Topic: OP+ Corrections Thread: as of version 3.0

[jimmi7769]

Quote:


Note.
For the OMH and the MGH, 1 of the sets of modules is hardwelded as a K module. That settles down the variants by quite a bit.
- E,K   (PFT, Combat)
- G,K  (Commando, Combat)
- M,K (PLaD, Combat)
- K,K (Combat)
 

Yeah, but they said that about the heavy hawks as well.  And we see how that has changed.

[FireSoul]

Quote:

Quote:


Note.
For the OMH and the MGH, 1 of the sets of modules is hardwelded as a K module. That settles down the variants by quite a bit.
- E,K   (PFT, Combat)
- G,K  (Commando, Combat)
- M,K (PLaD, Combat)
- K,K (Combat)
 

Yeah, but they said that about the heavy hawks as well.  And we see how that has changed.  

I think the heavy hawk variants had the modules hardwelded too.. but into that variant's form.
Anyways. That means a few DNs can appear in the shiplist for Rommies.

[jdmckinney]

Quote:

Quote:
FS, I think Fluf found some issues with drone placement on X-ships:

Quote:
Both the CCX and the BCX have the B and C racks in the wrong place. The C rack needs to be on the top as all the other ships are done. Without this, we cannot reload our C rack in mission, by making and canceling a SP and it becomes useless.

I didn't quite understand the problem, but I wanted to make sure it got pointed out to you before your next release.  

I need more info .. what's this about "on top"?  

I wish I knew. I only copied and pasted what Fluf wrote -- it's not a problem I'm familiar with. Perhaps you could PM or email Fluf for a better picture of the problem?

[jimmi7769]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
FS, I think Fluf found some issues with drone placement on X-ships:

Quote:
Both the CCX and the BCX have the B and C racks in the wrong place. The C rack needs to be on the top as all the other ships are done. Without this, we cannot reload our C rack in mission, by making and canceling a SP and it becomes useless.

I didn't quite understand the problem, but I wanted to make sure it got pointed out to you before your next release.  

I need more info .. what's this about "on top"?  

I wish I knew. I only copied and pasted what Fluf wrote -- it's not a problem I'm familiar with. Perhaps you could PM or email Fluf for a better picture of the problem?  

From just looking at the list through shipedit I can glean this from the above.  If you go to the above 2 ships and look at the weapons page the B racks a listed first before the C racks.  On most other Mirak ships the C racks are listed first.  that must make the difference on how the 'reload' effect takes place when you cancel a scatterpack.

[FireSoul]

Ok. Let's see what I can do for these:

Z-FFR -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-NCD -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-NCD -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-BC+ -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-CVS+ -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-DN -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-DN+ -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-DNH -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-CVAR -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-CVAR -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-BB -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-BBV -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-BBV -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-BCX -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-CCX -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-XFG -- M rack found after other drone rack
Z-XFG -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-XDD -- M rack found after other drone rack
Z-XDG -- M rack found after other drone rack
Z-XSC -- M rack found after other drone rack
Z-XCB -- C rack found after other drone rack
Z-XCB -- C rack found after other drone rack

[FireSoul]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Firesoul, if there are any models in  here  that you like, I can get you the model. Permissions are another matter...

On the MegaHawk, I don't have R7 (Metro Detroit, and I can't find a shop that carries SFB anymore ) so i don't know what material ADB gave to work with, but what I do know is that it's a DN hull that takes 4 SparrowHawk modules. I envisioned 3 basic variants; MHK-KK (LL would be better but would Command put that much Mojo in one hull?), MHK-EK (a PFT/combat platform), & MHK-MK (for use vs Hydrans & Mirak). JK, EM, EJ, KF,JM, FF, JJ .... variants might be interesting, but without guidelines from ADB to work from, I don't see how we could accurately calculate a BPV for a ship this far from the base version, and while they might make good fleet elements, would they be both practical for use in SFC and something that the Empire would really produce?  

Back to this:

I did some research, and it seems that there are some restrictions to which modules can be used. However, these following are legal in SFB, and possible under SFC. Skipped are scout (useless), repair (useless) and cargo (bleh).  Note that no plasmas would be added/removed.

1- R-DMH (DemonHawk) (Conjectural, so is "R" and new variants will be "R")
Modules: 2x matching sparrowhawk, 1x skyhawk
- G,A (commando, combat)  (SPECIAL)
- G,G (commando, commando)  (SPECIAL)
- G,C (commando, PFTender)  (SPECIAL)
- E,A (PFT, combat)
(E,C is legal, but can't be done in SFC)
- E,G (PFT, commando) (SPECIAL)
- K,A (combat, combat) (**Current config**)
- K,G (combat, commando) (SPECIAL)
- K,C (combat, PFT)

2- R-MGH (MegaHawk) (Conjectural. Will be "R")
Modules: 2 sets of matching sparrowhawk modules.
- E,K / K,E  (PFT, Combat)
- E,G / G,E (PFT, Commando)
- E,M / M,E (PFT, PlasmaD)  
- G,G (Commando, Commando)
- G,K / K,G (Commando, Combat)
- G,M / M,G (Commando, PlaD)
- M,M (PLaD, PLaD)
- M,K (PLaD, Combat)
- K,K (Combat)

3- R-OMH (OmniHawk, Light DreadNaught) (Conjectural, Will be "R")
Same as MGH's.

That's a lot of DNs.
-- Luc
 

Note.
For the OMH and the MGH, 1 of the sets of modules is hardwelded as a K module. That settles down the variants by quite a bit.
- E,K   (PFT, Combat)
- G,K  (Commando, Combat)
- M,K (PLaD, Combat)
- K,K (Combat)
 

OOof. Took a while, but completed this. All are "R".

[FireSoul]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
FS, I think Fluf found some issues with drone placement on X-ships:

Quote:
Both the CCX and the BCX have the B and C racks in the wrong place. The C rack needs to be on the top as all the other ships are done. Without this, we cannot reload our C rack in mission, by making and canceling a SP and it becomes useless.

I didn't quite understand the problem, but I wanted to make sure it got pointed out to you before your next release.  

I need more info .. what's this about "on top"?  

I wish I knew. I only copied and pasted what Fluf wrote -- it's not a problem I'm familiar with. Perhaps you could PM or email Fluf for a better picture of the problem?  

From just looking at the list through shipedit I can glean this from the above.  If you go to the above 2 ships and look at the weapons page the B racks a listed first before the C racks.  On most other Mirak ships the C racks are listed first.  that must make the difference on how the 'reload' effect takes place when you cancel a scatterpack.  

Done.

[FireSoul]

Note to self:

I've completed the correction requests up to this post.

[jdmckinney]

Quote:

H-MKI, H-IRC -- Fixed.
H-CVE: Agreed. Fixed.
K-G2, G2R -> Fixed. ph3->ADD
K-G2C and variants: check it out, it's wrong. Wrong shields, Aft Hull, number of weapons, # shuttles max..  .. anyways, it's fixed too.  

Was just checking through Jeff's shiplist and wanted to verify G2s. Did you see the following?

K-G2 should not have Ph3, and should have 1xADD6, shield 4 should be 9 boxes
K-G2R should be 50 BPV, should not have Ph3, and should have 1xADD12, shield 4 should be 9 boxes

In other words, the BPV, ADD type, and rear shield value all check out now?

This also affects the WG2 and WG2+, which should not have Ph3s.

[FireSoul]

I may have forgotten the WG2s. I will work on those later. Thanks.

[FireSoul]

Please note that the GCM's break model causes a CTD when a GCM variant explodes. I have redone the break model at my end with success. I guess it's only by playing that these things will be discovered.

-- Luc

[Sten]

Firesoul

I know you don't want to mess with the Taldren Ships.

But can you look at the Lyran PFE one time and remove 1 distruptor from the PFE so it only has 3.

I have been watching the PFE after it fires its first volley and the PFE has a problem even charging the 4th disruptor let alone ever getting the ESG charged.

After the first volley power is scarce.  

[FireSoul]

Quote:
Firesoul

I know you don't want to mess with the Taldren Ships.

But can you look at the Lyran PFE one time and remove 1 distruptor from the PFE so it only has 3.

I have been watching the PFE after it fires its first volley and the PFE has a problem even charging the 4th disruptor let alone ever getting the ESG charged.

After the first volley power is scarce.  

Have you tested this?
I've noticed the PFEs dropping to speed 8.3 or so after a volley (past experience). A removal of 1 Dizzy would probably speed it up by .. 12.. making it a speed 20 reloading PF. (not bad)

[Sten]

Quote:

Quote:
Firesoul

I know you don't want to mess with the Taldren Ships.

But can you look at the Lyran PFE one time and remove 1 distruptor from the PFE so it only has 3.

I have been watching the PFE after it fires its first volley and the PFE has a problem even charging the 4th disruptor let alone ever getting the ESG charged.

After the first volley power is scarce.  

Have you tested this?
I've noticed the PFEs dropping to speed 8.3 or so after a volley (past experience). A removal of 1 Dizzy would probably speed it up by .. 12.. making it a speed 20 reloading PF. (not bad)

Well yea. Actually I would like to see the PFE with only 2 disruptors and add in 1 phaser-3 LS and another RS. But with all the flames lately I looked at a more modest proposal.

The 4th Disruptor has a hard time getting charged after the first volley. The ESG forget about it.

So truth be told Dizzy's PFL from SG3 is what inspired me.

 Now to avoid any additonal hot dicussions about added internals and what not.  I came to two options to improve the power curve without adding aditional power to the PFE.

Option 1) Remove 1 disruptor frees up 2 points of power. The PFs AI seems to function better with the extra power. The AI will put power into ECM, and will attempt to charge the ESG.

Option 2) Remove two disruptors add 1 phaser-3 to the LS and add 1 phaser-3 RS. Again this version can defend itself but leads to the I can't kill em easy crowd getting bent out of shape.  This is the version that I feel might cause people to get bent out of shape.

You hit the nail on the head with the PFE. Once its fired its volley the power breakdown looks as follows: 8 points into 4 disruptors, 3 points into phasers, 1.5 point into housekeeping leaves you with 2.5 points for movement.

 Max Speed speed 12-13 while charging this is why the 4th disruptor has a devil of a time charging much less the ESG.

 

[FireSoul]

I don't mind removing 1 dizzy on the PFEs. I recognize the AI's stupidity.
Know that the BPV of the PFE will be lowered. (how much is 1 dizzy worth?)

[Rod O'neal]

I've always thought that the L-PFE is WAY overgunned. I agree with the 2xdisr, 2xPh3 version. Stock it outguns many frigates and is s-l-o-w. Personally, I like the L-PFL specs, which is much better defensively, and is more inline with the firepower of a vessel this size.  

[FireSoul]

Quote:
I've always thought that the L-PFE is WAY overgunned. I agree with the 2xdisr, 2xPh3 version. Stock it outguns many frigates and is s-l-o-w. Personally, I like the L-PFL specs, which is much better defensively, and is more inline with the firepower of a vessel this size.    

Remember that the L-PFE was a Taldren invention. Removing it would probably not help this project (I tend to preserve Taldren-made ships). Adding ph3s to it changes it too much to my taste. I much prefer the simple removal of a single disruptor for power balance.

That .. thing.. doesn't need more ph3s for defense.

[Sten]

FireSoul,

At this time just drop the entire PFE issue. Its not a good time it appears.

Anyhow as I drove into to work. That old beta tester mind kicked in and I thought of a possible work around.

Just need to test my ideal out when I get home tonight.

Since the PFs in OP do not launch semi-hot as they do in EAW. Its time to develope different tactics again.

If you would sir forget about what I posted.

[FireSoul]

FYI,

.. check out some of the ships I've made models for:
 http://208.57.228.4/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB11&Number=146540&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=31&fpart=1


I don't have permission to the modify part of his 'modify and/or distribute' agreement of his material. the author agreed on distribution as part of my mod some time ago via email, but the modification part only came recently when I discovered my 3ds legs.

..so.. maybe these won't make the next version.. or maybe these will. Dunno yet.
-- Luc

 

[jdmckinney]

Can you check the name of the R-SNE in the specs? I think it reads Snipe-B Battle Frigate, but should be (?) Snipe-E Escort (I'm guessing, since I don't have my books with me). If this does need to be changed, does the strings.txt etc. need to be updated?