Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Tree

Pages: [1]
1
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« on: October 18, 2017, 02:32:58 AM »
I'm a bit worried about Steve trying to tackle ground combat. It's a very difficult gameplay to design and balance. Something that rts and grand strategy games today still have difficulties to get right. For me the simple but straightforward ground combat aurora has is fine. I sincerely wish Steve delays this aspect of developement until everything else is ready
It'd be nice to get the Aurora port to C# first and keep the reworked ground combat for Aurora C# 2.0.
The following users thanked this post: Detros

2
Rye123's Fiction / Re: Second Outbound Flight - 2
« on: August 31, 2017, 07:36:44 AM »
I'm planning to add MSP storage to the fighter, so that'll help a lot too, thanks!

I'm not too used to energy weapons, what does the "6" in "6-0.05" mean?
6 is how much energy it needs to fire, 0.05 is how much energy its capacitor gathers per 5-second increment. So there it'd need 120 5-second increments, making it 600 seconds between shots overall, meaning you only need a power plant that gives out 0.05 energy per 5 seconds, not 6.
You can increase how much energy goes into the weapon/5-second by increasing your capacitor recharge rate tech. Using the reduced-sized modifier also greatly decreases how much energy it gets. I think you might have been too far in miniaturization there, but with a smaller power plant, you should be able to fit a laser closer to normal size.
The following users thanked this post: Rye123

3
C# Aurora / Re: Box Launcher Reloads
« on: July 19, 2017, 04:21:35 AM »
You should leave both in. Big ships can only be reloaded at (planetary?) maintenance facilities, and fighters only in hangars. I don't know about FACs. Both? Hangars only?

If you force me to use hangars, I'll just build a single one capable of taking one of my big warship (and on a civilian shipyard, since we're getting both civilian hangars and magazines), and instead of 5 hours of reload for all the ships' size 4 box launchers at maintenance facilities, it'll only take 30 minutes for each ship, less if the Fighter Ops bonus is fixed and works on bigger ships. And all that for just a few more clicks.
And if I have to reload my big ships with box launchers in hangars only, I might aswell tractor the hangar closer to the action and reload there and get back to in the fight faster, instead of having to send the ships back to a planet with both the missiles and enough maintenance facilities. Won't even be more logistically involved since I already always have tankers and colliers anyway, they'll just take care of the hangars instead of other ships, and this time the colliers will be massive civilian ships carrying a smegload of missiles for all the box launchers.
I won't ever even use regular launchers anymore and enjoy massive alpha strikes, this'll be fantastic.
The following users thanked this post: superstrijder15

4
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Ships
« on: June 29, 2017, 08:37:33 AM »
Home rule 1: Size 1 passive sensors are needed for navigational reasons.
All ships already sport a hidden strength 1 thermal and EM passive, though. Probably for navigational reasons too.
The following users thanked this post: Detros

5
Off Topic / Re: What would you consider an FAC?(other media)
« on: November 14, 2016, 10:38:57 AM »
But MF has waaaay to low firepower, after all its a fast and armed cargo freighter. FAC is suppose to be lightlky armoured but heavy armed craft with minimal crew.
I said ships its size. Obviously a freighter isn't going to be as armoured as a dedicated warship. But it's still big enough you can walk around and sleep in a bed, not in a cockpit.
The following users thanked this post: superstrijder15

6
Off Topic / Re: What would you consider an FAC?(other media)
« on: November 14, 2016, 05:12:02 AM »
The Millenium Falcon, or rather, ships its size in SW fit. It's a step above fighters and can fit a few weapons normally put on bigger ships. And don't forget SW runs in high automation and has droids, it'd probably have a bigger crew in Aurora.
The following users thanked this post: superstrijder15

7
Portable Launcher Utility / Re: Portable release - comments
« on: November 11, 2016, 03:21:26 AM »
These flags? UNSC in the bottom left for comparison. If so: here.



-
Updated links since Dropbox changed its rules.
The following users thanked this post: Lossmar

8
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: October 20, 2016, 12:57:28 AM »
I'm... honestly kind of opposed to this change. I think it's overcomplicating things for no real gain; I mean, just look at the last few pages for an example of how it complicates things.

I think things work fine as we are. We don't need a strict separation between what's in space and what's not.
Yes.
The following users thanked this post: Happerry, iceball3

9
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« on: October 19, 2016, 03:52:58 AM »
If we go the way that nothing powered and TN works in a gravity well, why do my ground units need TN materials to be built? Why do my buildings?
How come TN DSTS and mass drivers work? Surely these are definitely halfway into the liquid spacetime universe too (while the other buildings just might not be), and yet in a gravity well, meaning they shouldn't function?
And if fighters are separated, will TN fighters then be produced in orbital shipyards too? That's after all where TN ships are built, since they can't go down a gravity well at all.
But then we also have the problem of NPRs starting OOBs, they often have carriers and BB/BC much more massive than their shipyards (sometimes even bigger than all their naval shipyards put together). How did they come to be if they couldn't build them on the ground and send them up?

You should keep everything as is. Atmospheric fighters are more fit of being a ground unit with special rules than proper ships, I think. (I assume it'd be possible, since marines and combat engineers are fighting GU with special rules already.)
The following users thanked this post: palu

10
hxxp: ynea. futureware. at/cgi-bin/infinite_screen. pl
You can use this, and keep the windows at their normal height.  (A few buttons are missing in reduced height. )
The following users thanked this post: seronis

Pages: [1]