Jump to content


Replying to FAQ: Hardpoints in PR


Post Options

    • Can't make it out? Click here to generate a new image

  or Cancel


Topic Summary

Phoenix Rising

Posted 10 June 2009 - 06:01 PM

Yeah, I'm not totally sure what you're getting at... you could have a bunch of hardpoints in the same spot, but not one hardpoint that represents multiple things, unless you're talking about a battery of weapons. Even so, I tend not to operate in terms of batteries, but individual weapons. This is because EaW forces a minimum firing delay of 0.1 seconds, which although might be sensible for vanilla, is highly annoying to modders since you can't simulate coordinated fire, which is the whole point of a battery in the first place.

Posted 07 June 2009 - 12:30 AM

Second link from the bottom of the original post says no.

Posted 06 June 2009 - 10:07 AM

Query:

Is it possible to have multiple systems represented by 1 hard point.

If so this could allow incremental degradation (Every x% damage to the weapons hard point destroys a turret) while simplifying the interface).

I doubt this is possible with my knowledge of EAW's workings but it would solve the green ship issue.

feld

Posted 29 December 2008 - 06:04 PM

How I see it is that every ship basically has two hitpoint bars: shields + hull and hull...


Thanks! Quoted and added to FAQ above.

Kaleb Graff

Posted 29 December 2008 - 02:47 AM

What's the relationship between SBD and RU?

Phoenix Rising

Posted 27 December 2008 - 06:20 PM

How I see it is that every ship basically has two hitpoint bars: shields + hull and hull. When either one is depleted, the ship is killed. Normal weapons, such as lasers, must knock out the shields before they can damage the hull. Warheads (and a couple of other special weapons, such as slugthrower cannons) deal damage straight to the hull, which is ultimately what makes them useful.

Every ship has a different armament (which may or may not include anti-starfighter weapons) and a different shields-to-hull ratio. The average ship generally has twice as much shield protection as it has hull, but this can vary greatly as it upgrades. Some lines, such as the Acclamator, are focused on a strong hull over shields, so it's better to use turbolasers on them. Others, such as the Strike, have powerful shields at the expense of hull, so it's better to use torpedoes on them. Ultimately both weapons would work in either case, but in a close battle (such as Skirmish), it becomes increasingly important to drop ships in the most efficient manner possible in order to gain the upper hand. So that's why bombers (which are usually warhead-heavy) are useful.

feld

Posted 27 December 2008 - 06:17 AM

Nice job on the explanation, but there is one issue that I'm not sure has bee addressed: without hardpoints, why have bombers? It seems to me that in vanilla EaW, the primary strength of bombers was the fact that they could destroy targetable hardpoints. While the bombers can still bypass shields, the damage I've noticed them doing to capital ships hasn't been very significant. Is there still an effective way to use bombers that I've missed?


Good question. Added to FAQ with my answer below. PR/Ghost/others corrections always welcome:

Proton torpedo carrying bombers are useful against large ships because:
1. Protorps bypass shields
2. Bigger ships (especially those with mostly turbolaser armament) have a hard time hitting the bombers so they get multiple attack runs on the big ship.

SpardaSon21

Posted 26 December 2008 - 09:46 PM

Spam? Really, a couple of squadrons of K-Wings or Scimitars will down most caps easy, especially if the caps don't have any anti-fighter ships nearby.

Posted 26 December 2008 - 08:50 PM

Nice job on the explanation, but there is one issue that I'm not sure has bee addressed: without hardpoints, why have bombers? It seems to me that in vanilla EaW, the primary strength of bombers was the fact that they could destroy targetable hardpoints. While the bombers can still bypass shields, the damage I've noticed them doing to capital ships hasn't been very significant. Is there still an effective way to use bombers that I've missed?

Kaleb Graff

Posted 19 December 2008 - 07:31 PM

I'd certainly take it. I get my data from the DAT files, but spreadsheet sounds easier.

Review the complete topic (launches new window)