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: Suggestions for 2.1  (Read 282214 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

January 03, 2013, 10:52:05 PMReply #340

Offline Eclipse

  • Vice Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 350
  • Approval: +16/-5
  • My Eclipse has nothing to do with Force Unleashed.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #340 on: January 03, 2013, 10:52:05 PM »
That was the reason why I asked for it, it's exactly the same but looks much better and intimidating.
A Member of the Imperial Alignment(Allies With The Shadow Post Empire).

\"Yes, the destruction of Alderaan was regrettable, but so was the destruction of the Death Stars. Are the deaths of millions of Alderaanians?who conspired to overthrow the government?more tragic than the deaths of millions of Imperial soldiers who laid down their lives to defend our way of life? I think not.\"―Antinnis Tremayne


January 05, 2013, 01:53:26 AMReply #341

Offline ttrjames

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #341 on: January 05, 2013, 01:53:26 AM »
Hey guys, I just had a few suggestions. 

First, I noticed that the planet descriptions have disappeared from the game.  From my understanding, part of this is due to the fact that the pentastar cannot utilize these bonuses.  However, I also noticed that at least on Coruscant the income is greatly increased compared to other planets.  It seems to me that if this bonus is going to be left in the game then it would make sense to make a small mention in addition to the information concerning the level of space station that can be built on that planet.

My second suggestion is perhaps a bit more complex.  I was thinking that it may be an interesting concept to give fighters the ability to dock on ships and structures with fighter bays.  I?m thinking something along the line of infantry being garrisoned inside of troop transports.  This could have several in game applications.  First, it could possibly be used to provide repairs to fighter squadrons.  Second, it would work to reduce clutter on the battlefield by allowing commanders to keep their fighters docked until their presence was required.  This would mean that when moving an entire fleet one would no longer need to first select the fighter screen and then wait until enough fighters had moved before selecting the capital ships in the same area.  This is a problem that I?ve noticed in large space battles because by dragging to select units the fighters are almost always chosen first due to the simple fact that they vastly outnumber all the other ships.  And since only a dozen units may be chosen at a time this makes fleet wide movements very difficult to coordinate.  Anyways, just a thought, not sure on the feasibility but I think it could greatly improve the flow of the game.

Thanks for the great mod and keep up the great work.

January 05, 2013, 02:34:24 AMReply #342

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #342 on: January 05, 2013, 02:34:24 AM »
Hey guys, I just had a few suggestions. 

First, I noticed that the planet descriptions have disappeared from the game.  From my understanding, part of this is due to the fact that the pentastar cannot utilize these bonuses.  However, I also noticed that at least on Coruscant the income is greatly increased compared to other planets.  It seems to me that if this bonus is going to be left in the game then it would make sense to make a small mention in addition to the information concerning the level of space station that can be built on that planet.

It actually has nothing to do with the PA, it was because what Petro called "planet abilities" were almost universally pointless, self-evident, or didn't make sense. In this particular case with high-income planets leaving the text is completely useless. Every planet has its own credit value, so it's not like there's an assumption going in that they're the same, and what's more you can see the actual income value far more easily than you can get to the non-specific text that doesn't even tell you how much "high credit value" actually means. You just need to click on the indicator, check the credit log, or look in the manual, and all three would give you the exact base value, while being at least as easy to get to as the screen which just generally tells you it's worth a lot.
Quote
My second suggestion is perhaps a bit more complex.  I was thinking that it may be an interesting concept to give fighters the ability to dock on ships and structures with fighter bays.  I?m thinking something along the line of infantry being garrisoned inside of troop transports.  This could have several in game applications.  First, it could possibly be used to provide repairs to fighter squadrons.  Second, it would work to reduce clutter on the battlefield by allowing commanders to keep their fighters docked until their presence was required.  This would mean that when moving an entire fleet one would no longer need to first select the fighter screen and then wait until enough fighters had moved before selecting the capital ships in the same area.  This is a problem that I?ve noticed in large space battles because by dragging to select units the fighters are almost always chosen first due to the simple fact that they vastly outnumber all the other ships.  And since only a dozen units may be chosen at a time this makes fleet wide movements very difficult to coordinate.  Anyways, just a thought, not sure on the feasibility but I think it could greatly improve the flow of the game.

The actual garrison ability can't be used in space. It's somewhat possible to do it via LUA scripting, someone on the team (Smallpox) has done it before, but from my understanding it has several issues, including the fact that you can send a pretty much dead squadron in and immediately get back a full one.
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


January 05, 2013, 05:11:23 AMReply #343

Offline ttrjames

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #343 on: January 05, 2013, 05:11:23 AM »
Thanks for the reply.  As I was experimenting in GC I figured out that first part for myself.  Not too surprised with the issues concerning the second, I figured it would be more complex.  Anyways, I'll keep an eye out for anything else but I kind of doubt I'll find much, you guys really did a great job on this mod.

January 05, 2013, 05:45:04 PMReply #344

Offline yutpaeksi

  • Vice Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 436
  • Approval: +13/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #344 on: January 05, 2013, 05:45:04 PM »
How about adding in the ability for carriers and large capital ships to deploy their starfighters? As in, don't automatically deploy all the squadrons until the user chooses to do so. It would be nice to be able to jump in an ISD, let it kill or drive off a few corvettes before deploying its TIEs. Otherwise, the anti-starfighter ships automatically prioritize the fighters and shred the squadrons. It could add a nice extra tactical choice: Deploy fighters now and risk losing them or wait until later and risk having your capital ship take more damage from bombers while waiting for them to deploy one by one?

Since the AI tends to use its abilities as soon as it can anyway, this shouldn't mess with balance.

I could see that it might be a pain in larger engagements when a lot of ships are already present (i.e. not being jumped in as reinforcements), but you could always choose the "auto-fire abilities" option in the menu.
"That's not what the Empire would have done, Commander. What the Empire would have done was build a super-colossal Yuuzhan Vong-killing battle machine. They would have called it the Nova Colossus or the Galaxy Destructor or the Nostril of Palpatine or something equally grandiose. They would have spent billions of credits, employed thousands of contractors and subcontractors, and equipped it with the latest in death-dealing technology. And you know what would have happened? It wouldn't have worked. They'd forget to bolt down a metal plate over an access hatch leading to the main reactors, or some other mistake, and a hotshot enemy pilot would drop a bomb down there and blow the whole thing up. Now that's what the Empire would have done."
―Han Solo, to Vana Dorja

January 05, 2013, 06:20:00 PMReply #345

Offline Pox

  • Mod Team Member
  • Brevet Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 88
  • Approval: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #345 on: January 05, 2013, 06:20:00 PM »
How about adding in the ability for carriers and large capital ships to deploy their starfighters? As in, don't automatically deploy all the squadrons until the user chooses to do so. It would be nice to be able to jump in an ISD, let it kill or drive off a few corvettes before deploying its TIEs. Otherwise, the anti-starfighter ships automatically prioritize the fighters and shred the squadrons. It could add a nice extra tactical choice: Deploy fighters now and risk losing them or wait until later and risk having your capital ship take more damage from bombers while waiting for them to deploy one by one?

Since the AI tends to use its abilities as soon as it can anyway, this shouldn't mess with balance.

I could see that it might be a pain in larger engagements when a lot of ships are already present (i.e. not being jumped in as reinforcements), but you could always choose the "auto-fire abilities" option in the menu.

Well, there's two ways to do that.
1) Use the Executor's deploy ability, which would in my opinion be annoying to use, since it only deploys one squadron per time. I'm not even sure it has the autofire option?
2) I have already written a script that deploys fighters. The only catch is that it deploys all fighters at once and that means no reserve squadrons once a fighter squadron has been destroyed like it's been in vanila FoC.

So from a scripting point of view it would be possible.

January 05, 2013, 06:27:02 PMReply #346

Offline yutpaeksi

  • Vice Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 436
  • Approval: +13/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #346 on: January 05, 2013, 06:27:02 PM »
Well, there's two ways to do that.
1) Use the Executor's deploy ability, which would in my opinion be annoying to use, since it only deploys one squadron per time. I'm not even sure it has the autofire option?
2) I have already written a script that deploys fighters. The only catch is that it deploys all fighters at once and that means no reserve squadrons once a fighter squadron has been destroyed like it's been in vanila FoC.

So from a scripting point of view it would be possible.

The Executor's deploy option is too slow, I agree. For (2), how many ships even carry reserve fighters? I thought the only thing that had reserve squadrons was the Brask stations. I thought all the other ships dumped their fighters out as soon as they hyped in.

And yes it would be great if this was possible. Does anyone else think this would be an interesting capability? Thanks for listening guys.
"That's not what the Empire would have done, Commander. What the Empire would have done was build a super-colossal Yuuzhan Vong-killing battle machine. They would have called it the Nova Colossus or the Galaxy Destructor or the Nostril of Palpatine or something equally grandiose. They would have spent billions of credits, employed thousands of contractors and subcontractors, and equipped it with the latest in death-dealing technology. And you know what would have happened? It wouldn't have worked. They'd forget to bolt down a metal plate over an access hatch leading to the main reactors, or some other mistake, and a hotshot enemy pilot would drop a bomb down there and blow the whole thing up. Now that's what the Empire would have done."
―Han Solo, to Vana Dorja

January 05, 2013, 09:44:01 PMReply #347

Offline tlmiller

  • Tester
  • Moff
  • *
  • Posts: 2,363
  • Approval: +56/-9
  • Don't turn around you moron, ATTACK!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #347 on: January 05, 2013, 09:44:01 PM »
I would like it, yes.  Ecspecially as the IR/PA, who has the weakest fighters and the AI tends to build a LOT of corvettes, which means your bombers will get minced before they're able to do anything.  Currently I manually hotkey fighters/bombers and just keep them away from battle until I've dealt with corvettes, but this would be FANTASTIC.
People should not be afraid of their government...governments should be afraid of their people.

January 05, 2013, 09:54:56 PMReply #348

Offline Eclipse

  • Vice Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 350
  • Approval: +16/-5
  • My Eclipse has nothing to do with Force Unleashed.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #348 on: January 05, 2013, 09:54:56 PM »
It remins me the time I destroyed a corellian corvette with a defender squadron but yes the idea would be good and even better for the IR and PA
A Member of the Imperial Alignment(Allies With The Shadow Post Empire).

\"Yes, the destruction of Alderaan was regrettable, but so was the destruction of the Death Stars. Are the deaths of millions of Alderaanians?who conspired to overthrow the government?more tragic than the deaths of millions of Imperial soldiers who laid down their lives to defend our way of life? I think not.\"―Antinnis Tremayne


January 06, 2013, 07:05:31 AMReply #349

Offline Slornie

  • Mod Team Member
  • Moff
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,759
  • Approval: +54/-13
  • Every Silver Lining has a Cloud
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #349 on: January 06, 2013, 07:05:31 AM »
For (2), how many ships even carry reserve fighters? I thought the only thing that had reserve squadrons was the Brask stations. I thought all the other ships dumped their fighters out as soon as they hyped in.
At the moment it tends to mainly be the larger ships (e.g. the SSD-types) or carriers, but several people have asked if we could change it so more ships have reserves instead of launching everything at once.
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.

January 06, 2013, 09:21:52 AMReply #350

Offline Pox

  • Mod Team Member
  • Brevet Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 88
  • Approval: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #350 on: January 06, 2013, 09:21:52 AM »
At the moment it tends to mainly be the larger ships (e.g. the SSD-types) or carriers, but several people have asked if we could change it so more ships have reserves instead of launching everything at once.

Well, something like one or two waves of reserve squadrons could easily be implemented to launch on a second/third click on the ability.

The reason I said reserve squadrons were impossible to do like in vanila FoC was because I was concerned that it could cause tons of lag due to constantly having to check whether the spawned squadrons are still alive...for every ship.

So, reserve squadrons in general are possible, just not via automatic spawn as in FoC, but by clicking the ability a second time.

January 25, 2013, 07:47:20 PMReply #351

Offline rumiks

  • Brevet Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 71
  • Approval: +0/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #351 on: January 25, 2013, 07:47:20 PM »
can you make it so eras only change when all the major heros die i think its wrong when only one hero dies then everyone changes and gets more super powered people back.....all major heros should die to change era just a thought for 2.1 but i guess that would be hard right?
football (real one) meat pies kangeroos and holden cars i  got qq it is 2320886763@qq.com

January 25, 2013, 08:44:37 PMReply #352

Offline tlmiller

  • Tester
  • Moff
  • *
  • Posts: 2,363
  • Approval: +56/-9
  • Don't turn around you moron, ATTACK!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #352 on: January 25, 2013, 08:44:37 PM »
But it makes sense that when the IR leader dies, the next era begins.  After all, that's how it really did happen (more or less).  After Isaard managed to screw up everything, Thrawn returned.  Doesn't matter if the other heroes of the time are still alive, the leader was dead...which generally is how they are separating the eras.
People should not be afraid of their government...governments should be afraid of their people.

January 27, 2013, 06:16:23 PMReply #353

Offline rumiks

  • Brevet Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 71
  • Approval: +0/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #353 on: January 27, 2013, 06:16:23 PM »
But it makes sense that when the IR leader dies, the next era begins.  After all, that's how it really did happen (more or less).  After Isaard managed to screw up everything, Thrawn returned.  Doesn't matter if the other heroes of the time are still alive, the leader was dead...which generally is how they are separating the eras.
no i am asking that when isard dies that it stays in that era until all other major heros die then the era changes so acbar isard thrawn and who ever penstar one is have to die to change era it just changes so fast i think if only one dies just a thought i find in the game in the era changing ones the ai throws there heros around like crazy lol
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 06:20:09 PM by rumiks »
football (real one) meat pies kangeroos and holden cars i  got qq it is 2320886763@qq.com

January 27, 2013, 06:31:06 PMReply #354

Offline Kalo

  • Former Mod Team Member
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 363
  • Approval: +31/-23
  • That Guy
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #354 on: January 27, 2013, 06:31:06 PM »
inb4 Corey says no.

Codeuser says:
STUPID JFK

January 27, 2013, 09:10:36 PMReply #355

Offline Lord Xizer

  • Tester
  • Grand Moff
  • *
  • Posts: 3,222
  • Approval: +134/-14
  • Nothing shall withstand my ambition.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #355 on: January 27, 2013, 09:10:36 PM »
A heavy cap ship can shred the corvettes while your fighters hang back and bait them. Too easy.
"I do not intend to be the Emperor's servant forever..."-High Inquisitor Jerec

"The New Order has never fallen. Only the Emperor."-Grand Moff Ardus Kaine

January 27, 2013, 10:14:23 PMReply #356

Offline tlmiller

  • Tester
  • Moff
  • *
  • Posts: 2,363
  • Approval: +56/-9
  • Don't turn around you moron, ATTACK!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #356 on: January 27, 2013, 10:14:23 PM »
I like how the current era change is set up...to me it just makes sense.  Such as, to take era1 for example, if Isaard gets offed, if it doesn't switch to era2, who would be in charge?
People should not be afraid of their government...governments should be afraid of their people.

January 28, 2013, 10:46:56 AMReply #357

Offline Lord Xizer

  • Tester
  • Grand Moff
  • *
  • Posts: 3,222
  • Approval: +134/-14
  • Nothing shall withstand my ambition.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #357 on: January 28, 2013, 10:46:56 AM »
I like how the current era change is set up...to me it just makes sense.  Such as, to take era1 for example, if Isaard gets offed, if it doesn't switch to era2, who would be in charge?

The Council of Moffs.
"I do not intend to be the Emperor's servant forever..."-High Inquisitor Jerec

"The New Order has never fallen. Only the Emperor."-Grand Moff Ardus Kaine

January 28, 2013, 04:11:37 PMReply #358

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #358 on: January 28, 2013, 04:11:37 PM »
That won't even do what you want it to. If your issue is that "when only one hero dies then everyone changes and gets more super powered people back" why would we make it so that all of the important heroes have to die? That just means even MORE hero presence, because we'd have to give everyone back, otherwise you go through era 2-5 without any of the relevant heroes. All it's doing is adding a frustrating and pointless autoresolve fest to get to the next era, which is something we want to limit, not exacerbate since it's already frustrating as hell as the Imperial player if you want to change the era and have to go around having a bunch of battles just to get one of your own heroes killed. Why would we go through and add 8 more of those per era? We have to limit the amount of battles that occur so we don't hit the freeze earlier anyways. It's not even like this is some sort of tradeoff considering what you're suggesting doesn't even make any narrative sense either; it would make both gameplay and the narrative structure worse, it's a lose lose. Why should Ackbar have to die for Thrawn to take over the Remnant? Why should THRAWN have to die for Thrawn to take over the Remnant?

Would it make each era last longer? Sure. Is that even desirable? I don't think so. You tend to get 20-30 weeks in each era unless you go out of your way to make it change earlier (and again, making more irrelevant heroes have to die would make it more frustrating to do that). When we need to limit the game to around 250-300 weeks total, making the individual eras take that much longer would not be desirable, you'd never reach past era 2. If you want to stay in one era, then play the single-era GCs.
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


January 28, 2013, 04:34:29 PMReply #359

Offline JC123

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 169
  • Approval: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #359 on: January 28, 2013, 04:34:29 PM »
That won't even do what you want it to. If your issue is that "when only one hero dies then everyone changes and gets more super powered people back" why would we make it so that all of the important heroes have to die? That just means even MORE hero presence, because we'd have to give everyone back, otherwise you go through era 2-5 without any of the relevant heroes. All it's doing is adding a frustrating and pointless autoresolve fest to get to the next era, which is something we want to limit, not exacerbate since it's already frustrating as hell as the Imperial player if you want to change the era and have to go around having a bunch of battles just to get one of your own heroes killed. Why would we go through and add 8 more of those per era? We have to limit the amount of battles that occur so we don't hit the freeze earlier anyways. It's not even like this is some sort of tradeoff considering what you're suggesting doesn't even make any narrative sense either; it would make both gameplay and the narrative structure worse, it's a lose lose. Why should Ackbar have to die for Thrawn to take over the Remnant? Why should THRAWN have to die for Thrawn to take over the Remnant?

Would it make each era last longer? Sure. Is that even desirable? I don't think so. You tend to get 20-30 weeks in each era unless you go out of your way to make it change earlier (and again, making more irrelevant heroes have to die would make it more frustrating to do that). When we need to limit the game to around 250-300 weeks total, making the individual eras take that much longer would not be desirable, you'd never reach past era 2. If you want to stay in one era, then play the single-era GCs.

In summary:  1) Think of the poor Imp players and
                      2) The dreaded FREEZE
Did you see that?  Know what that cost?  $58,000.  I mean, what a waste.  It wasn't even funny.  That's $58,000 that could have gone to curing leukemia.  Or.  muscular dystrophy.  Or... what does Michael J. Fox have?  That.  Alright, let's watch some damn cartoons.

 

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!