Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Fozzy on May 12, 2002, 11:06:25 am
-
I have just came up with a idea for some secondary beams, the beams are normal beams but they are limited to a certian ammount of units (Cargo Size) each one of these units take a certain ammount of seconds to be used up. (not including warm up and warm down.)
Tech:
Due to the recent devlopments into the elementry matter reactors, the Vasudans have applied there beam making know how to devloping a fighter mounted reactor capable of powering a small antifighter beam "Aurora". The beam is limited only by the reactors power supply which is initialy 30 seconds of fireing time, and can be recharded by the newley modified support craft.
I think this will be a popular choice so if somone could develope this idea I and others would apreciate it.
8-)
-
Im really starting to get sick of hearing about people wanting fighter beams... I mean sure they are cool, but thats not really what fighters were meant for. Beams are big hulking weapons that are supposed to be used on big hulking capital ships, while small, manuverable fighters were meant to cause small amounts of damage while evading the big hulking weapons on big hulking ships. Lets not start mixing up the roles of each type of craft here.
-
Originally posted by vadar_1
Im really starting to get sick of hearing about people wanting fighter beams... I mean sure they are cool, but thats not really what fighters were meant for. Beams are big hulking weapons that are supposed to be used on big hulking capital ships, while small, manuverable fighters were meant to cause small amounts of damage while evading the big hulking weapons on big hulking ships. Lets not start mixing up the roles of each type of craft here.
for once, we agree (gasp, what a thought ;)) fighters just werent meant for certain weaponry, flak, beams, and meson bombs. I dunno how many people have said "Lets make a new secondary, a meson bomb/torpedo", no slight against anyone with ideas like these, but fighters werent meant to be as powerful as capital ships, and for that matter, frieghters werent meant to be able to take on cruisers. Over-arming ships screws up the balance too much.
-
well were not mounting BFreds of fighters, the beams are like 1/4 as powerful as an AAA beam, there fighter sized, they probly do less hull damage/second than most current fighter weapons
-
I worked out something called a beam laser, but when I initially made it, I used the same technique as the Babylon boys.
Has the source code been adjusted to make proper beams?
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
well were not mounting BFreds of fighters, the beams are like 1/4 as powerful as an AAA beam, there fighter sized, they probly do less hull damage/second than most current fighter weapons
Then whats the point? Beam weapons were meant to be fired while the ship is travelling at maybe 15-20 m/s tops, not 90m/s while in a full swing turn and a barrel roll. Besides, if the targeting laser has told us anything, its that beams are hard as hell to aim while moving, just drop the damn idea.
-
I think your all missing the point of this idea. What has been proposed is that we make one-shot beams that are secondaries, so they're not overly powerful, replace missiles in some situations and have a very long range. You'd make them non-shield penetrating, but since they're instant hit they'd be very useful and since you only have a limited amount they couldn't be overly powerful. I think this is a great way of doing it without throwing out the game balance.
-
I'm after the same idea as Minbari fighters. Except my fighters are better, and the beams are yellow. :)
-
I like the beams, there only realy usfull up close, they add a new element to game play,
I don't see why you dislike them so much
-
wanna know what i think? i think vBB shoulda stayed so all the newbies and trolls would stay there and not come here
-
Are you calling me a troll? :mad:
-
I don't think he was calling you a troll
-
I think fighter beams have a great place beside standard pulse weapons. There are problems that need to be sorted out:
- shield penetration
- damage / range issues
- visually
However, its doable from what I'm told and it adds another type of weapon to play with. Nobody is suggesting putting mega powerful weapons on a fighter. That'd be as stupid as a BFRed on every turret the Fenris has.
And any problems with aim would be something that the player would have to deal with....there are ways to balance this effect/weapon out to make it beneficial.
-
Originally posted by LtNarol
wanna know what i think? i think vBB shoulda stayed so all the newbies and trolls would stay there and not come here
:yes:
Not pointing at anyone in particular.... *cough*
-
no frenzy, i wasnt refering to you
-
Ok cut this into two ideas going separate ways:
The first is what was originally suggested and I expanded on - beams as secondary ammo that give you a single shot each (and you wouldn't have many)
The second are 'beam bombs' which you shoot and travel like bombs towards a target but rather then bombing they shoot a beam at a certain range (a pretty powerful one, but not more damage then a Helios)
-
why,
beams are energy weapons they have emiters and use reactor power, they arnt bombs and there isn't a limeted number of shots any one can have (unless you hold it down too long and the heat sinks melt)
I actualy think it would work better if fighter/bomber mounted beams were controled as a seperate weapon system entierly, with it's own set of locking systems (right now I'm thinking, instant lock, something like aspect lock, and dumbfire ie strait) and power system, also these could be controled through turrets thus could be destroyed
however I think getting a simple dumbfire beam that comes out of the primary banks would be good also
-
Originally posted by vadar_1
Im really starting to get sick of hearing about people wanting fighter beams... I mean sure they are cool, but thats not really what fighters were meant for. Beams are big hulking weapons that are supposed to be used on big hulking capital ships, while small, manuverable fighters were meant to cause small amounts of damage while evading the big hulking weapons on big hulking ships. Lets not start mixing up the roles of each type of craft here.
I gotta agree. Beams kind of lose their mystique if every ship and its dog has one, no matter how toned down they are.
-
As I said earlier, Minbari fighter weapons are my idea of fighter mounted weaponry. Besides, if the human race gets to that level of technology, our fighter weapons will look like that.
-
I don't see the point here anyway. If people don't like it, just don't read the thread and don't use fighter beams, m'kay?
-
Originally posted by vadar_1
Then whats the point? Beam weapons were meant to be fired while the ship is travelling at maybe 15-20 m/s tops, not 90m/s while in a full swing turn and a barrel roll. Besides, if the targeting laser has told us anything, its that beams are hard as hell to aim while moving, just drop the damn idea.
Yeah, but it's fun as hell to try with the Thor, the modified targeting laser in SHaS. Just get behind the Basilisk, aim your crosshairs, and let it rip!
-
Why not have every kind of weapon possible? I'm looking forward to crazy stuff like beam bombs in a few years.
-
If something is relatively easily doable with the source (such as the fighter-beams) than it may as well be enabled. If someone is worried about balance issues, then only play missions/mods that don't have fighter beams.
Even if nothing else, there are mods that WILL have use for beam weapons on fighter (Babylon Project etc.), so there's no reason to not make it possible for modders/FREDders to do.
--TurboNed
-
I'm looking forward to crazy stuff like beam bombs in a few years.
Thats standard practice in the Honor Harrington series of books :)
-
I, for one, think we shouldn't just make secondaries that act as primaries, but give primaries their own size limitations... I mean, what competition is there, really, when you can have a choice between an equal number of Kaysers and Subaches?
-
hmmm, they're energy weapons?
i think the idea of possible limits on primaries is a good idea, particularly the maxim as it is a mass accelerator, at the same time, i think the option should be available to make come primaries limitless.
-
Hey, Lt. I assume you love Wraith Squadron! :D:D
-
hey heres a good idea, why dont we just give fighters super-ultra weapons that kills everything on the screen, its not like we havn't ruined fs2 already with your incredably stupid ideas.
Why dont you just mount a Shivan BFRed (now it seems like its a cliched term, thanks fellahs, I dont even need to tell you what type of weapon it is.) on an Ursa. Theres your damn fighter beam, its unrealistic, but who cares?
calm blue oceans... calm blue oceans...
-
have you played the fighter beams I made?
-
here, and look at the damage rate
$Name: fighter beam
+Title: XSTR("fighter beam", 3306)
+Description:
XSTR(
"", 3307)
$end_multi_text
+Tech Description:
XSTR(
"", 3308)
$end_multi_text
$Model File: none
@Laser Bitmap: newglo6
@Laser Color: 190, 150, 250
@Laser Length: 10.0
@Laser Head Radius: 0.90
@Laser Tail Radius: 0.30
$Mass: 0.2
$Velocity: 450.0
$Fire Wait: 0.2
$Damage: 3
$Armor Factor: 0.9
$Shield Factor: 0.7
$Subsystem Factor: 1.3
$Lifetime: 0.0
$Energy Consumed: 0.20
$Cargo Size: 0.0
$Homing: NO
$LaunchSnd: 115
$ImpactSnd: 27
$Flags: ("beam" "player allowed")
$Icon: iconKayser
$Anim: Kayser
$Impact Explosion: ExpMissileHit1
$Impact Explosion Radius: 3.0
$BeamInfo:
+Type: 2
+Life: 0.0
+Warmup: 0
+Warmdown: 0
+Radius: 1.0
+PCount: 0
+PRadius: 0
+PAngle: 0.0
+PAni: particleexp01
+Miss Factor: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
+BeamSound: 115
+WarmupSound: 0
+WarmdownSound: 0
+Muzzleglow: thrusterglow01
+Shots: 0
+ShrinkFactor: 0.0
+ShrinkPct: 0.0
$Section:
+Width: 0.75
+Texture: beam-white
+RGBA Inner: 255 255 55 255
+RGBA Outer: 150 150 150 10
+Flicker: 0.1
+Zadd: 2.0
$Section:
+Width: 1.25
+Texture: beam-dblue2
+RGBA Inner: 160 160 0 255
+RGBA Outer: 60 60 0 10
+Flicker: 0.1
+Zadd: 1.0
$Section:
+Width: 1.5
+Texture: beam-dblue
+RGBA Inner: 255 0 0 255
+RGBA Outer: 60 0 0 10
+Flicker: 0.1
+Zadd: 0.0
$Section:
+Width: 1.6
+Texture: beam-green2
+RGBA Inner: 160 160 0 255
+RGBA Outer: 60 60 0 10
+Flicker: 0.4
+Zadd: 1.0
-
and honestly the only thing that would make this a better choice than some Kays would be it's sheild piercing abilitys (wich someone along the line will fix), wich makes it mostly usefull againces some lightly armored targets, wich are generaly fast and agile, and if a ship gets more than 500m away it is hard to hit. and it drains energy dry in about a second, fighter mounted beams can only bea a good thing, they add an entirly new aspect to the gameplay.
-
Originally posted by vadar_1
hey heres a good idea, why dont we just give fighters super-ultra weapons that kills everything on the screen, its not like we havn't ruined fs2 already with your incredably stupid ideas.
Why dont you just mount a Shivan BFRed (now it seems like its a cliched term, thanks fellahs, I dont even need to tell you what type of weapon it is.) on an Ursa. Theres your damn fighter beam, its unrealistic, but who cares?
If you had read this thread at all, you would have noticed that no matter how stupid a weapon may seem to you, some people will find use for it. This "beam bomb" someone mentioned could work pretty dang well as a special sort of mine that the player can lay.
No-one has said we should put BFred:s on Ursas, and most importantly, _these weapons will not necessarily be used in Freespace universe, but possibly in a mod_. If we can do something, why not try it?
-
You know, while we're busy not doing stuff, we could not touch the planetary stuff as this is a SPACE sim, our fighters weren't meant for atmospheric combat. Adding the ability for a FREDer to make a planetary-based combat misison would COMPLETEY ruin my experience with FS2.
Also, that 60km box - keep it, nobody touch it. It was put there for a reason. If it's moved, adjusted, expanded, contorted, or otherwise tweaked, play balance will be horribly wrecked.
Those subspace bombs we were thinking about? They're too much of a potential super-super-superweapon...they'll wreck gameplay too if the engine supports their use.
NOTE: All of the above was written in a highly sarcastic tone. I actually support the addition/modification of all of the above (along with fighter beams). Though I agree with Vadar, a BFRed would be somewhat destabilizing to the game when mounted on an Ursa, simply having a "beam" weapon mounted on a fighter is not going to affect the playing experience in any way. I realize that no player will be forced into using the beams, and no FREDder will be required to use or even allow them in their missions. I also realize that what we have here is the source to the Freespace ENGINE, not the Freespace GAME. By allowing the ENGINE to support all kinds of cool stuff, we're allowing the creation of all new GAMEs (such as The Babylon Project, etc.)
--TurboNed
-
lol, usually, I'm not think minded, but it was a good idea to mention you were sarcarstic :lol:
The only thing I'm kindda against is removing the shield pircing for the beams. enable/disable ok ( a tbl tag maybe, that could be given to any weapon would be neat in fact ). But removing it, please not. But still, i read Tned's first sentence, and I suppose I needn't worry for a long time...
-
Originally posted by venom2506
But still, i read Tned's first sentence, and I suppose I needn't worry for a long time...
I assume you mean "While we're busy not doing stuff...."? Actually, that wasn't what I meant by that, as there ARE people working on these things (DTP and Bob are both doing some good stuff with the source), I meant that as a retort to vadar_1 who felt that just because something had the potential to be misused, it shouldn't be allowed. (-:
Your interpretation of it works too, though. [grin] (Assuming I interpreted your interpretation right)
--TurboNed
-
Well im totally shocked.....in so many ways that its indescribable.
In any case, I LIKE what Bobboau has done here and the attention to balance that he has observed. Even if half of you can't see it...
-
Originally posted by LtNarol
wanna know what i think? i think vBB shoulda stayed so all the newbies and trolls would stay there and not come here
Are you talking to me? (http://www.smilies.nl/bounce/huepfenicon111.gif) My little smilies will kill you!
-
Originally posted by IceFire
Well im totally shocked.....in so many ways that its indescribable.
In any case, I LIKE what Bobboau has done here and the attention to balance that he has observed. Even if half of you can't see it...
you know, some people just love to complain and be against everything new. just ignore them.
-
Damn, I've never seen a group of friends break up over a few measely fighter beams before. It's a matter of opinion. If someone wants to put tiny beams on a fighter, let them. If someone wants to spend 200+ hours turning the game into 800x640, let them. If you don't like it, don't get it.
-
I think we should create phasers!
-
o dear god, not for freespace2, only in trekkie TCs...*shivers at the thought*
-
you could do a ST shuttle flyby with its phasers and blow stuff up on large ship (voyager does that a lot). Cool Oh yeah and my TC too! I want fighter beams which go stright and that swing to target.
-
LAW ENFORCER you could do a ST shuttle flyby with its phasers and blow stuff up on large ship (voyager does that a lot). Cool Oh yeah and my TC too! I want fighter beams which go stright and that swing to target.
Voyager got very bad reviews for doing that, mainly cause it's non-realistic and stupid.
-
Who cares? Im not a engineer who plays by the book and never trys anything diffrent anyway! (eh? even i don't understand why I put that)
It looks good and it was cool... thats all it needs to be, without it it would have turned into "Quick, we need to hold a confrence! Captain! They just won't accept our peace offering! oh dear, I sujest we run away! The end."
anyway in the clearas possible way of explaning it...
it better because of it... yes ingnor all the above and this sentence and read that bit there.
-
ok so i will explain what i ment:
Fighter beams are a stupid idea, what i ment was a secondary beam for bombers to take out cap ships with, it has a set amount of fuel so you have to be conservatave in your jugement when to fire. we already have a rediculasy powerfull bomb the heilos, as long as you dont make it more powerful than this i dont see a problem.
The downside to this is it will be hard to aim when moving fast or rotating. Making you an easy target just like when you are on a bombing run.
Stop calling me a newbie i joined HLP before you LtNarol i just dont post every day. :doubt: infact i think venom posted somthing that applys nicely to you.;7
"you know, some people just love to complain and be against everything new. just ignore them."
-
Although an anti-cap secondary beam might work, I think that having anti-fighter beams on bombers would be better. In the non-controllable turret, make a weak aaaf. That way, when bombers are going in for bombing runs they will be more protected. Besides, with the anti-cap secondary beam, you have no time to run when the ship blows.
-
AAA beams on bombers? done.
Fugitive class bandiot bomber from my TC *puffs up cheast and tries to look important.... fails*
its a weaker still version so its sort of balanced... until I make the Segie calss...
-
or change the aaa beam so it has a very big mass and little damage so when it hits something, that thing gets pushed of course (like a reverse tractor beam)
-
Dredging up old topics...
Beam bomb type things do have lots of poential uses. I'd love to see some sort of beam-mine. Basically, it'd be a very small power core, jammed, and have turrets on each face (or a few faces). When in range, it'd fire short range, medium-power beams at capital ships. You could create a latticework of beam death from them... :cool:
However, to make them balanced you'd want to make them pretty weak and not anti-fighter, or something. I do realise these can easily be made with the current incranation of FS as well, by the way... ;)
-
Originally posted by Kellan
I'd love to see some sort of beam-mine. Basically, it'd be a very small power core, jammed, and have turrets on each face (or a few faces). When in range, it'd fire short range, medium-power beams at capital ships. You could create a latticework of beam death from them... :cool
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but how would this differ from the Mjolnir RBCs in the main campaign?
-
Just a thought
If you think fighter beams are stupid...don't freakin work on them and don't DL the scripting to USE them.
If you want/like fighter beams...work on it or assist/support those coders that ARE working on it.
Jesus H. Christ flying an Ursa! You ppl ***** and ***** sometimes :P (lol and a FEW of you used to slam on the SW guys for whining about stupidity for it's own sake)
I mean seriuously...if you see a thread about an idea you hate....WHY go whine and ***** in it? It's not like the second someone codes this effect your FS2 directory will auto-link and begin the download.
Bob...I'm looking forward to trying these effects out later on buddy.
-
Originally posted by penguin
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but how would this differ from the Mjolnir RBCs in the main campaign?
mjolnir fires more or less straight forward, ahve a big range and deal muchos damage. quite a difference no?