StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Nephtys wrote:Fleet Intel: They seem to be using some sort of ion beam, which is superior to our mass drivers.
Fleet Command: Attack! Shoot! Boom! Violence! Salvage!
Fleet Research: Because the beams are blue, we can now reverse engineer them, despite them being totally advanced alien technology....
Fleet Intel: We can design a ship of the line identical to a major galactic powers', given a couple of days.

*rolleyes*

err what?

Ace Pace wrote:I'm asking myself, a question relating to alot of mods.

Isn't it time to stop pushing features in, but to polish, optimise and bug fix?

Well there are two options, polish and clean up; or continue to deliver content. The first, while nice, is not going to keep people playing, considering the HW2 online community is now something like 20 people, the only way they can really hope to keep people playing is to keep throwing us cool new toys to play with.
It would be super-cool if I could hop-online and in 5 minutes find a game of PDS, but that'll never be an option, the HW2 online community is very much dead.

Obviously, except the PDS fanbase is still there and will remain there, so whats the problem of doing a 7.x(5?) just dedicated to polishing? It won't win awards but it'll be a solid release.

InnocentBystander wrote:

Nephtys wrote:Fleet Intel: They seem to be using some sort of ion beam, which is superior to our mass drivers.
Fleet Command: Attack! Shoot! Boom! Violence! Salvage!
Fleet Research: Because the beams are blue, we can now reverse engineer them, despite them being totally advanced alien technology....
Fleet Intel: We can design a ship of the line identical to a major galactic powers', given a couple of days.

*rolleyes*

err what?

She is referring to Fleet Intelligence's ability to reverse engineer alien technology thousands of years in advance of their own based on a blasted hulk they've salvaged and then put it into mass production in a matter of minutes. Make sense? Good.

How are they going to polish it? Make Hiig/Vagyr balanced as well as they were in the orignal game, the balance is already fair; though I've never acutally played a "normal" game of PDS so I really cannot comment 100% on balance (the AI doesn't count, it's stupid as hell, com'on guys, I can take on two of them on a good day). There are things that could be done here and there, but they're already looking into making the "lite" version for people with computers that are more than a year old. What more do you honestly want? They're coming out with new content every couple months, the game is largely bug free, and fairly stable compared to say... Warlords... heh; still waiting on Warlords .5 :/

As you said before, Fighters, making it more understandable, I'd kill for a manual, but as you said, to keep the fanbase happy its more ships, bigger battles, longer combat.

I have absolutely no problem with longer combat, bigger battles and more ships. I do have a problem when the ships that interest me the least, and are the most difficult to watch, ruin the game for me.

As far as the manual goes, while it'd be nice, everything is pretty straightforward. Ask me about a ship and I can tell you what you need to know about it.

For instance:
Attack Carrier HGN - Escort Carrier, pathetically weak, but extremely fast and armed well enough to provide fire support.
Escort Carrier HGN - Escort Carrier, pathetically weak, but also relatively inexpesive. Extremely fast and armed well enough to provide point defense for nearby ships. Has some sort of weak repair aura (white).

If you read the descriptions once or twice, you can generally get a good idea of the role of each ship. Or hell, use them once or twice and figure it out for yourself

Or how about they understand the concept of easy to understand descriptions? Not everyone understands the following intuitively:

3 PIC
4 RG 300mm
5 AC 55mm
2 HVAR
3 MRAM

Speaking of which, is there like a glossary of those terms around somewhere.

Also, what are the differences between the additional sides that have been put in?

IVF is basicly Higarra light, now with them adding half the big guns into it, theres really very little difference from them to Higara aside from lack of mothership and destroyers.

Ace Pace wrote:IVF is basicly Higarra light, now with them adding half the big guns into it, theres really very little difference from them to Higara aside from lack of mothership and destroyers.

IVF is the Vagyr, Sobani is the Hiigaran light faction. Though the IVF can build a shipyard, so really, it's just a sucky start for Vagyr

3 PIC
4 RG 300mm
5 AC 55mm
2 HVAR
3 MRAM

This means 7 large guns, 5 pd guns, 5 missiles.

When you opened up PDS for first time, did you know that?

DoH, I forgot.

Nephtys wrote:

SylasGaunt wrote:

phongn wrote: Well, yes, but the tech curve is far too fast for my tastes.

Well that's homeworld for you.. look what happened in the first game.

Fleet Intel: They seem to be using some sort of ion beam, which is superior to our mass drivers.
Fleet Command: Attack! Shoot! Boom! Violence! Salvage!
Fleet Research: Because the beams are blue, we can now reverse engineer them, despite them being totally advanced alien technology....
Fleet Intel: We can design a ship of the line identical to a major galactic powers', given a couple of days.

*rolleyes*

The HW manual says thast the Kushan dudes already had ion beams before the mothership left, just that they hadn't developed any sort of way to mount it on a ship. So it's slightly less farfetched.

Ace Pace wrote:Or how about they understand the concept of easy to understand descriptions? Not everyone understands the following intuitively:

3 PIC
4 RG 300mm
5 AC 55mm
2 HVAR
3 MRAM

PIC: Pulse Ion Cannon
RG: Railgun
AC: Autocannon
HVAR: High-Velocity Attack Rocket
MRAM: Medium-Range Attack Missile

InnocentBystander's description of them is reasonably accurate. HVARs are unguided rockets but hard to intercept due to speed. MRAMs are homing but slower and interceptable.

Nephtys wrote:Fleet Intel: They seem to be using some sort of ion beam, which is superior to our mass drivers.
Fleet Command: Attack! Shoot! Boom! Violence! Salvage!
Fleet Research: Because the beams are blue, we can now reverse engineer them, despite them being totally advanced alien technology....
Fleet Intel: We can design a ship of the line identical to a major galactic powers', given a couple of days.

*rolleyes*

I think it's more worrying that the Taiidan haven't advanced a bit in 3,000 years, really. I mean, the 3,000 year old Kushan hulks in Karos have very slightly wussier weapons than modern, top-o' the line Taiidan ships.
Kushan speedy tech gain is countered by the fact there isn't all that much tech to gain speedily, I suppose.

Ace Pace wrote:Or how about they understand the concept of easy to understand descriptions? Not everyone understands the following intuitively:

3 PIC
4 RG 300mm
5 AC 55mm
2 HVAR
3 MRAM

You know there is a manual for it that gives all those definitions and most of the other weapon Acronyms with the exception of the new ion cannon classes.

Vanas wrote:

Nephtys wrote:Fleet Intel: They seem to be using some sort of ion beam, which is superior to our mass drivers.
Fleet Command: Attack! Shoot! Boom! Violence! Salvage!
Fleet Research: Because the beams are blue, we can now reverse engineer them, despite them being totally advanced alien technology....
Fleet Intel: We can design a ship of the line identical to a major galactic powers', given a couple of days.

*rolleyes*

I think it's more worrying that the Taiidan haven't advanced a bit in 3,000 years, really. I mean, the 3,000 year old Kushan hulks in Karos have very slightly wussier weapons than modern, top-o' the line Taiidan ships.
Kushan speedy tech gain is countered by the fact there isn't all that much tech to gain speedily, I suppose.

Or how about no-combat-experience Kushan with space travel only as legends design light and heavy fighters equal to the dominant galactic empire's craft? That's pretty bad too.

The only thing that bothers me about PDSs ship tooltips is they don't mention hitpoints or speed (ph34r the n00b) and they use largely meaningless jargon to describe weapons instead of giving you an idea of weapon effectiveness. I sure as fuck don't know at which calibre the projectile guns become useful against DDs, and the game ain't going to tell me.

PDS needs to seriously reexamine their weapon loadouts relative to hitpoints. The fighters are the best example, but even the larger ships should not be able to laugh off DOZENS of FULL SALVOS from the heaviest enemy warships main battery. Also, the subsystems hits are far, far too low relative to total hitpoints. Vaygr need to be subbed out as much as the Higs are.

SylasGaunt wrote:You know there is a manual for it that gives all those definitions and most of the other weapon Acronyms with the exception of the new ion cannon classes.

Where? I have been unable to find it.

The Iskander Shah is fun to use. Sure, it is hideously vulnerable if left along but when you have ships to distract the enemy from shooting at it, well, all that firepower

Stark wrote:The only thing that bothers me about PDSs ship tooltips is they don't mention hitpoints or speed (ph34r the n00b) and they use largely meaningless jargon to describe weapons instead of giving you an idea of weapon effectiveness. I sure as fuck don't know at which calibre the projectile guns become useful against DDs, and the game ain't going to tell me.

Take stab. I'd guess somewhere around oh... 300mm (which is you know, the size on the destroyer).

Where? I have been unable to find it.

Under downloads in the 'PDS Documentation' section.

SylasGaunt wrote:

Stark wrote:The only thing that bothers me about PDSs ship tooltips is they don't mention hitpoints or speed (ph34r the n00b) and they use largely meaningless jargon to describe weapons instead of giving you an idea of weapon effectiveness. I sure as fuck don't know at which calibre the projectile guns become useful against DDs, and the game ain't going to tell me.

Take stab. I'd guess somewhere around oh... 300mm (which is you know, the size on the destroyer).

I'm pretty sure a destroyer is more than 300 millimeters long.

Also, how in hell is one supposed to know the length or size of a destroyer?

No, PDS has grown increasingly obfuscating and unintuitive.

Under downloads in the 'PDS Documentation' section.

The only document there refers to 6.1

Uraniun235 wrote:

SylasGaunt wrote:

Stark wrote:The only thing that bothers me about PDSs ship tooltips is they don't mention hitpoints or speed (ph34r the n00b) and they use largely meaningless jargon to describe weapons instead of giving you an idea of weapon effectiveness. I sure as fuck don't know at which calibre the projectile guns become useful against DDs, and the game ain't going to tell me.

Take stab. I'd guess somewhere around oh... 300mm (which is you know, the size on the destroyer).

I'm pretty sure a destroyer is more than 300 millimeters long.

Also, how in hell is one supposed to know the length or size of a destroyer?

No, PDS has grown increasingly obfuscating and unintuitive.

300mm is the bore size of the guns on the destroyer. "the size on the destroyer" not "the size of the destroyer."

That's still pretty wildly unintuitive.

Uraniun235 wrote: Take stab. I'd guess somewhere around oh... 300mm (which is you know, the size on the destroyer).

I'm pretty sure a destroyer is more than 300 millimeters long.[/QUOTE]

That should have been 'destroyer's' as in, the same size as the Destroyer's guns.

The only document there refers to 6.1

And? He was looking for a document that would explain all the acronyms used, and almost all of the ones that were used in 7.0 were used in 6.1.

Uraniun235 wrote:That's still pretty wildly unintuitive.

Not in light of the fact that it's been made fairly clear that bigger gun = more damage.