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 - tlmiller

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 103
1
Propulsion systems to make intra-galactic travel in non-generational ships...

2
I was unaware that the Hapans ever constructed anything larger than the Star Home...

Notice it's not in bold, and so it's not a canon/legends class of ship for them.  This is one of those times where they're taking liberties like with the EOTH ships.  Unlike EOTH, it's never stated anywhere that the Hapans had anything AGAINST dreadnought-level ships (which is stated multiple times for Thrawn), and so they've given them a dreadnought.

3
I can't get excited for not triangles  ;D

:D  I can foresee much ignoring the Hapans in your future then, since I REALLY doubt that there's going to be ANY triangles!!

4
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: How Do You Use Praetors?
« on: February 10, 2019, 08:05:03 PM »
Are Praetors good at anyhitng?

 They take up a lot of room. Of the 3 factions that can build them 2 of them can build Tectors and 2 tectors>1 Praetor (yes I know 2 Tectors are marginally more expensive).

 That leaves the Pentastar Alignment and if I am going big ship with them you can run 4 SSD's and ISDs+ carriers seem a better boom fleet.



To an extent I agree.  The Praetor is for most groups one of the worst value ships.  It's expensive, but offensively rather meak.  Defensively it COULD shine due to it's powerful shields allowing support ships (glass cannons) to work their stuff while the Praetor soaks up damage.  Sadly, it's pop cost is so high that it doesn't particularly work for that, either, since you can't bring in enough support ships to really be powerful.  The one time they do show some promise is in defensive fleets, as they're wonderful in a defensive posture when they don't need to move  However, the game engine ruins that, as it puts other ships so far away from it that it ends up making all other ships easy prey for the attacking fleet due to being spaced so far apart and some ships setting in the enemies firing arc upon starting battle.  In the end, basically it is exactly as you say, it's just not really useful for anything.  I'm not really sure it's fixable, either due to the limitations with the game engine.

5
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: How Do You Use Praetors?
« on: February 10, 2019, 07:41:46 PM »
They still do.  They don't discharge a TON of fighters compared to their size, but they most definitely do have hangars and have fighter support.

6
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: How Do You Use Praetors?
« on: February 07, 2019, 09:35:25 AM »
For the EA, I don't use them.  I use Tectors + ISD-II's + VSD-II's.  They're great for defensive fleets, but by the time I can afford them I have no need for them.  Offensively, they're tanks but are so slow they're not worth using (IMO) due to their (comparatively) low offensive output for their size.

For the PA, I do use them simply because they don't have any other ships that can protect their fragile carriers.  So I'll have a single Praetor in a fleet as a flagship, drop it more or less center of combat and build slightly behind it so that it protects all my carriers disgorging the bombers, and have a few ISD-II's and VSD's to help actually defeat things.

7
Ascendancy Discussion / Re: How does Ion damage work in Ascendancy
« on: February 05, 2019, 11:06:13 PM »
I can't say for certain that it is coded this way, but it should be 100% damage to shields.  Ion Cannons shouldn't be able to damage hull at all.

8
Make sure you have a ton of units in orbit and auto-resolve, you should win and your units will return, although depending on their makeup, you may lose units.  Issue has been reported by a few people.

9
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: So, which units need rebalanced?
« on: January 17, 2019, 10:04:21 PM »
The only annoying thing about the Allegiance is it's pathfinding imo. I tend to not bring many just because of how slow they are and how much more versatile ISD IIs are, but that's kind of a preference thing. As a poor man's Praetor I think they fill their role pretty well.
I wouldn't really relate the Allegiance to the Praetor.  The Praetor is a tank.  It's got slightly above average damage but it can take a beating.  The Allegiance is the polar opposite.  It's shields won't last long in a sustained firefight, but there's not many ships that aren't significantly larger that can take getting into a slugfest with it.  It just has too much offensive power and will blast through the shields of opponents.  Only in the face of sustained combat where they can't regen shields do they wither and die, and even then, they take quite some time due to how beefy their hull is even AFTER the shields are down.  The key is to keep pesky bombers away from them to keep their shields up as long as possible.

10
They do not.  Thrawn did not believe in using vessels of that scale, so they don't have any.

11
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Dark troopers for GE and rest
« on: December 25, 2018, 03:20:13 PM »
Are you talking about the Dark Elites?  They weren't dark troppers, they were just dark side force sensitives with a modicum of training.  They weren't even powerful enough to be considered jedi/sith, they were just force users.

Dark troopers (except phase zero) were droids, not living beings.

12
So just to be sure, the ICW team is considering adding fanon units to the game?

No, they won't add Fanon ships when there are so many canon (legends) ships that can be used in their place.

13
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Tactical Requests
« on: December 13, 2018, 08:21:27 PM »
Shield pas-through is a far larger problem than not.  A single squadron of bombers making a single pass and taking out the shield emitters on any ship is, simply put, OP'd.  The only way to deal with shield pass through and keep it from being OP'd would be to make bombers do such insignificant damage that they'd be useless.  As is, if you don't use corvettes or fighters to screen the bombers, you'll lose your shields quickly and very quickly start getting your hard point ripped to pieces, but a single bomber squadron can't defeat a flotilla of ISD's by itelf.  While it might not be absolutely perfect, the system the team is using is about as good as the game engine is going to allow for strategic play without making bombers insanely overpowered.

14
News, Dev Diaries & Announcements / Re: Mod of the Year 2018 Begins
« on: December 05, 2018, 07:24:03 PM »
So if you fall out of placing this year with any or all, does that mean next year it "resets" and you can place again?

Just wondering how it works, I voted.

15
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Warlord Nuso Esva
« on: December 03, 2018, 12:07:13 PM »
And I don't think either of those even had a description of what they looked like, much less canon pictures.

16
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Imperial Army Troopers
« on: November 17, 2018, 11:40:57 PM »
Stormtroopers = 4 squads.
Army troopers = 5 sqads.

So if you want to split up your regiments to simply use them to cover ground, capture reinforcement points, and build pads, the Army troops give you a better ability.


Also, if youre using them defensively, 1 regiment of army troopers perfectly fills a bunker, so they're great for that.

17
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Best Imperial Starfighter?
« on: November 12, 2018, 07:22:41 AM »
The TIE/D but it's not here so i chose the Preybird.

dots...

18
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Tactical Requests
« on: October 24, 2018, 10:45:42 PM »
1.  Generally, no matter weak you make bombers when they pass through the shields, they're still OP.  Bombers are now powerful enough against most capital ships that a decent amount of bombers will QUICKLY strip the shields thus still allowing for quite good tactical battles (I do this constantly with the GM)

2.  Mon Cal ships (and those with shields designed by them) had multiple, redundant shield emitters.  So this is as it should be.

3.  The lousy positioning is a long-standing gripe.  The team have actively started trying to fix this (putting them in a more logical position and closer to defenses), but they're not miracle workers and they can only redo this so much at a time while trying to get everything else done and still have time for the things in life that make modding possible (like working to keep food in belly and electricity running to the pc).

19
Star Wars Discussion / Re: Best Fleet Composition?
« on: October 03, 2018, 10:18:52 AM »
I'd probably have Tectors & MC-90's as my primary combatants, with CC-VSD's as support, Endurance carriers to give some additional fighter supply.  Probably CR-90's for anti-fighter since lancers are so slow.  For starfighters, I'd have Tie Avengers as primary fighter, and the Skipray Blastboat as my primary bomber.

20
Discussion, Suggestions & Feedback / Re: Super Capital Shipyards
« on: September 26, 2018, 07:58:20 PM »
I basically agree with your shipyards that should get super-cap production.  I will say with most of them going to have the super station in defense (Valedusia/Cardan/Empress), 2-3 Capitals as a garrison would make them EXCEEDINGLY difficult to defeat.  I'd definitely agree with 1, 2 maybe as long as it's MC-80B/ISD-II type not MC-90/Praetor/Allegiance sized ships, 3 is definitely too much.  IMO, obviously.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 103
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!