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 282151 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

February 08, 2013, 09:48:22 PMReply #380

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 #380 on: February 08, 2013, 09:48:22 PM »
Uhmm I remembered taht once I invaded'em with just AT-AA and did the same with some NR planets
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


February 09, 2013, 12:39:32 AMReply #381

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 #381 on: February 09, 2013, 12:39:32 AM »
Agreed. Airstraekers are not overpowered but they sure as hell can make you respect the EotH if you are foolish enough to invade their planets without AA units!

Exactly.  They were overpowered early on in the 2.0 release (I remember 1 squad of Airstrakers taking out 3 or 4 entire SQUADS of AT-AA's before being destroyed), but now they're quite easily dealt with as long as you have dedicated AA units.  But don't take dedicated AA units, and while many other units have the ability to target aerial units, they'll be ripped apart before they are able to finally take out the Airstraekers.
People should not be afraid of their government...governments should be afraid of their people.

February 09, 2013, 11:07:53 AMReply #382

Offline Blindsided

  • Stormtrooper Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #382 on: February 09, 2013, 11:07:53 AM »
its a shame we cant have pentastar aligment in From the ground up would make this mod perfect for me

February 10, 2013, 05:12:35 AMReply #383

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #383 on: February 10, 2013, 05:12:35 AM »
been a while since ive been around. real life stuff, anyway i was just playing essence as NR and had isard then thrawn hit kashyyyk killed them both easy lol. isard i just blasted her with my bombers and cap ships.

Are you going to include the Galaxy gun/ Eclipse 2 for next release?
For the Galaxy Gun, no. Superweapons like that just don't function well in EaW. As for the Eclipse II, also no because there's nowhere to put it; it wouldn't make sense as a buildable ship, and Palpatine already has the Eclipse I as his flagship. Putting it in would just mean Palpatine has to be killed twice and be another free superlaser-toting SSD. Same reason we don't put Pellaeon through a bunch of different ISDs in era 5, minus the superlaser.

its a shame we cant have pentastar aligment in From the ground up would make this mod perfect for me

We intend to make another GC of that style with the PA in it, however since the layout would need to be pretty diferrent and there's no problem with how FTGU functions, we're just making it its own new GC. the PA will be in FTGU in all but name.

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


February 10, 2013, 09:36:56 AMReply #384

Offline Blindsided

  • Stormtrooper Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #384 on: February 10, 2013, 09:36:56 AM »

We intend to make another GC of that style with the PA in it, however since the layout would need to be pretty diferrent and there's no problem with how FTGU functions, we're just making it its own new GC. the PA will be in FTGU in all but name.


if i got hit by a car right now,i would die as a happy man knowing this!

February 10, 2013, 11:04:09 AMReply #385

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 #385 on: February 10, 2013, 11:04:09 AM »
PA new GC?
"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

February 11, 2013, 05:25:24 PMReply #386

Offline yutpaeksi

  • Vice Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 436
  • Approval: +13/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #386 on: February 11, 2013, 05:25:24 PM »
Can you boost the firing rates of laser cannons and quad laser cannons on ships a little (NOT the anti-starfighter corvettes, those are fine)? For instance, the Enforcer frigate's two quad laser cannons fire at the same rate as the turbolasers, which is to say, incredibly slowly. You get just two quad laser cannon projectiles per second, which isn't useful at all. This makes ships that are supposed to be jack-of-all-trades very ineffective against starfighters, including the Sacheen, the aforementioend Enforcer, and the Karieks.

To compensate for the increased rate, you could lower the damage modifier for laser cannon projectiles against frigate/SD armor and shield types. This could prevent ships with large numbers of laser cannons, like the NR Assault Frigate, from being more powerful than they're meant to be.
"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

February 11, 2013, 07:51:47 PMReply #387

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 #387 on: February 11, 2013, 07:51:47 PM »
Can you boost the firing rates of laser cannons and quad laser cannons on ships a little (NOT the anti-starfighter corvettes, those are fine)? For instance, the Enforcer frigate's two quad laser cannons fire at the same rate as the turbolasers, which is to say, incredibly slowly. You get just two quad laser cannon projectiles per second, which isn't useful at all. This makes ships that are supposed to be jack-of-all-trades very ineffective against starfighters, including the Sacheen, the aforementioend Enforcer, and the Karieks.

To compensate for the increased rate, you could lower the damage modifier for laser cannon projectiles against frigate/SD armor and shield types. This could prevent ships with large numbers of laser cannons, like the NR Assault Frigate, from being more powerful than they're meant to be.

That's actually a pretty good idea.  I had never looked to see why the Enforcer was so useless against fighters since it's supposed to be, as you pointed out, the jack-of-all-trades type vessel.
People should not be afraid of their government...governments should be afraid of their people.

February 14, 2013, 04:33:57 AMReply #388

Offline SoldierForTheEmpire

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #388 on: February 14, 2013, 04:33:57 AM »
Welp here I go, bear with me please. As for suggestions of new units I'll start with the Imperial remnant. I think it would be cool to replace most of the original units in the original star wars empire at war and forces of corruption game that were made only for the purpose of this game. This mod did an excellent job cleaning up all of the space units so most of my opinions are going to be based on ground units. First on my list would be for you guys to possibly and hopefully create the Imperial I-H Imperial class repulsor tank as a replacement for the 2-M saber class repulsor tank.I understand that many of these tanks were destroyed after the destruction of the original death star but some did indeed survive and it's claimed that production did continue at a slow and reduced pace after which would mean that more units of this tank did exist. Wouldn't it honestly be better to have this tank in the mod over the 2-M since the only evidence of the 2-M in existence is only in this game like so many other units in the original game. I personally believe this is a more appropriate unit to have since it's evidenced to exist in other star wars material. I understand that it's factual length is at 20.5m which is slightly less than that of the AT-AT but the picture from the star wars adventure journal with the imperial gunner beside it on the wookieepedia link ( http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/1-H_Imperial-class_repulsortank ) appears to be quite smaller than the length listed. I totally agree that fact is fact but that brings me to my next point.

If length is the issue then there are obviously exceptions since actual scaling of units in this mod aren't entirely accurate like the discrepancy in the height, bulk and fire power when it comes to AT-PT compared to the AT-ST in Thrawn's Revenge. The AT-PT appears just as tall if not bigger than the AT-ST and it certainly (I don't know why) seems more powerful and costs more. You can see the appropriate size on page 206 of 251 in Chapter 12 of the Thrawn trilogy sourcebook at this link (http://d6holocron.com/downloads/books/WEG40131.pdf) and another comparison of the AT-PT here (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/File:SWGalSeries3_DFR.jpg) and finally a comparison of the AT-ST here (http://www.dk.co.uk/static/html/features/starwars/technology_gallery/images/AT-ST%20Cutaway.jpg) I would suggest scaling the AT-PT down and making it less powerful and expensive to the AT-ST.

I know this next request might fall on deaf ears since I know others have requested it but I would be elated to see the AT-ST/A implemented in this game. I know you guys have argued that it's too similar to the AT-ST. I know this is true but the same is true of the tie crawler and the tie mauler. Why not get rid of the tie mauler since it was obviously based on the crawler due to it's incredible similarity and the fact that the crawler was already documented to have existed before the mauler. For the AT-ST/A all you have to do is make it taller, have enclosed viewports, more powerful (more expensive) with its single chin mounted heavy blaster cannon, better armored and perhaps slower than the original AT-ST. Besides aren't military walkers the most critical military component of the Imperial Army compared to other vehicles?

You guys should also add the Swift Assault 5 Hoverscout  (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Swift_Assault_5_Hoverscout) for the empire or can't you because it's too similar to the Chariot LAV? (not trying to be sarcastic) If not then definitely for the Pentastar Alignment so you can keep them looking a little more Imperial over Grand Army of the Republic.

I would also suggest giving the S-1FireHawke Heavy Repulsortank (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/S-1_FireHawke_Heavy_Repulsortank) for the Pentastar alignment since the tank was replaced by the 1-M and it would fit perfectly in the theme of them utilizing different/older imperial equipment along with that of the Grand Army of the Republic that you created. Keep the TX-130 but defiantly ditch the Bantha skiff.

Could you guys also have the alignment possessing AT-ST's. I feel like it's too common of a weapon system for any of the Imperial breakaway warlords and systems not to possess. If not then maybe consider the AT-XT (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/All_Terrain_Experimental_Transport).

Can you guys do anything with structures as well and introduce new infantry to be trained like Imperial ARMY TROOPS at the Imperial barracks and have any Stormtrooper type units trained at a separate structure like say a "stormtrooper academy?" I feel like after the battle of endor stormtroopers became more scarce and Army troopers were used to fill the void. Just make stormtroopers more expensive and powerful over the Army troops.

I also feel like black hole or shadow stormtroopers would be better than the nova troopers in the game. You guys if you're able to could have them become cloaked or invisible for short periods of time and/or until they open up fire.

As for the New Republic I feel everything is good except for the HTT-26 Heavy Troop Transport. Suggest replacing it with the A-A5/A-A6z heavy speeder truck. (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/A-A5_heavy_speeder_truck)  or the specforce  free runner apc (http://www.star.etmortius.net/equipement/vehicles/D6%20-%20vehicles%20netbook/images/Star%20Wars%20-%20D6%20-%20Vehicles%20Stats%20Netbook_img_69.jpg)

Maybe add the Arrow-23  land speeder for the New Republic as well.(http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Arrow-23_transport_landspeeder)

Thats all   :police:
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 05:09:25 AM by SoldierForTheEmpire »

February 14, 2013, 02:48:59 PMReply #389

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 #389 on: February 14, 2013, 02:48:59 PM »
I think it would be cool to replace most of the original units in the original star wars empire at war and forces of corruption game that were made only for the purpose of this game.  ... Wouldn't it honestly be better to have this tank in the mod over the 2-M since the only evidence of the 2-M in existence is only in this game like so many other units in the original game. I personally believe this is a more appropriate unit to have since it's evidenced to exist in other star wars material.
If you're going to use appearances in non-game canon as the primary basis for whether a vehicle/ship should be included in the mod, then presumably you would also advocate removing the following units whose canon appearances are only or primarily games (Empire at War or otherwise)?  :angel:

  • Self-Propelled Medium Artillery
  • T2-B Repulsor Tank
  • T4-B Heavy Tank
  • Mobile Proton Torpedo Launcher-2a
  • Heavy Assault Vehicle Transport B5 Juggernaut (Although I think the version we have in the mod is pretending to be the A5)
  • Imperial Dropship Transport
  • MC40a Light Cruiser
  • T3-B Heavy Attack Tank
  • T1-B Hovertank
  • AAC-1 Hovertank
  • Imperial Escort Carrier
  • TIE Hunter

Could you guys also have the alignment possessing AT-ST's. I feel like it's too common of a weapon system for any of the Imperial breakaway warlords and systems not to possess. If not then maybe consider the AT-XT (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/All_Terrain_Experimental_Transport).
Continuing from my above point, your argument precludes the addition of the AT-XT as that itself is primarily a game-canon unit! :P
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 02:54:10 PM 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.

February 14, 2013, 04:02:50 PMReply #390

Offline SoldierForTheEmpire

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #390 on: February 14, 2013, 04:02:50 PM »
I'm afraid your research and argument is flawed a bit. The  T3-B Heavy Attack Tank and the T1-B Hover tank make their appearance in both Force Commander and Galactic Battle Grounds. T4-B appears in the Battle Front series of Elite and Renegade Squadron, not just empire at war. MC40a Light Cruiser- appears in tie fighter and x-wing series.


Continuing from my above point, your argument precludes the addition of the AT-XT as that itself is primarily a game-canon unit!- umm actually that made an appearance in a comic series. ( http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_Republic:_The_Battle_of_Jabiim:HA: not just the video game

As to the  Self-Propelled Medium Artillery and Mobile Proton Torpedo Launcher-2a- you're absolutely right, I thought those should be left alone since not much information or appearances of artillery exist except for the SPHA-T and so those units are for the purpose of game mechanics. I guess you guys could implement the mobile artillery (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Mobile_artillery) for the empire over the SPMA or for the pentastar alignment though. 



Heavy Assault Vehicle Transport B5 Juggernaut (Although I think the version we have in the mod is pretending to be the A5)-Sooo identical to the A6 that it doesn't really pose a problem.
   
Concerning....

Imperial Dropship Transport
AAC-1 Hovertank
Imperial Escort Carrier
TIE Hunter

All exceptions because my argument I guess would be that the original ideas concerning the units and vehicles should take precedence over the units designed solely for the empire at war game because most other units are actually evidenced to exist from other sources, not just the game itself. technically everything in the original empire at war game is cannon but it doesn't exist outside the game like so many other potential units, vehicles, etc do, thats all I'm trying to point out. Trust me...I'm not trying to put down original or new ideas but I believe ideas that have already been documented and evidenced should honestly take precedence over what this game originally produced and that's just my opinion. That includes units developed and created in other games where they make their only appearance because again those ideas are more original and should be followed up on, not shelved. Again just an opinion.

 :police:




February 14, 2013, 04:47:10 PMReply #391

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 #391 on: February 14, 2013, 04:47:10 PM »
I'm afraid your research and argument is flawed a bit. The  T3-B Heavy Attack Tank and the T1-B Hover tank make their appearance in both Force Commander and Galactic Battle Grounds. T4-B appears in the Battle Front series of Elite and Renegade Squadron, not just empire at war. MC40a Light Cruiser- appears in tie fighter and x-wing series.
So their main or only appearance(s) in canon are in video games, which was precisely my point. If you're going to suggest we replace the 2-M and TIE Mauler because they only appeared in Empire at War then how can you justify continuing to use other vehicles which were also created specifically for a game, albeit a different one.
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.

February 14, 2013, 05:44:02 PMReply #392

Offline SoldierForTheEmpire

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #392 on: February 14, 2013, 05:44:02 PM »
Because at least in these video games the storyline is consistent with the established Star Wars cannon where Empire at war is full of inconsistencies with the established canon which in my mind makes these units all the more problematic. If they weren't you guys would have all the other units from Forces of Corruption and Empire at War in this mod which you guys obviously don't. You missed my point that units developed and created in other games who make their only appearance in these games should indeed be implemented because they indeed are more original and they existed first so they should be followed up on, not shelved in favor for the next game creators own spin on the Star Wars universe. Units appearing only once in a single game can be narrowed down to the Imperial Dropship Transport, AAC-1 Hovertank (at least this is used in several different battlefront versions), Imperial Escort Carrier, TIE Hunter. Those should be the exception to the rule.

I just feel you guys have the opportunity to make this the most accurate representation ever of any star wars game and you shouldn't sell yourselves out to any of the units in the original game unless it's strictly game mechanics.

February 14, 2013, 07:39:39 PMReply #393

Offline Revanchist

  • Mod Team Member
  • Grand Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • Approval: +42/-5
  • I am Revan reborn. And before me you are nothing.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #393 on: February 14, 2013, 07:39:39 PM »
Ok...changing subject here, I had a question about the Y wings. Does their ion cannon have a 360 degree firing arc? If not, would that be to hard to add in?

As to SoldierForTheEmpire, I somewhat see your point about the canonicity of EaW vehicles, but why should those vehicles be any less canon than the others that only showed up once in a video game?
"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."
Grand Admiral Thrawn

"But...it was so artistically done."
Grand Admiral Thrawn

Member of the Imperial Alignment


February 14, 2013, 08:08:26 PMReply #394

Offline SoldierForTheEmpire

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Approval: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #394 on: February 14, 2013, 08:08:26 PM »
Because in this mod all of the spacecraft from the original empire at war and forces of corruption game are non existent (that I'm aware of). Why can't the same standard be applied to the ground vehicles when better candidates from the actual expanded universe exist? Thats like me saying what makes any of the spacecraft less canon from empire at war compared to this mod? Shouldn't they be in here also? no because they don't appear anywhere else...it's not necessarily whats more or less cannon but what would serve as the best representation in the history of the expanded universe after looking and analyzing all of the evidence and source material. The fact is that many of these units don't appear anywhere else but units that do make more than one appearance should be the better candidate. Thats how i feel about all of it.

oh yah and the Arrow-23 should replace the T2-B, could use the same armament since the arrow was highly customizable.

February 14, 2013, 10:09:08 PMReply #395

Offline Corey

  • Mod Leader
  • Administrator
  • Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,520
  • Approval: +410/-80
  • Dream Crusher
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #395 on: February 14, 2013, 10:09:08 PM »
I'll start by addressing the mod's general canonicity argument, then get to specific suggestions/examples:

Before I really get into this, I'll say none of it applies to the Empire of the Hand. With the Empire of the Hand, we intentionally took a large chunk of lore directly related to Thrawn that has very little information available, and then filled the gaps left by that information, trying to flesh it out more without contradicting what is known. It's basically used as an outlet to be a bit more creative, since with the other areas we have to stick within more well-defined boundaries. It gets boring modelling the same space triangle repeatedly.

As far as the rest of it goes, there's really no saying unit x is "more canon" than unit y. Sure, you can say x appeared more often in Star Wars history than y, but that doesn't make it more canon any more than Hobart's Funnies being used in fewer battles during WWII than the generic Shermans makes them less existant in reality. The only place where this would apply is where there's an inconsistency, and leaving aside gameplay necessities, FoC really doesn't have any more inconsistencies than most other sources. Is it chock-full of stupid, unnecessary shit? Sure, but the existance of the Lancer making the Tartan unnecessary to have been made doesn't make the Tartan any less canon. The ZC may seem like the result of a vodka bender and 17 concussions, but nothing's uncanon about it. Deciding the better candidate isn't just whether or not it was just in FoC, or just in other source x, it's based on several factors, the following are connected to the whole sourcing issue though.

  • Was this used by group x in this time period?
  • Is there a better candidate used by group x in this time period?

Remember, these aren't all of them, just the ones connected to what you mentioned. Neither of them are just directly just "was it only in FoC" however; our goal isn't to remove everything made by Petroglyph. If there's two units that do the exact same thing, and one thing was in 50 EU battles more connected to what we're doing and the other was only in FoC, then we'll tend to go with the more prominent one, but that's true of things that are in "just" Galactic Battlegrounds, just one book, etc. Aesthetic preferences and how smoothly EaW's engine can handle them also enter into it.

Part of that is where the disparity in how much content we kept from space vs land comes from. Space combat in Star Wars is simply much better docuimented, and Petroglyph's space stuff took a lot more liberties than their land stuff in terms of armament and balancing, so where on ground we could compare a direct armament value from another EU source to EaW's, for the space units made up by EaW there was always going to have to be an executive decision made by us on what that unit's "real" armament would be, which always put them at a disadvantage to their EU counterparts; a challenge not shared by the land units. Add in the fact that there's just so many more possible space units for the same amount of slots and they got edged out. Also, since the specific events we're trying to create come from those other sources to begin with, EaW content has another disadvantage.

So, here's the reasons each EaW-based space unit doesn't exist:
-Assault Frigate Mk. II: Any armament basis we have would just be based off of a comparison with the Assaulty Frigate Mk. II, and when the AFI is just a modification to the Dreadnaught, which also has another modification (Katana) the role was just too saturated.
-TIE Scout: Filled an unnecessary role.
-MC30c: Almost made it in, but not enough build unit slots so the MC40a kept that slot.
-Tartan: Entirely pointless next to the Carrack and Lancer.  It's actually appeared in other sources since being in EaW.
-Broadside: Tried to find a way to keep it in, but too weak and no reason to. The marauder's lucky it's relevant.

With land stuff, there's fewer units to work with overall so to flesh the factions out a lot of the EaW units got a pass. Way less competition for space, and EaW is one of the few places in canon to cover land combat in any depth. If we're comparing one unit that only appeared in one place to another unit appearing in only one, at least equally obscure place then yeah, we'll just go with what we have; land units are much harder to do without making them look terrible, since space units don't need animations and don't have as many possibilities for fucked up interactions.

Quote
First on my list would be for you guys to possibly and hopefully create the Imperial I-H Imperial class repulsor tank as a replacement for the 2-M saber class repulsor tank.I understand that many of these tanks were destroyed after the destruction of the original death star but some did indeed survive and it's claimed that production did continue at a slow and reduced pace after which would mean that more units of this tank did exist. Wouldn't it honestly be better to have this tank in the mod over the 2-M since the only evidence of the 2-M in existence is only in this game like so many other units in the original game.

As far as sourcing goes, EaW is at least as valid of a source as Adventure Journal and equally as relevant. Anyways, we had 2/3 of the Imperial-class tanks in at various points in development. Neither of them actually fills the same role as the 2-M. The 1-L is a light vehicle that really wasn't worth having with the AT-ST and AT-PT there, and the 1-H likes to think its a heavy vehicle in the vein of the XR-85, TIE Crawler and AT-AT, but it would be generous to even call it redundant with how ineffective it was. The 1-M (the one we never actually did) would be the closest to the 2-M in function (hence how the 2-M was made) but they're both in equally as many equally relevant sources, and the profiles of the Imperial-class tank series actually contributes a lot to how useless they are; their heights and interaction with terrain variability make the designs less than optimal for EaW. It's correctable, but there's no reason to considering the alternatives fit at least as well in this case. Did think about using them for the PA, however.

Quote
I know this next request might fall on deaf ears since I know others have requested it but I would be elated to see the AT-ST/A implemented in this game. I know you guys have argued that it's too similar to the AT-ST. For the AT-ST/A all you have to do is make it taller, have enclosed viewports, more powerful (more expensive) with its single chin mounted heavy blaster cannon, better armored and perhaps slower than the original AT-ST. Besides aren't military walkers the most critical military component of the Imperial Army compared to other vehicles?

(Cut the stuff about Crawler/Mauler from this since I wanna address it seperately)
Because a role was more important doesn't mean you then need more units of the exact same role, and that's what this is. Just redundant. Even if it were put in, it's all well and good to say just make it more powerful, more expensive and slower, but the differences would still be very slight. Almost imperceptible. The end result is that building one or the other is always the "right" choice (more than likely the AT-ST/A), because there's effectively no tradeoff there. It's the exact same situation as the ISDI/ISDII. If it weren't for how canonically ubiquitous both are, we would only have one or the other, because when both are available you really should only be building the II.


Quote
I know this is true but the same is true of the tie crawler and the tie mauler. Why not get rid of the tie mauler since it was obviously based on the crawler due to it's incredible similarity and the fact that the crawler was already documented to have existed before the mauler.

Two completely different units and functions. TIE Mauler is fast and anti-inantry, completely useless against almost any vehicle. TIE Crawler is much slower and anti-vehicle. They have completely different armaments, the only similarity is they're both called TIE Somethings. You seem to conflate visual similarities with performance similarities, considering both this comparison and the Chariot LAV to the Hoverscout, which also have virtually nothing in common.

Quote
You guys should also add the Swift Assault 5 Hoverscout  (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Swift_Assault_5_Hoverscout) for the empire or can't you because it's too similar to the Chariot LAV? (not trying to be sarcastic) If not then definitely for the Pentastar Alignment so you can keep them looking a little more Imperial over Grand Army of the Republic.

This unit has made it on and off unit lists for the past 5 years, however it's role is too similar to the IFT-X and the 2-M to have both on the same faction, era differentiation notwithstanding, and whenever we've tried to make it it simply hasn't come out well. It looks terrible. I've gotten some people pissed off in the past by saying we pick one option over another based on what's "easier" when comparing otherwise similar options, but considering how much time has to go into everything it's less about being difficulty and more about being able to actually finish stuff. When there's otherwise no reason to prioritize one over the other, that's an important consideration. We'd love to be able to just throw in any unit we want, but the reality is we have extremely limited development resources. IT becomes more difficult when dealing with these kinds of references (where it's just some schematic drawn from the side), since coming up with the design then becomes an issue.

Quote
I would also suggest giving the S-1FireHawke Heavy Repulsortank (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/S-1_FireHawke_Heavy_Repulsortank) for the Pentastar alignment since the tank was replaced by the 1-M and it would fit perfectly in the theme of them utilizing different/older imperial equipment along with that of the Grand Army of the Republic that you created. Keep the TX-130 but defiantly ditch the Bantha skiff.

This, like the Hoverscout, is something we'd like to do if it's feasible.

Quote
Could you guys also have the alignment possessing AT-ST's. I feel like it's too common of a weapon system for any of the Imperial breakaway warlords and systems not to possess. If not then maybe consider the AT-XT (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/All_Terrain_Experimental_Transport).

They got the AT-PT for this role. The AT-XT has a very similar (see: exact same) armament to the AT-PT, and was far less likely to be in possession of the PA.

Quote
Can you guys do anything with structures as well


Quote
and introduce new infantry to be trained like Imperial ARMY TROOPS at the Imperial barracks and have any Stormtrooper type units trained at a separate structure like say a "stormtrooper academy?" I feel like after the battle of endor stormtroopers became more scarce and Army troopers were used to fill the void. Just make stormtroopers more expensive and powerful over the Army troops.
This falls into the same category as the whole AT-ST/ATSTA thing, only to a far greater degree. There's really no way to distinguish them, so the better ones become ubiquitous and it's pointless to have the others. Stormtroopers still definitely say wide usage, to the point that they're still almost the exclusively mentioned land forces of the Remnant in any novel, so anything below them would either be useless or OP; we can't make the stormtroopers more powerful than the NR SpecForce soldiers, obviously, so the Army troopers would have to be noticably below them to make it possible to distinguish them, but then why buy them? If we just make it so they're weaker but come with more soldiers per unit, they become immediately OP because the health and damage values are already so low for infantry that variations between them don't matter much, so the simple fact that there's more of them  = more firing and = more targets that have to be switched between for them enemy = instantly better. Even if we buff the infantry, the relative differences still remain meaningless. There's really just no room within EaW's simplistic infantry systems for specialization. That's why we were able to use the Navy Troopers for the PA; we wanted to differentiate them visually from the IR, and their relative weakness to all the other infantry doesn't end up mattering because at that level the differences are imperceptible.

Quote
I also feel like black hole or shadow stormtroopers would be better than the nova troopers in the game. You guys if you're able to could have them become cloaked or invisible for short periods of time and/or until they open up fire.

We can't add cloaking meshes to anything in the game; the Exporter for the versions of Max we have (9) don't function with them properly. As far as the differences between the Blackhole Troopers and Novatroopers, it's effectively just the difference between gold stripe or no gold stripe. Blackhole Troopers were more directly associated with Cronal and Carnor Jax, which is why we went with the somewhat more generic Novatrooper as the IR commandos.

Quote
As for the New Republic I feel everything is good except for the HTT-26 Heavy Troop Transport. Suggest replacing it with the A-A5/A-A6z heavy speeder truck. (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/A-A5_heavy_speeder_truck)  or the specforce  free runner apc (http://www.star.etmortius.net/equipement/vehicles/D6%20-%20vehicles%20netbook/images/Star%20Wars%20-%20D6%20-%20Vehicles%20Stats%20Netbook_img_69.jpg)

We've wanted to do the A-A5 before, but again, until/unless we're able to make one there's nothing wrong with the Gallofree. I'd even say it's even preferable, based on gameplay.

Quote
oh yah and the Arrow-23 should replace the T2-B, could use the same armament since the arrow was highly customizable.

IT's really a weaker version of the T2-B, and it's not more canonically relevant than the T2-B, so it's not worth having both. There's no reason to get rid of the T2-B.
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


February 16, 2013, 11:50:02 AMReply #396

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 #396 on: February 16, 2013, 11:50:02 AM »
Erm I was wondering why not using the hypervolicity canon explosion effect when shooting with the eclipse/sovereign superlaser? I mean that would make the explosion look better. Because there's no effect, it's just a green laser (wich looks more like a stick rather than a laser) wich just impacts the ship and it makes it blow up. Some more explosions will be cool
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


February 16, 2013, 12:21:54 PMReply #397

Offline Revanchist

  • Mod Team Member
  • Grand Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • Approval: +42/-5
  • I am Revan reborn. And before me you are nothing.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #397 on: February 16, 2013, 12:21:54 PM »
I had an idea for the TIE Hunter (PA). Give them the ability to buy a fully loaded squadron (ion, torps, and hyperdrive) but make it cost almost as much as the Escort Carrier. They could then choose whether they wanted three weaker squads with a carrier or one stronger one that could be retreated. You might also add a build limit to the fully functioning Hunters.
"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."
Grand Admiral Thrawn

"But...it was so artistically done."
Grand Admiral Thrawn

Member of the Imperial Alignment


February 16, 2013, 06:05:26 PMReply #398

Offline Revanchist

  • Mod Team Member
  • Grand Admiral
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,473
  • Approval: +42/-5
  • I am Revan reborn. And before me you are nothing.
    • View Profile
Re: Suggestions for 2.1
« Reply #398 on: February 16, 2013, 06:05:26 PM »
Sorry for the double-post, but Eclipse's comment reminded me of something. When the HVG is fired, a blinding flash of light follows. Is this intentional?
"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."
Grand Admiral Thrawn

"But...it was so artistically done."
Grand Admiral Thrawn

Member of the Imperial Alignment


February 16, 2013, 08:33:53 PMReply #399

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 #399 on: February 16, 2013, 08:33:53 PM »
I think it was part of a particle effect that didn't go well but don't really remember (if you are talking about the explosion that seems it's gonna destroy the entire enemi fleet but in the end just destroys non capotal one and just a few fighters)
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


 

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!