Jump to content


Photo

Dual space/ground map units.


5 replies to this topic

#1 a.fake.name

a.fake.name

    title available

  • Members
  • 539 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 04:41 AM

So lets discuss how adding some currently space only units to ground maps could be worked in the limitations of the engine.

This is not a thread about asking it to be added, we've had enough of those that the mod team knows some of us think it's silly not to have, this is just a discussion about how it should be done if it were to be done.


Now, here's how I see it:
-what ships get to go into atmosphere
-what will be the criteria for limiting the ships capabilities in atmosphere

 

Ok first up, how do we decide what you should be able to bring into a fight on the ground (or run into on a ground map).

Well, the answer is simple: The same way the PR team decided what weapons each ship got.
Look at the canon. If a ship is capable of atmospheric flight, it should be able to be used on ground maps.

This pretty much covers all type-1 yard vessels, and most type-2 ones as well.
For anything larger than a corvette it should be case by case basis, but for cap ships specifically stated in the cannon as being intended to land or fly in atmosphere (Acclamator, VSD-I, Venator) they should be included for that reason alone.

Now, the next question is what's the criteria for limiting their capabilities.
That is to say, when do we nerf them ?
My thoughts on the matter are simple:

 

-snubcraft get the same stats as in space, except they all get a lowered speed and their maneuverability gets raised or lowered depening on the ship (IE: a TIE would get less maneuverability on the ground)
 

-Make missile/torpedo/rocket/bomb weaponry an special ability that has to be targeted on something or an area of ground. Instead of the infinite automatic reloads that auto-fire at the target like in space, you have to target something, then get a cool down that depends on the ordinance type.
So from fastest to slowest cooldown... conc missiles, proton torps, proton rockets, proton bombs.

 

-Regular transports as well as compat transports (IE: YT-1300, stormtrooper transport, Assault Transport) should function the same as LAATs.

 

-With turreted weapons, only the ventral turrets should be able to target ground units. If possible, have the dorsal turrets only capable of engaging higher flying craft using the same layer as the airspeeder and the cloud cars (which should also be the layer that snubcraft use).

 

-Cap ships should have significantly reduced speed (the bigger the ship, the higher the reduction).

 

Obviously, only a handful of cap ships would be usable on ground maps.

 

Their hull strength should also be lowered quite a bit in atmosphere, because while they can limp on damaged engines in space, they'll go splat in atmosphere with damaged engines.

 

Of course the turreted weapon restriction would also mean that their ventral guns could engage ground targets (or their torpedo/missile weapons).

 

Have them in the higest possible layer on ground maps (IE: the one the cloud cars use, or a higher one if possible.), and set them to always be visible everywhere on the map (it's a big ship high up, everyone can see it).

Also, their weapon range and line of sight should be greatly reduced so on their own they can largely only target the area directly beneath them, or provide fire support to friendlies in contact.


Thoughts ?

 


Playing PR when stoned is awesome

 


#2 johnchm.10

johnchm.10

    ALL HUMANS ARE VERMIN IN THE EYES OF MORBO!

  • Members
  • 738 posts
  • Location:OMICRON PERSEI 8!

Posted 27 June 2014 - 05:18 AM

1. I don't know if having capitals like the Victory 1 or venator would be a good idea on the basis of map size. If anything, have them, and maybe the Acclimator be an additional form of artillery/airstrike/bombardment, similar to how naval vessels of the real world act as gunfire support to amphibious assaults. 2. Im with you on the small craft. The A-wing isn't much bigger than a T-47, so that's a plus. Transports land and disgorge troops and vehicles so that's a plus. 3. Would the land equivalent be the basic model of the unit, I.e. the T65A model X-wing, or would you have whichever model you have in orbit? This one goes to the PR team. How much work would something like this take?

#3 skie9173

skie9173

    Rebel (not so) High Command

  • Members
  • 257 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 06:07 AM

What about the Dreadnaught-class? Didn't Thawn use a cloaked one hidden under planetary shields to scare the crap out of planets? That implies they are at least somewhat atmospheric capable then, right?

And what about the Bulwark-class? It is shown on the ground in some comics.

http://starwars.wiki...ark_III?cb=4530

Half way down.

/ end sarcasm

Edited by skie9173, 27 June 2014 - 02:05 PM.

There is no emotion, there is peace. There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity. There is no death, there is the Force.

#4 johnchm.10

johnchm.10

    ALL HUMANS ARE VERMIN IN THE EYES OF MORBO!

  • Members
  • 738 posts
  • Location:OMICRON PERSEI 8!

Posted 27 June 2014 - 08:36 AM

I don't remember it being a Dreadnought, although bel ibls' army did have some parked at his base near new cov. I always thought that the ship might have been a Carrick. Less of an investment should the operation go south, and still carries a decent amount of firepower. A bulwark... again, my concern has to do with size

#5 evilbobthebob

evilbobthebob

    evilbobthemapper

  • Project Team
  • 2,304 posts
  • Location:USA
  • Projects:Phoenix Rising Maps
  •  Phoenix Rising Mapping Lead

Posted 27 June 2014 - 08:51 AM

John is right, size is a very important consideration when dealing with space units on land. If you play as the Empire, you'll have seen the Action IV transport landing and how larger that is. Now compare that in space to a proper capital ship...


Phoenix Rising, head of mapping. Thanks to everyone who got us to the position below!
Posted Image


#6 a.fake.name

a.fake.name

    title available

  • Members
  • 539 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 04:43 PM

1. I don't know if having capitals like the Victory 1 or venator would be a good idea on the basis of map size. If anything, have them, and maybe the Acclimator be an additional form of artillery/airstrike/bombardment, similar to how naval vessels of the real world act as gunfire support to amphibious assaults. 2. Im with you on the small craft. The A-wing isn't much bigger than a T-47, so that's a plus. Transports land and disgorge troops and vehicles so that's a plus. 3. Would the land equivalent be the basic model of the unit, I.e. the T65A model X-wing, or would you have whichever model you have in orbit? This one goes to the PR team. How much work would something like this take?

To a few of your numbered points

1-Remember, size is all in perspective.
Have them display at around the same size as in space maps, except floating WAY WAY WAY up in the sky
IE: on the same layer or higher as airspeeders and cloud cars.
That way, you have the unit looking like its way up there (prespective wise) but still get the benefit of having it.
Alter the range so unless other units extend it's line of sight, it can't see/shoot too far away, AND can't use it's main armament.

3-There would be no land equivelant, that's just silly.
You know how heroes and some units (stormtroopers for example) have land/space units (IE: in space stormtroopers are in a stormtrooper transport)  Basically do that with these units.
Their normal pre-existing version is the space unit, and if you drag them onto land maps, then they load the land version.
Same stats, minus the above mentioned reductions to speed and manuverbility.
So if you have the fully upgraded K-Wing in space, you get it on ground maps.

As for how much work it'd take, while I'm not on the team I can say this: It could only use pre-existing models, rescaled.
 

What about the Dreadnaught-class? Didn't Thawn use a cloaked one hidden under planetary shields to scare the crap out of planets? That implies they are at least somewhat atmospheric capable then, right?

And what about the Bulwark-class? It is shown on the ground in some comics.

http://starwars.wiki...ark_III?cb=4530

Half way down.

/ end sarcasm

 

Thrawn had a ship in an extremly high orbit just below the planetary shields.
It would fire at the same time as a ship ABOVE the shield, while cloaked, and with C'Both assisting the timing of it.
Thrawn would then proceed to punk whole planets into thinking he was shooting thru the shields and surrender.
That was out he captured Ukio with it's shield generators intact.

And as soon as the trick was figured out, the ship got wtf owned real fast.A

As for the Bulwark class, yeah, as I said above:

 

For anything larger than a corvette it should be case by case basis

 

Also according to that article the Bulwark that landed was a MkIII in the NJO era.
This is the same era that decided introuduce itself by killing Chewie off.
So yeah, this era is what killed Star Wars.

 

 

I don't remember it being a Dreadnought, although bel ibls' army did have some parked at his base near new cov. I always thought that the ship might have been a Carrick. Less of an investment should the operation go south, and still carries a decent amount of firepower. A bulwark... again, my concern has to do with size

To be fair I don't remember for sure what it was.
C'Both was used to coordinate the firing, so it appeared to be a single beam penetrating.

Remember tho, the firepower is irrelvent, he only fired single blasts at a time because they needed to match up as perfect as possible to fool the planet into surrendering.

 

John is right, size is a very important consideration when dealing with space units on land. If you play as the Empire, you'll have seen the Action IV transport landing and how larger that is. Now compare that in space to a proper capital ship...

See my reply to Johnchm.10


Playing PR when stoned is awesome

 




Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users