StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Speaking of that. I've read that there is stuff you can do with Luke if you capture him. But I've newer actually done it. So what gives? Can anyone tell?

If you're playing as the Empire and he just gets randomly captured, I don't think so. It only really triggers if he's on a mission and Vader is also wherever that mission is taking place. Then he and Vader have their little "ESB duel" and "I am your father" moment, and Luke either escapes or gets captured. And from them on if they encounter each other on missions they'll also have a duel event. If Luke gets captured as the outcome of this duel, he and Vader will automatically go to wherever the Emperor is, and have their Final Battle. At which point either Luke gets captured for reals (and becomes like a normal prisoner), Luke escapes...or he wins and manages to capture Vader and the Emperor.

This series of events is probably easier to trigger as the Alliance, obviously, since you can send him to try and capture Vader whenever you locate the Dark Lord. As the Empire, you kind of just have to hope the two will meet, or that you can arrange something. It may trigger if you send Vader on a mission to some system where Luke happens to be, but I've never actually tried that and could not confirm.

Oh, and after Luke learns his heritage, he can go on a mission with Leia, where they learn they're related and Leia discovers her Force potential. It's the only way she'll get Jedi points in the game.

Did anyone ever actually play a LP of that game?

Purple wrote:Did anyone ever actually play a LP of that game?

http://lparchive.org/Star-Wars-Rebellion/

COOL

Oh damn, now that the computer using XP is kaput, trying to play Rebellion on anything later is a pain in the ass in regards to the mouse pointer. I wonder if this version would fix that. Even then, I am too used to the Rebellion editor that I am not sure if I can play it as originally programmed anymore especially when getting into the hex code and changing the amount of days it takes for ships and characters to travel. No way I am going back to hyperdrive rating of 90 and what not.

Ah... Star Wars Rebellion... where half the battle is finding planets with at least 10 slots for shipyards...

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Ah... Star Wars Rebellion... where half the battle is finding planets with at least 10 slots for shipyards...

Even for its time rebellion had a UI from hell. 14 years worth of advancement since then has not made that any better...

What do you mean? I found the UI to be quite good my self. Than again, I do enjoy micromanagement. Really, the only flaw I can make for the game is that it would not let you do anything when paused.

Purple wrote:What do you mean? I found the UI to be quite good my self. Than again, I do enjoy micromanagement.

You are a sick, twisted individual, do you know that?

I don't think I still have Rebellion but I hated it with a passion. Still do.

Rebellion's UI took a lot to get used to. But what I never liked was planet building slots were erratic as hell and building 2-3 mega shipyards to produce ships for victory took a lot of effort. Building the shipyards themselves wasn't difficult, but finding the critical mass was. A shipyard system with only 6 shipyards was only good for producing starfighters and frigates in quantity, but building big capital ships, destroyer and above, requires a 10 shipyard star system.

I understand what you are saying but honestly I newer had issues with building capital ships even with smaller numbers of shipyards. Yes it takes longer per planet but you can have more of them working out of synchronization so that evens out.

I've never played the game, but canon wise; why should any system not be able to support as many shipyards as you desire them to? Star Wars shipyards aren't planet based, rather they are space stations and the only limitation should be the ease of getting raw materials and finished parts shipped to any given system. We also know that the shipping or said resources isn't a huge deal simply because we know that something as massive as the DSII can be built out in the ass end of nowhere in secret. If I was a modder I might allow any planet to support an unlimited number of shipyards, or, depending on the games time scale, I would simply make building new shipyards outside the scope of the game so you're stuck with what you started with and the focus of the game would be capturing or destroying the enemy's shipyards.

in the game each "building" including things like shield genertors and space stations take up varying amounts of slots in the systems, this repesents the system's ability to logistically support those stuctures, so when we say there's "no room" for a shipyard what we really mean is that this system doesn't have the logistics to support a shipyard.

Lord Revan wrote:in the game each "building" including things like shield genertors and space stations take up varying amounts of slots in the systems, this repesents the system's ability to logistically support those stuctures, so when we say there's "no room" for a shipyard what we really mean is that this system doesn't have the logistics to support a shipyard.

Yeah, except that's pretty much bunk. Even if there literally wasn't enough population to support them you could just recruit more soldiers and station them there in much the same way that we run military bases in the arctic today, only much easier. Shipping in supplies is also a non-issue given that we know that a private firm was able to supply the raw materials to an out of the way planet on a large enough scale to get 60% of the DSII built in less than a year. Logistics should be a complete non-issue.

Lord Revan wrote:in the game each "building" including things like shield genertors and space stations take up varying amounts of slots in the systems, this repesents the system's ability to logistically support those stuctures, so when we say there's "no room" for a shipyard what we really mean is that this system doesn't have the logistics to support a shipyard.

Actually, for shipyard systems, I tend to leave a fleet there for defense rather than rely on planetary shields. Sure the shields will delay the enemy but a fleet provides a surer defense than just shields which could be crippled with enough bombardment or sabotage.

Jub wrote:

Lord Revan wrote:in the game each "building" including things like shield genertors and space stations take up varying amounts of slots in the systems, this repesents the system's ability to logistically support those stuctures, so when we say there's "no room" for a shipyard what we really mean is that this system doesn't have the logistics to support a shipyard.

Yeah, except that's pretty much bunk. Even if there literally wasn't enough population to support them you could just recruit more soldiers and station them there in much the same way that we run military bases in the arctic today, only much easier. Shipping in supplies is also a non-issue given that we know that a private firm was able to supply the raw materials to an out of the way planet on a large enough scale to get 60% of the DSII built in less than a year. Logistics should be a complete non-issue.

Then it could be seen as an abstraction of the kind of political fights that prevent every planet or even one arbitrary planet from reaching its full potential, even in Canon there really are only a few really significant shipyard worlds where presumably the bulk of investment was put into them, over centuries, so I don't really have any objection to the difficulty of finding suitable planets. But I suppose if we wanted to get really nitpicky, it's not like in canon the empire and rebellion were busy building up planets or colonizing the galaxy anyway, they were fighting with the infrastructure they already had more or less. I mean, in the real world, the US pulled of some incredible industrial development and all that, but it wasn't like the yards that built the battleships and carriers sprung up overnight, they already existed and were just expanded and run much harder than they normally would have been...every major shipyard world in canon I can think of was already a shipyard world in the Old Republic era, and had been for centuries (Kuat, Rendilli, Anaxes, Corellia so on so forth), the Empire itself only ever established suppy yards and repair depots (e.g. that one in the Black Fleet crisis).

But back to the UI - I suppose it really isn't that *bad* par se, insofar as it's consistent and logical and you can just drag stuff around, and if I could figure it out as a 15 year old there really isn't any reason at 30 I should have problems with it, but my gold standard for space 4x UI's is the original MOO, which remains unsurpassed in it's elegance.

AniThyng wrote:Then it could be seen as an abstraction of the kind of political fights that prevent every planet or even one arbitrary planet from reaching its full potential, even in Canon there really are only a few really significant shipyard worlds where presumably the bulk of investment was put into them, over centuries, so I don't really have any objection to the difficulty of finding suitable planets. But I suppose if we wanted to get really nitpicky, it's not like in canon the empire and rebellion were busy building up planets or colonizing the galaxy anyway, they were fighting with the infrastructure they already had more or less. I mean, in the real world, the US pulled of some incredible industrial development and all that, but it wasn't like the yards that built the battleships and carriers sprung up overnight, they already existed and were just expanded and run much harder than they normally would have been...every major shipyard world in canon I can think of was already a shipyard world in the Old Republic era, and had been for centuries (Kuat, Rendilli, Anaxes, Corellia so on so forth), the Empire itself only ever established suppy yards and repair depots (e.g. that one in the Black Fleet crisis).

You could, but that's taking control away from the player. If I want to play a total war footing Empire why shouldn't I be able to? If the game doesn't want me doing that they can add some system to represent political will and have planets defect or go independent if I piss them off too much, but really there shouldn't be anything aside from that preventing me from taking the Empire from barely militarized to something that would make the factions in 40k blush. Plus, in canon, I should be able to crank out a new Death Star every few years or so at any random world I so choose and the rebels shouldn't have a way to respond as long as I don't try to use my incomplete super weapon as some form of trap.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Lord Revan wrote:in the game each "building" including things like shield genertors and space stations take up varying amounts of slots in the systems, this repesents the system's ability to logistically support those stuctures, so when we say there's "no room" for a shipyard what we really mean is that this system doesn't have the logistics to support a shipyard.

Actually, for shipyard systems, I tend to leave a fleet there for defense rather than rely on planetary shields. Sure the shields will delay the enemy but a fleet provides a surer defense than just shields which could be crippled with enough bombardment or sabotage.

I prefer to always have two shield generators since that makes planetary bombardments impossible. That way I don't have to tie half my fleet down defending the shipyards.

Jub wrote:You could, but that's taking control away from the player. If I want to play a total war footing Empire why shouldn't I be able to? If the game doesn't want me doing that they can add some system to represent political will and have planets defect or go independent if I piss them off too much, but really there shouldn't be anything aside from that preventing me from taking the Empire from barely militarized to something that would make the factions in 40k blush.

I think you need to treat the "shipyard" facilities as an abstraction and not just an assembly plant. In my mind they always represented the entire production and logistics train that goes into building a starship. You have your turbolaser factories, your sensor assembly lines, plumbing installation companies etc. Once you start doing that things start making a lot more sense since you can see how every planet can only supply so many skilled hands and resources to work on all these diverse fields which none the less make it into a starship.

Plus, in canon, I should be able to crank out a new Death Star every few years or so at any random world I so choose and the rebels shouldn't have a way to respond as long as I don't try to use my incomplete super weapon as some form of trap.

You pretty much can do this in game. Not at the beginning of course but give it about a year worth of building shipyards and developing them and you can just start cranking out death stars. That's basically my primary strategy in the game. Turtle up and take the core worlds. And when production is high go around blowing everything up until I am left with a one planet empire that's 100% loyal to me.

Purple wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Lord Revan wrote:in the game each "building" including things like shield genertors and space stations take up varying amounts of slots in the systems, this repesents the system's ability to logistically support those stuctures, so when we say there's "no room" for a shipyard what we really mean is that this system doesn't have the logistics to support a shipyard.

Actually, for shipyard systems, I tend to leave a fleet there for defense rather than rely on planetary shields. Sure the shields will delay the enemy but a fleet provides a surer defense than just shields which could be crippled with enough bombardment or sabotage.

I prefer to always have two shield generators since that makes planetary bombardments impossible. That way I don't have to tie half my fleet down defending the shipyards.

Jub wrote:You could, but that's taking control away from the player. If I want to play a total war footing Empire why shouldn't I be able to? If the game doesn't want me doing that they can add some system to represent political will and have planets defect or go independent if I piss them off too much, but really there shouldn't be anything aside from that preventing me from taking the Empire from barely militarized to something that would make the factions in 40k blush.

I think you need to treat the "shipyard" facilities as an abstraction and not just an assembly plant. In my mind they always represented the entire production and logistics train that goes into building a starship. You have your turbolaser factories, your sensor assembly lines, plumbing installation companies etc. Once you start doing that things start making a lot more sense since you can see how every planet can only supply so many skilled hands and resources to work on all these diverse fields which none the less make it into a starship.

Plus, in canon, I should be able to crank out a new Death Star every few years or so at any random world I so choose and the rebels shouldn't have a way to respond as long as I don't try to use my incomplete super weapon as some form of trap.

You pretty much can do this in game. Not at the beginning of course but give it about a year worth of building shipyards and developing them and you can just start cranking out death stars. That's basically my primary strategy in the game. Turtle up and take the core worlds. And when production is high go around blowing everything up until I am left with a one planet empire that's 100% loyal to me.

Cool, people were making it sound like it was a struggle to build even normal sized fleets. Though it might be cooler just to get the equivalent billions of ISD's instead. Just picture running around with an ISD for every man woman and child alive today and crushing your foes.

Purple wrote:I prefer to always have two shield generators since that makes planetary bombardments impossible. That way I don't have to tie half my fleet down defending the shipyards.

They aren't that quite impossible if you bring a large enough fleet to do the job and keep bombarding till the planet cracks. Granted the AI might not be smart enough on average to do that.

Also, leaving a sizable number of squadrons of fighters can actually be quite a deterrent against enemy fleets.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Purple wrote:I prefer to always have two shield generators since that makes planetary bombardments impossible. That way I don't have to tie half my fleet down defending the shipyards.

They aren't that quite impossible if you bring a large enough fleet to do the job and keep bombarding till the planet cracks. Granted the AI might not be smart enough on average to do that.

Also, leaving a sizable number of squadrons of fighters can actually be quite a deterrent against enemy fleets.

I thought that it was hard coded that 2 intact generators made bombardment useless; the problem being that shield generators take away space for more shipyards

Luke Starkiller wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Purple wrote:I prefer to always have two shield generators since that makes planetary bombardments impossible. That way I don't have to tie half my fleet down defending the shipyards.

They aren't that quite impossible if you bring a large enough fleet to do the job and keep bombarding till the planet cracks. Granted the AI might not be smart enough on average to do that.

Also, leaving a sizable number of squadrons of fighters can actually be quite a deterrent against enemy fleets.

I thought that it was hard coded that 2 intact generators made bombardment useless; the problem being that shield generators take away space for more shipyards

Maybe I brought a Death Star or lots of saboteurs.

2 shield generators are good for early fleets but cannot stand up to six or so ISDs. They will break through. I always build three generators on important planets and 2 on mining planets. Let the alliance/Empire take as many crappy planets as they want.