Logo Platform
logo amplifiers simplified

[Discussion] Ship Design

Reply
Copied to clipboard!
12 years ago
Apr 15, 2012, 12:53:12 PM
I didn't mean trajectory of weapons fire, it's space, effects of gravity well shoud be ignored since it would take far too much computing otherwise.



By arcs of fire I mean if I put big weapon on the left side, then I have to turn my ship(s) so that gun, not ship points towards enemy.



Kind of like sailing ships that had strong broadsides, but weak front and back guns.
0Send private message
12 years ago
Apr 15, 2012, 8:31:03 PM
Gluon disruptors? You mean a weapon that would cancel the strong force temporarily and locally? Interesting idea... You'd get a localized nuclear fission explosion where it hits. I'm not sure if that wouldn't be overpowered. XD




If the gluons are "disrupted", we could imagine it'll disconnect all electrons and protons to make a plasma cloud.

Indeed it could make a hole with a size according to the weapon stength, but we may have visual effect in the form of a coloured cloud around the hole.



When the effect of the weapon is done, the quark could recombinate to protons/neutrons with the renewed gluons. Maybe even to molecules, which may form some kind of dangerous schrapnel
0Send private message
12 years ago
May 4, 2012, 5:50:25 AM
Raptor wrote:
And another one, even if a bit rusty, Vorlon and Narn fan smiley: smile




And another one. Give me some Centauri with mass drivers. If not, a few Minbari would do.
0Send private message
12 years ago
May 4, 2012, 6:34:23 AM
A Minbari cruiser would do nicely, thank you very much. smiley: smile



no_one_you_know wrote:
And another one. Give me some Centauri with mass drivers. If not, a few Minbari would do.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 9:18:22 AM
Guys, MP is Military points, the ones you spend to unlock tech in the Military branch (the one with the fist) of the tech tree:



0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 26, 2012, 8:42:05 PM
Of course I like it. What's not to like, look how many variables smiley: smile Not sure about those MLRS-like trucks "A-entropic fields", what are those? I'll make a wild guess and assume these are some kind of anti-entropic missile shield but I'm not sure about the icon, something like this would make more sense to me:





I'd love to see a comparable Craver ship next to this one to make a comparison but I'll have to wait for that I guess smiley: smile
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 26, 2012, 8:57:35 PM
clean design look's great!!!. but personally i would like too see this ship longer, to give a certain appearance of a really important vehicle for intergalactic adventure.=)
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 26, 2012, 9:03:55 PM
Gluon disruptors? You mean a weapon that would cancel the strong force temporarily and locally? Interesting idea... You'd get a localized nuclear fission explosion where it hits. I'm not sure if that wouldn't be overpowered. XD



P.S.: Misguided thinking: There would actually be an energy loss by disconnecting the strong force completely, for a while. (Up to iron in the periodic system, you gain energy by fusion, afterwards by fission. Reducing everything to protons and neutrons or even quarks would not free energy, but suck it up...)



The armor would have a hole and there would be a lot of radiation, anyways. But at least it isn't an atomic explosion anytime it hits, as I initially thought.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 26, 2012, 10:10:54 PM
Are there other ship templates for the "UE large class"? In MoO2 you could chose several templates for a ship class (e.g. Cruiser). I think, it would be a compromise, between fixed ship designs like in SoaSE and the GalCiv2 ShipDesigner where you could create your ship designs without any limitations.

But that is only a detail...
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 12:02:46 AM
I wonder how big this ship is, and the sizes of the later ones. Still, i love the idea of being able to customize the appearance/performance(?) of you ships.Honestly, I would ALMOST rather not see this stuff as it is making me waaay too excited for this game to come out.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 5:11:09 AM
I like what I can see. What are those MP for ? Movement Points ? Magic Points ? Military Points ?

We can see the tonage of each module, but you don't see "effectiveness" or "power" or how much damage you can do with a weapon. I just hope those modules aren't cosmetic but also provides gameplay changes in battles (some weapons disabling shields or things like in Gratuitous space battles).

We can see that modules are in three area : weapon, defense, support. What "support" stands for ? More energy to fuel your weapons ? Cloaking devices ? EMP jammer ?
0Send private message
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 6:58:53 AM
I'd just speculate about "Mass Points" for MP, because there was a mass budget mentioned in the interview.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 7:36:28 AM
Yes, it seems appropriate if the left value under each icon is module`s cost.



EDITED: Looking more attentively at modules icons i can see a fist being used for MP, so it is probably Military Power or other related thing. And the left value seems to be represented by weighing scales icon of some sort.



EDITED: actually if you look at the tonnage you`l see that weighing scales icon there. So yes, MP is not related to mass.
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 9:03:45 AM
My first thought was that MP stands for Manpower. But the more i think about it the less i think it is correct. It would, in a way, be reasonable because if you look at the values the active attacking devices need more MP (bring more MP?) than the defensive devices but that could equally be explained by the "Military Power" explanation, because in the end, attack is more valuable than defense etc. ...



But, if MP means Manpower, than what use would this value be if you are not limited by hull-size but gain more Manpower just if you put more guns to your ship? So i think it musst be something else. ...
0Send private message
0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 26, 2012, 8:18:31 PM
Check this screen shot out guys!



(Right click -> view image for a bigger image)



What do you guys think of the current system? Personally I'm hyped! \o/



SS: Ship design is one of the 4X gamer’s dearest features. What will ship design be like in ES? I understand that you will offer a modular approach for designing ships. Will it be possible to spot and destroy individual systems in-battle for example. Will there be different hull sizes available? Unlocked by research perhaps?



Romain: Ship design is both simple and powerful. The simple part is that you have a set amount of free weight on your ship hull for modules, and you can install as many modules as will fit within that weight limit.



Where it becomes more complex is in your choice of ship class, with each class having their advantages and disadvantages, unique modules, fleet-wide modules, ship specific modules, weapon types, defense types etc… We prefer that the player focus on what to put in their ships, rather than where to put them.



For most factions, research will be the best way to get new modules to equip your ships.




I like the direction AS is taking with ship design, what are your comments and concerns on the matter? Do you like it/hate it? Discuss here!



Screen shot and info taken from http://www.spacesector.com/blog/2012/03/interview-with-amplitude-studios-on-endless-space/.
0Send private message
0Send private message0Send private message
13 years ago
Mar 27, 2012, 5:32:54 PM
@ Raptor:



Are you certain? Is there a developer post that confirms this? I did not read anywhere that one can research with anything other than research points. Any form of "Military Points" working like this would remind me of Hearty of Iron 3 practical points, which is not a bad thing. But i would think it strange if you could just get more military technology by just building ever more ships ...



And if your only evidence for your theory is, that the symbol in the tech-tree is the same, than i would seriously doubt that this is sufficient. In this phase of the development it may even be that the symbols are just placeholders at the moment and that this is a coincidence.
0Send private message
?

Click here to login

Reply
Comment