+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Flak (/showthread.php?tid=3690)
Flak - Dab - 09-02-2007
Templar, your own post shows how overpowered flak is. Even if the ships didn't have wireframes the equipment is stripped in 2 hits.
Sinking yourself
Flak - Panzer - 09-02-2007
Normally I ignore such replies...
Anyway, there is a difference between nerf/repair and remove, isn't there?
Flak - Exile - 09-03-2007
Now, annother example :
Today, on my Osiris Tauri the BSG attacked, jumped in, took my shields down with 2 battlestars, warhammer & Nemesis. after the shields, wham, 2 flaks comming towards me. 2 of my guns blown off and 75% HULL. to slitherenes! yust because i fly a vanilla ship against flaks.
Now, i will not fight ANNY ship with flak on my osiris, for i see this weapon as a bug exploit and unfair towards Vanilla Battleships.
Flak - Panzer - 09-03-2007
It's overkill
Nem was the only ship mounting flaks - 2
I foresee a BIG nerf on these
Flak - Eppy - 09-03-2007
Yes, I just saw half a squadorn get blowin up by Nemesis's FLak cannons.
...we are displeased.
Flak - Panzer - 09-03-2007
Well, another half got wrecked by Hammer's regular guns... And I wasted half of my CDs :angry: :laugh:
anyway... OVERKILL
Flak - Qunitinius~Verginix - 09-04-2007
I don't give a damn what happens to Flak. I never use it, and I rarely ever go seeking a fight with my capships (mostly just defense) and then again most of my capships are gunboats. Delete it, or leave, I probably wont affect me in too many ways.
Verg
Flak - Dab - 09-04-2007
That was real useful there Verg. Swear and say you don't give a [beep]. Real constructive..
Now flak either needs a 75% decrease in explosion size, 25% decrease in speed, and 60-75% decrease in damage, or removed. However, until we have no wireframed ships at all, its unfair, especially to the Vanilla capships.
I vote for a complete removal.
BTW, you guys didn't get Fenrir.. But before Tank gets credit, I was flying it.:P
Flak - Panzer - 09-04-2007
Was a reeeeal nice battle.
Considering getting rid of these flaks off Nem... Wasting CDs only...And with my own fighters tangled with yours, I don't want to hit anything by accident.
Flak - Tortured_Soul - 09-04-2007
Pulled from the 'weapon_equip.ini' file.
[Explosion]
nickname = li_battleship_flak_turret01_explosion
effect = li_flakcannon01_impact
lifetime = 0.000000, 0.000000
process = disappear
strength = 100
radius = 200
hull_damage = 10000
energy_damage = 0
impulse = 0
Strength, I believe this is to do with physics rather than weapon damage.
Radius, Explosive Radius - the area is deals damage to, in this case 200m from the epicenter
Hull Damage, speaks for itself. This does 10000 points of damage to anything within the Explosive Range
How-an-ever, this doesn't need to be modified at all. No-one seems to be complaining about the damage that the Flak can deal, simply that it strips other ships equipment too quickly. Tis is easily solved by reducing the 'explosion_resistance' modifier from 1 to probably 0.2. This would stop the weapon stripping from occuring because the flak, from the engines point of view, is simply an explosion from a specific point.
Problem solved, for Capital Class ships anyway. My view on fighter being struck is this, don't make your flight plan so predicatble. There is a further modifier, elsewhere in the file, that sets the projectile to detonate when it's within 4m of a target. This should probably be zero'd and the turn rate for the actual turret itself should be chaged from 90 deg per second, to something much lower.
But that's just my opioin.
As for the wireframe/collision data I want clear things up for everyone.
They are NOT the same thing. Wireframes are the display in the bottom left of the screen that you see when appropriate. They have no other use other than making models/the game seem more polished and visually complete. Collision data controls the physics behind how everything reacts to the explosions. They could be added (so far as I know, I've never done any work with SURface files) with relative ease.
The wireframes I've already given my personel verdict on, they would require a huge amount of time, effort and a lot of dedication. This is because they need:
1) Permission from the original author to modify/recreate his/her work (10 minutes up to Never)
2) Work modifying/recreating the model (Couple of weeks)
3) UVW mapped again (A week for a good one)
4) Re-textured, although this could be avoided with some nifty UVW mapping (A week for a good one, maybe less)
5) Suitably reduced so that they make effective wireframes (and potentially customised SURface files) (Hours)
6) Not so much recoded, but certianly they would need retested. (Week)
That's per ship, which is why I never bothered myself to make a start back on this. There are how many custom ships in Discovery at the moment?
I've never been brutalised by someone using Flaks, so I'm with holding my vote until I have something to base it on, but that's what the files look like to me, and that's my views, thus far.