[aldo_14]

This isn't a WW2 battleship, though.  Or WW2.

[Taristin]

Originally posted by aldo_14
This isn't a WW2 battleship, though.  Or WW2.

Seriously, stop living in the past...

[Flaser]

Though he has a point on ship building.

However IMHO said turrets failed to operate long before it came to that when they took a direct hit near their base or the surrounding armor did - since that could damage the turrets suspensions.

You're right however about these aspects of heavy armor.

I'm also among the nitpickers whose no.1 fancy is a wargamish damage simulation.
What I came up with was making a new subsystem(s)frame. The ship no longer has a hull hitpoints, instead if any of these subsystems is destroyed (it should get a flag so anti-subsytem weapons only do normal damage against it, that way piercing/penetrating weapons would be that still do subsytem damage against it).
If any frame subsystem is destroyed the ship is dead - you could complicate it saying if frame-hitpoints
So you place this frame subsystem - deep inside the model or under the model's exterior.
So how will anything hit it?
Put destroyable non-targetable subsystems over it - actual armor plates. These just like the frame won't take subsystem damage only normal damage.

If they are destroyed the frame will be exposed.

.....

Off course I know a downside to this method: Who the hell want's to actually slice up a model and wrap it in layer after layer of submodels?!
A hell of a work - but it could lead to the ultimate damage simulation.

[Bobboau]

if I knew how/were it was broke I would fix it but I removed the flag a long time ago had no problems, then you uncomented it, mentioning something about a divide by zero error. does it cause a divide by zero error? if so were?

[Goober5000]

I ran into a div-by-zero error when that was enabled.  I was never able to track it down, but when I uncommented the assert, it went away.

Of course, it could have been something else.  But if we remove that limit, someone has to make sure it doesn't cause a crash.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by aldo_14
This isn't a WW2 battleship, though.  Or WW2.

It was a freakin example you knuckehead!!!!

If my capship has a big, heavy turret the size of a cruiser, then it has to have the armor value greater than a cruiser.
With this limits, I am FORCED to give my capship either a kazillion hp's, or uber-weak turrets, or drasticly reduce the turret number.

[StratComm]

The latter of which would not be a bad thing if you're having a real problem with it.  Too many huge turrets makes for an uninteresting design when you actually are trying to build a mission around the sucker.

My gripe really comes in with the limit when you get down to specific balancing, when that button anti-fighter turret on your cruiser needs to have just a little more armor but you can't afford to pull it from one of the other subsystems on the ship.  Or if you've got a heavy turret on top of the weapons subsystem, and are having problems with weapons getting blown out when someone goes after the turret.  Balancing in general.

[Taristin]

Well, duh, Trashman... if your turrets were indestructable, then game playability just went out the window.  This is a game[/b] not real life. You have to be able to destroy the turrets with weapons smaller than a helios, or else the game isn't fun.

[NGTM-1R]

Originally posted by Raa
Well, duh, Trashman... if your turrets were indestructable, then game playability just went out the window.  This is a game not real life. You have to be able to destroy the turrets with weapons smaller than a helios, or else the game isn't fun. [/B]

*coughBearbaitingcough*

[jc4jc]

Look I am sorry for causing a big word fight about this. I just hate it when I have a mod with a cruiser that has a few well armored turrets and subsystems blasts a destroyers under armored turrets and subsystems and bashes it with no oppostion, Lucifers systems. I know for the GTVA this is good but, game wise it takes from the feeling.

[Flipside]

It's best to think of it not as Armour, but as 'Health'. A Moloch has 80,000 units of health, 30% of which is taken up by Engines, 15% by sensors etc.

I'm pretty sure theres a sexp to set a subsystem invulnerable, if there isn't, It might be a good idea anyway

I need all sorts of subsystem controls and features, I think they are massively underused

[WMCoolmon]

Pardon my lack of FREDding experience, but...

every-time
-- subsystem-strength < 100
-- real_subsys_hits = real_subsyst_hits + (100 - subsystem_strength)
-- if real_subsys_hits < 101
---- set-subsystem-strength 100

Okay, it's hackish, but you could improve upon it to set the subsystem strength to the 'real' percentage. Right now you get a subsystem with 200% of the hitpoints.

[Turnsky]

Originally posted by TrashMan


It was a freakin example you knuckehead!!!!
 

aldo's british... forgive him, for he has seen too much red dwarf

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Raa
Well, duh, Trashman... if your turrets were indestructable, then game playability just went out the window.  This is a game not real life. You have to be able to destroy the turrets with weapons smaller than a helios, or else the game isn't fun. [/B]

For ships and campaigns I make, ships can be whatever *I* want them to be.
Leave the balancing to me. I've made balance packs for dozens of games so far and they were all rated 9/10.

I'm not aiming for indistructable turets, but for realisticly strong turrets. take the Archangel for example - it has 9 huge turrets and I have to give tham a HP value to fit realisticly with their size. On top of that, I have about 64 other turrets on the ship.

With this restriction, it impossible to do it right.