Topic: OP+ corrections thread (Read 73877 times)

jimmi7769 · « **Reply #100 on:** May 24, 2003, 11:00:06 pm »

Quote:

Next question: Looking through the shiplist, I am once again confused by the term BCH when applied to the roms. What, exactly, is the rom BCH? Other than the KHK, which is literally supposed to replace a destroyed DN, or a KCN, which in SFB is a conjectural design since the klinks could never spare a C7 for any reason. The Firehawk-A is listed as a BCH. Two S torps and two F torps, plus 4 ph-3 and 5 ph-1 don't normally add up to a BCH. I went and checked advanced missions (my rom stuff is limited to this and basic) and it's listed as a CA. However, it also lists the KHK as a CA.

I get the feeling that there are errors here, but I don't have the reference material to correct.

There is much debate over this topic.

In short the Roms only true BCH is the KCR.

In SFB the Novahawk was considered a BCH but it had a working cloak, the SFC one doesn't.

Most Roms consider the KHK a BCH, but I think it's really a step above the other BCH's I mean it's got 6 more power than a C7 and that should just be illeagal.

But, realisticaly, I the the Gorn BCH is superior to the KCR(cause of the lack of offensive D-Racks) so there we are again, the Roms really don't have one.

Mog · « **Reply #101 on:** May 24, 2003, 11:30:21 pm »

Mace, having flown the G-BCH and the KCR a lot, in a battle between the 2 I'd go for the KCR. Better power curve, turn rate, and imho, better firing arcs on the ph1s.

The_Infiltrator · « **Reply #104 on:** May 25, 2003, 01:45:40 am »

In the absence of info to the otherwise, yes. It seems that checking available info, the roms don't have a BCH, or one like everyone else.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #105 on:** May 25, 2003, 10:14:19 am »

Luc, FYI the Tech Wars server is using a similar breakdown for the Rom hawks and BCHes, in case you see pricing differences.

FireSoul · « **Reply #106 on:** May 25, 2003, 10:24:45 am »

could you paste a copy of what you did at your end?

FireSoul · « **Reply #107 on:** May 25, 2003, 11:42:56 am »

Note to self:

Someone reported to me that lyran PFs were short-changed by 1 point of power.
Hm. I could always do a check-up..

jdmckinney · « **Reply #109 on:** May 25, 2003, 05:17:24 pm »

Some Rom classification changes from OP+ specs (some may be the same, may have missed others):

FFH-A: CA (all other races' CFs are CA in the Tech Wars list, and not restricted)
FFH-K: CA
FHA: CA
FHF: CA
FHK: CA
KCR: BCH
KCRF: BCH
KHK: BCH
NHK: NCA (some other races' cruisers were also put here, since NCA on Tech Wars is more expensive than CA)
RGK: CA
RHK: NCA
SUA: CA
SUK: CA

Hope that helps.

FireSoul · « **Reply #110 on:** May 26, 2003, 01:53:55 am »

Note to self:
The H-IC is way too powerful as it is, Playing it on TechWars proved it easily, aside from the crap that I've recieved from MadElf about it.

.. looking at the BPV of the ship, it has a EPV of 35 points higher. Increasing the BPV by 35 eems like a good way to help balance the ship a bit.

Request: Nomad, if you read this..
.. please change the IC's hulltype on techwars.. and up the BPV by 35 on the server side's shpilist too, while at it..
It's only 16-17K as it is, and is completely OTT. A ship like that should be priced as a CVA .. which is "DN".

-- Luc

The_Infiltrator · « **Reply #111 on:** May 26, 2003, 02:16:11 am »

The problem, IMO, is the class listing. What SFC2.NET has done for the last several servers is take all carriers and assign them to the base hull class they come from. That makes the Uhlan a destroyer, a Trooper a Light Cruiser, and the Iron Duke and Chancellor dreadnaughts. It's silly that a Uhlan might have nearly the same cost as an Iron Duke.

There is no listing for "Carriers" on the master ship chart; it lists the fed CVS as a heavy cruiser for example. I say follow this lead.

Cleaven · « **Reply #113 on:** May 26, 2003, 04:56:50 am »

Perhaps it's time to acknowledge that the Taldren shiplist is only structured with SL in mind. D2 play is an afterthought. But SL is dead and D2 is not.

FireSoul · « **Reply #114 on:** May 26, 2003, 05:04:50 am »

I strongly disagree!
There's more to standard multiplayer than SL!

Cleaven · « **Reply #115 on:** May 26, 2003, 06:51:43 am »

Exactly, which makes the SL bias an even worse outcome.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #117 on:** May 26, 2003, 08:01:14 am »

Luc, I'll change the IC/IC+ stats today. Note: most (all?) of the CVAs were classed as CARRIER when I went through to do reclassification. They should all be adjusted to DREADNOUGHT if you haven't already done so. The only reason the IC wasn't changed was because it had no heavy weapons. I was rushed, and obviously some things slipped through. All Xes were also classed up a notch or two to make them cost closer to their effectiveness.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #119 on:** May 26, 2003, 03:28:33 pm »

I'm not at all familiar with the requirements and limitations of scripting. Can't you call carriers by grabbing ships with a special role of "V" rather than by CARRIER class? If so, the class could be changed.

News:

Topic: OP+ corrections thread (Read 73877 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

jimmi7769

Mog

jimmi7769

FireSoul

The_Infiltrator

jdmckinney

FireSoul

FireSoul

The_Infiltrator

jdmckinney

FireSoul

The_Infiltrator

FireSoul

Cleaven

FireSoul

Cleaven

FireSoul

jdmckinney

FireSoul

jdmckinney

Topic: OP+ corrections thread (Read 73877 times)