Lavo

Congratulations sloose!

That would be silly, and wouldn't work well. Personally I like to think of population as representing the overall economy and population data of the planet. With bombing, factories, schools, and other buildings are destroyed, which reduces the income, and thus tax flow, of that planet. "Building" population can represent getting better census data, or investing in factories/education/etc.

That GWG looks really nice. I like it! That sounds like a good idea for a shield generator. That would work. With it, I'll change how the Vong's "mines" work. Rather than an instant explosion, they will fly over to a ship and "eat" it, causing a large amount of damage over a slightly extended period of time. So while it won't be instant like a mine, the total damage will be more. I'm also thinking of putting multiple Grutchins in the Grutchin's mesh, to give each "mine" the appearance of a whole swarm being present when someone lays multiple mines. Thanks to the copy function in 3DS Max, this is possible and can be done, as I can make copies of the original and then merge them all into a single material.

I answered this on the moddb page already, so I'll copy/paste that answer and tweak it. The AI pretty much sucks on most pre-made maps, unless you start out with multiple planets. This is mainly due to the planets mod, which has colonization techs far down the Civilian tree. That and virtually all of the AI stuff is hardcoded and cannot be modified. Unfortunately there isn't any real fix for this, though the "Enlarged - Extra Planets" random maps greatly help alleviate this issue by giving players two additional planets and ensuring the first few planets you encounter either require the Arctic colonization tech or no tech at all to colonize it. However, I must admit that recently I noticed that what we previously thought the AI "used" in order to calculate how much of each frigate/cruiser it needed was incorrect. This has been recently fixed in my working version of the beta, and is awaiting the restoration of the SVN server to be added. These changes will be included in the next full release of SoGE, which will likely come about sometime in May; though this would not cause the issue(s) you have experienced. Which map(s) were you playing on when you experienced this behavior?

Thanks!

I'm wondering this as well; the restoration of the SVN is the primary factor in what will determine when the next full release will be.

Nope. Don't forget, in Sins logic, frigates and cruisers are one of the same. The Empire currently has two vacant slots; one of which is reserved for the Lambda shuttle (envoy). Well, depending on how the ability is structured, it can do ALL of these things. You can have it set up where a lucky hit does both a full disabling and a percentage based reduction, or separate chances for both, and many other things. I see where you are going with this however, and it's a good idea, but I want to put in some full disabling effects as well, mainly so that it isn't a duplicate of the ion abilities currently in place... Though one could argue the reason ion abilities exist in the first place is due to a lack of real ion cannons. Unfortunately, setting up a shield failure ability is virtually impossible. Due to how Sins is coded, ShieldFailure is only present as a finish condition for an ability. It is possible to do, and I've looked into it, but it is simply beyond my abilities to make it. In addition, unlike canon, shields are always up on every area of a ship in Sins, versus making it possible to create "holes" or "breeches" in a shield; such a lucky shot can arguably represent this, even if this is a bit of a drawing at straws argument. Ion cannons will not cause hull damage. This is final. They will cause greater shield damage than turbolasers however.

I'm aware of this. Ion cannons will have a chance of disabling the various components of the ship it is firing upon (engines, weapons, etc), but it will be a very, very small chance. Mainly as you will have dozens of cruisers/frigates firing upon a single target, and each one has a shot at disabling things. The ability will also have no stacking limit, so mass enough ships against a single target and it's screwed. The Torpedo Sphere capital ship. i.e. Get rid of the capital ship, turn it into a cruiser.

That's impossible.

Another thing that's come to mind recently... Originally, the Torpedo Sphere was put in because the Imperials lacked a mid-tier capital ship between the Tector and Executor. This role has since been taken up by the Allegiance, which is a far more suitable fit, as the Torpedo Sphere was not a combat vessel; it was a dedicated siege platform. In terms of SoGE, it has more in common with the Acclamator II than any other ship, in terms of it's role. It also, canonly speaking, wasn't that well armed for it's size. As such, I am considering turning it into a cruiser instead of leaving it as a capital ship.

I actually haven't used corvettes yet. :v Though from what I read they are mainly based around either their abilities and/or spamming them. Well, it's more that for some factions, they don't have space for more frigates. So I have no choice but to "add" the Envoy bits to something that already exists.

Thing is, abilities are semi-limited in what they could do. The tractor beam idea I got would basically be the frigate tractor beam already in place, except it would act like an actual tractor beam, instead of a buff that applies even when a ship is outside of tractor range of the casting vessel. This of course wouldn't be implemented in all vessels, only those who currently have a tractor beam ability and have an "open" weapon slot. Mmh, this is what spurned the idea to put in real ion cannons in the first place over a year ago, though their implementation has been delayed to due the numerous other things that SoGE needed at the time, plus the then 3 weapon slot limitation.

Awesome! It'll be added into my working version fairly quickly. Skytop Station could certainly work for the CIS. While I'm not actively looking for a replacement model, Skytop looks very nice! Eh, I don't think that such a platform would work well as a Hangar Defense, mainly as it's quite large. That and it doesn't look nearly as nice as what we already have. As for Rebellion, seeing as how corvettes are just over-glorified frigates, I was thinking of leaving them alone entirely. For Envoys, I was thinking of reusing/re-purposing some existing frigates, such as giving the Corellian Corvette, and Consular LCG the diplomatic relationship boost that Envoys have. I'd also make the Hardcell the CIS' envoy, and I have a Lambda shuttle model for use with the Imperials.

It is avaliable on our moddb page.

You can't shoot down missiles without going into abilities, which is a pain and is an area I'm really unfamiliar with. It might not even be a "real" PD shield like say, the Zann Consortium's corvette in EaW. Yeah, I've noticed that issue with anti-starfighter frigates, even if with a solid flak burst they get slaughtered. While this is partially mitigated with the frigate health boost I put in, once again pending SVN server restart, the supply cost decrease will do wonders in the end. I might reduce costs further, but as it is, you can get around 25 Lancers for the upkeep of a single ISD I. I agree that ship weaponry should be expanded, to an extent that's why I created this thread. The Carrack is a nice durable ship, now that it has 1400 shielding instead of 1000. As for point defense, as I mentioned earlier, it will primarily be a replacement for current absurdities that were made necessary by the three weapon limit. Also, earlier you mentioned possibly tractor beams their own weapon, after thinking about it I think that it might in fact be possible to do this, however it would require it's own weapon slot, which would limit it to ships that will only need 3-4 weapon slots, such as the Carrack. I believe it could be achieved by making it a beam weapon that causes no damage, but the ship has a passive OnWeaponFired ability that, when the beam hits it's target, causes a speed/acceleration decrease.

It's a teaser yup. I'd set aside a little piggy bank for Rebellion though, as there is absolutely no doubt that we will be porting over to it.

Yeah, for the ISDs I was planning to make their side cannons actual weapon slots in and of themselves. As for point defense, many ships, such as the Dreadnaught, ISD-I cruiser, and Venator, already have point-defense lasers (their weakest laser weapon). Others, such as the Executor/Viscount/World Ship, currently can fire their second turbolaser weapon at fighters. Making a PD laser slot would replace that absurdity. Even if a ship has point defense weaponry, it will not stop more than 1-2 squadrons. With hull research on the enemy's part this decreases further. Seeing as how anti-starfighter frigates, once the SVN comes back up, will cost very little supply (less than 1 supply per ship), a few of them can provide very good coverage for the maintenance cost of a single mid-tier cruiser. However, I do agree on the point that weapon specialization should be kept, though the question is, how much. One thing also to remember is, specialized ships, such as the Lancer and Broadside Cruiser, have unique abilities that other ships would not have, such as a powerful Flak Burst (or as I like to call it, the fly-swatter) and Siege Torpedoes. For example, even if other ships have some missile armament, they cannot give you the missile abilities dedicated missile ships can.

As I confirmed here, ships in Rebellion can have a maximum of 5 weapons. This is a very good thing, and will allow for several things, such as the proper implementation of point-defense systems on some ships. For others it means more weapons. But for nearly all of them, it brings up the question of what should be done for weapons in general? With five weapon slots, not only could one put in say, point defense lasers and ion cannons, but still have three slots left for different missile and turbolaser combinations. While this is clear cut for some ships (ex. Executor will get ion cannons and point-defense lasers), the question remains on what to do for some other ships, such as the ISD-II. This thread is for people, including myself, to brainstorm and discuss possible weapon configurations for ships of all kinds, for when we make the port over to Rebellion.

Refer to this thread for more info.

That's odd... Try running 2.0 first, without installing the 2.1 patch, and see if that works. If it does, then the 2.1 patch wasn't installed right. But seeing as how you've tried re-dling and re-installing, this might not be the issue, but it's the only thing I can think of. As well, if you have Trinity, run the Entrenchment exe directly, do not use Trinity's exe chooser thing.

Meshes are a breeze to convert to Rebellion; just need to add a single line at the beginning. I've noticed Rebellion to be quite RAM intensive, at least at the the beginning in comparison to Ent.

Warb, your Viscount is much better looking than any of the ships in Rebellion. The new shadows system finally does it justice. Encase anyone is wondering, the planet in the background is in fact NU's Terran. http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad33/Lavo_02/SoGE/ScreenShot_0.png http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad33/Lavo_02/SoGE/ScreenShot_1.png

As I said in the post above yours, due to the SWR server migration, the SVN is down currently.

Some people on 2.0/2.1 reported that they previously had issues with 1.051 but somehow updated to 1.053 fixed them. I cannot confirm this as I personally have a crappy netbook on 1.051 that is able to play the beta. Deleting the .svn folder won't put you back at square one as you will have downloaded some of the files; when you re-checkout it will version said files instead of re-downloading them entirely. Due to SWR's server migration the SVN is acting a bit odd/is down; it'll be back to full duty after the move.

Nabbed it. Will likely slap it in this coming week at some point.