[starlord]

Won't we have the same danger as the azzameen matter, then?

[Turey]

Won't we have the same danger as the azzameen matter, then?

Perhaps. It was just a thought.

[Akalabeth Angel]

     I've seen some talk in this thread the people want the conversion to emulate the movies rather than the game, but I'd go a step further and to say don't emulate the movies either . . . at least not in terms of the ships. The ship combat in star wars is pathetic really, huge kilometre long ships that fire a few pop guns here and there. Star Wars is quite honestly dreadful for ship to ship combat.

    Yet the ISD has four HUGE turrets on either side of the super structure, we never even see these fire.
    So what I'd like is for the ships to have some meat on their bones, so they can smash the hell out of the other ships. Not just firing a bunch of pissy little anti-fighter turbolasers at eachother. I wouldn't necessarily say be restricted to canon either. The canon stats seem a bit all over the place really . . . and they're more fluff than stats for the most part. One good source might be something like the old Rebellion, game which seperates anti fighter and anti-ship stats for each ship. Just a thought anyway.

    I should also point out that in Revenge of the Sith, one ship does fire a blue beam weapon. So there is a precedents for beams, even if it's from a really laughable source. (you can also model little guys loading cartridges into an 88' flak can- er . . . I mean turbolasers  )

[brandx0]

You're stepping a bit outside the design idea of this mod there Angel.  The game was concieved of as a simulator based very closely on the action as portrayed in the movies and in fiction.  Will it be exactly like the movies? No, Star destroyers will have all the guns they had in the published material, but we're not going out with the idea of creating our own universe here.  This is meant as a sim, and we're doing all we can to keep as close to the films as possible

[chief1983]

Yes, we're aiming to have all ships default configured as close as possible to what they're 'supposed' to be.  We've covered the list of where we want to grab this info from many times in the past, as you've stated you've seen.  The fact is, Lucas envisioned the combat as WWII in space.  So, the fighters fly like fighter planes roughly, fairly low agility, but moving relatively fast.  The capital ships are mostly designed to either launch fighters, attack other capital ships, or both.  Fighters will play a role against them, but will have a very hard time singlehandedly eliminating any but the smallest capital ships.  This is fairly close to how fighters were used in WWII, swarms of them could inflict serious damage, but only when used appropriately, and it would help much more to have some capital ships of your own aiding in dishing out some damage.  We hope to avoid using mechanics and such that were only seen in the games, because we're not trying to recreate the old games.  We want to make something new, that feels different wherever necessary to achieve a slightly more realistic, but still fun, feeling.

And as far as complaints that having all that firepower on the capital ships will be hard to balance, just because ships can carry X amount of guns doesn't mean they'll always be configured that way.  The mission designer can rearrange or disable the turrets however he wishes within the bounds of the table, which won't be very restricting.  I just see no reason not to allow the maximum level of firepower possible, for when it _is_ wanted.

[Akalabeth Angel]

You're stepping a bit outside the design idea of this mod there Angel.  The game was concieved of as a simulator based very closely on the action as portrayed in the movies and in fiction.  Will it be exactly like the movies? No, Star destroyers will have all the guns they had in the published material, but we're not going out with the idea of creating our own universe here.  This is meant as a sim, and we're doing all we can to keep as close to the films as possible

   Oh I'm not saying make your own universe . . that just that every piece of information needs to be taken with a grain of salt. And weighed against other informatioon, and what would be fun and so forth. I'd say the first source of information would be the models themselves, that's why I reference the large turrets on the side of the ISD.
   I mean people always mention the 60 turbo, 60 ion cannons. But the thing is, you never see the ISDs firing that volume of fire  . . . at the same time, you never see them firing as much as they should be. We see the Medical Frigate at point blank with the broadside of an ISD, and they exchange about 2 or 3 very very minor blasts from some random place on their hull. The whole 60/60 thing is I believe from some Star Wars RPG anyway, hardly a great source for information. If it were from say a tactical boardgame, then I might give it a little more weight.

   There's more to emulate in a movie than the laser blasts. When Ackbar says "we won't last long against those Star Destroyers" he's concerned about their firepower, but in terms of visuals we later never see an Alliance ship fall to the ISDs. One ISD explodes in the background and the Executor does it's all too familiar plunge into the Death Star with the sense-of-scale breaking rush of flame. The only Rebels dying around the ISDs are a bunch of random fighter pilots, some black guy exclaiming "she's gonna blow!" and of course Mr. Awing and his SSD-shattering scream.

   So what I'd like from the project is an emulation of the feel of the combat, rather than a direct translation of the combat itself. Not necessarily an easy task to be sure.

[starlord]

I personnally always felt fustrated by the LOOONNNNGGGG delay taken for firing lasers in x wing games (especially x wing because in addition to that, precision firing was extremely difficult in the game: ARGH, how I HATED the b wing... ), luckily, the timing was slightly accelerated in x vs t and in alliance (by a factor of 1.5 I think) and precision was greatly improved in tie fighter alone: that 3d CMD tasted heaven

However, when you see how they fire in the movie, it's maddening.

Also, regarding the ISD, I'll gie you this info taken out from the secret plans book i have at home: they (at least the class 1, have 8 heavy turrets on the sides of the bridge pillar: to each side: 3 heavy turbos (they are said to penetrate shields and to pierce vessels like butter) and 1 heavy ion cannon.

[starlord]

One thing also: Please let us dogfight missile boats 

[chief1983]

If someone models the missile boat, you will be able to dogfight with it.  But I don't think anyone's claimed that one yet, or the Gunboat either.  They're not currently very high on the priority list, could change if we need them for a campaign though.

The firing rate will hopefully be significantly faster, but come with some other penalties for having it that way (quick energy drain most likely, causing burst fire).

[TomShak]

I'm very excited about the SWC Project, being both a big fan of the X-Wing series and FS2

I think it's great you're not going to re-create the X-Wing series style exactly, I think it would be really interesting to see how Star Wars star-fighter combat could be re-envisaged.  Some earlier comments suggest adopting a pace more similar to BtRL. I like the BtRL mod, but I think the ships turn a bit too fast in it. Combat tends to de-generate into ultra high-speed spins of death, with neither party really being able to hit the other (due to the very limited firing opportunity). You can break out of this in BtRL by using the slide feature, but I doubt you'd be having such a slide in SWC. No doubt you'll come up with a combat mechanics that plays well though

The comparison with WWII fighters is interesting, although my understanding of WWII was that whilst a single fighter couldn't take out a capital ship, it didn't take that many. Most capital ships couldn't survive more than a few direct torpedo hits. Even if they survived they were typically severely crippled. Indeed WWII was the point at which the fighter became the dominate force in naval combat, and the battleship became largely irrelevant. In some ways I see the Star Wars universe as being fighter dominated too, capital ships seemed to be carriers more than anything else. Certainly this interpretation makes for a more fun "star-fighter simulator"

The Assault Gunboat, as I understand, only appears in the games. However, it is also the only imperial ship that is armed with ion-cannons and which can be controlled by the player. So I guess it might turn out to be a necessity. Ion-cannons allow for much more varied missions since you can have the whole, "identify -> disable -> protect capturing operation" missions

All in all, good stuff, I'm looking forward to the first release


Tom

[starlord]

Well, there is still the tie defender...

[chief1983]

Lawl TIE Defender haha lol lulz...*sigh*

[brandx0]

Heh, me and the rest of the senior team have quite a bit to say about the TIE Defender... hehe

Anyways, one important thing to remember is that Ion Cannons won't be quite as neccesary as in the X-Wing games, due to the FS engine's ability to disable a craft with normal weapons by targeting specific subsystems.   I'm sure the Gun Boat will be seen at some point in this mod, but at the moment the team is really focusing a lot on ships and fighters which will show the true differences between the two sides of the conflict.  Rebels with their smaller and more lightly armed capital ships vs. the big imperial cap ships bristling with guns, and strong, powerful rebel fighters versus light, fast but fragile imperial TIEs.  I always found that the Gunboat, Missile boat, Tie Advanced and Tie Defender really kind of destroyed this great duality that exists in the universe, after all, remember the empire's stance on fodder... err, I mean, fighters and their pilots:  "We can always build more..."

[TomShak]

Ah that's interesting, my favourite game in the X-Wing series was TIE Fighter, so I never really saw the TIE fighters as fodder To me the TIE fighter seemed about equal to an X-Wing, and a TIE interceptor could literally run rings around an X-Wing. Sure the TIE Fighter was fragile but it had great maneuverability. So against an X-Wing, if you could survive the head on pass then you'd almost always win the turning fight. The small profile was also a big win

[starlord]

I'd still take an A wing rather than a tie (fighter or interceptor).

[aRaven]

Ah that's interesting, my favourite game in the X-Wing series was TIE Fighter, so I never really saw the TIE fighters as fodder To me the TIE fighter seemed about equal to an X-Wing, and a TIE interceptor could literally run rings around an X-Wing. Sure the TIE Fighter was fragile but it had great maneuverability. So against an X-Wing, if you could survive the head on pass then you'd almost always win the turning fight. The small profile was also a big win

Well, the game X-Wing said that 3 TIE Fighters equals 1 X-wing, and I think that is the  way it should be, since TIE pilots don't survive that much and not many veterans are out there to gain experience in battle. But these veterans definitely stand a chance against the rebels if they survive.

And f*** the small profile... in the x-wing games all objects had huge hitboxes, which made it easier to damage any craft. Fortunately the FSO Engine is more accurate in this regard...you can only hit a ship without shields when your weapon directly impacts the hull. So TIEs should have a greater chance of survivability as well as the x-wing to evade shots due to its evasive x- profile.

It's also sad that the X-Wing game or any space simulator game in that matter lack something like energy fighting, firstly successfully used in WWI in the naval battle between ****cats and Zeros. In fact, George Lucas based the properties of the X-Wing and TIE Fighters on the American fighters(Heavier,faster, heavily armored ) and Japanese fighters(nimble, more maneuverable, hardly any armor). The American's only stood a chance when taking the fight to the vertical and using their speed to an advantage. Sadly, space simulator games only have turn fighting. This problem is further emphazised in the BTRL project, where fighters hunted each other in neverending circles.

That's why I love Il1946 atm so much, air fighting is such a beautiful and complex matter.

[TomShak]

Well, the game X-Wing said that 3 TIE Fighters equals 1 X-wing, and I think that is the  way it should be, since TIE pilots don't survive that much and not many veterans are out there to gain experience in battle. But these veterans definitely stand a chance against the rebels if they survive.

Pilot skill definitely makes a huge difference, for example in both X-Wing and TIE-Fighter the AI couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. As a result the player could be effective in both the X-Wing and the TIE-Fighter.

And f*** the small profile... in the x-wing games all objects had huge hitboxes, which made it easier to damage any craft.

Ehehe the hitboxes were a little unfair on the TIE's

It's also sad that the X-Wing game or any space simulator game in that matter lack something like energy fighting, firstly successfully used in WWI in the naval battle between ****cats and Zeros. In fact, George Lucas based the properties of the X-Wing and TIE Fighters on the American fighters(Heavier,faster, heavily armored ) and Japanese fighters(nimble, more maneuverable, hardly any armor). The American's only stood a chance when taking the fight to the vertical and using their speed to an advantage. Sadly, space simulator games only have turn fighting. This problem is further emphazised in the BTRL project, where fighters hunted each other in neverending circles. That's why I love Il1946 atm so much, air fighting is such a beautiful and complex matter.

Yes actual air combat is much more complex, I guess mostly owing to gravity. Space combat is greatly simplified in that regards. One-on-one encounters tended to start with a head-on pass and then whoever turns the quickest wins. However whilst 1-on-1 was common in air combat it's quite rare in games like X-Wing, and that makes the situation more complex. Also the X-Wing series tended to have lots of objectives that needed constant attention. The bombers are torpedoing your freighter, the enemy frigate is escaping, you need to guard the capture operation whilst trying not to get trashed by the enemy fighters. Air combat never had objectives that were that so complicated or tricky

[aurora_energy]

Anyways, one important thing to remember is that Ion Cannons won't be quite as neccesary as in the X-Wing games, due to the FS engine's ability to disable a craft with normal weapons by targeting specific subsystems. 

What if you made an ion cannon, and had it as the equivilant of both the emp missle and the stelletoII?

[Snaga]

Anyways, one important thing to remember is that Ion Cannons won't be quite as neccesary as in the X-Wing games, due to the FS engine's ability to disable a craft with normal weapons by targeting specific subsystems. 

What if you made an ion cannon, and had it as the equivilant of both the emp missle and the stelletoII?

I think that (later than sooner) when the priority 1 ships are ready, and an initial campaign is launched, just then will there be a need to finish with the rest of the shiplist (even the ones that are not listed), as more and more fredders will be making new campaigns and will be in need of more diversity. In this community there´s very talented people that can have great ideas on using something that the rest of us might deem as useless in a great and mindblowing way  .....

[chief1983]

Yeah, I mean, you may have to disable a really weak craft for one, and that's not even too far-fetched.  But normally you'd take out an escape pod in a couple of shots.  Ions would alleviate that worry.