There appears to be a wreck in Bergundy in the Saint-Remy Nebula that causes you to crash to desktop if it's selected on the nav map or ingame. It's something to do with the Maquis aunno but's it's still encoded as an object.
I would like to see ammunition occupy cargo space.
You could then raise the limit on ammo to a large number - and use a ships cargo hold to balance their firepower.
Various ammunition types could then be made - some could be powerful, but occupy more cargo - so less are able to be carried.
Fighters could use the same type of ammo as bombers -like Nova Torps but again they must carry less - so it requires more fighters to do the same job as a bomber could (and with only one torp/cd slot to do it!).
Using ammo with cargo, you could in theory add torp hardpoints (or replace some turret hardpoints) to freighters and gunboats - hell all capital ships.
In fact, really, the concept of 'cargo cost' - taken to its fullest extension - could represent the ultimate in flexibility and customisation for the player.
The process has already started with armour and some other equipment incurring a cargo cost.
At the moment, 'low level' ships and equipment represent underutilised resources. A few players might use them for RP value - but the overwhelming majority soon move on to 'elite' equipment - and the mod balance is aimed at balancing the elite ships (from LF to Battleship).
What if every piece of equipment had a cargo value attached to it? What would be the 'baseline' for distinguishing one ship from another?
Well each ship has its own base properties - size, turn rate, base armour, powerplant, hardpoints, and of course cargo hold. What if ALL ships had a lot of hardpoints - as many as you could put on without it looking stupid?
A player might be inclined to wet themselves, thinking 'ohh I can now pwn everyone with my 12 Class 10 Codies!'....but a player is limited by cargo space!
A player could then choose between having a couple of powerful guns, or lots of less powerful ones. Can choose to forgo a thruster, or heavier armour, or a super-scanner, in exchange for cargo space to equip something else.
A power trader might totally strip back their ship to maximise cargo hold in exchange for vulnerability - or buff it up to resemble something close to a gunboat.
Rather than having Four types of Class 7 Transport turrets - one could have the ability to mount just about any turret within limits of power, faction and cargo space.
After all, what is a ship that can mount a single powerful gun, and a few less powerful ones? It is most likely a Gunboat or Cruiser class ship with a forward cannon!
What is a ship that chooses to mount light armour, but a better thruster and CD? An interceptor!
What is a ship that mounts little in the way of equipment, leaving a larger amount of cargo free? A trade ship!
It must be noted that a developer can still place boundaries on reason on this. I mean a Rhineland Battleship as a cargo transport? In theory it is possible. But pure 'trade' vessels could be made desirable for their purpose by simply lowering their powerplants and number of hardpoints.
It sounds strange, and maybe heretical to some who can already imagine some odd combinations...but imagine the possibilities!
NPCs seem to be a bit too strong. Sometimes when you get a mission that gets screwed up and you get 5 destroyers instead of 5 little ships.. its impossible to win. Thats suppose to be a 300-350k mission. I dont know if that could be fixed.
Last time I was in game, I heard a comment about Liberty turrets on a Corsair Osiris being OORP, but last time I checked, the Osiris comes with them?
As stupid as it may sound (I may be wrong), it's what I remember, and I don't think anyone should be the testbed for an issue that comes with the mod itself. It may not be much, but just to make sure everyone has the best experience.
"It is a cold universe until you know God as your Father, and then it becomes a home. Even the next life simply becomes the Father's house, home."
—David Pawson
and excuse me, as it is it seems to be an expensive useless ship.
It has only 2 guns firing forwards
and its 2 turrets can only fire backwards,
comparing this with other heavy bombers like the Barghest
this baby is not what it should be and the much cheaper
old Rheinalnd bomber is a lot more effective in any combat.
Seeing its price it should also have 3 torp/cd slots, both turrets also firing back- and forwards and a
little bit more cargo space that it can mount capital
armor 3 which takes 170 units of cargo, but thats minor.
' Wrote:It's a Thrudgelmir, and whats the point in posting twice your point?
' Wrote:Today I got myself a Fafnir,
and excuse me, as it is it seems to be an expensive useless ship.
It has only 2 guns firing forwards
and its 2 turrets can only fire backwards,
comparing this with other heavy bombers like the Barghest
this baby is not what it should be and the much cheaper
old Rheinalnd bomber is a lot more effective in any combat.
Seeing its price it should also have 3 torp/cd slots, both turrets also firing back- and forwards and a
little bit more cargo space that it can mount capital
armor 3 which takes 170 units of cargo, but thats minor.
John
Happened by chance,
sorry - what you wrote about the Twin-SNAC doesn't seem to work as the Fafnir
just doesn't have enough power to fire two SNAC's at the same time and then
still a 3rd slot for a cd was missing.
Then I could life with just 2 guns for- and 2 turrets firing backwards.
![[Image: QLRpcZ1.png]](https://i.imgur.com/QLRpcZ1.png)
![[Image: B305-A724-C3-D9-4-D19-83-EF-92-B478-B8-F595.png]](https://i.ibb.co/gjNT9fz/B305-A724-C3-D9-4-D19-83-EF-92-B478-B8-F595.png)
![[Image: GMG_banner.png]](http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/thenoseyshadow/GMG_banner.png)
![[Image: sigiw102.jpg]](http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff111/rytirm/sigiw102.jpg)
![[Image: audrey03a.png]](http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/7610/audrey03a.png)