25 replies to this topic

[Kitkun]

Converting some of the old Petroglyph ships for use in Skirmish.

Unofficial PR v1.1.2 version Courtesy of Tropical Bob

Kitkun's Skirmish Ver. 1.0 on FileFront
Unit information for Release 1:
 Info.txt   6.82KB   74 downloads

My goal is to increase the variety of ships available by converting the Empire at War and Forces of Corruption ships for use in skirmish battles.
I'm attempting to make each of the ships as unique as I can while maintaining balance and giving each ship it's own role. In addition, I will attempt to maintain the 'spirit' of the ship as designed by Petroglyph.

Imperial and Alliance ships will of course be used by their respective factions, while Zann Consortium ships will be added to the CSA.
I know this is not canon, but (Since I'm not creating a new faction) this will increase variety of ships available to the CSA, plus the CSA bought all kinds of ships anyways.

Complete:

• Keldabe-class Battleship: CSA Capital Ship
• Krayt-class Destroyer: CSA Capital Ship
• Abolisher-class Assault Frigate: Alliance Destroyer
• Vengeance-class Frigate: CSA Frigate
• Crusader-class Gunship: CSA Corvette
• Tartan-class Patrol Cruiser: Imperial Corvette
• Guardian-class Light Cruiser: Imperial Transport
• Golan Power Ver. 2:
  
• NOTE: Golan Power Ver. 2 affects Galactic Conquest as well.

Cut:
KDB Broadside-class Missile Cruiser: Cut due to failure of 3DS Max. Needs more firing bones. Preferably a lot more.

Edited by Kitkun, 03 June 2012 - 04:16 AM.

[Tropical Bob]

I like the idea of adding in the Broadside-class Missile Cruiser in. Not sure how I feel about the Zann ships though, especially the Aggressor-class Destroyer. It's going to need some serious balancing work.

I think the Vengeance-class Frigate should have the extreme range, especially if you keep it without shields. That will give it a little edge over the more protected ships.

[Pred the Penguin]

Personally, I think the Aggressor is an ugly ship and doesn't feel Star Wars.
I have my doubts about the Broadside. Will it play like the vanilla-EaW Broadside?
As for the Vengeance, just give it normal mass drivers. XD

[anakinskysolo]

Are any of these stats canonical?

[anakinskysolo]

Are any of these stats canonical?

[Pred the Penguin]

I think the Broadside's are...

[Kaleb Graff]

We have saga RPG stats for it, from The Force Unleashed Campaign Guide.

[Kitkun]

Thanks for the input all!

I like the idea of adding in the Broadside-class Missile Cruiser in. Not sure how I feel about the Zann ships though, especially the Aggressor-class Destroyer. It's going to need some serious balancing work.
I think the Vengeance-class Frigate should have the extreme range, especially if you keep it without shields. That will give it a little edge over the more protected ships.

The Aggressor is going to be effective against the big ships only. In fact, it'll have little hope of hitting anything cruiser sized and below.
My proposal is to make it a very unwieldy weapon. Low accuracy, low rate of fire, with poor maneuverability and few other defenses. It won't be hard to get out of it's firing arc. Since I'm not working with a projectile with defined characteristics in PR, it won't have extreme range either; probably it will end up going as far as a heavy turbolaser.

I might have to try both shields and no shields with buffed speed and hull on the Vengeance. I haven't really done balancing passes on the incomplete ships since I don't have them in game yet, so I just don't know how it'll work in game. Mainly, I wanted to keep the shield refresh for survivability.

Personally, I think the Aggressor is an ugly ship and doesn't feel Star Wars.
I have my doubts about the Broadside. Will it play like the vanilla-EaW Broadside?
As for the Vengeance, just give it normal mass drivers. XD

Yeah, the only reason I want to add the Aggressor to add a rather unique ship in.

The Broadside will be firing the normal projectiles you find in PR already. Basically I wanted it to be this little ball spewing all kinds of missiles. In reference to the games though, I gave it a good bit of concussion missiles and some diamond-boron missiles as well.

Well, the illegal Carrack has a set of ten heavy mass drivers, and so it seems to me that the purpose designed ship should have something better. Though now that I think about it, it probaby won't have high damage...

Are any of these stats canonical?

We have saga RPG stats for it, from The Force Unleashed Campaign Guide.

Stats are... not exactly canon. At all.

I have neither the RPGs (Can't understand half of the stats they use anyways. :-P) not the Force Unleashed Campaign Guide. The Crusader is built on top of what PR has now, and the Broadside is made from this page stating that it has forty missile tubes and two turbolasers. Other than that, I have absolutely no references besides the game and backstory.

The other thing is giving them unique roles. The Tartan in particular was a bit of a challenge, as anti-fighter was filled quite amply by the IPV and Lancer, while the Bayonet did long-range anti-frigate. Finally I noticed the Empire's odd habit of mixing lots of ranges, and had no really 'fast' corvette, where the Tartan was specifically noted as having oversized engines. So now it's the Imp's fastest, and has a whole load of short range weapons as a counterpart to the Bayonet. (If I added longer range weapons, it stopped too far for it's better weapons to engage, yet was usually well inside the enemy's range.)


Edit: Gee, I can't seem to spell right now.

Edited by Kitkun, 27 January 2009 - 10:11 PM.

[anakinskysolo]

Ok then:

These are the armament of the ships according to Wookiepedia:

Crusader-class Corvette

- 12 laser cannons
- 1 point-defense laser cannon

Tartan Patrol Cruiser

- 20 laser cannons
And the length is 600 meters.

Keldabe Battleship: No information apart from the game (which is obviously erroneous).

Vengeance Frigate: No information apart from the game.

Assault Frigate Mk II:

- 15 laser cannons
- 20 quad laser cannons
- 15 turbolaser batteries (which, according to PR, are just heavy turbolaser cannons).

Broadside Missile Cruiser: Just as you said.

Aggresor-class Star Destroyer: No information apart from the game.

I know these would make the Mark I versions of each ships, and you are doing the Mark 8 version. I also know that maybe you don't want to stick to canon, but I'm giving you this information in the case it might help you. About the Broadside Missile Cruiser, are you planning on adding new bones to the model? Because if that's the case and you know how to do it, I want to ask your help for adding some bones to the Lucrehulk I'm making. Coinich and I have been trying to do it, but our (mostly his) effort has been in vane.

[Kitkun]

Figures. The three pages I didn't remember to check before hand are the ones that list actual stats...

For the Crusader, I'm sticking with PR's armament, which is what the Mark 8 I did is made from.

The Tartan and AFII stats they have listed I have to take issue with.
[rant]
The Tartan is supposedly as big as a Dreadnaught at 600 meters, yet is able to 'skirmish directly with enemy starfighters' with only the implied speed and maneuverability of a Carrack? Has only 20 lasers? Plus, what's the point in the Lancer if you already have an almost identical ship?
What really annoys me is that it far inferiot to the same company's earlier design, the Carrack. Which is near half the size, has far better armament, and similar agility as the Tartan. The Tartan isn't looking too good there...

After taking a look at the AFII stats, I thought it was a bit similar to what the AFI had. Then I discovered it seems similar because it's identical. Really, from the single Gamma-class complement, right down to the cargo capacity, passengers, and length. The only real improvement it notes is better shielding, despite it clearly being a completely new ship. Oh, and there's supposedly a Dreadnaught hull in there somewhere.
[/rant]

Edit: Forgot to address, I don't know much anything about rigging the models. I also don't have 3DSMax. I was actually going to take a look at the Blender thing myself...
Edit 2: Unsuccessful so far. Trying the 3DSMax trial. 3DSMax tutorials unhelpful so far. I'm going to try my tried and true method of clicking things until something goes right. Or left, as the case may be.

Edited by Kitkun, 03 June 2012 - 04:13 AM.

[Pred the Penguin]

Completely forgot about the AFII... Now it's giving me a headache. =/

I say do what you think is best.

[Kitkun]

Why, thank you Autodesk! Your useless installer not only fails to work, it gives no info about why it failed. And bluescreened my computer. Didn't work in Safe Mode either. Nor did the other install method work. And the help text appears to point to a readme file that, unsurprisingly, is part of the failing install and so is not installed for me to see. Oh yeah, and it corrupted a bunch of data. Screw you.

[coinich]

For some reason, bones added in Blender were not working well for the program. :(

[Kitkun]

[rant]
Well, because I'm a stubborn *****, I have 3DS Max running. I have to say that thing sucks.
After running the importer, it can't manage to load any of the shaders for some unknown reason, the bone system refuses to show me any existing bones, and if I try something as advanced as clicking on the model to try and edit it or change the camera perspective, it glitches and I can no longer see what I'm doing.
What a waste of a day.
[/rant]

So... if anybody knows of a standalone converter, I'd really like to try a different program, such as Blender. (The standalone one I had failed quite spectacularly, and the only other one I know of is a plugin for 3DS Max.)

Put up few more stats.

Edited by Kitkun, 29 January 2009 - 04:07 PM.

[anakinskysolo]

Are you running Windows Vista? Because that may be the problem, as I had exactly the same issues as you had until I tried in my other PC, which is XP.

[EduardPais]

vengeance - the frigate or jerec's ship ?

the weapon stats for jerec's ship are the same as the executor's http://starwars.wiki...Star_Destroyer)

[coinich]

Hey, does that mean the bones show up now?

[Kitkun]

Are you running Windows Vista? Because that may be the problem, as I had exactly the same issues as you had until I tried in my other PC, which is XP.

Vista, though it's supposedly compatible. My XP machine no longer has a full set of parts, so I can't try it out...

vengeance - the frigate or jerec's ship ?

The frigate. Not a whole lot of reason add in a ship that's identical to another in all but the model.

Next up, I test a theory about Space Colonies, then get the Vengeance in-game.

Edited by Kitkun, 01 February 2009 - 11:43 PM.

[Phoenix Rising]

I think the Vengeance-class Frigate should have the extreme range, especially if you keep it without shields.

Unless I'm mistaken, the shields were removed to support the cloaking device, so the stock model should have shields. Double check that though.

For the Crusader, I'm sticking with PR's armament, which is what the Mark 8 I did is made from.

Mine's based directly on the concept art; Wookieepedia stats are based on the model that appeared in EaW that was based on the concept art. Yeah...

The Tartan and AFII stats they have listed I have to take issue with.

That's why I cut them a long time ago and never looked back.

Well, because I'm a stubborn *****, I have 3DS Max running. I have to say that thing sucks.

Haha, yeah. That's unfortunately why you can't just pick it up one day and expect to start modding. I had three classes in 3ds Max specifically, plus a couple others that required its use, but even then I had to teach myself how to rig for EaW (I recommend doing these turorials) and I just don't have the artistic faculties to be able to do any serious modeling .

Edited by Phoenix Rising, 05 February 2009 - 09:51 PM.

[Kitkun]

Release. See top of the original post. If you have any feedback, I'd like to hear it.
Added to do list for next release, mostly for my own benefit.

Known issues:
Crusader's Advanced Double Turbolasers use the Heavy Double Turbolaser effect. The combination of me and 3DS Max produces levels of incompetence never before seen, so there's no new effect for now.
The Abolisher is scaled close, but not correct. The numbers I calculated were far too big to be correct, and put the ship somewhere in the 1200 meter range.

Thanks for all the info, PR.
Yeah, I decided to give it shields anyways. Still pretty fragile.
I never thought to look at the concept art, but I couldn't really get anything new from the other pieces.
I certainly never thought to look for tutorials for specific programs like EaW... I'll have to take another look at it. That's crazy...

Edited by Kitkun, 09 February 2009 - 08:51 AM.