Jump to content


Replying to How to build SSD?


Post Options

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

  or Cancel


Topic Summary

megabalta

Posted 29 September 2014 - 04:03 PM

Well, if you think about it, PR has the Imperial class SD mk4 right now. How is that for canon? I'd say PR is about keeping the "canon feeling", and a truckload of upgrades.

Anyway under fan fiction I meant actual data (and ship models) with actual sources like this or this. Most of the fan fiction is about the legacy era though, which I personally don't fancy that much, so I'm far from requesting a MC130.

There's only one tech tree file per side for all campaigns, so its an either or.


Aizen Teppa

Posted 29 September 2014 - 03:48 PM

So I will ask spiteful question: is PR about fan fiction or 'canon'?

 

Always thought the latter.

 

... Yes it would be interesting, perhaps special tech-tree for small CG 20-30 planets?


megabalta

Posted 29 September 2014 - 02:41 PM

Most dreadnaughts and battleships are ok to have only one version. Some star capital+ sized ships could have 3 levels -if it's logical- though. While the victory mk3, the imperial mk3, bulwark mk2 or the MC80c are fan fiction, there are models already made for them, and it's always possible to modernize the complements too, creating a what if scenario.

It would be interesting to make the whole tech tree nearly impossible to research in a single campaign (due to money/time limits), so the player had to choose what units he/she upgrades. It could increase the replay value significantly. 

I agree to remove ties without hyperdrive from the build quene. There could be an upgrade tech tree as a requirement for higher level carriers, but I don't think its necessary to have them as separate buildable units.


Aizen Teppa

Posted 29 September 2014 - 09:38 AM

To break up upgrades into tiers (excluding of course ships added in 1.3):

 

Battleships - 1 (Praetor, MC120, Bulwark)

Star destroyers and heavy cruisers - 2 (lvl 4 shipyard and perhaps some on lvl 3)

Rest - 3

 

+

 

removal of ordinary Tie-s. I have nothing against Tie spam during tactical combat (seriously beefed up complements), but build menu are no-go for them.


megabalta

Posted 28 September 2014 - 09:28 PM

Upgradable units are one of PRs main features. I agree however, that there are way more units than an average player needs. How about 3 levels for a single unit? It would cut about 60% of current the unit number, and probably around the same amount of lag. Do you know any canon/legend ships that has more than 3 types worth implementing?


Rhakorii

Posted 28 September 2014 - 12:18 PM

Forgive me for being totally ignorant, but if that were the case, could one not just replace all of the 'upgrades' with a single edition? The same as base FOC.

 

Less canonical, sure. But much more playable right?

 

Is there anything else you would need to alter to remove the lag?

 

And how would you go about doing that?


Aizen Teppa

Posted 28 September 2014 - 05:45 AM

Having a gazillion different units doesn't matter as much as playability to me! 

We are in agreement on this one - with a proviso: each unit built must be useful, not just unit for sake of unit. And issue was raised few times, to cut number of upgrades. Each upgrade clogs CPU a little bit. For capitals it's not that bad, but for corvettes, transports and fighters 7-10 it's pain. Each upgrade slot is a new unit, which create loooong list of same units just with different specs. Not perfect. Human player can easily replace old units with new ones. AI can't [won't?] do that and it clogs CPU performance one fighter wing at a time. Often the only way for AI to replace ships is to attack and be utterly defeated, but also often when player create 'stack of doom' in every target-able world, AI just sit camped and stacks junk.


Rhakorii

Posted 27 September 2014 - 07:36 PM

Yeah, that's why I was curious about using similar maps to base FOC. Frankly, I'd be happy just replacing the base units with their upgraded PR equivalents (the combat mechanics and graphic effects in this mod are amazing). Having a gazillion different units doesn't matter as much as playability to me! 


Aizen Teppa

Posted 27 September 2014 - 05:46 PM

Well, all your advice worked. 

 

The only problem, is that the game became unplayable after week 30. Just slowed down to an insufferable crawl.

 

Tried Chih's sub mod on GFFA, which worked great at first, but the same problem eventually occurred.

 

Pah! Great mod, but my comp is too shit to play it. Typical. 

Welcome to the PR club  :thumbsuphappy: lol

 

Like Evil Bob said, there is absolutely nothing team can do about this. Of course there is small work around to mitigate the issue to some extent (removing useless units from map, limiting fighter buildup, disabling/removing certain useless ships from research tree), but you'll run PR into the ground at some stage anyway. If it is any consolation [prize] 1.2 is much, much faster than 1.1 was not to mention 1.0. Original GFFA was much bigger and totally unplayable when PR first appeared. On Pentium 4 it was literally suicidal-sadomasochism kind of game, Core 2 Duo improved it, but real breakthrough came with X58/1366 CPUs. I can testify than all further top CPUs failed to deliver on performance front badly. All i7 which came after X58 are just slightly better copies of old Nehalem. There was no (incl. X99) burst of raw power we experienced jumping from P4 (old VW Beetle) to C2D (SR-71) to i7 (USS Enterprise-e oh wait.... Millennium Falcon ha, ha).


evilbobthebob

Posted 27 September 2014 - 04:40 PM

Nah the performance issues probably aren't specifically down to your PC, but rather the game having problems utilizing the resources that are available to it. It's single-threaded and CPU-bound so once one of your CPU cores is saturated, it can't perform any faster.


Review the complete topic (launches new window)