Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Alan Bolte on January 11, 2005, 03:22:13 pm
-
Well, it seems everyone I talk to has a slightly different idea of how things are working at present, what flags are available, etc. I PM'd Bobboau because Mantis lists him as taking care of something relevant, but he didn't seem to know much more than I did, and suggested I post here.
Here's what I think I know:
By default in the code, beams totally ignore shields.
The command line option -nobeampierce overrides any flags and the default setting to make beams have to take down shields before they can start damaging hull, just like any other weapon.
The weapon table flag "no pierce shields" does the above for a single beam weapon.
A mission flag, "pierce shields", can be set to make any weapon pierce shields. This overrides "no pierce shields" on beams, but not the command line option.
Not so sure about:
Some say that by default beams ignore shields below a certain number of shield points and hit shields above that number. I find this suspect because no one knows what that number is.
Other sources indicate that default is for damage to be done simultaneously to shields and to hull. This may not be the code default, but a default mission-making option in FRED.
Also, do any of you know of any code that could make a specific ship (mission or ship table option, whatever) invulnerable to shield-piercing weapons (much like -nobeampierce does for all ships), or how difficult this would be to implement if I could rope some coder into making up a special build for a mod? I ask this last question because I want to know if it's worth bothering to ask anyone about doing it.
-
I've often suggested that once the Tertiary systems are incorporated, there should be provision for allowing for a craft's shield generator to be a tertiary, allowing for upgrading a craft to a better unit later in a campaign, and allowing said shield systems to be given more flexible capablities. This would include a pierce resistance factor of 1 to 10, while there would be an addition to weapons table entries as a pierce factor of the same range. Pierce factor would work in place of an previous weapon flags for this purpose, and be infinitely more variable. Put simply, a weapon has to have a pierce factor greater than the resistance factor of the shield on a target ship, in order to penetrate. Weapons with a greater pierce factor would consume more energy, so it would be less efficient if you use one of them, when the enemies you expect to face have low pierce resistance shielding. It puts a little more strategy and planning behind chosing your loadout and equipment before a mission.
Later!
-
Originally posted by Alan Bolte
Here's what I think I know:
By default in the code, beams totally ignore shields.
The command line option -nobeampierce overrides any flags and the default setting to make beams have to take down shields before they can start damaging hull, just like any other weapon.
The weapon table flag "no pierce shields" does the above for a single beam weapon.
A mission flag, "pierce shields", can be set to make any weapon pierce shields. This overrides "no pierce shields" on beams, but not the command line option.
All correct.
Not so sure about:
Some say that by default beams ignore shields below a certain number of shield points and hit shields above that number. I find this suspect because no one knows what that number is.
Other sources indicate that default is for damage to be done simultaneously to shields and to hull. This may not be the code default, but a default mission-making option in FRED.
Both are false.
Also, do any of you know of any code that could make a specific ship (mission or ship table option, whatever) invulnerable to shield-piercing weapons (much like -nobeampierce does for all ships), or how difficult this would be to implement if I could rope some coder into making up a special build for a mod? I ask this last question because I want to know if it's worth bothering to ask anyone about doing it.
I don't know of any such code.