both; both have 40 Heavy Turbolasers, 40 regular turbolasers, 20 ion cannon, the NSD just has some concs on top of it. Add to that the fact that the Republic-class is inherently terrible looking (believe me, we tried to make it look good but the design is just awful) and that canonically it was relatively limited in production, and the NSD wins.


Quote
I was looking through the files in the mod, and I found two files for Yuuzhan Vong Amphistaffs, last modified in 2012. What is the story behind this?

Not just Amphistaffs. The files are for a fully-functional Yuuzhan Vong warrior who happens to be holding an Amphistaff. The others were supposed to have Razor and Thud bugs, hence the naming convention. These files are the result of one of the many periods in which we intended to put in Vong. IIRC those files are from much earlier, but they were in the mod at that point because one of the plans with 2.0 (it may even have been 1.3) was to do something in AoW or Final Imperial Push where, after a certain amount of time, we just popped a bunch of Vong units into the galaxy and completely screwed the player over on account of how funny we thought it would be. It would have been mostly space units and then just the three infantry types, because fuck trying to get all those ground units doing anything properly. Codeuser and I even got a prototype for how we'd do Dovin Basal coding instead of shields for their ships. Obviously, we never actually did it. Of course, that could change if enough people pestered us to do the Vong for Ascendancy.... Especially if the freeze fix thing goes anywhere.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Augustus Lucius Flavius on January 23, 2014, 05:24:01 PM
You plotted to put the Vong in? Why did you not finish this? It is now an Imperial Order.  Your future Emperor demands it.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on January 23, 2014, 08:51:37 PM
If the freeze fix works, first we must have fully functioning AI for everyone in AoW, then we must have the Vong pop in.

On another note: will the PA ever get Shock Troopers?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on January 24, 2014, 12:54:51 AM
You plotted to put the Vong in? Why did you not finish this?

Because in the last 8 years I've learned how to distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable commitments for a single version.

On another note: will the PA ever get Shock Troopers?

It's possible.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on January 24, 2014, 12:22:52 PM
It's possible.

No Corey, you are supposed to say: "You will be pleasantly surprised...;)" (If anyone doesn't get this, this is a mod joke).

Joking aside, are you still planning to release those Podcasts that were mentioned a while ago?

Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on January 24, 2014, 12:36:37 PM
I wanted to, but Kalo recorded them in the dumbest way possible. Also, if I were to finish editing it it's still past the point where anything we said would be relevant. I'd be more inclined to do something like it again if we had more community-suggested topics.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Blindsided on January 24, 2014, 01:22:23 PM
So i noticed today that the Yaga Minor in From the Ground Up has 1 unindentified ship with missing tooltip and it deploys unindentified fighters.I assume that was the "cut out" ship for pentastar?
providence was it or am i thinking something else? and the tooltip/icon for the fighters looked like CiS tri droid fighter? i was so excited to see these units in the game so i rushed to start off art of war to see if they were era specific thingies but to my disapointment i didnt see them in the build list,which led me into quickly reading through the manual alot of sadness followed

as for the CiS Tridroid fighter lookalikes,they seem to be bit too sturdy in the from the ground up. im not sure if that was intended or not but i dont see how 1 squadron should be able to tank a victory star destroyer missiles+2 Munificients+2 patrol ships+venator+like 6 squadrons of bombers/fighters it took roughly 2mins to kill one squadron with game on "fast foward" mode

but uhh in short what happened to the providence look alike thingy for pentastar? ive been gone abit and if it was informed somewhere i aplogize for lack of knowledge!


Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on January 24, 2014, 02:05:41 PM
Those are indeed the Providence and the Tri-Fighter. The Providence was intended to be a Pentastar ship for a while when we cut the Recusant, but the Providence was cut because its role would have been like a shitty intermediary between the Venator and Lucrehulk. The PA doesn't need another old capital ship whose primary role is as a carrier with some secondary anti-frigate duties, since they already have that in spades. The Tri-fighter was only there because before I did any of the stat changes, I took the code directly from one of our other release, the FotR minimod. I never deleted the code for the Providence because it's more fun to leave that stuff in, but I hadn't realised it had been prematurely inserted into the starting forces for that GC. As such, there was never any stat adjustment. I'm aware the Trifighters have been problematic, but they're being removed anyways. They were never supposed to be there, so any discussion about their power level is kind of moot.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Blindsided on January 24, 2014, 02:33:27 PM
Ah fair enough i was assuming it was some sort of special thingy with the tri fighters :/

shame about Providence tho,model for it looked so good ^^

thanks for the answer
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on January 24, 2014, 08:08:17 PM
Ah fair enough i was assuming it was some sort of special thingy with the tri fighters :/

shame about Providence tho,model for it looked so good ^^

thanks for the answer

Hmm I havn't seen this...perhaps you have a screenshot?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on January 24, 2014, 08:47:33 PM
Play FTGU as the PA and attack Yaga Minor as soon as possible and you'll see it.  It'll be a Praetor-II, Providence, and like 3 other ships.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Blindsided on January 26, 2014, 09:42:02 AM
Hmm I havn't seen this...perhaps you have a screenshot?

http://imgur.com/a/6wgp9

(http://i.imgur.com/i1e6jVt.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: kucsidave on January 26, 2014, 08:54:44 PM
i just noticed something very intresting!
I played The Hunt for Zsinj as IR, and i just found that i can not build Corellian Corvettes
i dont know if it's an accident or it have a reason why, but that means Zsinj have no "Anti fighter" ship building capacity!!!
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on January 26, 2014, 10:53:35 PM
i just noticed something very intresting!
I played The Hunt for Zsinj as IR, and i just found that i can not build Corellian Corvettes
i dont know if it's an accident or it have a reason why, but that means Zsinj have no "Anti fighter" ship building capacity!!!

I noticed the same problem.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: jordanthejq12 on January 28, 2014, 04:22:50 PM
Not a bug, it's an oversight. It's a relatively simple fix (basically just clone the CR90 and put it in the Zinsj.xml file that contains Warlord units), but I'd probably wait for official support on that.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Singularity on March 14, 2014, 06:50:57 PM
So Lucrehulks can only be built on the Corporate Sector planets?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: turtle225 on March 20, 2014, 01:22:05 AM
Hey, I figured this didn't warrant it's own topic so I'll put it here.

There appears to be a bug in Operation: Shadow Hand where none of the imperial heroes spawn in if you start as the New Republic. If you start as the Remnant they all spawn in fine but are all absent if you play as the New Republic. Easy way to check this is to simply start as the New Republic and immediately attack Byss.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Singularity on March 20, 2014, 11:38:02 AM
Hey, I figured this didn't warrant it's own topic so I'll put it here.

There appears to be a bug in Operation: Shadow Hand where none of the imperial heroes spawn in if you start as the New Republic. If you start as the Remnant they all spawn in fine but are all absent if you play as the New Republic. Easy way to check this is to simply start as the New Republic and immediately attack Byss.
The Imperial AI dont seem to do anything either.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on March 20, 2014, 03:37:19 PM
The Imperial AI dont seem to do anything either.

Shadow Hand has always had a few issues(it took forever to get rid of the Fleet Commander spam) The AI's docile nature is a side effect I think of that bug's fix, though it is preferable to the old bug
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Halcyon on March 21, 2014, 07:12:15 PM
Diggin 2.1 so far congrats. Sad to hear its the last major update but I understand why. I'd still like to see a three man spec-ops team with a sniper, rapid fire blaster, an missile launcher lol.

Thank the Gods you didn't add Vong. I absolutely HATE the Vong.

Lastly Episode 7 is set 30 years after Vaders death in Star Wars time, which the is the same in real time since they just celebrated 30 years of RotJ in 2013. So that's right after the Vong War wonder if they'll mention it or if it doesn't exist? Also it won't mess up the history of this game which is sweet!
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on March 22, 2014, 12:17:19 AM
Thank the Gods you didn't add Vong. I absolutely HATE the Vong.

I feel so sorry for you . . .

Anyways, an idea for the fighter heroes: could they be given the Summon Wingmen ability?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Halcyon on March 28, 2014, 06:19:16 PM
Oh Revanchist of course you like the Vong, they are basically the Zerg brought into Star Wars. Of course I'd rather have the actual Zerg, they're way more interesting than the Vong are.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Halcyon on March 28, 2014, 06:21:35 PM
Instead of the Vong they should have worked more with the Ssi-Ruuk, there's some interesting stuff there. Having them invade en masse would have been far more interesting than the Vong. Especially with their intechment technology being sorta similar to the Rakata's ancient form of using biologicals for power sources.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on March 29, 2014, 02:08:26 AM
Oh Revanchist of course you like the Vong, they are basically the Zerg brought into Star Wars. Of course I'd rather have the actual Zerg, they're way more interesting than the Vong are.

The Vong had an interesting story and the caste system was decent, I think they were better made than the zerg myself.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Darman on April 03, 2014, 08:09:39 PM
Um, quick question. I know that the Lucrehulks are for the PA faction, but i can only seem to build them in the skirmishes. Are they planet/scenario specific? i know they are not era specific because the PA stays the same all throughout.
Thanks! ;D
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on April 04, 2014, 04:08:49 AM
Um, quick question. I know that the Lucrehulks are for the PA faction, but i can only seem to build them in the skirmishes. Are they planet/scenario specific? i know they are not era specific because the PA stays the same all throughout.
Thanks! ;D

Yes, only available in GC when you have Ession, Telos and one other corporate sector word whose name escapes me...
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Darman on April 04, 2014, 06:14:14 AM
Thank you much!
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Revanchist on May 03, 2014, 09:01:31 PM
Some small suggestions:

Increase the Majestic's range to be more of a sniper unit, or decrease its points to 3.
Increase the number of fighters you get immediately from the Endurance to 5 or 6 (that way you are spending 1 point for each squadron immediately received + 1--2 points for the ship). Alternatively, maybe the Endurance could get the Launch Squadrons that the Executor had on the Vanilla
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Shiakou on May 21, 2014, 09:58:15 PM
Is there any way that I can order a unit to retreat by itself? Say an ISD is badly damaged but I managed to get it back behind my lines; can I tell it to bug out and bring in another ISD?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on May 22, 2014, 12:57:37 AM
Unfortunately not. There's technically a way to script it, but it means you can just bring it right back in fully repaired, so it's not something we want to do.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Avarice1987 on May 23, 2014, 07:46:37 AM
Are new units adding in future versions?

I miss the Allegiance and and the Titan Star Destroyers.

Or there will be no new units.

Your mod is very very nice to play. 

Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Singularity on May 29, 2014, 08:18:43 PM
I can't believe I'm saying this...but I think the PA have become OP!  :o They just conquered every northern IR planet, killed Zsinj and have almost all the Corporate Sector by Week 7!
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on May 29, 2014, 08:23:19 PM
Are new units adding in future versions?

I miss the Allegiance and and the Titan Star Destroyers.

Or there will be no new units.

Your mod is very very nice to play.

We have no plans to add more units at the moment. The Allegiance's role is already covered by the Praetor/Tector, and there's no such thing as a Titan Star Destroyer, so I don't know what you're referring to.

I can't believe I'm saying this...but I think the PA have become OP!  :o They just conquered every northern IR planet, killed Zsinj and have almost all the Corporate Sector by Week 7!

Nothing's changed about them, so it's probably just a lucky game. If this is with the patch, the Warlords could have gotten too aggressive.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on May 29, 2014, 10:02:08 PM
We have no plans to add more units at the moment. The Allegiance's role is already covered by the Praetor/Tector, and there's no such thing as a Titan Star Destroyer, so I don't know what you're referring to.

Nothing's changed about them, so it's probably just a lucky game. If this is with the patch, the Warlords could have gotten too aggressive.

Titan is a Fanon 5700 meter upscaling of the Allegiance.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Singularity on June 20, 2014, 04:00:28 PM
On hard difficulty as NR on the big GCs, Isard always ends up travelling everywhere with up to 3 SSDs, which kinda makes the entire game impossible. Is there any way to avoid this?

At the moment shes stuck above one of my planets with 3 SSDS and refuses to move, on week 73 no less. So I can't change the era any more.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on June 20, 2014, 06:53:02 PM
On hard difficulty as NR on the big GCs, Isard always ends up travelling everywhere with up to 3 SSDs, which kinda makes the entire game impossible. Is there any way to avoid this?

At the moment shes stuck above one of my planets with 3 SSDS and refuses to move, on week 73 no less. So I can't change the era any more.

Easily.  Just blitzkrieg the imperial shipyard planets, kuat,byss, bilbringi and take fondor too just to be safe. Concentrate heavy ground defenses and forces on them, or marshal your fleet early and camp over just those planets, denying isard the facilities to construct ssds. The ai wont tolerate you blockading its worlds so will attack them repeatedly thus weakening their forces and leaving your worlds alone to build up a force to hunt down isard and end the ssd threat via era change.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on June 20, 2014, 08:58:18 PM
Easily.  Just blitzkrieg the imperial shipyard planets, kuat,byss, bilbringi and take fondor too just to be safe. Concentrate heavy ground defenses and forces on them, or marshal your fleet early and camp over just those planets, denying isard the facilities to construct ssds. The ai wont tolerate you blockading its worlds so will attack them repeatedly thus weakening their forces and leaving your worlds alone to build up a force to hunt down isard and end the ssd threat via era change.

I deal with it because you AT MOST can only have 2 SSD's at a time attacking.  2 HyperV's/Ion Cannons on the planet below when 2 SSD's hyper in, you pull your entire fleet back into a defensive position, and while the SSD's act like balerinas spinning and twirling about, if you have Hypers they'll lose one then the other to the HyperV.  When the 1st is destroyed and the 3rd comes in, concentrate fire of everything on it and continue to Hyper the #2.  You'll lose units, but unless your defensive fleet is pretty small, you'll take out all 3 SSD's without losing everything yourself.  If you have Ion Cannons you just send your fighters to eliminate the SSD once the shields are gone after the first Ion Cannon.  This makes it even better because once you've ion'd it once, your fighters will keep it's shields from regenerating so you can then Ion the other SSD.  Usually lose the first before they even attack anything of importance.  Then when the 3rd comes in Have EVERYTHING fire at it and Ion it taking down it's shields, and it'll be gone in no time.  Just keep hitting that power to shields on the MC's and you'll have minimal losses.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on June 20, 2014, 09:49:22 PM
Also a good strategy
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Carnivore Jacques on June 20, 2014, 10:29:18 PM
On hard difficulty as NR on the big GCs, Isard always ends up travelling everywhere with up to 3 SSDs, which kinda makes the entire game impossible. Is there any way to avoid this?

At the moment shes stuck above one of my planets with 3 SSDS and refuses to move, on week 73 no less. So I can't change the era any more.

I think the mod does a good job of distinguishing the factions from each other with respect to gameplay. Most other factions start with conquering territory and building up a bigger fleet. This doesn't do you any good with the New Republic - any tempo you gain is lost when the SSDs show up. You can't really build a fleet that rivals the Remnant's anyway.
The situation is this: you have two powerful neighbours, and you're only getting weaker.
The avoidance is this: engage the Lusankya directly, as soon as you can, in the most favourable battle you can manage. I usually do this within fifteen weeks of starting, somewhere around Corellia. When I play NR I just can't wait to get Isard alone in a room with a fish tank and an ion cannon and do some nasty things to her, you know?


E:

Above are good suggestions for engaging SSDs directly. Keep in mind: ion cannons take a long time to build and you can only build one per planet. Sometimes you won't get the opportunity to face her over your planet, but if it's early they won't have Hyp-Vs and maybe you'll get the opportunity to fight her alone if you decide to do it over an Imperial system.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Singularity on June 21, 2014, 09:35:44 AM
Alright, I'm going to build an Ion Cannon on the planet and just throw everything I can at Isard, then escape with whatever ships I have left when she's dead. Thanks for the advice guys  :D.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on June 23, 2014, 02:42:41 AM
Alright, I'm going to build an Ion Cannon on the planet and just throw everything I can at Isard, then escape with whatever ships I have left when she's dead. Thanks for the advice guys  :D.

NR winning strategies. Cut off the head and watch the body die. Repeat
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on June 23, 2014, 02:44:09 AM
I've been thinking about adding engine hardpoints to a lot of the ships that don't have them, lately. So there's that.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on June 23, 2014, 02:51:52 AM
I've been thinking about adding engine hardpoints to a lot of the ships that don't have them, lately. So there's that.

So...15 engine hardpoints for SSDs then
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Drathmar on June 24, 2014, 05:01:41 PM
Just joined and wanted to say great mod. I also had a question/comment as well.

Is the Chaff Frigate supposed to be super good? Started an EotH AoW campaign last night and ended up getting hit by a raid fleet while taking Yaga Minor. My Chaff was lagging behind cause it was the ship I warped in first...

so I turned it around to try and delay the raid fleet of 1 MC80b, 1 MC40A, and 2 Dreadnaughts... and it killed most of them. Only a dreadnaught was left. Which was mostly surprising cause of the inclusion of the MC80b. Or is the MC80b just really really weak? Haven't played much as the NR outside of a short FTGU campaign to try out the mod to see if I liked it so never really used them myself.

Was on the hardest difficulty as well if that matters.

I was just wondering if it was because

1) The Chaff is amazing.
2) The MC80b is really weak.
or
3) Raid fleet ships are weaker versions.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Carnivore Jacques on June 24, 2014, 06:23:01 PM
As a matter of fact, the Chaf is amazing and the MC80b is rather weak as capital ships go. I think it's plausible that one of them could fight three ships. Did you send any fighters or bombers with it?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on June 24, 2014, 07:30:15 PM
As a matter of fact, the Chaf is amazing and the MC80b is rather weak as capital ships go. I think it's plausible that one of them could fight three ships. Did you send any fighters or bombers with it?

Yup.  IMO, Chaf is quite possibly the best heavy frigate in the game, and while the shields of the MC80B are fantastic, it's offensive potential is quite underwhelming, although vastly improved over the MC80's.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Thuellai on June 24, 2014, 08:14:43 PM
Just joined and wanted to say great mod. I also had a question/comment as well.

Is the Chaff Frigate supposed to be super good? Started an EotH AoW campaign last night and ended up getting hit by a raid fleet while taking Yaga Minor. My Chaff was lagging behind cause it was the ship I warped in first...

so I turned it around to try and delay the raid fleet of 1 MC80b, 1 MC40A, and 2 Dreadnaughts... and it killed most of them. Only a dreadnaught was left. Which was mostly surprising cause of the inclusion of the MC80b. Or is the MC80b just really really weak? Haven't played much as the NR outside of a short FTGU campaign to try out the mod to see if I liked it so never really used them myself.

Was on the hardest difficulty as well if that matters.

I was just wondering if it was because

1) The Chaff is amazing.
2) The MC80b is really weak.
or
3) Raid fleet ships are weaker versions.

Little of everything.  Chafs are really solid, with good guns and conc missiles - their weapon layout is pretty similar to the VSDI, which is another fantastic ship in that class.  The MC80b is tough, but in terms of offensive firepower it lags a bit.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Singularity on June 26, 2014, 03:50:04 PM
Should AT-PTs be re-scaled? Because I think they're actually bigger than AT-STs in the mod.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: John on July 03, 2014, 03:23:37 PM
I like the purpose and direction of the mod but I don't like the way it plays.
My major beef with the mod (and the vanilla game) is that I expected the ship combat to be more destructive and faster particularly with larger ships like SSDs and ISDs vs smaller ships-corvettes, frigates, and so on. The reason for that is larger ships have huge weapon arrays, shielding and hull. These small ships don't have those.

Why are the small ships taking massed barrages of heavy turbolaser fire from a huge capital ship before losing shields and becoming seriously damaged?

The visual strain of the mod crushes my PC and makes the space battles play slower and worse than vanilla, a problem that wouldn't be so bad if the damage tolerances of the ships were different.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Vulcanus on July 03, 2014, 06:20:32 PM
I like the purpose and direction of the mod but I don't like the way it plays.
My major beef with the mod (and the vanilla game) is that I expected the ship combat to be more destructive and faster particularly with larger ships like SSDs and ISDs vs smaller ships-corvettes, frigates, and so on. The reason for that is larger ships have huge weapon arrays, shielding and hull. These small ships don't have those.

Why are the small ships taking massed barrages of heavy turbolaser fire from a huge capital ship before losing shields and becoming seriously damaged?

The visual strain of the mod crushes my PC and makes the space battles play slower and worse than vanilla, a problem that wouldn't be so bad if the damage tolerances of the ships were different.

From a game balance perspective it does not really make sense to make smaller ships weaker than they already are, because then they wouldn't be worth building anymore. Alternatively, if their build cost was also reduced to match their reduced power, it wouldn't make them any easier to destroy, since you would be facing potentially dozens more small ships in space combat.
For the player, more powerful and expensive frigates and corvettes also means they are easier to control in combat.

Drastically increasing ship firepower would also turn space battles more arcade-y and make speed-based tactics meaningless.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on July 03, 2014, 07:32:28 PM
agreed
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on July 03, 2014, 08:42:57 PM
Very true.  most of the reason that the larger ships seem to spend so much time shooting at smaller ships without taking out their shields is due to trying to hit moving objects...then it seems to take them forever to choose a new target because of the limitation of the game engine where you can't choose a new target mid-salvo, so the current firing salvo must finish before it moves to the next target.  It happens with the smaller ships too, but much harder to see simply because they don't have so very many hardpoints firing at a single ship at once.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Thuellai on July 04, 2014, 12:50:41 AM
I like the purpose and direction of the mod but I don't like the way it plays.
My major beef with the mod (and the vanilla game) is that I expected the ship combat to be more destructive and faster particularly with larger ships like SSDs and ISDs vs smaller ships-corvettes, frigates, and so on. The reason for that is larger ships have huge weapon arrays, shielding and hull. These small ships don't have those.

Why are the small ships taking massed barrages of heavy turbolaser fire from a huge capital ship before losing shields and becoming seriously damaged?

The visual strain of the mod crushes my PC and makes the space battles play slower and worse than vanilla, a problem that wouldn't be so bad if the damage tolerances of the ships were different.

Welcome to 'The best reason to bring an ISD1'

Nothing says lovin' like nailing a small ship with the tractor beam and watching it crumple about a billion times faster.  It's mostly tracking against small, fast ships that creates lots of inaccuracy - capital ship damage is actually pretty intense.

Apparently 2.2 is going to reduce particle size and increase particle speed, which should increase performance AND make ships a little more accurate against moving targets (I think)
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: John on July 04, 2014, 03:07:24 AM
From a game balance perspective it does not really make sense to make smaller ships weaker than they already are, because then they wouldn't be worth building anymore. Alternatively, if their build cost was also reduced to match their reduced power, it wouldn't make them any easier to destroy, since you would be facing potentially dozens more small ships in space combat.
For the player, more powerful and expensive frigates and corvettes also means they are easier to control in combat.

Drastically increasing ship firepower would also turn space battles more arcade-y and make speed-based tactics meaningless.

Disagree. The game and battles would be balanced by bringing your own capital ships to counter theirs while your lighter escort vessels deal with ships they are designed to deal with, and by having larger ships take longer to build than the smaller ships. The concentration of force and concentration of resources in a capital or super cap is in itself a reason to build smaller, more mobile ships. "Speed based" tactics have no real place in a battle full of cap ships and space stations, that are supposed to be able to shrug off and dish out huge amounts of firepower, where the point is to establish and keep control of the space and planet.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: TYBER.ZANN on July 07, 2014, 02:50:07 PM
I don't know if this has been suggested but, I think it would be cool if all the ships where scaled down just a bit. Also, I think It would be nice to have your fleet closer to your space station or defensive platforms when you are defending against an attack, as well as the opponents ships when you are attacking, and why are the ships so spread out, just wondering. I've had fleets that are so spread out when I am defending that by the time I regroup my fleet I lost half of my support ships.

Just a suggestion guys, I still really like this mod and I appreciate all the hard work you guys are putting into it.  ;D ;)
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Thuellai on July 07, 2014, 06:14:57 PM
I don't know if this has been suggested but, I think it would be cool if all the ships where scaled down just a bit. Also, I think It would be nice to have your fleet closer to your space station or defensive platforms when you are defending against an attack, as well as the opponents ships when you are attacking, and why are the ships so spread out, just wondering. I've had fleets that are so spread out when I am defending that by the time I regroup my fleet I lost half of my support ships.

Just a suggestion guys, I still really like this mod and I appreciate all the hard work you guys are putting into it.  ;D ;)

I think the defensive formations are hard-coded.  And if they made the ships any smaller, it would take them even LONGER to get into formation.  I think the scale is generally pretty good where it is.  I suppose a small reduction wouldn't be too bad, might make the super-ships a little bit more maneuverable, but as they are it feels good to see that enormous SSD roll in.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on July 07, 2014, 10:38:11 PM
It is truly sad the Defensive formations are hard coded, they have cost me more problems than a dozen raid fleets put together
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on July 07, 2014, 11:08:24 PM
It is truly sad the Defensive formations are hard coded, they have cost me more problems than a dozen raid fleets put together

I do hate that, doubly so because it likes to put your weakest heavy frigates in the front of your formation for defensive fleets, and your light frigates setting in asteroid fields so that you lose 2-3 ships within 3 seconds due to asteroids ripping through 2 and the lead frigate being blasted to pieces before you've even managed to hit the pause button.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: darthsayrehs on July 16, 2014, 06:18:33 AM
Can you add the ability for individual ships to hyperspace out of battle?

Also I feel that the superstar destroyers like the eclipse and other executor class star destroyers are waaaay too powerful. Because of this I don't feel like playing as any other faction at all.

And can you write an alternate AI which is less defensive and more aggressive (constantly attacks the player) forcing the player to go on the defensive.
I never get attacked on the planets I build Golans on.

 It's also frustrating when the AI builds Turbolaser turrets in all its planets 5 mins after the game starts.

Yet again I request you to make a more aggressive AI.

Have an option which allows the player to choose the desired AI.

Eagerly awaiting version 2.2

PS. hopefully with the change I've suggested.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Mat8876 on July 16, 2014, 07:21:07 AM
Have an option which allows the player to choose the desired AI.
You can choose how effective the Ai are at the start of a Galactic conquest with the 3 ranks in the bottom left of the screen.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on July 16, 2014, 04:16:24 PM
First, you don't need to post the same thing in so many places. We read everything, and it won't get a response any faster since we have to take the time to remove the extras and shift around any responses it already has to the proper thread.

Can you add the ability for individual ships to hyperspace out of battle?

The only way to script this tends to end up with them being able to immediately be brought back in, which is undesirable.

Also I feel that the superstar destroyers like the eclipse and other executor class star destroyers are waaaay too powerful. Because of this I don't feel like playing as any other faction at all.
They're very easy to beat, and even fairly easy to lose. They're not even especially population efficient.

Quote
And can you write an alternate AI which is less defensive and more aggressive (constantly attacks the player) forcing the player to go on the defensive.
I never get attacked on the planets I build Golans on.

 It's also frustrating when the AI builds Turbolaser turrets in all its planets 5 mins after the game starts.

Yet again I request you to make a more aggressive AI.

Have an option which allows the player to choose the desired AI.

EaW tends to not load edits to its actual AI files at all, and you certainly can't script two separate AIs for them and have it be a choice you make ingame. That's absolutely impossible to implement. Besides, the AI already attacks fairly often and with considerable forces, depending on the difficulty you're on. If we made them attack more often, it would end up like the old attack loops where you get extremely small fleets (like 3 frigates) repeatedly at the same planets.



Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Carnivore Jacques on July 16, 2014, 06:31:45 PM
The only way to script this tends to end up with them being able to immediately be brought back in, which is undesirable.

Would this work?

The self-destruct ability from vanilla is added to every ship. It is replaced with the 'jump to hyperspace' ability - it is disabled if engines are destroyed or interdictors are on. It does three things: reduces shields, reduces weapon power, and destroys the ship. The ship, when destroyed in this manner, doesn't explode or produce a deathclone, it just disappears. The game makes a record of which ships are hyperspaced.
Upon victory, when returning to galactic, the hyperspaced ships are recreated at the site of the battle, similar to how one gets free stormtroopers for taking Coruscant.
Upon defeat, the hyperspaced ships are recreated in orbit of a friendly planet, in the same manner that heroes are spawned at the beginning of eras.


It sounds like a lot of work for something so small, but I'm curious if it's technically possible.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on July 16, 2014, 06:38:10 PM
Abilities are pretty much unmoddable, so that wouldn't work.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Phunnyphil on July 21, 2014, 07:19:21 PM
As I was playing on the Duskhan League's GC, I noticed that I couldn't capture build pads with them. Is that something that could be fixed?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Mat8876 on July 21, 2014, 08:22:24 PM
It's probably the same problem as the PA had in 2.0 (before the hotfix) but since the Duskhan League are a minor faction it's not to big of a problem.

To be honest I would rather they put mining facility's available to them since they can't build any ships with only the planet income.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Carnivore Jacques on July 21, 2014, 10:17:58 PM
I agree, Yevetha infantry can't use bunkers or build pads. If I remember right they can capture sensor arrays for some reason. Either one may be an oversight.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Phunnyphil on July 22, 2014, 03:01:21 PM
Something strange that I noticed is that Admiral Teradoc's ship spawns a single tie bomber, and instead of coming out of the hanger, it comes from hyperspace. Is that supposed to happen?
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Woodie on August 06, 2014, 09:42:59 PM
Something strange that I noticed is that Admiral Teradoc's ship spawns a single tie bomber, and instead of coming out of the hanger, it comes from hyperspace. Is that supposed to happen?
HAHA I have noticed this too. I doubt it is meant to happen.

Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Woodie on August 06, 2014, 09:46:42 PM
If you're interested (which you probably aren't), I have a map or two and some voice recordings for 2.2. I got sick of some of the same ground maps appearing for different planets. I made one for Eriadu and Garqi. Just say if you want to have a look at them, mod team.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: ColDale on August 11, 2014, 04:51:44 PM
Hello all. Just got the mod installed. Pretty exceptional! like all the extra units , several new campaigns and choice of factions.

The upgraded details is very well done. Like the way the space battles are darker, more realistic looking. I've also noticed that the fighters move more-well like fighters than the original game where they used to have a tendency to bumble around bumping into each other.

Only one thing though, being a more casual gamer, I don't have the time available to be massively competitive (One reason I avoid MP lol ) and it seems almost every mod ramps up the difficulty even on easy. I can understand the need for those with many hours practice. Just wondered if there's a way I can edit a setting to dump the difficulty down a bit for a while. - Thanks  :)

Also wonder if a Victory star destroyer III will appear ;) lol.

Thanks again for great Mod!

Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on August 11, 2014, 05:45:10 PM
Hello all. Just got the mod installed. Pretty exceptional! like all the extra units , several new campaigns and choice of factions.

The upgraded details is very well done. Like the way the space battles are darker, more realistic looking. I've also noticed that the fighters move more-well like fighters than the original game where they used to have a tendency to bumble around bumping into each other.

Only one thing though, being a more casual gamer, I don't have the time available to be massively competitive (One reason I avoid MP lol ) and it seems almost every mod ramps up the difficulty even on easy. I can understand the need for those with many hours practice. Just wondered if there's a way I can edit a setting to dump the difficulty down a bit for a while. - Thanks  :)

Also wonder if a Victory star destroyer III will appear ;) lol.

Thanks again for great Mod!

You will not see a VSD-III since there never was a VSD-III.  I have heard of the Harrow-type VSD's called the VSD-III, however the VSD-III is strictly a Fanon design.

No idea on the difficulty thing.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Vulcanus on August 12, 2014, 05:04:02 AM
Welcome to the forums, ColDale!

For beginners I would recommend starting an Empire of the Hand campaign in Art of War. You start with unified starting planets at the edge of the Galaxy with no immediate enemies threatening your borders and a chance to develop your economy before trying to expand. EotH also is in general just a bit over-powered, they are the mod team's baby after all (Corey plz don't crucify me). This is somewhat counter-balanced by their lack of super star destroyers and planetary cannons.

Alternatively you could start one of the Era 1 campaigns with the Imperial Remnant as you have a strong starting position, NR is still weak and you got the Lusankya as the ultimate trump card in space battles.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: ColDale on August 12, 2014, 03:35:26 PM
Thanks for the Advice  :)

Good to see a good number of SSD in this mod.

Doe's anyone know of a SSD that was basically an oversized Imperial Star Destroyer?.

Personally I'm new to expanded star wars universe. I've read the Thrawns trilogy (Which would be good if the new films are based on that! lol ) and that's it. Good books though.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on August 12, 2014, 03:49:54 PM
Allegiance was basically a 2.2 KM Tector, that's very similar to what you're looking for (although I don't know if they're classified as SSD's since they're only Battlecruisers).

Assertor was 15 KM long and specifically designed for "conventional warfare" which kinda meets that criteria also.

Bellator as well, since it was a 7.2 KM designed to be much faster and more maneuverable than many other dreadnoughts.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Vulcanus on August 12, 2014, 04:06:43 PM
Thanks for the Advice  :)

Good to see a good number of SSD in this mod.

Doe's anyone know of a SSD that was basically an oversized Imperial Star Destroyer?.

Personally I'm new to expanded star wars universe. I've read the Thrawns trilogy (Which would be good if the new films are based on that! lol ) and that's it. Good books though.

If you wish to further explore expanded universe related to Thrawn's Revenge mod timeframe and the Thrawn Trilogy, I would wholeheartedly recommend the X-Wing novels and the Hand of Thrawn duology. And if you like comics, throw in the X-Wing: Rogue Squadron comics, particularly "In the Empire's Service" arc.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Lord Xizer on August 12, 2014, 04:30:02 PM
X wing series, Darksaber, Dark Empire, Hand of Thrawn dualogy, the courtship of princessleia, dark forces I, II and III books are all good reads that cover the timetable
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: ColDale on August 14, 2014, 04:27:49 PM
Allegiance was basically a 2.2 KM Tector, that's very similar to what you're looking for (although I don't know if they're classified as SSD's since they're only Battlecruisers).

Assertor was 15 KM long and specifically designed for "conventional warfare" which kinda meets that criteria also.

Bellator as well, since it was a 7.2 KM designed to be much faster and more maneuverable than many other dreadnoughts.

That's what I'm thinking of I think. It was one of the extra ships added in a mod for the EAW demo . I think that was the name of it.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tomcat1516 on September 19, 2014, 01:24:37 AM
i asked a question about why the AI factions get more than one planet in from the ground up and the answer i was given explained that this is needed for the AI to expand. while this makes sense, it does put the player at a disadvantage. i was wondering if there was a way to change this to give it some balance. some ideas are to

1. move the AI controlled planets farther away so that you have some time to prepare. this would be especially good for the Eoth as they have two New Republic planets next to them.

2. give the player two or three planets instead of one to decrease the time it takes to get your faction running.

3. give the player more ships at the start or the AI fewer

thanks for reading
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Vulcanus on September 19, 2014, 12:28:59 PM
In every campaign the player is at a disadvantage with AI making up to 15 times more money before you get the Tax Agencies going. Yet still the AI gets beaten like an old drum in almost every single GC. It's very satisfying to have a genuinely challenging campaign that pushes the player to the limit and makes every move count. The FTGU as it is now is in my opinion the best GC in the game because of that, and could instead be made more challenging for player-New Republic campaign rather than making others easier. There are plenty of other GCs where you get to enjoy slow build-up and superior starting forces anyway.

I would consider altering difficulty levels instead. Right now the Easy (Recruit? Forgot the name) difficulty is so much easier than Captain and Admiral that its a bit useless. Changing Easy difficulty to be more aggressive but with the same 2x credit modifier or retain its passiveness but have a better credit modifier could be the solution to keep FTGU manageable but still challenging for new players.

Just food for thought, at this point I may be too much of a veteran player to comment on difficulty settings.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tomcat1516 on September 24, 2014, 10:27:45 PM
i was reading the forums and came across the one on incompatibility with the republic at war mod. i made the recommended changes and found the game to be easier on the standard difficulty. so it looks like i was wrong about the game being unbalanced. i still think that one of the new republic planets should be moved for the Eoth start in from the ground up, but otherwise the mod is great
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Vulcanus on October 16, 2014, 04:12:31 AM
Bug report:

Credit to Lord Xizer for noticing it; there is a bug with the Transitory Mists - Terephon trade route in the Hunt for Zsinj GC. The trade route is listed as MistThre_Terephon when it should be MistThree_Terephon and as a result you can't reach Terephon.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: kucsidave on November 04, 2014, 03:33:07 AM
I use v2.15 [beta], and i noticed that the NR's Sacheen's engines hardpoint does not work properly.
I shot them, and as an effect the ship's overall HP is decreesing, and the whole ship can be destroyed this way.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: tlmiller on November 04, 2014, 11:14:35 PM
I use v2.15 [beta], and i noticed that the NR's Sacheen's engines hardpoint does not work properly.
I shot them, and as an effect the ship's overall HP is decreesing, and the whole ship can be destroyed this way.

I've noticed it too.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Mat8876 on November 05, 2014, 02:54:35 PM
It's a corvette that's why, it may have hardpoints but it's not the same as a frigate.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Insergence on May 04, 2017, 01:33:11 PM
Does anyone know if its possible to bring the updated models and textures from the 2.2 Demo to 2.1? I have been trying and got everything over except for the laser effects, they work but some of the lasers are gigantic.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: d1001more on August 31, 2017, 12:46:38 PM
Does the Katana Fleet event take place in the  Thrawn Campaign  2.1 or is that new for 2.0?  Im guessing not in 2.1 because you start out with Mirkir (sorry spelling) as one of your territories. If I am wrong (usually) can someone explain how to trigger the event. Thanks in advance!
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: kucsidave on August 31, 2017, 01:15:14 PM
It is in the 2.1 already, and will still be present for 2.2(I suppose that's what you meant by 2.0)
There are 3 mini-missions in 2.1 which you can all find in the manual.
It is triggered by capturing a planet(not sure which at the moment, though it differs which one for the IR and the NR), what gives you access to the Deep Space location, where you can travel with a fleet if Thrawn/Talon Karde is in it. As soon as you arrive, the battle for the katana fleet begins.
Make sure to capture as many katanas as possible before finishing off the NR/IR, as if you destroy the NR/IR the mission ends, and only the already captured ships will be added to your fleet. You won't be able to build more either, so make the ones you capture count.
Oh, and have fun.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: TheKaiser223 on November 10, 2017, 12:11:01 PM
I'm not sure if this has happened to anybody else, but when infantry open fire, I don't hear any noise. I would also like to note that I really, really dislike the rate at which the infantry fires at each other, it makes it impossible for me to manage my infantry properly when gunfights are decided in two seconds.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on November 18, 2017, 09:28:21 AM
the firing effects were just unhooked at some point in 2.1's dev process and rever hooked back up. It's been fixed since. As for infantry being fragile, that's partially a result of the removal of the take cover ability, which we removed because of issues with the animations for the NR trooopers (since it would be unfair to have one faction not have it, especially when their infantry were supposed to be slightly better). The ability has also since been reinstated
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: TheEmprahofman on December 04, 2017, 03:09:39 PM
So I have a question/concern about the space battles. In the mod, it appears that all the ships have the same or similar range, units like the Marauder Cruiser once being a long range missile ship is now just a standard early game frigate. Many of the ships appear to have very similar attacks that all really feel the same (All of weapons rate of fire are the same (Not amount of shots per burst), the speed that shots take to reach their targets is the same, there are no shots that have lots of splash damage, and even missiles which can no longer penetrate shields, feel like normal blast bolts because of that nerf. I have not been playing this game this much (Only half way through a NR game), but could some one give me some insight of ship weapons that have cool traits (That are not ions) that act differently? (
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Corey on December 06, 2017, 07:36:49 PM
If your definition of things that have cool traits is stuff like penetrating shields, then you won't find much like that. That was incredibly unbalanced, and not lore-friendly. While things like weapon ranges are being diversified more, generally it's the multipliers against different types of shields and armour that make things different. It may not have the same visual difference on impact like something irgnoring shields does, but different weapon types are defininitely used for different things.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Jake Trout on February 11, 2018, 10:27:53 PM
Greeting, didn’t know where else to look to ask this question where people have replied to a thread I. 2018, but I reached era 4 in GC and now I can’t initiate space combabt. My fleet just hovers over an enemy planet with their fleet there. And my ground forces initiate a space fight when I go to conquer a planet and I can’t retreat from it so essentially all I can do is build and move fleets around but no combat at all. Is there a fix for this? I have 2.1 installed. Playing as republic

Thanks for your time and help
Jake
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: fireball900 on February 12, 2018, 09:45:56 PM
Greeting, didn’t know where else to look to ask this question where people have replied to a thread I. 2018, but I reached era 4 in GC and now I can’t initiate space combabt. My fleet just hovers over an enemy planet with their fleet there. And my ground forces initiate a space fight when I go to conquer a planet and I can’t retreat from it so essentially all I can do is build and move fleets around but no combat at all. Is there a fix for this? I have 2.1 installed. Playing as republic

Thanks for your time and help
Jake

Have you tried initiating a fight somewhere else first? Maybe that will provide a sufficient 'reset.'
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: 0ffkilter on February 15, 2018, 02:18:01 PM
Greeting, didn’t know where else to look to ask this question where people have replied to a thread I. 2018, but I reached era 4 in GC and now I can’t initiate space combabt. My fleet just hovers over an enemy planet with their fleet there. And my ground forces initiate a space fight when I go to conquer a planet and I can’t retreat from it so essentially all I can do is build and move fleets around but no combat at all. Is there a fix for this? I have 2.1 installed. Playing as republic

Thanks for your time and help
Jake

This can also happen if a planet switches allegiance or a story event happens.  If I recall correctly, you can initiate a fight on that planet by just moving your fleet from your spot to their spot, but if not I was able to send one additional corvette to the planet to trigger a fight.

If you literally can't fight at all, that's a different bug.
Title: Re: Questions/Comments About 2.1
Post by: Hairybum74 on February 16, 2018, 10:22:42 PM
Is It normal for the IR to have 14 SSDs in two different fleets while you're playing as the NR in 2.1? Just wondering if this has happened to other people.