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!

Author Topic: question_Tector_SSD  (Read 5789 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

December 16, 2010, 01:10:53 PM

Offline Pomerancak

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 183
  • Approval: +6/-4
    • View Profile
question_Tector_SSD
« on: December 16, 2010, 01:10:53 PM »
Hi,

I am probably having a dumb question but I can't find Tector Star Destoryer. I started Art of war campaign I am having Ysanne Isard as leader, holding couple shipyards worlds (Kuat etc) but I still cannot build Tector. What am I doing wrong?

Also I have noticed a long discussion about SSD balance and result in one of news regarding upcoming changes in 1.1. As a player and fan of the mod I cannot say I am comfortable about SSD balance. However before I am going to say anything else I would like to ask. Are SSDs generally subject to change or they are a "rock solid thingy" now?
Quote from: Mitth'raw'nuruodo
History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all.

December 16, 2010, 01:17:04 PMReply #1

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2010, 01:17:04 PM »
The Tector was cut a long time ago, so you won't find it. We might put it in later, but that'd require some work that we're not presently equipped to do.



As for the SSD, make any suggestions you want, everything is always subject to change, it's just a matter of when they'd be made.
I also have a YouTube channel where I talk about mod development and gaming, do tutorials, and Let's Plays. If you like the content, consider supporting it on Patreon


December 16, 2010, 03:44:53 PMReply #2

Offline Pomerancak

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 183
  • Approval: +6/-4
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2010, 03:44:53 PM »
Ah,

I was not able to found much more info about Tectors except this.

Nevertheless, about SSDs. I was having hard time to take this ugly beasts down. Speaking about one executor, using mass of Y-wing, some X-wings to bring some more mess into fight and couple capital ships to drag some fire. Either I was doing it wrong or I am loosing my shape :D but the losses on my side were, ehm massive. So moving to my thoughts.
I think SSDs are having too much hardpoints now. I am only and solely speaking about numbers. I am not sure about certain number (I am not that good in math :) ) but I think it is more then 100? Mainly heavy turbolasers, right?

So I humbly would suggest decreasing amount of hardpoints simply by swapping some of heavy turbolasers to dual or quad ones. This way SSDs won't loose any of its firepower but they will be vulnerable to certain type of attacks (bombing runs)


Btw: these posts (IT, NR) are outdated badly? Bacause I think i can for example train Norghi strike teams with Ysard for example.
Quote from: Mitth'raw'nuruodo
History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all.

December 16, 2010, 04:06:06 PMReply #3

Offline Zeron

  • Former Mod Team Member
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • Approval: +17/-11
  • The Galaxy Abhors The Lack Of Faith
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2010, 04:06:06 PM »
That's...kind of the point. SSDs are each supposed to be a fleet of one. They are the most massive ships in the SW galaxy and they have the firepower and strength to go with it. It should and does take an entire fleet of ships to take one down. Fighting even one is supposed to be a grueling task that will deplete the strength of your fleet and force you to actually think before taking it on. In other words, it's supposed to be like that.

December 16, 2010, 04:12:43 PMReply #4

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2010, 04:12:43 PM »
The number of hardpoints accurately reflect what it should have relative to the other ships, and they're the right type. Fighter spam is a bad idea in general. Usually the Executor is seen as too weak, from what we've read. Try changing your tactics a bit.

Those updates are somewhat outdated, but in general are right (after all, they were posted a year before release). However, the ReadMe is the exact unit lists
« Last Edit: December 16, 2010, 04:40:22 PM by Corey »
I also have a YouTube channel where I talk about mod development and gaming, do tutorials, and Let's Plays. If you like the content, consider supporting it on Patreon


December 17, 2010, 06:20:44 AMReply #5

Offline Pomerancak

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 183
  • Approval: +6/-4
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #5 on: December 17, 2010, 06:20:44 AM »
That's...kind of the point. SSDs are each supposed to be a fleet of one...

Well I mentioned I will try to keep SSDs firepower the same. But well lets go a bit deeper, read further please...

The number of hardpoints accurately reflect what it should have relative to the other ships, and they're the right type. Fighter spam is a bad idea in general. Usually the Executor is seen as too weak, from what we've read. Try changing your tactics a bit.
About the battle tactics, I tried crushing Isard with NR on level 1, which showed to be quite a challenge. I haven't invented a better technique then aiming hardpoints with Y-wing (or other bombers generally), letting X - wing fighters protecting those bombers and capital ships taking most of the damage while providing some support fire. Maybe some more experienced player will share a hint of a better battle plan =)
Regarding hardpoints it is more or less a question of "cannon"? For me it is indeed an exciting moment to have a "fully sized and fully equipped" Executor but I still cannot get rid of the idea that the whole SSDs concept is not being capitalized fully. Maneuvering and generally controlling SSD is not so enjoying as I would expect. Therefore I would rather sacrifice a little bit of "realism" for the sake of gameplay. Starting with reducing the size of ship to changing hardpoints types and numbers as mentioned above. Maybe even cutting its firepower with that cost reduction should be applied. Idea is to make SSDs more "playbable". However that is only my humble opinion. May some other members will add their thoughts.

Quote from: Mitth'raw'nuruodo
History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all.

December 17, 2010, 07:49:11 AMReply #6

Offline Slornie

  • Mod Team Member
  • Moff
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,759
  • Approval: +54/-13
  • Every Silver Lining has a Cloud
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #6 on: December 17, 2010, 07:49:11 AM »
You're missing the point.  As Corey said, fighter/bomber spam isn't as effective in TR as it is in vanilla EAW/FoC.  This is deliberate, as outlined in Future Plans and Criticisms Addressed:

3. The game is different and doesn't play exactly the same way it used to. I can't just bomber spam and win.
Thank you. Goal achieved.

You're going to have to use a whole range of units to defeat an Executor-class, from capital ships down to smaller frigates and yes, fighters/bombers.  To my mind the Executor's greatest strength lies in the number of its hardpoints, which will continue pounding your ships until you destroy them - concentrate on each hardpoint in turn.  Yes bombers can hit the hardpoints through the shields, but there is a lot to be said for turbolaser fire and even starfighter laser cannons once your other ships have overpowered the shield.

On the other hand the Executor's greatest weakness is probably its shape, most of the guns are along the side of the wedge.  If you can get your ships behind it, they can pound away at the rearmost hardpoints while staying out of the bulk of turbolaser fire on each side.  If it starts to turn, you can focus on the rearmost hardpoints on the side closest to your ships.  Rather than using your capital ships to draw fire away from your fighters, use corvettes and frigates to draw fire away from your capital ships.

If it helps, here are two screenshots from my many games against Isard while testing v1.0:





That is the entirety of my fleet, destroyed (the additional two Dreadnaughts in the after-shot are because i reloaded a recent save to try and bolster my defences and that was all i could move in time).  I lost the battle, BUT i did manage to kill Isard by focusing all my attention on the Lusankya at the expense of her other ships.  Admittedly i was defending and had the bonus of the unlimited space station garrison, however until the shields are down there is little they can do other than draw fire.

NB. The Executor has been altered in v1.1, so the above example is probably no longer relevant.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2010, 07:51:12 AM by Slornie »
Quote from: RonMaverick291 (Gametrailers)
why do u hate america? if it were not for us u guys would be lost. i mean we invented the tv, we invented the internet, cars and we even went to the planet moon. we won all the wars and we always help the little countries who cant fight and we give food to poor people.

December 17, 2010, 11:05:33 AMReply #7

Offline Pomerancak

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 183
  • Approval: +6/-4
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #7 on: December 17, 2010, 11:05:33 AM »
You're missing the point.  As Corey said, fighter/bomber spam isn't as effective in TR as it is in vanilla EAW/FoC.  This is deliberate, as outlined in Future Plans and Criticisms Addressed
I have read this, however hitting as much hardpoints as possible with bomber before shields are down still seems worthy to me.

On the other hand the Executor's greatest weakness is probably its shape, most of the guns are along the side of the wedge.  If you can get your ships behind it, they can pound away at the rearmost hardpoints while staying out of the bulk of turbolaser fire on each side.  If it starts to turn, you can focus on the rearmost hardpoints on the side closest to your ships.  Rather than using your capital ships to draw fire away from your fighters, use corvettes and frigates to draw fire away from your capital ships.
^^ THIS is it! I used frigates and corvettes but they literally get fried. Not to be surprised they were mostly on sides ::) Funny thing is, that it is the most bothering thing for me when I am using Executor - position of its weapons. I will adjust my battle plan for NR now :)
One more word to your screenshots: respect =)

The Executor has been altered in v1.1, so the above example is probably no longer relevant.
In the light of knowledge I have recently gained from replies here I think I should rephrase. Executor seems very well balanced now.
My suggestion has now moved to rather elementary level. I think you have done damn good job finding some sort of mark between realism and gameplay for most of the ships. Except Executor. As I wrote in last post I would prefer to sacrifice more of realism to behalf to more "playability" of Executor. Accepting rather a crripled  version possessing lesser power and costing fewer credits for possibility to see Executors more often in GC and in skirmishes maybe one day. I understand that this cannot work for all SSDs because Eclipse and Sovereign having Superlaser.
Thus for me little voice in depths in your fan base ;-)

Anyhow I am going to torture Isard once again, cross your fingers for me :)
Thanks for valuable intel!
Quote from: Mitth'raw'nuruodo
History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all.

December 17, 2010, 11:18:43 AMReply #8

Offline Enceladus

  • Assistant Canadian
  • Former Mod Team Member
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 433
  • Approval: +33/-11
  • Did I mention GROUNDBREAKING?
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #8 on: December 17, 2010, 11:18:43 AM »
Quote
As I wrote in last post I would prefer to sacrifice more of realism to behalf to more "playability" of Executor. Accepting rather a crripled  version possessing lesser power and costing fewer credits for possibility to see Executors more often in GC and in skirmishes maybe one day.

Not going to be happening. You wouldn't even be able to call in Excecutors on most skirmish maps due to their (SSD) size. The skirmish maps are designed alot differently than the GC maps. They are a lot less open.


~Thrawn's Revenge Staff~

December 17, 2010, 11:52:36 AMReply #9

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #9 on: December 17, 2010, 11:52:36 AM »
As for the suggested changes, they'd all sacrifice realism, and gain none of the balance you want.

1. Group heavies together into duals and quads, along with scaling the ship down.
The Executor, Sovereign and Eclipse are all already scaled down to a third of what they "should" be. Scale them down any more, and they'll be too small, and the hardpoints would all start to overlap. If we did that along with grouping the turbos togther into duals and quads, you're just increasing the concentration of the hardpoints, which would make them even more powerful and more than make up for the slight loss in firepower from switching. Right now it can probably bring a sixth of its weapons on to any one target at most, but if you make the ship smaller with fewer hardpoints, that would probably go up to about half. And if we reduce the numbers on the Executor, the same has to be done on the Eclipe, and then on the Sovereign, until the Sovereign is about equal to an ISD with a superlaser, which really throws off the balance. The alternative is have Executors closer to Sovereigns and the Eclipse in firepower, which renders the Executor basically pointless.

 Sure, the Executor has 140ish hardpoints, but regular capital ships can have between 12 and 20, some of them a lot more powerful (Executor doesn't have a single dual or quad I don't think, whereas the Republic SD for example has 6 Dual Heavies, which is essentially 18 regular turbos, in addition to 6 more Heavy turbos, which is more like nine. So on that ship alone you have the equivalent of 27 weapons. If you adjust the Executor in the same way you come to about 170 weapons I think, which is only the power of 7 Republic SDs, which have better Fighter compliments.

Quote
^^ THIS is it! I used frigates and corvettes but they literally get fried
Frigates just don't have the shield and hull strength to stand up to an Executor, and both corvettes and frigates tend to lack the firepower needed. They typically have lasers instead of turbos, which are terrible against non-fighters.

Quote
In the light of knowledge I have recently gained from replies here I think I should rephrase. Executor seems very well balanced now.
My suggestion has now moved to rather elementary level. I think you have done damn good job finding some sort of mark between realism and gameplay for most of the ships. Except Executor. As I wrote in last post I would prefer to sacrifice more of realism to behalf to more "playability" of Executor. Accepting rather a crripled  version possessing lesser power and costing fewer credits for possibility to see Executors more often in GC and in skirmishes maybe one day. I understand that this cannot work for all SSDs because Eclipse and Sovereign having Superlaser.
The version we have now is actually somewhat crippled; shield, hull and firing rates are all way less than they should be, and there's even fewer weapons than there should be. About three quarters of what should be there by our representation system is. The entire point is that they're rare, that's why they can be as powerful as they are, but they are by no means invincible or absent; even playing through The Hunt for Zsinj, I typically run into one or two (excluding Iron Fist). But as Enc says, you will never see them in skirmish.

The main changes between v1.0 to v1.1 is the shields have been weakened and the health of each hardpoint has been increased. The problem that people who say it's too powerful typically have is by the time they are able to actually start targeting the weapons, their fleet has been decimated. This way, shields shouldn't last as long, but its made up for by the individual hardpoints lasting a bit longer.


Also:
Before: http://screenshot.xfire.com/s/108233542-3.jpg
After: http://screenshot.xfire.com/s/108234527-3.jpg

The remaining Carrack and Assault Cruiser were both within one or two hardpoints of death, Mon Remonda and Song of War esceped more or less entirely intact, my Star Destroyer and Dominator both lost about half their hardpoints.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2010, 12:23:15 PM by Corey »
I also have a YouTube channel where I talk about mod development and gaming, do tutorials, and Let's Plays. If you like the content, consider supporting it on Patreon


December 18, 2010, 09:23:54 AMReply #10

Offline WooZIE997

  • Stormtrooper Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 17
  • Approval: +3/-1
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2010, 09:23:54 AM »
what i usually do about a big bad SSD when it comes into play is simple. RETREAT!!!  :HA: then i regroup my forces and either beef them up or make a small strike force depending on the size of the enemy fleet. a SSD that catches you unaware isnt really fun at all lol. so after i determine my fleet size and make up i either lull the enemy into peeling off a portion of their force and chasing the SSD or i hit them back in full force. either way whenever the battle begins with a SSD i always hyperspace in 1 ship first instead of the whole fleet at once. i hyperspace a few corvettes and frigates in and maybe 1 more capital ship for "bait" then i send groups of fighters in to check out unit positions and just to see all the lasers start flying ;) i keep all the bombers back for later. and whiles thats going on i rush my starting forces at the SSD or at the ships they send in first. meanwhile watching the battle from a good viewpoint are the fighter squads i have sneaking into the SSDs weak spot behind the ship. i get into position and warp in another capital in the front of the battle drawing a bit more attention to that side. i bring in a frigate in the rear and unload almost the rest of my forces to attack the rear of the SSD. then i send in my initial bomber swarm in the front to harass the enemy while i get my rear force into positions and bombers sorted out on the enemy ships. then i hope for the best and send in the rear for the assault. this has worked for me more than once. but sometimes they anticipate it almost and have a few ships hang back. ;)

December 19, 2010, 02:29:48 PMReply #11

Offline Pomerancak

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 183
  • Approval: +6/-4
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2010, 02:29:48 PM »
Right now it can probably bring a sixth of its weapons on to any one target at most, but if you make the ship smaller with fewer hardpoints, that would probably go up to about half.
Uhh, this is a thing that has not come into my mind. You are so right I am turning red from shame... Obviously this way Executor will end up as ISD III or something like.  I would also like to appreciate  the way you treat with my questions and suggestions. Discussion was really fruitful for me. Accept apologies for my dumbness regarding my ideas.

Also I have one more question. I was wondering if there is some way how to find if hero has some passive leadership bonus for units and numbers for these bonuses?

Thanks again for taking time to explaining things so thoroughly :)
« Last Edit: December 19, 2010, 02:36:42 PM by Pomerancak »
Quote from: Mitth'raw'nuruodo
History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all.

December 19, 2010, 03:03:06 PMReply #12

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #12 on: December 19, 2010, 03:03:06 PM »
Right now it can probably bring a sixth of its weapons on to any one target at most, but if you make the ship smaller with fewer hardpoints, that would probably go up to about half.
Uhh, this is a thing that has not come into my mind. You are so right I am turning red from shame... Obviously this way Executor will end up as ISD III or something like.  I would also like to appreciate  the way you treat with my questions and suggestions. Discussion was really fruitful for me. Accept apologies for my dumbness regarding my ideas.
Your ideas aren't dumb, just not the best way to deal with it in our opinion. We appreciate all suggestions and discussion, we want the mod to be as good as we can make it, so we're always open to criticism. I hope you don;t take any of this as an attack on you, it's just a discussion of the ideas. We can sit around all day saying something is good until we're blue in the face, but if it isn't, it isn't. Wait until you play with the adjustments that have been made since 1.0. There are still some issues with it I'd like to work out, but as of now I think it works fairly well for its role.

Also I have one more question. I was wondering if there is some way how to find if hero has some passive leadership bonus for units and numbers for these bonuses?
Right now, if the icon has a yellow glowing ring around it in tactical battles then it gives a bonus. One of the problems with the mod is lack of useful information in descriptions though, which JLC is working on, so in future versions that kind of information will be available up front. It won't be in 1.1 , but should be in the next release after that.

I also have a YouTube channel where I talk about mod development and gaming, do tutorials, and Let's Plays. If you like the content, consider supporting it on Patreon


December 21, 2010, 03:28:08 PMReply #13

Offline Pomerancak

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 183
  • Approval: +6/-4
    • View Profile
Re: question_Tector_SSD
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2010, 03:28:08 PM »
I hope you don;t take any of this as an attack on you, it's just a discussion of the ideas. We can sit around all day saying something is good until we're blue in the face, but if it isn't, it isn't. Wait until you play with the adjustments that have been made since 1.0. There are still some issues with it I'd like to work out, but as of now I think it works fairly well for its role.
Not to worry, there was no irony in my last reply. I am not getting offended :) I will be looking forward for new version. Hope I will have some more free time to play, university is a time-chewer :-\
One of the problems with the mod is lack of useful information in descriptions though, which JLC is working on, so in future versions that kind of information will be available up front. It won't be in 1.1 , but should be in the next release after that.
Yep, some nice descriptions will be appreciated.
Quote from: Mitth'raw'nuruodo
History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all.

 

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!