shak4l 01

May be a good idea, we'll see how it works.

Dont scream You'll have it... You forgot to mention that all turrets are break-offs, brillant skin, custom hardpoint&projectile for SPHA turbolaser, some bones for point defence cannon hardpoints... I would say that this is best Warlords conversion done yet-but i didn't saw all warlords conversions.

Hmmm, next time try to outnumber them 5-1, lol Or get TIE defenders And be happy that JC didn't coded a quad (or dual-I forgot) turbolaser on K-wing (it had one ;D) Yep, E-wings should be faster than most of TIEs. And how about my idea, ??:

Oh, dual defeat? E-wings owning TIEs and K-wings owning SDs http://forums.filefront.com/images/smilies/pwned.gif I'll say that K-wing dont have hyperdrive so make it spawn ONLY from high tech capships (mediator,perphaps?)

Maybe you just don't protected your SSD efficiently enough However JC you may reduce SPEED of K-wings so they could be easier to shoot down.

Ok, let's end this tech discussion cuz i start to think about new pc,lol (about which i dream alltime anyway) I also did tweak the spawn times on the starships and starbases, to spawn faster - maybe this time should be increased as well. to help prevent lag, although space battles will be a little dull. - particularly for me who likes big space battles.. Well, i think that this ones from current alpha is quite OK... maybe reduce the number of squadrons on each MC85-they seem to carry to much. @Mr. Caine It's still in alpha stages... I guess you could apply for testing if you want.

Well, this happened also to E-wings (but in alpha3)-so I guess its pretty general problem. This bug happens ONLY when squadron is ordered to move after dogfight. I'll say that you may see it a bit worser than JC- but it will be still good, cause skins don't cause that much lag like shaders. However I'll suggest you to buy at least GF7600GT (not a most expensive card-but it is enough to play FoC with all detail ;D) Model itself is sweet @JC, HK-47 I would say that lags on galactic map may be CPU issue, not GPU- especially if your CPUs are pentium4/pentiumD. And it's not important that you both have dualcore CPUs, cause I bet that Alamo engine is not supporting dualcores and HT.

Wookiepedia says that it carried both greandes and missiles: http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/f/f7/JuggernautROTS.jpg On this image you can clearly see missiles I think you should give it PLEX missiles, not the T4-B's ones. Reduce damage a bit. And scale is OK, you cant make it realistic without a new model. http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/1962/venatorrender1rl5.jpg http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/3038/venatorrender2om7.jpg

Ok, but why concussion grenades instead of missiles? I think it should fire missiles. Rest is OK.

I was thinking about dual weapon change ability: weapon change #1: autoblasters/missiles weapon change #2 Rapid repeating laser cannon/Heavy laser cannon I hope coding such a thing is possible. And scale is correct I think some more renders: http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/8678/vsfiirenderll7.jpg http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/8564/isdiirendervg2.jpg http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/3562/mediatorrendertx3.jpg

Not the best idea, i think. At least give rebels more than 1 planet and make all other planets controlled by pirates. OR... maybe remove shadow of the empire campaign and replace it with campaign that have all planets featured in SotE game...of course no ZC in such a scenario. Yuck, forgot that EaW campaigns could be glitchy in FoC currently > YAY!http://forums.filefront.com/images/smilies/buttrock.gif!! But I suggest to remove point defense laser ability and maybe replace it with switch weapons (anti-personel lascannons/PLEX missiles), also scale it up to 1.2-1.3 (bigger may not work correctly on some maps )

In GC campaign "empire surrounded" I noticed 2 bugs: -Starbase model not appearing on endor-not the biggest bug, but... http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/6127/stationglitchxk3.th.jpg there is icons, build options, station level but model was not appearing. Don't know how is it in tactical mode. -In same GC, when I advanced tech level, and tried to steal tech from corelia, game crashed. I hope that was a random glitch ;D I played as rebels BTW if you're going to make HAVw A5, not A6, then don't rescale it, 1.0 is correct with B5 model.

Will do I was doing that for every in-game screen I took ;D It's quite useful. BTW TIE raptor is ugly Anyways, some renders: http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/3269/ewingrendertx4.jpg http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/7381/kwingrenderdy9.jpg http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/3902/vsdirenderrz3.jpg http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/7783/isd1rendereo9.jpg http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/7383/mc85rendersv4.jpg And Daft I see you liked that sig

Good idea, but it would be a bit hard to put a big load of weaponry of A6 to turrets on B5 > The true model of A6 with all of its turrets would be more than useful

and Do you realise that half of juggernauts height is wheels? I know that jugg is supposed to carry small vehicles- but in fact this was about speeders, not walkers. Also not entire size of juggs interior is cargo bay... :-\What you think about raising AT ST pip value to 3...to add some realism. And DT III- lower pip value to 1

Garrisoned...where? I know that with FoC patch 1.1 you can garrison TIE maulers in juggernaut, but AT ST wouldn't fit to it. Same as T1 B and T3 B :-\ This was done in veeery beginning, I might say We want to be a canon mod ;D And BFII shocktroopers... are there any model of it for EaW?

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/9761/venatorrendervm8.th.jpg Yes, that's a Venator we are using @JC Avenger will be cahnging this model a bit. Don't worry it will not be a big changes. Well, there is something called "TIE boarding craft"- but it would use model of TIE bomber. However, imperials would prefer to destroy ships instead of capturing them.

Well, Guri would be with Xizor And TX130T- I'm not sure that is a best idea- that's a clone wars vehicle, and 2-M was created in GCW. But if you are using same model- there's almost no difference. @Daft_vader Nice maps man

JC didn't you forgot about something?: ;D Those are some good-looking maps

Yeah, that is what it should look like

This rack looks promising But shouldn't TIEs be placed one after another, not side by side? And I think that LOW is still going on but they just dont have any site. BTW: HK-47 your maps are good- keep it up

And I think that using LOW props or any other stuff may require written pemission from Fosh ;D Also I doubt he would give permission to anyone who ask

That's good ideas Please check your PM on filefront ;D

And some more pics: Victory SD mkI Tector-class SD #1 Tector-class SD #2 Strike cruiser ISD Imperial escort carrier Quasar-fire carrier MC80A cruiser MC60 frigate K-wing #1 K-wing #2 MC85 These are made on GF6600

Interesting idea However only 3 fighters... :-\ Can't you make it a ground company of 2 squadrons- 3 fighters each? I'm sure that's possible.