I didn't expect to be coddled. I mean this release is here to knock on some of the stuff that has grandfathered itself in ... and needs to get out of my system by the time I am done with all three The Lost Generation
-campaigns (Of Shivans and Men
will survive it, but what comes next ... surely not)
The campaign is setup pretty much specifically for trebs and maxims which are required to do all the beam disarming at once, meaning all other loadout options are basically traps.
You are right when it comes to the stricly dominant (Maxim+Tebuchet) and dominant (Trebuchet) loadouts. Maybe I can mitigate some of it when I fix the Stilletto II changes and maybe take another look at the changes to the Infyrno that are already in TLG
, and by extension Walking on Ashes
(tl;dr: the Infyrno got more range to take the risk out of using it, but that also upped the skill required for using it, in terms the lead actually required and the fact there is no way to actually judge its blast from distance).
But then the mission red-alerts into kind of a cluster **** of the shivans throwing all the things at you at once
I am overly fond of letting you see what is coming... I just really like the visual of a threat literally growing closer.
The ambush is way to break away from that, and I am not going to apologize for it* - and an ambush is supposed to be disorienting and putting you on the backfoot.
I though by minimizing the impact of the Rakshasa (it is almost immedieatly out of position, safe for the AAA beam) and guiding the view point back towards with the Ravana with the Molochs would be working.
*It has already been pointed out to me, that I seem to be unwilling to leave obvious openings when designing enemy deployments. And that I over-compensate when I do.
Also, maybe I just can't unsee it:
Even with every cruiser arriving with escort fighters, there is a wave pattern to the ambush and rest of the battle: Cains and their fighters, Molochs and their fighters, first bombers arrive in range about the same time as the Molochs, then the Ravana, then all the other bombers
[...] with no way to repair [...] and more leeway in terms of repair
I don't think that in-mission repairs are a very appropriate design choice for something so closely married to Freespace 2. But that might be my own biases speaking the loudest.
I will look into applying the same remedy I have in other TLG
-campaigns, because I am no longer using the in-engine Red Alert (Old grudges live the longest) and instead port over loadout choices via variables (lots of busy work and one typo can spell doom); basically it would mean the option to "buy" a hull and ammo boost upon a mission restart.
However working out the mechanics for that are on the backlog ATM (keyworded as quality of life), so don't expect me do an update to that effect quickly.
ps. The last time I did this strict "between mission continuity" for a mothership's hull was in Drums of War
for The Babylon Project
and back then I added an adjustment for balance at each mission start; it was needed because the Centauri Primus and Vorchan (main enemy capital ships) have blob turrets as anti-capital weapons, and interceptable primaries were not thing yet. In a Freespace 2 envoirment, where capital ship attack each other mostly by beams and taking down beam turrets is a known quanity, I did not think such would appropriate.
But this is also not actually communicated to you in the briefing itself
Noted. I will address this in an update.
Typhon with the funny vasudan nameMeretseger
The name is grandfathered in now (so is the ironic use), but I got the memo to cut down the number of syllables in a critical ship's name, esspecially if it is not a common thing.
On the subject of the HUD, I feel like I have to say a few words since the mod enforces it:
I admit that there are additions to the HUD I would like to impliment, and just haven't checked if they are possible or are already out there. I have an original project in the pipeline that would require a large scale change to the HUD, simply as a requirement of the setting. As per my injury over the Holidays I was not able to do as much of the research and technical foundational work I was hoping to (damage to the shoulder puts strain on the neck muscluature etc etc), so any work that would have sprung from that which could have benefitted this release didn't happen.
As for the things that I would like to add and that would be a) a ammunition indicator for secondaries at the inside of the "ring" (for secondaries only; I will hold frim on that "no limited ammo primaries"-policy for everything but OSaM
), b) an indicator for active hardpoints (which I know exist) with symbolic represenations for the weapon type, sidearm/anti-shield/anti-hull/anti-system, (which I don't know exits, and it would be pointless without), and c) a RTS/MOBA-style health bar, which marries a percentile display with segments for absolute ammounts (I find a pure percentage bar like in WoD insufficent).
That being said, I like the individual HUD elements smaller and pulled to the perifiery because my tastes in games generally gravitate towards the isometric perspective, where UI design generally moves elements to the perifery. I also have to admit that I seem to have a better than average short term memory, and so tend to keep way more information in my head during play than other people. (which also why mission specific HUD elements like WoD
have greater than average chance of confusing me)