show us that line from your ship file... plz
show us that line from your ship file... plz
I've tried fiddling with the values or using just one or the other instead of both, with no luck. That combination produces an ability indicator sphere and an energy bar, but doesn't enable the c key or the cloak buttonCode:addAbility(NewShipType, "CloakAbility", 1, 2, 2000, 4000, 3, 100, 1, 1000); AddShipAbility(NewShipType, "Cloak", 0, "ThisShipOnly", 1);
Edit: Gah, I spent a couple hours slamming my head against this a week or two ago, and didn't notice the boolean in AddShipAbility was wrong. Flipped that, it works, nevermind.
Last edited by Siber; 25th May 09 at 7:33 PM.
Co-founder of Homeworld:@
Open to new members
no worries glad it worked out after looking at it again... sometimes a pair of fresh eyes (even if they're your own) help out a lot...
lol, glad to hear it got sorted out. Was away from my computer this evening.
And yes Siber that was exactly what I was talking about.
A Brave New Homeworld. (◔ ◡ ◔ )
Matth, if you'll read the preceding posts, I did post my code, and did notice what was wrong with it, and now it works. Thanks for trying to help, though.
o_o f*ck, seems that I missed a page :/ sorry. I'm gonna delete it.
OK guys! I'm back for a little while... I'm on a very interesting internship that is kinda awesome except for the whole 60 ish hours of work a week >.>
So we'll see how that goes. Anyway, I wanted to ask a question about salvaging to you guys. We kinda enjoyed HW1, cause you could get whatever you wanted, if you were badass. While it was a unique gameplay element, it got kind of silly if you salvaged EVERYTHING. Like... all the frigates in mission 14.
HW2's salvaging mechanic meant that your salvage target needed to be relatively isolated, or else the target's buddies would blow your frigate away.
HW cataclysm made salvaging... harder, and much much easier at the same time; cause workers were about 2 to 3 times tougher than salvettes and could repair each other rapidly.
So we were thinking... salvaging as the term for capturing enemy vessels implies less like combat boarding, and more like cleaning up after the battle. So we were thinking about setting up EMP damage so that there was an essentially random chance that any given ship was disabled, and salvageable.
So what do you think? Do you want to be able to pick and choose which ship you salvage, or should it be up to chance?
Perhaps both? Keep EMP as an ability, but also add a small amount of EMP damage to ships weapons (simulating ship infrastructure damage as they take hits)? Take enough concentrated fire, ships systems go down, and you can salvage. This might be better than random chance which - if it really is random - might mean you could disable a Battlecruiser with a flight of interceptors? That might play havok on balance.
The implementation idea we had was to have all weapons do both EMP and regular damage, with overlapping damage ranges, while all ships would have as much EMP health as regular health. That would mean that on average you'd be dealing more regular damage than EMP damage, but the RNG god would sometimes intervene and a ship would run out of EMP health before it ran out of regular health, and it would be disabled.
Getting it working just right would be a big exercise in playtesting, but the question is, does the idea of what is available for salvaging being somewhat random sound appealing at all, or is it anathema?
Pick and choose. If i want that Qwarr-Jet, i want my Qwarr-Jet!
And the ability to produce Swarmers.
At least in skirmish.
Are we gonna have to use fuel? Moreover, are we going to have intelligent strike craft that will leave the battlefield when they are low on fuel, gas up, and report for duty?
Hmmm. I wonder if the special attack AI could be used to switch fire of craft over to entirely EMP damage, but significantly less of it than would be dealt in normal mode; that way you could pick and choose which ship you wanted but at the cost of dramatically reducing your DPS. Against a lone (ship you want to salvage), that could make it almost assured you'd get to salvage it, at the cost of micro (at the very least a button press to activate EMP mode and a button press to deactivate it). I'm thinking that dropping to at MOST 1/3 normal DPS is all but a given; ridiculous scenarios where I triple my fleet size in one level until I've got an entirely bootleg armada makes all those regular units seem a bit redundant. My gut instinct is that stealing enemy ships whole (or even in tatters) should be -difficult-, certainly harder than just zapping them into dust.
One thing to mention is things like surrender and scripted disabling that could be done of key ships in missions, so if we do go with the random-disable idea and have "capture the taiidani cupcake ship" mission objectives, you won't have to savescum until you can actually get all three delicious cupcake ships.
I like the idea of adding in the EMP bit. Maybe instead of being random or a salvage op, it would really be much more like a assault boarding party...
10% of life is what happens to you and 90% is what you DO about it
I imagine that Salvaging in HW2 will always be harder than it was in HW1 because the AI is better. Occasionally, in HW1, you could slip in Salvage Corvettes without the AI giving a damn (though usually it did - it was just too late). But I'll be damned if the HW2 AI leaves those Marine Frigates alone.
No matter if you disable the ship you want to salvage, you're still going to have to contend with its attendant ships trying to kill the Marine Frigate - so it should still be suitably difficult. Even if EMP damage was given to all ships, I think it would still be exceedingly difficult-to-impossible to disable an entire battle group so you could move your Frigates in out of harm's way.
The special attack mode is also an interesting idea, but I have no idea how to go about doing it. I suppose it would involve making two sets for each weapon - one for EMP and one for Normal mode.
I like the random idea, after all, in a battle you never know if that one ricochetted bullet will make the reactor explode or just shut down. so for salvaging, you never know what you're going to get.
At the same time, it would be great to have at least one dedicated emp system (emp mines, modified bombers, whatever) to go after specific ships to support boarding actions, for those cupcake missions.
Wintermute: Stock Homeworld 2 is VICIOUSLY coded to attack capture frigates; I did a little math a while back and in terms of lifetime marine frigates last about as long against a destroyer's guns as a salvette did in HW1, except you can't get swarms of salvettes. And if you think Homeworld 1's AI ignores salvettes, I direct you to mission five. Those two taiidani destroyers will drop what they're doing and actively hunt your salvettes to the exclusion of all other vessels you field, which can cause hilarious disasters if you accidentally flee your salvettes to your huddled resource and research vessels...
back on topic: The team and I discussed weighting certain weapon systems to make them more likely to disable ships before destroying them; energy cannons (bomber weapons) came up as a possible candidate; bombers as precision-strike capital assault craft were nice. In our discussions of balancing, especially balancing strike craft fleets that include both attack bombers and ion corvettes, we've decided that we want bombers and ion 'vettes to serve primarily as zoom and boom front loaded damage; get in, drop a train on someone, get out before the missile swarm eats your face off. Cloaked bombers, by contrast, have enough protection from fire with their cloaking device that they can afford to stick around and continually damage a target. This means that cloaked ships are better at picking off isolated targets, as well as operate better in a furball (as long as the bad guy hasn't got prox sensors).
With the zoom'n'boom mission in mind for ion corvettes and attack bombers, then, it seems justified that those craft could likely cripple or disable a target. Dedicated disabling craft... well, I'm certainly not sold on, to tell you the truth. My fear is that they'll either be so much worse than their equivelant value in conventional weapons that they're not worth building... or they'll be better than standard ships and see huge widespread use. Hmmm... if we COULD get it so you could only capture a disabled ship, perhaps your capture craft should have weapons that deal disabling damage at point blank range, kinda ramming frigate style?
Thanks for the opinions, and keep 'em coming!
-perhaps your capture craft should have weapons that deal disabling damage at point blank range, kinda ramming frigate style? -
Actually, an idea I've toyed with a little bit is giving marine/infiltrator frigates upgrades to give them EMP guns (like scouts) and/or Jamming systems (enemy ships within radius modifiers to accuracy/damage) to try to make them survive a bit longer. having them at the top of the targeting priority lists is annoying, even if it does make sense.
It's a shame you couldn't replace things like "aggressive" and "defensive" tactics with something more akin to "go for the kill" or "target their primary systems" types of stuff; essentially using the tactic system to make your ships switch their weapons to a higher destructive or a higher "disably" quotient. As I understand it, tactics govern flight-paths and conditions of engagement, and have no effect on the weapons the ships use. Of course, if I'm wrong, it might be something to look into...
In any case, I really like the idea of randomizing it so that a ship could be disabled or destroyed- I think the addition of possible outcomes to the situation would make the game more life-like. However, if you go this route, I would suggest that, if Marine Frigates are still the way this team intends capturing to work, you make one more akin to the Vaygr Infiltrator Frigate; the little pods are much more believable than the "beam" as I'm sure you'll agree, and they could "theoretically" be used as repair craft as well, explaining how the ship you capture can suddenly operate again.
Ho boy, I almost wrote an update last week and trying to collect my thoughts on what's happened, I probably should have. Lets see what we can do here.
First I'd like to announce the participation of the wondrous Icefox, a friend who has something of a programming background and has stepped up to help with scripting related tasks. He has so far whipped the AI into a shape approximating working. It's not been rigorously tested or tuned, but it does research and build both the finished and unfinished UNH fleets in something resembling a competent fashion. He has achieved this faster than I think I could have, for which I am quite grateful.
Relatedly, the placeholder ships for the UNH is largely in place, though they're not precisely fully functional. It remains to be seen how much this will change before the next release. The research tree is also in place and functional. We have had a small handful of MP tests, and fixed a few particularly egregious balance issues. For example, the first-pass defender was as powerful as 1.5 corvettes, and as such hilariously game-winning. However, we're holding off on any serious balancing until more of the game-changing features are in place. Stay tuned on that front.
Also in the news, I continue to take advantage of Mikail's map functions to put together a basic map roster. There are maps for 2, 3, and 4 players, and I hope to have a working 5 and 6 player map in place before next release. If anyone has requests for things they'd like to see on that front I'd be happy to hear it. Keep in mind that are using a completely different map design philosophy than HW2's default. Where HW2 has large resource pockets you take and hold, HW@ has large veins of smaller resources. Unfortunately, to our knowledge resourcers can not be made to visit multiple rocks in one journey, so at the moment every asteroid is worth exactly one harvester load. Plans are on the table to use larger asteroids in some cases, but those are the exception, not the rule.
Also of note: The first post of this thread has been overhauled to better explain who we are to the uninitiated. It also contains a refined version of our terms for use of our assets in other mods.
I believe that's all for now.
About the MP: I request porting over all the Skirmish maps from HW1 to HW@. They were very, very good, particularly the Nebula one.
Space will actually be black sometimes in this mod, right? You will actually be able to see stars?
Let's sail in this sea of charms
Let's drown underneath the stars
Erp, totally forgot to reply to you, John. I think there are some existing map packs that do that, I'm not sure if there would be any compatability issues or not at this time. I'll try to look into it at some point.
We've got a lot of ideas for backgrounds, and we'll show them to you as they bear fruit, as always.
In any case, another few weeks, another update.
First up, I'd like to mention Doci7 and his Czalkir. I'm hodding them for him, and future releases of HW:@ will include them, though they may not appear in any capacity outside starting fleet hackery for quite some time.
Secondly, we'd like to show you the recently drafted plans for the Vaygr Destroyer.
Quick guide to the blueprints: This is a top and side view with only geometry details to aid in modeling. Features in blue are radially symmetrical; features in green are closer to the viewer while features in pink are further away. I apologize in advance if it's kind of hard to figure out.
Where the Higaaran destroyer emphasizes speed and power, the Vaygr destroyer is intended to spearhead large offensive pushes. The ship is longer, sleeker, and bristling with quite a range of weaponry. Along either side are a triplet of point defense turrets; each armed with a pair of 40mm proximity bursting explosive cannon and a pair of box light missile launchers. Against the lightly armored and armed Vaygr combat craft, this combination gives the Destroyer an effective defensive armament. Against the robust, coilgun-armed strikecraft of the Galactic species, these weapons are woefully short range and underpowered. Nevertheless, in groups the point defense power of Vaygr Destroyers can be quite threatening.
Backing up these six point defense turrets are two massive double barreled heavy mass drivers. Among the first indigenous Vaygr coilguns, these weapons are essentially scaled up versions of the cannon on their Gunships; they deliver large penetrators at medium speeds. Compared to the energy cannon mounted on UNH capital ships and bombers, it is less powerful but effective against a greater range of targets. Last but not least, the Vaygr destroyer has a pair of fixed ion cannon in an arrangement very similar to that of the Turanic Raider assault carrier, suggesting they either patterned the layout off of that vessel or purchased the technology from the Raiders. Obviously inferior in coverage to the turreted ion weapons on the UNH Destroyer, their power output is similar and thus just as deadly.
Thirdly, drone frigates now work.
Sexy work. I love your guys ship designs - very original, yet seems to keep a Homeworld touch.
Wow, that looks really cool! I don't exactly know why you're remaking the Vaygr, but your take on them is phenomenal.
That I've got to see! I've wanted to get the drones back into the game for ages now. I'll have your babies if you guys give permission to use the technique/ship for drone frigates. Now, the thing I'm wondering; did you use gamerules or some wildly cleaver weapon scripting to pull it off?Originally Posted by Siber
As always, this mod continues to impress and amaze. I'm really itching to give it a go (in its entirety).
"Always listen to the experts. They tell you what can't be done, and then do it." - L. Long
My Project: www.hwconquest.com
Doci7: Apart from personal aesthetic taste, the Vaygr recycled a lot of Taiidani design motifs especially with their texturing. We're bringing back the Taiidani as an important plot and multiplayer faction, and keeping the Vaygr and Taiidani thoroughly distinct (not slave races or other silliness). This means we need to make sure the Vaygr look totally different from the taiidani in both geometry and textures...
The big ideas for the Vaygr are cylindrical and tapered cylinder shapes, and radial symmetry. It's VERY hard to see on the current plans; there's going to be three fins on the rear of the destroyer. I just figured it'd be more helpful to whoever ends up making the thing to draw top and side views of 'em. The Vaygr also use softer edges in a lot of places than the taiidani or UNH do; check out the edges along the top of their gunship.
Thanks for the praise anyway, I'm really glad you guys like it.
McGlaspie - While I'm not the one who's been working like crazy on drone code, I can say almost certainly that it'll be available. WHEN... well, in a bit. I personally am hoping we can pull together some sort of end-of-summer release with all sorts of cool gadgets and gizmoes in it. But, it's been quite a while since we last made anything available, so maybe we'll go sooner? Regardless, it's super cool that you're interested.
Wintermute - Thanks so much!
Hey guys, first time poster, long time homeworld player. Found this forum at work an I just have to say I love the work you guys have done so far. I really like the idea of bringing the HW1 ships "up to speed" and expanding on it. I was just wondering, as I find this to be relevant to the above post, if there is any chance of incorporating the work done in the MoH mod for the Taiidan?
Oh, and on a side note, can we not use custom avatars?
EDIT: Thanks Oh,John,no!
Last edited by John Galt; 22nd Jun 09 at 11:39 AM.
WARNING: The above post may contain words, or traces of words.
To your side note: Only Senior Members and above can use custom avatars.
Siber: So you're incorporating what looks like a smaller version of the Trinity Cannon. Good, that's always sounded cool.
And I'm very glad to hear that Drone Frigs are coming back, they were one of my favourite ships from HW1.
Oh,John,no!: Well... we -are- including a smaller version of the trinity cannon effects, but for the energy cannon on vessels of the Taiidani Republic, the Taiidani Confederation, and the Higaaran kiith. I'm not sure which line in Siber's post got you thinking that the Vaygr would be having large fixed energy pulse guns. The Vaygr destroyer's gonna have two large fixed ion cannons - just like the Higaaran destroyer, but worse.
John Galt: MoH has some very, very pretty concept artwork; unfortunately we don't think that their reinterpretation of the Taiidani aesthetic really works for our project. Though if Talros wanted to draw pictures with me, I would be down with that in a big way.
Ah, I see. Thanks for the quick response, can't wait to try this mod out!
The drones are built off the example provided by Beelzebuddy's hive carrier and flagships mods. I myself haven't been doing the coding, but I believe I understand the principles, and will elaborate.
Our drone frigates work a bit more like Cata's hive frigates than HW1's drone frigates, with each frigate supporting a fleet of semi-independent drones that act like small fighters. A gamerule tracks each drone frigate, and keeps a list of drones attached to it. If there aren't enough drones in that list, it will eventually spawn a new one to be launched from the frigate. It constantly orders the drones to guard the frigate, or to attack the frigate's target if it's given an attack order. The drones themselves will be unselectable. And that's about it.
Ahhh, I suspected the flagships mod had some part in it. That's a fun mini-mod to play with.
Do you think it would be possible to create a specific Strike Group formation just for drone frigates? Then you could assign a frigate and its drones to that strike group, which might provide for some interesting formations of drones. You could even change the strike group per drone frigate based on the frigate's tactics. I'm assuming the drones are kept in a separate SOB per drone frigate, otherwise this wouldn't work. I suspect you could also hide the custom strike groups by not including them into the UI. I don't know how efficient this would all be, but I'm beginning to wonder it that would give the frigates a HW1 feel. Anyways, random idea.
On EH it says that the Trinity cannon might be a projectile weapon (or it says something to the effect, somewhere - either on the Trinity Cannon page, or the Vag Desty page).
Sorry for misconstruing it.Backing up these six point defense turrets are two massive double barreled heavy mass drivers
Heh, those two heavy mass drivers are on turrets, and fire regular bullets instead of glowy red gobs of frigate nullification.
The Trinity Cannon, as I understand it, is a super-beefed-up version of the weapons on the Laser Corvette, which uses the same technology as the Lance Fighter, which essentially is armed with a plasma beam. So, Trinity Cannons are big plasma guns. I think.
So, been doing some concept stuff again. Just wanted to pop in to ask for some opinions... Those who've completed Homeworld 1 know that a Council ship arrives at the very end; it's this rocky, crystally thing with a rocky underbelly and an orange crystal top. I've been thinking about developing this species some; I wanted get your opinions.
Most large military vessels are made out of metal today because it is tougher than rock; in designing a warship for this species I was struck by the thought that whether or not the species was rocky or crystalline or whatnot; they'd still want to make their ships out of tough stuff. I mean, humans are made out of meat, and we don't make meat ships. I liked the orange crystal canopy, though, so I thought I'd keep it.
So, hit me with some opinions. Would it be inconsistent or jarring to have civilian ships for this species that were essentially mobile asteroid habitats; a rock that had a hyperdrive and living space in it... and then have metallic combat vessels for these people?
Here's my -crappy- working sketch concept. I'm probably going to simplify it a bit more; topside details are mostly the crystal stuff, bottom is going to be a dusky bluish-purple metal. Armament is fixed beams and rapid fire missile turrets.
So do you want to include it as an own, playable race or is it more a singleplayer-NPC-ship like the keeper or bentus?
I wouldnt find it jarring, sounds like a neat idea, though I'd probably go the extra step and have their ship mostly made of the crystal stuff. After all, it is tough enough to stand up to things like micrometeorites and space radiation.
I would mix and match a bit, perhaps. Just because they look like ships made of rocks doesn't mean it's actually just plain rock, you know? Anyway, it's funny you've thought of this, because I had given thought to working on these guys too. There's a couple of concept drawings floating around out there that suggest the rockship was originally intended to launch "Spire-Frigate" type things; I found that really cool.
So, while I really like your concept drawing, and think it has semblance enough to the rockship to look like it belongs to the same fleet, I'd support the idea of making a mixed fleet of various-levels of rocky vs. metal appearance, some (like this concept) having no rockiness at all. That's my opinion, anyway.
I always thought of that ship more as "ceremonial" than anything else, like a floating united nations, and hence why it was so pretty and didn't look like a warship. If it does have some combat capability, I'd think the best way to protect it would be with shields, a Taiidani-like defense field, or both.
I never really thought of the galactic council as it's own race. I always thought it's fleet would be a UN of sorts, comprising of ships from different member nations. Of course, if you think you have the time and enough ideas to develope it it's a great idea! It would be prefectly fine for that to be the only ship built on an asteroid, as essentially it's a big building in space. I don't think having traditional metal ships around it would be a problem, but instead it might make the Council ship stand out even more, which could be good.
Last edited by John Galt; 1st Jul 09 at 1:18 PM.
monolith: Our current attitude towards the council is to develop it in the vein of the Turanic Raiders or Kadesh in HW1: Small mini-fleets from a relatively large number of species. We're thinking probably three to five ships tops from something like five or six species, or about enough to add up to one full "faction".
Of course, they're not going to be balanced to be MP-playable.
Geofreitag: Space radiation and micrometeorites are one thing; hypervelocity kinetic penetrators, beams of charged particles, and thermonuclear missiles are an entirely different kettle of fish . But, it's certainly a cool idea. I'm currently envisioning a stained-glass window sort of effect, with multiple large crystalline "facets" supported by metallic structures, with more conventional docking bays and weapon mounts.
Doci7: True. And it's entirely possible to emulate the rocky appearance to an extent without necessarily giving it a rocky texture, which... is a route I'll probably be exploring more. There will certainly be a number of civilian type ships, so we'll probably draft up concepts for a few different rock-ship variants. As, after all, no two asteroids are exactly alike. These may even serve in the role of mothership; but in that case I'd heavily penalize either their hit points count or their regeneration rate (probably both) to represent their substandard armoring.
Re: Spire frigates. If you squint at my scribblings you can see I marked out a few on the bottom of my concept (four). If we can get that working we'll probably do it, though it may end up being an animating nightmare (and thus something else for Siber to want to strangle me for).
John Galt: The Council as we have envisaged it both echoes and rather subverts the united nations. As I mentioned to Monolith, not one of the species will be getting a full, diverse shiplist. More plot important factions will probably get a few more ships (perhaps six or seven). At the end of the day, though, you won't be able to look at any of these species and match their fleets up class-for-class with playable species (vaygr, taiidani, higaaran, et cetera).
When it comes to the ships of "the council", take a look at the vardrag race from nexus the jupiter incident (space rts game). Their ships look like they are made of stone but at the same dosen't look like they are. I wish I had a picture to show you. If anybody can find a picture please upload it.
Well, one of them could, when I'm through with my project . Granted, you won't need all of my ships, but you're welcome to any and all that I produce. Anyway, I see what you mean about the Spire Frigates; sorry I missed that before.As I mentioned to Monolith, not one of the species will be getting a full, diverse shiplist... At the end of the day, though, you won't be able to look at any of these species and match their fleets up class-for-class with playable species (vaygr, taiidani, higaaran, et cetera).
Doci7: Oh we're gonna have Czalkir fleets fo sho. If we can find a way to make it easy for the player to know what the Czalkir fleet consists of, we'll feature as much as we can. We just want to keep the number ships we have to make below 200.
Orgus tott: Not finding any screenshots of these people...
You know, I had an idea a while ago that I figured I'd bring up now that the coding end of things is looking optimistic thanks to the persistent efforts of ajlsunrise. If the Tagfighter can indeed function as I'd like it to, I thought it might be neat if in some encounter between Czalkir and the Hiigarans, that they give them the Tags to build and also the artillery tech; sort of a parallel to getting Movers in HW2's SP but on a more Mothership-involved level, since it would have to build the artillery gun subsystems. Of course, this is only a good idea if we can find a way to make enemies eventually become resilient to whatever tagging system is made to work.
Hah, you're assuming of course the Higaaran mothership won't already come equipped with heavy artillery. If you'll recall from our ion frigate description, we mentioned that it mounted a single mothership-class ion cannon that ran the length of its hull.
Suffice to say, this was not idle talk.
Anyway, I think it'd better show off the unique artillery and spotter system the Czalkir have going on to do that within their own shiplist. We do have some fairly large battles planned; one possibility is the higaaran player being granted some tagfighters to spot for NPC Czalkir ships. That would keep the Czalkir tech and abilities within your awesome Czalkir fleet, focusing more attention on them whilst giving the player access to their guns. Plus, it'd avoid subsystems as much as possible; which is a Good Thing in my opinion.
That sounds just as cool, if not much cooler. It isn't every day you can coordinate the attacks of ships that don't even belong to you; I'll bet that would be pretty enjoyable! I must have missed that Ion Frigate description; I didn't know about any references to the mothership having weapons. I'm glad to hear it will be well-armed.one possibility is the higaaran player being granted some tagfighters to spot for NPC Czalkir ships.
Midway down this page you'll see the description of the Blaze in the second paragraph as "(a) single, fixed, mothership-class beam wrapped in strategically placed armor and engines". So yes, the 15th fleet mothership will be fairly well armed.
We're hoping to have a number of rather unconventional (by homeworld terms) battles; the secret there is that my very favorite Homeworld experience was the final mission in Cata, simply because if you timed it just right you could save a relatively large Republic fleet, and then they immediately went crazy, warped in like 15 ion frigates, launched huge waves of interceptors constantly, and ran around messing the Beast up. For the first half of the mission, the AI ended up running smart enough to convince me that we were an actual joint fleet. He was hunting down lots of small beast fleets, while I was assaulting the nomad moon and interdicting the cruiser shipping. It was quite frankly extremely badass, and we hope to have similar experiences for HW@.
Don't worry, this doesn't mean every mission will have a significant NPC component; that would be silly! If you have too much of the battle resting on the shoulders of the NPCs, the player starts to feel like they're irrelevant which is bad.
Wow, I guess I never managed very well in the final Cataclysm mission then; though I can remember chasing around a couple of their destroyers I saved, helping them harass the Beast. It's a favorite mission of mine as well; fighting the 'supership' Naggarok, working with the Republicans and later even the Imperials, getting to use Bentusi fighters, and the one and only animated background!!! A finale mission if there ever was one.
At the start of the level there should be two or three destroyers fighting a beast cruiser; use your siege cannon to kill this cruiser while you beeline your entire fleet to protect the Taiidani carrier. I'm serious, it builds tons of frigates and fighters and warps in support frigates that fly around healing your shit and it warps in a destroyer. It's pretty darn epic. If you're really badass and move fast to destroy the nomad moon emitters, you'll help prevent the taiidani from suiciding but that takes a level of micro that's kinda uncomfortable for me.
That's right, HWC is constantly underrated. Even if it is not as great as HW1 was (who could ?), it is also great, in a different way. Most missions are much more interesting and enjoyable than some HW1 ones, and the fact that you can use some CPU allies is not one of the least features. Anyway HW1 is the greatest, but HWC was more innovative I guess, and can arguably be seen as more enjoyable.
Mission 1-- a totally awesome start! You get to be a sort of side-liner of an epic battle against Taiidani.Most missions are much more interesting and enjoyable
The Research Station mission-- probably my favorite in the whole game. It presents many fun challenges as you struggle to succeed without really going toe-to-toe with your enemies.
Mission 10-- really creepy. Totally enjoyed it!
Mission 15-- take on the Bentusi!!! Not very easy; not overly fun, but the very thought of it seems so far removed that it is certainly an interesting scenario.
I'd have to agree, Cataclysm is solid, if for different reasons then HW1. The units are bizarre, the unit cap system is limiting, and salvaging won't save you, but the missions are generally very well thought-out, the new technologies are fun, and your mothership more than in any other HW game has some teeth! Plus the Beast are just plain creepy-- I remember them being described as having some similitude to a monster from a 'B-movie' or something, but I thought they were genuinely terrifying and a very effective adversary, even if they could be looked at as an excuse not to make a whole fleet's worth of new ships. Go Cataclysm!
There are currently 8 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 8 guests)