Author Topic: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion  (Read 137337 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mor

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 305
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #90 on: February 13, 2016, 03:20:14 AM »
Will NPR make use of deep space stations? If so please make sure that they will have a marine compliment because I'll be requisitioning all those for the empire.

EDIT:
Also does anyone know if you can board a ship with Shields up?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2016, 03:47:11 AM by Mor »
 

Offline Rich.h

  • Captain
  • **********
  • R
  • Posts: 555
  • Thanked: 55 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #91 on: February 13, 2016, 05:16:34 AM »
Will NPR make use of deep space stations? If so please make sure that they will have a marine compliment because I'll be requisitioning all those for the empire.

EDIT:
Also does anyone know if you can board a ship with Shields up?

I haven't tried yet but I believe boarding ignores all aspects of defence, you simply target a ship and try to board them and the only considerations are the speed differences with regards to how many marines actually make it onto the enemy vessel. Though since many boarding craft travel at slow missile speeds I do think if possible that raised shields should prevent boarding attempts.
 

Offline Felixg

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • F
  • Posts: 47
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #92 on: February 13, 2016, 06:22:40 AM »
Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=8152. msg86322#msg86322 date=1455199676
It may be a while.  I have a few other changes in mind and with several fundamental changes I need to test it for a while.

I don't mind.  Seems like it will be worth the wait!
 

Offline dgibso29

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • d
  • Posts: 179
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #93 on: February 13, 2016, 10:22:07 AM »
Titans. Woah.
 

Offline illrede

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • i
  • Posts: 55
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #94 on: February 13, 2016, 11:04:08 AM »
You may want to file off some serial-numbers on the titan nomenclature, there.

How feasible would it be to make an Ogre/Bolo/Continental Siege Machine version of this? (It's pretty much there I think, but for fluff, unless the mechanics allow for deployable PDCs.)

Do the mechanics allow for deployable PDCs?

*quick check with current game*

Not really, no. You can put one in a mothership of sufficient bay size but task forces with PDCs can't be given orders.

*unless*

Still no, even with making an Order Template as a work-around.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2016, 11:07:04 AM by illrede »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11661
  • Thanked: 20383 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #95 on: February 13, 2016, 11:11:39 AM »
You may want to file off some serial-numbers on the titan nomenclature, there.

How feasible would it be to make an Ogre/Bolo/Continental Siege Machine version of this? (It's pretty much there I think, but for fluff, unless the mechanics allow for deployable PDCs.)

Do the mechanics allow for deployable PDCs?

*quick check with current game*

Not really, no. You can put one in a mothership of sufficient bay size but task forces with PDCs can't be given orders.

*unless*

Still no, even with making an Order Template as a work-around.

Yes, I probably should have some less specific names before release :)

 

Offline illrede

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • i
  • Posts: 55
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #96 on: February 13, 2016, 12:14:10 PM »
Make sure the Star Swarm gets these.

Kaiju. Kaiju.
 

Offline QuakeIV

  • Registered
  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 759
  • Thanked: 168 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #97 on: February 13, 2016, 12:35:50 PM »
Make sure the Star Swarm gets these.

Kaiju. Kaiju.

 

Offline TheDeadlyShoe

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1264
  • Thanked: 58 times
  • Dance Commander
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #98 on: February 13, 2016, 12:39:17 PM »
Titans look sweet.

1x CIWS shot @ Racial Fire control x 4?

Note: You can do quasi-deployable PDCs by shipping small prefab PDCs.  With a large invasion force you can complete PDC construction before the fighting is over, especially if it becomes a stalemate. 
 

Offline illrede

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • i
  • Posts: 55
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #99 on: February 13, 2016, 01:28:16 PM »
Titans look sweet.

1x CIWS shot @ Racial Fire control x 4?

Note: You can do quasi-deployable PDCs by shipping small prefab PDCs.  With a large invasion force you can complete PDC construction before the fighting is over, especially if it becomes a stalemate.

Did that (even invaded with a large number construction batalions), set too high a bar (shipped in an actual PDC instead of a glorified pillbox).
 

Offline backstab

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • b
  • Posts: 169
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #100 on: February 13, 2016, 02:17:04 PM »
oh God ... OGRE !
Move foward and draw fire
 

Offline Black

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 868
  • Thanked: 218 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #101 on: February 13, 2016, 03:05:53 PM »
Is there PDC Barracks equivalent for Titans?
 

Offline Gyrfalcon

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commander
  • ***
  • G
  • Posts: 331
  • Thanked: 199 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #102 on: February 13, 2016, 03:47:48 PM »
You mght want to more generically title them Scout, Battle and Siege Titans. It'll help keep GWS away.
 

Iranon

  • Guest
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #103 on: February 13, 2016, 05:00:52 PM »
I have already voiced my concerns about civilian alternatives to formerly military-only tech, but that may be just the tip of the iceberg. It adds more options to break an underlying assumption (that military ships present a logistics challenge), the bigger problem is probably the incentive to do so.

In 7.1, I already felt disposable ships (long maintenance life, use up/salvage/scrap when worn out) were often the more economically appealing option. With the changes to the maintenance system, it seems tempting to ignore that maintenance facilities even exist and put some unintuitive effort into recycling MSP.
 

Offline ardem

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • a
  • Posts: 814
  • Thanked: 44 times
Re: Change Log for v7.2 Discussion
« Reply #104 on: February 13, 2016, 06:36:39 PM »
WOOHOOO some ground combat love. Thanks Steve for adding more in the area.