Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Like others have said, Missiles are fast and guided, good for destroying fighters and damaging shields. Torpedos are slow, unguided and do lots of damage. Not all others. For the record, Star Wars "missiles" and "torpedoes" only differ in the power and size of their warheads. They all use the exact same propulsion systems (thus all move at the same speed) and the guidance units are interchangeable between them. If one missile/torp has better accuracy, it's because it was equipped with a better on-board tracker. Such (improved) trackers are cheap, compared to the cost of the missile itself. Let me give you a few examples: standard concussion missile: 8d10x2, 500cr heavy concussion missile: 9d10x2, 750cr standard proton torpedo: 9d10x2, 800cr heavy proton torpedo: 10d10x2, 2,000cr assault concussion missile: 9d10x5, 2,000cr marginal guidance system: (-5 accuracy) -200cr good guidance system: (+5 accuracy) +200cr amazing guidance system: (+10 accuracy) +500cr "Amazing" trackers are very hard to acquire. Han Solo had "good" trackers on the Millennium Falcon's missiles. X-wings have average trackers on their torps, and Y-wings have "marginal" trackers on their missiles. I assume that TIE bombers have average trackers. More info: Star Wars: Imperial Torpedoes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meethos Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Not all others. For the record, Star Wars "missiles" and "torpedoes" only differ in the power and size of their warheads. They all use the exact same propulsion systems (thus all move at the same speed) and the guidance units are interchangeable between them. If one missile/torp has better accuracy, it's because it was equipped with a better on-board tracker. Such (improved) trackers are cheap, compared to the cost of the missile itself. Let me give you a few examples: I stand corrected. Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I stand corrected. Thanks for the info. You're welcome. Note that I added a footnote link as you were replying. There's good info to be had on that page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 "Star Destroyers were able to survive half an hour of ship to ship battle with Mon Calamari battlecruisers in the Battle of Endor before they started to lose shielding. If we assume roughly one Star Destroyer per Mon Calamari cruiser and ignore fighters (in spite of the fact that they were carrying thermonuclear weapons), we can estimate that a Star Destroyer can survive many thousands of shots before shield failure. In the opening scene of ANH a Star Destroyer is seen firing roughly 25 shots in 5 seconds, for a time-averaged refire rate of 5 shots per second." -- from Star Wars: Imperial Shields Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLeeLee Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 i think you have done a great job but i think you need to change the laser texture in ground battle just seem a bit long and bright, space is great, once again great job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meethos Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 "Star Destroyers were able to survive half an hour of ship to ship battle with Mon Calamari battlecruisers in the Battle of Endor before they started to lose shielding. If we assume roughly one Star Destroyer per Mon Calamari cruiser and ignore fighters (in spite of the fact that they were carrying thermonuclear weapons), we can estimate that a Star Destroyer can survive many thousands of shots before shield failure. In the opening scene of ANH a Star Destroyer is seen firing roughly 25 shots in 5 seconds, for a time-averaged refire rate of 5 shots per second." -- from Star Wars: Imperial Shields Now that would be cool, having long drawn out battles. As it stands now, unless you have a huge fleet in orbit, battles are over done with way too quick (usually under 5 mins). But I suppose some people might find long battles boring, but than they can always play in FF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Not all others. For the record, Star Wars "missiles" and "torpedoes" only differ in the power and size of their warheads. They all use the exact same propulsion systems (thus all move at the same speed) and the guidance units are interchangeable between them. Actually if they all have the same propulsion system, but different mass(they vastly differ in size, so i assume they have different mass), they cant move at the same speed. Especially not in star wars physics. The tie bomber for example even has a stronger engine then a tie fighter, but he supposedly moves slower cause he is more heavy. Also i dont think a proton bomb has the same maneuverability and speed as a light concussion missile just because you stick another guidience system on it. It just makes no sense, mass and momentum exist in star wars too, otherwise a ISD could pace around like the millenium falcon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 It just makes no sense, mass and momentum exist in star wars too. The physics of Star Wars does not bear close scrutiny, so please spare me. (Lasers do not emit slow-moving, short-length, visible "bolts" in vacuum.) Could be worse, could be Star Trek ... PS - I majored in astrophysics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Well they actually explained that the visible bolts are tracer lines coming behind the real laser that you cant see looking from the side. So the damage is actually done before the tracer arrives, which can be suposedly seen in some scenes. Edit: Im not trying to apply real world physics, but even limited starwars physic have some rules, like bigger/heavier=slower. As shown by fast and nimble fighters, and slowmoving Capital ships. P.S. If ship weapons would supposedly be manned by real people it would make sense to use tracer bolts as it would be difficult to coordinate the fire without it. Edit2: As seen here http://www.stardestroyer.net/tlc/Nature/1stasteroid.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Well they actually explained that the visible bolts are tracer lines coming behind the real laser that you cant see looking from the side. So the damage is actually done before the tracer arrives, which can be supposedly seen in some scenes. Pardon me, but that explanation always struck me as bulls**t. (I've heard it before.) It's so contrived as to be laughable. While it makes sense from a targeting perspective, it makes even less sense from the standpoint of physics. And the few occasions when people drop before a bolt hits them are universally deemed to be continuity faults (bloopers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Excuse me but in the military we used tracer bolts all the time and it made perfect sense, it didnt seem to offend the physic one bit either. All you need to assume is its heated plasma or some such that doesnt travel at the speed of light. Besides we are getting offtopic again. I merely stated that it would make my eyes bleed to see large missile ordenance move at the same speed and have the same accuracy as small anti fighter missiles. Neither blasters or turbolasers offend me that way, cause i can make up a reasonably logical explanation for them for myself. Edit: Besides the only thing you would have to say about them really is that they are not lasers in the sense we know them, and that their function is unknown to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I know we're off-topic. Bear in mind you started it. As for invoking plasma somehow being fired from the same weapon, the argument is becoming more and more contrived. Give it up. If you really need a rationale for the missiles, try variable-thrust engines. It slows the lighter missiles down so that their (relatively stupid) onboard targeting computers can keep pace (it assumes that a missile that moves too fast won't be as accurate because the computer cannot process the incoming data fast enough). It's as contrived (I just invented it) as any other explanation for what's seen in Star Wars. Can we now please drop this fruitless discussion and return to topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 i think you have done a great job but i think you need to change the laser texture in ground battle just seem a bit long and bright, space is great, once again great job Thanks, because of the increased zoom the bolts got ridiculously thin at longer distances and therefore I raised the Z-scale in the Gameconstants.xml, that caused all the shots to stay bigger when you zoom out. Since the land camera has not the same zoom factor they appear even larger. Perhaps I can adjust that... or I'd have to resize all land based bolts. PS: Mornin' everyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 G'mornin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yes, please... no reality checks here... this is Star Wars, a fairy tale in space. Those lasers just look cool that's it, that's why George made them the way they are I don't think he ever cared about physics when he created Star Wars... those "explain the Hyperdrive" thing is a fanbase creation because many people (go check Star Trek, holy sh**!) need to have a logical explanation for how things work to make it "more real" for themselves... or more believable. While I personally do apply some basic physical rules to Star Wars (big = heavy/slow as you mentionned already rocketeer) I never cared much about the indepth stuff like how the engines work, or what kind of shields there are and why. I think this kinda takes some of Star Wars' "magic" or feel if you will. So... so much for that. How's 008 working for everyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haard Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Monin'! Is it a mod thingie or vanilla that the powered down crafts at Fondor are hostile (to rebel in conquest)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 How's 008 working for everyone? I assume you mean "latest_version.zip"? I preferred it when the zipfiles were version-stamped. It'd be better yet if there was a changelog/history file inside the archive. That way you could keep the same filename but we could easily tell what version it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I noticed that on some spacemaps the ships attack the asteroids if no other ships are near, would be kinda nice if they would blow them up, or stop doing that if they cant blow them up . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Oh... long battles. I had a great, long battle (skirmish) last night I had to cancel because it was getting too late. I always try my changes with 4 players on hard difficulty (2 vs 2). I was a little lazy at the beginning because I was still trying to figure out if my missiles are targetable by now (no luck ) and so I kinda lost the initiative relatively fast. I was trying to build a fortified mine in the center of the map (Battle over Coruscant) to have a kind of stronghold there (and some income of course!) when the first Acclamator already showed up. I didn't even built a Nebulon B yet so I was kinda caught flatfooted. He immediately scrapped my fortified mine which was still under construction and therefore very vulnerable. Damn. I of course lost my three X-Wing squadrons relatively fast thereafter to some pescy Tartans... Uh... that was not good. Venators those might help... so I dispatched my fresh wing of X-Wings to capture the merchant dock (which they did). Meanwhile there were two Acclamators closing on my level 2 base with about 5 bomber squadrons behind them. My mining base close to the space station was quickly eradicated... damn. Okay I didn't worry that much about my base since it could withstand two acclamators for a while until it gets upgraded. My X-Wings had reached and captured the dock in the meantime, luckily without much resistance, the Tartan fleet was also closing on my space station... the Empire probably thought I'm easy prey now. 7500c for a good old Venator Star Destroyer... ouch. Okay... waited a few seconds until I got that sum and ordered my first Venator (yay!). A long wait (and sweaty hands) later - my base lost its first hard point to bomber attacks - I could call my Venator in to lift the siege. I let it jump in a good bit behind my base to avoid fire during its vulnerable phase right after the jump. Phew... all went fine and he engaged the first Acclamator at full speed with the turbolasers searching for targets. Ignoring the Tartans he slowly crept towards torpedo range with the first Acclamator, both, the Acclamators and the Venators shields were already battered from the heavy turbolaser bombardements but at least the fighter wings of the Venator cleared the enemy bombers and thus the Venator had some badly needed advantage since the next salvo of missiles was already closing in... that's gonna hurt. It seemed like eternity until my Venator finally crept into range of its heavy torpedo tubes... fire! It was a great sight to see those 8 heavy torpedos head towards it's target... Oh well... it's getting longer than expected... long story short. It was a great battle and it took quite a while until I managed to build an MC80 which I dispatched to secure a mining asteroid. I was slowly getting the growing enemy force away from my base again and without this Venator I would have surely lost. I lost another Venator to a Victory though which surprised me while it just crippled another Acclamator (they spawn like mushrooms) and was left with almost no shield. The MC80 was also killed by a bunch of Acclamators later which really bothered me... *grumbles*. Anyway... the whole battle surely lasted over 30 minutes... and burning hulks were floating around while half burned spaceships were navigating through the wrecks and fleeing ships to take up the flag and drive the enemy further back. Just great Mmh... sorry... nothing useful to say right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 I assume you mean "latest_version.zip"? I preferred it when the zipfiles were version-stamped. It'd be better yet if there was a changelog/history file inside the archive. That way you could keep the same filename but we could easily tell what version it is. The version stamped file's still there if you look at the first post. I just don't have the enthusiasm to change my sig everytime I release a new version I'll see if I can include a readme with the apropriate version number at least. But writing a changelog with so many things changeing all the time really isn't fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Sorry, I hadn't looked at post #1 in a while. My bad. The changelog in #1 is good enough for me (and you could just stick that into the archive as a text file if you want). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketeer Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Hehe i told you those acclamators mean buisness The missiles they use also have quite superior range. Btw i just noticed(while toying with firerestrictions) that the mc 80 has no fighter defense lasers. How about giving him some, and in turn restricting his turbolasers to dont fire at small fry? Edit: ups he seems to have anti fighter cannons, but he wasnt using them ... strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yea, sometimes they don't use them until you tell them to attack the fighters directly. Not sure why... The Acclamators are sure tough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adonnay Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Monin'! Is it a mod thingie or vanilla that the powered down crafts at Fondor are hostile (to rebel in conquest)? I didn't change any planet's parameters. So I suppose it's vanilla. I noticed that on some spacemaps the ships attack the asteroids if no other ships are near, would be kinda nice if they would blow them up, or stop doing that if they cant blow them up I just looked at the spaceprops and they should actually be not a viable target... weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tal Odo-ki Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I just looked at the spaceprops and they should actually be not a viable target... weird. My ships tend to shoot asteroids after all enemy ships are gone and the mission has been won, or on the way to a waypoint if there's nothing else to shoot at in range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.