Those working on this mod do so in their own free time and for no pay.
Show your support for them by enabling ads on this site!

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Corey

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 211
EaW and FoC Mods / Re: RAW future?
« on: Today at 02:38:22 AM »
On a technical level. It'd probably be okay if they set up their GIT  to not let people push directly to source, and require one of them to pull it into the main repository when a non-approved member makes a change. But, EaW would have a lot more potential for merge conflicts... We sometimes have to untangle stuff just between us, and there's not many of us to begin with.

I'm not really sure how much there'd be anyways. I guess it's an attempt to garner more help for the dev team, but I don't think they're gonna get a bunch of people fixing whatever they post on the task list. If people wanna work seriously on the mod, they'd be just as likely to actually join the dev team, especially if they wanna be consistent. Admittedly though, I'm a bit more micro-managey. If you look through every dev blog since the last patch in 2013 (which I think is three), the common theme is that they're being delayed because they don't have time to work on the mod (I know ICW's last release was 3 years ago as well, but we also pretty much made the entirety of Ascendancy in that time, and have a lot more to show for 2.2 including a playable demo, so I think it's a bit different).

Also there seems to be an argument between developers in the comments so I was wondering what that's about.

Welcome to EaW.

Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: 2.2 Demo Feedback
« on: Today at 01:22:32 AM »
It should, but EaW doesn't handle patching and targeting very well. The bigger the ship, the bigger the problem.

News, Dev Diaries & Announcements / Forum Issue Update
« on: May 22, 2017, 05:01:28 PM »
As you may have noticed, we've been having an issue recently where some posts may give an error upon trying to post. We apologize for the inconvenience, and we're attempting to address it. We have just attempted a fix, so please let us know if you continue to get the error after this point, and we will continue trying to fix it.

The Republic will definitely be made up of Judicial forces and planetary forces like that before the Clone War eras, assuming we get to a point where we're able to cover it. The CIS isn't really about militarizing, more about about putting the C in CIS.


in the NJO compilation mod for ICW, LegostarwarsEU came up with a brilliant approach to the build bar overload problem for the NR, which could be carried over: there is a NR membership build with is required to build a group of 8 or so core units, while all planets have indigenous(local units) on them. if carried over to ICW, this would fix buildbar overload, plus allow for any units people may want to add, and give better representation for the elements of the NR

Our approach is that if we're filling more than the entire build bar at once we have too many units. We're partially addressing it through research, we usually haven't been fans of location-locking units. If you tie too much stuff to pre-req planets, you're hamstringing the AI, and requiring the presence of certain planets in every GC/their starting forces for them to have a viable roster. That's probably less of an issue in the NJO period where the NR/GFFA is consolidated, but it's especially problematic in early-ICW where they tend to be very separated. If you tied Mon Cal ships to Mon Calamari, they'd have literally no access to capital ships for most of their forces, and would pretty much just be a mass of Quasars and Nebulon-Bs until Era 3-4.

Making the Lancer much rarer- they tear through fighters and bombers, but then thus completely neutralize the NR's main strength. Making it an occasional super unit would present a challenge on some worlds, but allow the NR to occasionally use fighters in a battle without seeing more than 50% rates of attrition. Endless Lancer reinforcements from a shipyard can get impossible to wear down.

Lancers are pretty easy to focus down so I'm not sure why we would need to artificially limit them. You can pretty easily avoid them with your fighters if you need to, and get other ships to take them out first. If you focus fire from bombers, they die pretty quickly from the fighters themselves, too. Station garrisons are being changed for 2.2, so the anti-fighter counts will likely be lower, but really stations aren't difficult to take down in the first place, most frigates can do it on their own. Garrisons are being limited in the same way ground garrisons are anyway.

Perhaps a few systems where there can be no infrastructure? Thus golan spam and shipyards calling in endless reinforcements would be slightly rarer. 

That make a lot of factions non-viable in a lot of GCs, or we'd have to do different variants of each planet depending on the GC. Most planets are limited to Golan Is, and only two slots. Removing infrastructure like that basically just turns the majority of the map into even more of a pointless no-man's-land.

Some more early era NR v IR scenarios sans Pentastar? If they are meant to be neutral, it seems a little weird I keep getting pincered by both the Reaper and Lusankaya.

Thrawn Campaign has tended to fill this niche of a straightforward NR vs IR scenario early on since there wouldn't really be much different about an era 1 one. Bacta War sorta fills where Fractured Empire was, although Zsinj is there.

EaW and FoC Mods / Re: Awakening of the Rebellion Tips
« on: May 21, 2017, 09:22:29 PM »
Capital ships and the AOTR AI does not Cheat Money.

This isn't strictly true. They don't have as high a multiplier (though they still have one- 1.5x on normal, 2.0 times on Hard), but they also have higher guaranteed cash drops and significant credit reserves. They also unfortunately seem to neglect to spend what money they do have on larger ships or re-make the larger stuff they lose, which sorta contributes to what I was saying where the biggest threats are the hero fleets, since they end up getting a ton of easily-killed frigates in the Marauder range.

The Lounge / Re: What the Hell is going on with Bill C-16
« on: May 21, 2017, 09:02:51 PM »
I can only provide so much information and can't speak directly for anyone, but I can answer some of your questions from a broader perspective and give you some links you may find useful or interesting.

also I don't mean to be a dick but why do people have to claim to be non gender binary?

The most important thing to remember is that the main point here is people trying to be the most authentic version of themselves possible, often at the cost of significant physical and mental strain, on themselves and on their relationships with people who, intentionally or not, see them differently and hold them at arm's length because of it. People don't do that because they just want to. Very often, people will see LGBTQ issues, and because it doesn't fit within their definition of normal, it must therefore be inauthentic and somehow and attempt to trick them or something.

I like Survivor, and this issue came up recently with a contestant on the show. His name is Zeke, he was on a whole season where nobody knew he was female-to-male trans. He didn't say anything, nobody knew until some people dug through his history online and found his college application form, which had him as female. This season, he came back and still told nobody, until another contestant outed him and tried to use the fact that he was trans and nobody knew against him. He wrote this column about his experience with coming out, the process for him, and being outed in such a public forum. As an actual trans person, his words should have a bit more weight here than mine:

I'll try to add a bit more information where I can.

There's also a distinction between sex and gender, and being gender non-binary is kinda separate from trans. Masculinity and femininity are not the same as your sex; it is, to a large degree, socially created. The "gender binary" is an idea that gender, sex, and sexuality are all connected. So, a person born male, they will have a certain masculine appearance, act a certain way, and be attracted to women, and vice versa. Non-binary gender is the refutation to that idea. To the extent that you can say a feature is "biologically masculine" or feminine, there's still a certain amount of people who are going to have or not have that characteristic (in personality, in outfit, etc), independent of sex. Non-binary gender sort rejects the idea that it's this male to female spectrum, and that there's far more other factors, though it also doesn't mean people aren't allowed to subscribe to those binaries if they want- just don't force them onto others. Being non-binary can be as simple as ignoring those social norms. One day, a person may identify in a more masculine way, and dress a certain way, act a certain way, etc. Another they may identity and act as more feminine and dress in a way that might be considered more feminine (like wearing a dress, makeup, whatever). Some people with male sex organs identity as female in terms of gender (again, this is separate from their junk) expression.

This is a good, quick link about non-binary gender, even though I'm not a huge fan of the whole top 10 format thing:

There's also the idea of gender roles- men are the providers, head of the family, etc. It's become more and more acceptable to throw out certain parts of this binary for a long time, but to a large extent the system still remains, and each step usually has significant traditionalist opposition.

The wikipedia article actually covers this pretty well, too:

I mean not to be a dick but aren't their only two genders(male and female) and If you denied that you are either then you denied the existence of Sexual intercourse?

We've already covered the difference between sex and gender, so we'll just talk about sex here. First, saying there are not only two sexes does not deny the existence of sexual intercourse. Yes, we do have the two standard sets of genitals that interact in a specific way, but there's even people who don't fit into either category with that, called intersex. Being a hermaphrodite would fall into this group, but that's a very outdated and overly-simple example- there are people who, at birth, have basically any imaginable combination of genitals, chromosomes, or any other indicator for sex that you can think of. Some people who may develop as a "typical" male or female in terms of their body can, upon genetic testing, turn out to have chromosome combinations that would typically be considered the opposite sex and would never have known it without genetic testing.

So, if even something which seems as clear-cut on the surface as the physical development can have such variation, you can see the extension on psychological development, how even if we were to say gender identity (which is, again, not the same as sex) were entirely biologically determined (and it isn't), the factors there can be significantly varied, far more so than even sex.

In my religion (catholic) they say that God created two genders for a reason(to mate)

And this is the crux of the issue to a lot of people. While you are, of course, free to have your religious views, keep in mind that not everyone subscribes to that. What ends up being a typical description in nature, that things typically are a certain way because that is what the multiple, messy natural processes that make us who were are resulted in, often turns into a hard and fast rule in religious dogma that doesn't match the reality of the situation. The resulting thinking from this is that anything which does not match the typical or mandated "way things ought to be" must be wrong, and anyone who doesn't match it must be trying to trick you. I'm sure you've heard the common tired trope of how homosexuals, rather than just wanting to live their lives, have some sort of agenda beyond that and want to turn everyone's kids gay.

This gets a little bit separate, but to your point specifically that god created two sexes, tied to the concept of gender, and one individual is one thing and that's it, looking within nature, you see that what we'd think of as typical human sexual dimorphism (two separate sexes with separate sexual characteristics) isn't the only game in town. Even in species that do use that kind of system, the mechanism is different. Humans use the XY sex determination system, where each parent contributes a chromosome to the pair, and people with XX are female, XY are male, as determined by what's donated by the sperm, since the only place to get a Y chromosome is the male (though keep in mind still, while it's very rare, you can end up with XX males or XY females, as I mentioned earlier). Other animal groups may use something different- birds typically use something called the ZW system, X0 for a lot of insects- similar, but based on a slightly different mechanism. Some fish and reptiles have their sex determined by temperature during development. Some species have/use male or female sexual characteristics and genitalia based on their position within a hierarchy in a group, or what they need to use at a time. So, the idea that male/female sex being tied to one thing is a strict natural order with no fluctuation or differences isn't true. The point is, the fact that there are typically two specific types of genitalia used for mating doesn't really have any additional implications for the individual carrying them.

I dunno, I'd find that kind of weird honestly. If they're functional enough to be doing stuff on the docks, it'd be kinda weird that you can't actually command them separately. If we wanted to have stuff docking, I much prefer the Pegasus Chronicles dock-as-protection LUA feature (buggythough it may be), instead of just tacking an extra mesh onto a drydock model. Since we typically don't weaponize shipyards, the entire defensive value of it would be coming from those ships. We'd have to change the actual station every coupel eras, too, since stuff like Venators don't exist in earlier levels.

EaW and FoC Mods / Re: Awakening of the Rebellion Tips
« on: May 21, 2017, 04:11:34 PM »
One of the big problems with AotR, that makes it a little inaccessible is that there doesn't appear to be much documentation on what stuff actually does. It may exist in the original German version, i'm not sure, but there's not much for English. I'm less familiar with the specific tech requirements of the Rebels and Empire, but I did sorta figure out how the basic gameplay loops seem to work, which I think would apply regardless of faction.

The main thing I would suggest is go hunting for their shipyards and tech centers, since the AI doesn't seem to rebuild them once they're done. Most of your military power seems to also come from your station+heroes as well, especially as a function of power to credit value. One of the big effects of ships being expensive and taking a long time to build is that bomber swarms become a lot more powerful, especially for the Black Sun and Rebels, because they're relatively low-risk, high reward, and a lot of the strategy is having to play through hero spawn timers. Because the shipyards don't tend to get replaced, and ships are super expensive, the AI will typically rely on fleets of heroes, plus a bunch of small frigates, Carrack/Assault Frigate size and under. Playing as the Black Sun, I don't believe I fought a single non-garrison capital ship that wasn't a hero besides one or two Allegiance classes at the start, and Rebel fleets were fairly similar. Lots of maurauders and small Corellian stuff.

Ultimately, what ended up being effective for me was grouping a fleet around a defensive station, using the fleet+ the station to kill off their hero fleet, and then you'd have that hero respawn cycle to expand almost unopposed and fortify before the heroes come back. Once you have a fleet superior to their hero fleet, they can't stop you. For the Rebel AI, this is a Home One-centric fleet, for the Empire, it's the Executor, Arc Hammer, Needa and Brandei. The result can be fairly challenging, especially when unfamiliar with the systems, but overall, if you're looking to customize fleets and use them when it still matters as opposed to trying to navigate around your stations and hero spawns, it may not be for you.

Pretty sure that was the old 2.1 Stars Align, but early 2.2 changes (Sariss, Entralla added). we'd posted it a while ago when Entralla was added for some reason.

The Lounge / Re: What the Hell is going on with Bill C-16
« on: May 21, 2017, 03:28:37 PM »
Yeah, as I say, this isn't even anything super new- it's an amendment to an existing set of bills adding a new group in its coverage, and even then, it's a group that's been covered on the provincial level for years as well, sometimes explicitly like in Ontario since 2000, Alberta since 2015 and BC since 2016, and sometimes, like Quebec, they cover it under the grounds of sex in their provincial charter from my understanding. There's not any type of action being prohibited that wasn't already prohibited since 1977, it just covers more people, so if they have a problem with it now, where have they been for the last forty years?

The Lounge / Re: What the Hell is going on with Bill C-16
« on: May 21, 2017, 02:04:47 PM »
What about it? Basically, we have a law called the Canadian Human Rights Act, which does this:

Quote from: Canadian Human Rights Act, Purpose of Act
...extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

What C-16 does is add in "gender and gender identity" to that last bit there, and as a prohibited grounds of discrimination. This means people cannot be denied things like employment, an economic service, or housing because they're trans in the same way you already can't because someone's a different race, gay, Catholic, Protestant, whatever else is covered by those existing grounds. You can read the exact changes it makes to the CHRA and the Criminal Code in their entirely here: It's basically a single page, with just the words "gender identity and expression" added.

All in all, a very good step, and a fairly innocuous bit of legislation, with significant multi-party support. It passed our House of Commons (our lower house, which is sort of our "main" electoral body, has the Prime Minister and the cabinet in it- these are the members we actually elect) in a vote of 248-40, with support from all members of the Liberals, NDP, Green, Bloc Quebecois, and significant Conservative support as well, who were about 37/40 yes/no for those who decided to vote, based on my quick count.

Now, there have been some people saying this steps all over their free speech and will get them arrested because of their use of pronouns. This is a misrepresentation. There is one primary figure for this that stands out, a psychology professor named Jordan Peterson. This is, for one thing, not his field so it shouldn't be incredibly surprising that a lot of what he says on this topic is either untrue or a misrepresentation. He's trying to argue that, if someone tells him they prefer to be referred to by a specific pronoun, and he refuses to do it, he will go to jail. Firstly, actual legal experts, including the Canadian Bar association, have pretty much agreed that refusing to use specific gender pronouns (ie zie, zhe, etc) you would not be found in violation. In fact, while this is at the federal level, the exact same protections have existed since 2000 at the Provincial level in Ontario (the province that he teaches in, as well as my own province) and it hasn't been an issue.

So really, asking "what the hell is going on?" is really just this one guy getting overly sensitive about something that's actually a non-threat to his ability to be a dick to people who regularly have people be a dick to them, since so far he hasn't gotten in trouble for the things he says he's gonna get in trouble for, and it takes actually and intentionally harassing someone before it becomes grounds for any sort of actionable criminal or human rights code.

Well I mean that in the map there is a max of 3 factions at one time playing with sometiems pirates?

There are plenty of maps in 2.1 already (the version you're playing) with more factions than that, so no. If you look at the descriptions of the GCs, it tells you exactly how many factions are in that GC, and which are playable

Say I want to change that faction, which one is it and what color would be better?

As Bucman said, that's coded as Pentastar. Judging by your screenshot though, I don't think your problem is the faction colour, considering it's supposed to look like this in 2.1:

I'm pretty sure your problem is your gamma settings, which makes everything incredibly dark. If you go into video options, you'll see these sliders. It's the bottom one.

The first thing is that you need to add the RemnantResearch_Bellator file to the entity.manifest file in the main mod folder. The second is that your increment count for Research entities in the Remnant is 95 when there's actually 96 in the list, which will always cause a runtime error. The last thing, which may not necessarily cause an error (it might, not sure) is that all of the abilities you gave it will have the Titan level source type, so they won't work.

Empire at War and Forces of Corruption / Re: Hardpoints and bones
« on: May 20, 2017, 11:41:01 AM »
Yes, but if you want both to be targetable, that'll cause issues.

Empire at War and Forces of Corruption / Re: Hardpoints and bones
« on: May 20, 2017, 01:15:55 AM »
The bone names are just name, You can use any bone for anything.

Star Wars Discussion / Re: Stellaris and Thrawn's Revenge
« on: May 19, 2017, 03:54:39 PM »
as for the other part, i was more think how there are two different "teams" in TR: the group who works on Ascendancy, the group who works on EaW, and a few(including you, corey), who work on both. i was think expanding that concept to adding in a number of people who could start working on stellaris to give even more respect to that period.

As Dave says, that's not really how the team is structured. It sorta looks like this


Dr Knickers


Blue works on just Ascendancy, green's work is applicable to both, yellow on just ICW/FotR. The overlap is pretty big. Before Bane joined when STAIII:TFF released, I was doing all of the coding for Ascendancy, plus ~50% of the coding for ICW. To start a Stellaris mod, for people to want to join you have to be able to show that you've made progress, otherwise they feel like they're joining on to do everything themselves. There would be a long period where I'd be doing all of the coding and rigging on my own before anyone at all joined, and we can't be sure anyone would. Making plans based on future expectations of team members doesn't always go over well.

My French isn't good enough, and I'm the only one on the team who can speak French at all, so it's not something we can do. Someone else would have to volunteer to translate all of the tooltips themselves, we can't really help with that.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 211
Those working on this mod do so in their own free time and for no pay.
Show your support for them by enabling ads on this site!