Author Topic: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion  (Read 30777 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ardem

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • a
  • Posts: 814
  • Thanked: 44 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #30 on: April 27, 2013, 03:32:12 AM »
I am glad minority unrest is removed however I think the unrest needs an overall.

Population unhappiness should be checked against population security (aka ground forces) then should be logged if unrest is in place. It very tiresome view a lot of unrest issues the the log files, especially if you already have enough troops so it keeps it in check. Also I think unrest should grow fast, the small increments it grows at the moment give you not concerns to do much about it.

 

Offline Arwyn

  • Gold Supporter
  • Commander
  • *****
  • A
  • Posts: 338
  • Thanked: 40 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #31 on: April 27, 2013, 02:58:13 PM »
Love the new spinal mount weapons. Looking forward to seeing the other versions, it reminds me of old school High Guard and Leviathan. :)
 

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #32 on: April 27, 2013, 03:19:05 PM »
What about railguns? Those poor, forgotten railguns.

Other than that, it mostly seems like a novelty. Lasers are mainly limited by fire control, at least at long ranges, and the benefit to really heavy lasers is to try to pierce your opponent's armor, which is hard to do at range. So as I see it the main benefit of spinal lasers would actually be at extremely close ranges where their armor penetration is worth the tradeoff of a lower fire rate.
 

Offline clement

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • *
  • c
  • Posts: 137
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #33 on: April 27, 2013, 06:39:29 PM »
I can't wait for all of these changes, the shock damage, spinal mounts, and the automatic lagrange point plotting.
 

Offline icecoldblood

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 99
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #34 on: April 27, 2013, 07:46:08 PM »
Spinal mounts sound great. Now I can make whats effectively an armoured gun with engines. Looks good for making beam-armed siege/orbital bombardment ships.
 

Offline Gyrfalcon

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commander
  • ***
  • G
  • Posts: 331
  • Thanked: 199 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #35 on: April 27, 2013, 10:19:07 PM »
Question on railguns - These were already spinal mounts, does that mean a turretable 'normal' version will come, or that they more come in three different fixed versions?
 

Offline Conscript Gary

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 292
  • Thanked: 27 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #36 on: April 28, 2013, 12:19:15 AM »
'Normal' doesn't mean turretable in and of itself. Think of it as just a fixed mount, just one that isn't large enough to require significant bracing. Assuming he follows the same pattern railguns, particle beams, and lasers will have a standard mount version, which is fixed in the hull but not large enough to require bracing, and then the spinal and advanced spinal mounts, which do.
Lasers are just special in that their standard mount version can be put onto turrets
 

Offline Haji

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 442
  • Thanked: 53 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #37 on: May 06, 2013, 07:19:37 PM »
I like the idea of spinal mount weapons. The problem is I don't see any use for them, at least if they are like in the example shown. In that example, the largest mount actually has lower dps than the smallest one (0.78 dps vs 0.8 dps) and is 50% larger. It allows powerful first punch, sure, but other than that, the smallest weapons offer the best offense over any longer period of time.
 

Offline bean

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • b
  • Posts: 916
  • Thanked: 55 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #38 on: May 06, 2013, 08:23:43 PM »
I like the idea of spinal mount weapons. The problem is I don't see any use for them, at least if they are like in the example shown. In that example, the largest mount actually has lower dps than the smallest one (0.78 dps vs 0.8 dps) and is 50% larger. It allows powerful first punch, sure, but other than that, the smallest weapons offer the best offense over any longer period of time.
The highest DPS comes when the power requirement is an exact multiple of the best recharge rate available.  The biggest advantage of a heavier gun is better firepower at long range.  Closer in, the edge shifts to smaller, faster-firing weapons.
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline Cripes Amighty

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #39 on: May 06, 2013, 11:09:03 PM »
I like the idea of spinal mount weapons. The problem is I don't see any use for them, at least if they are like in the example shown. In that example, the largest mount actually has lower dps than the smallest one (0.78 dps vs 0.8 dps) and is 50% larger. It allows powerful first punch, sure, but other than that, the smallest weapons offer the best offense over any longer period of time.

Also, with the addition of shock damage, harder punching weapons will now have an edge.
 

Offline Zatsuza

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Z
  • Posts: 39
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #40 on: May 19, 2013, 05:13:51 AM »

Quote from: Steve
Spinal Lasers

You can now design Spinal Lasers, which are larger weapons than could normally be constructed using available technology. A ship can only mount one spinal weapon and they cannot be mounted in turrets.

A fifth category has been added to laser design, entitled Energy Weapon Mount. The possibilities are Standard Mount, Spinal Mount and Advanced Spinal Mount. The latter two cost 5,000 and 20,000 RP respectively. A spinal mount uses a focal size 25% larger than the maximum possible for a normal laser. The Advanced Spinal Mount uses a focal size 50% larger. Here are three examples using the same technology level but with different mounts. For the moment this is just for lasers but I intend to also add particle beam and railgun versions as well.
[/spoiler]
I squealed like a little girl. Literally, I went 'Squeeeeee.'
This is God-Given Gloriousness.

The only addition I could ask for is the ability to mount multiple spinal weapons on a ship.
I know a lot of you are probably thinking 'wut?' to this but hear me out :P
Given the size of ships involved a large-calibre spinal weapon is a given, but if you reduced that size you could pack in more of them.

Instead of having a large-calibre laser or particle lance or something (AKA Homeworld-esqe Ion frigates) you could for example have 2 or 4 particle lances on a spinal mount (with a reduced calibre compared to a single) for more continuous fire or rapid-fire ability. Personally I can't see the maximum amount of spinal lasers going above 8 without the reduced calibre becoming more of a hinderance than a help though, it'd be like sticking a few needle guns to the front of your ship.

Also there's mass and balancing to take into account.

Also as already stated, a fixed-facing weapon doesn't necessarily mean it's a spinal mounted one. You could have a fixed-facing broadside or chase armament, think victorian era frigates, cannon broadside, for example.
 In contrast, a spinal mounted weapon can only ever be forward facing and more than likely the entire ship would be built around it. Also it should really be drawing power directly from the engines.
 

Offline viperfan7

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • v
  • Posts: 61
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #41 on: May 23, 2013, 03:43:26 PM »
I wish he would send out a patch that just removes the minefields
 

Offline orfeusz

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 109
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #42 on: May 23, 2013, 09:10:38 PM »

Instead of having a large-calibre laser or particle lance or something (AKA Homeworld-esqe Ion frigates) you could for example have 2 or 4 particle lances on a spinal mount (with a reduced calibre compared to a single) for more continuous fire or rapid-fire ability.

I think that one single big gun is what this change is about. Having more of them would make ship overpowered.

Quote
Also it should really be drawing power directly from the engines.

Sure, engines doesn't need that energy.... :)  If this weapon could charge from engine then why not normal versions too?
Only in Death does Duty End
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #43 on: May 24, 2013, 07:07:06 AM »
Also as already stated, a fixed-facing weapon doesn't necessarily mean it's a spinal mounted one.
I thought all non-turreted weapons were considered fixed? As they use the ships speed for targeting.

I think that one single big gun is what this change is about. Having more of them would make ship overpowered.

Sure, engines doesn't need that energy.... :)  If this weapon could charge from engine then why not normal versions too?
I agree.

Actually shouldn't all systems need power from the reactors? Life Support, Command/Control, Magazines, Launchers, Sensors, Scanners?

It would be cool to see Power supply handled in a more generic way, but that is a future suggestion.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2013, 07:08:41 AM by alex_brunius »
 

Offline Gidoran

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 135
Re: Change Log for 6.30 Discussion
« Reply #44 on: May 24, 2013, 07:36:46 PM »
I thought all non-turreted weapons were considered fixed? As they use the ships speed for targeting.
I agree.

Actually shouldn't all systems need power from the reactors? Life Support, Command/Control, Magazines, Launchers, Sensors, Scanners?

It would be cool to see Power supply handled in a more generic way, but that is a future suggestion.

I think that non-turreted weapons are handled in that if the default tracking speed tech is higher than the ship's speed, they use that instead. So if your tracking speed tech is 5000, your FC is 10,000 and your speed is 1000, they track at 5000. I might be wrong, it's been a bit since I booted Aurora. But if I'm not remembering wrong, then it implies they might be pintle mounts.
"Orbital bombardment solves a myriad of issues permanently. This is sometimes undesirable."
- Secretary General Orlov of the Triumvirate of Venus