I'm glad you like it. The links are fine now, I was changing it a little, that's why it was broken.
Edit: The pictures are on the previous page now, which is pretty stupid.
I'm glad you like it. The links are fine now, I was changing it a little, that's why it was broken.
Edit: The pictures are on the previous page now, which is pretty stupid.
Holy shite, damn nice Pouk!
You just keep cranking it up another notch.
It's like you're setting whole new standards for HW2 Mod presentation, and more importantly; content.
I like it a lot.
New standards, ok I will have to make some new standard video someday as well. The only decent one I've got is the one presenting an Artillery frigate.
Yea and that Artillery Frigate video was unlike any other I've seen to promote a HW2 mod, in a very impressive way.
(just on the subject of videos, with my home pc dead and all my recordings stuck on it,
I have to concede defeat to the plans I had for a REARM promo movie/thing happening any time soon, no big deal but sorry man)
I couldn't imagine to have PC down for such long time. And I have to say I was looking forward to the video, but never mind.
Heh, yeah we become pretty dependent on the pc's aye, but never mind indeed.
Were these lovely Modular DD images created in Photoshop or some other program?
I get the impression that because 3D design seems to be your bread and butter, you don't think of it as being all that impressive, but it's pretty damn impressive to me, all shiny and pro.
Yeah, it's not that shiny for me, but it's nice to hear that people like it. To answer your question, yes it's Photoshop.
Heh, just saw the modular DD for the first time. No intrinsic weapons? Bombers will love it... and its flax batteries will love them. I love it!
Can't wait to actually play with it...
Everything has a reason.
Right now it loves bombers maybe way too much, but the balancing isn't over yet.
What it doesn't love at all are corvettes, only with corvettes you can be 100% sure that he'll be hopeless.
"play with it" is pretty exact term, when I made it, I was actually just playing with it for hours.
Also I really want the next release to make Mac friendly, so you should be able to run it normally finally if everything will go well.
And if you see it for the very first time, you may be interrested to see some sooner released images:
I think those are only on moddb.
Last edited by Pouk; 23rd Apr 10 at 7:30 AM.
i can try making a video... if i have a script to work with.
if you have a script to work with? I'm sorry I'm a little lost, what script?
I guess he means how do you want the plot to the video to be.
strange...as wonderfull as it may be,i'm still...up here... floating...and no one even seems to notice.
In that case, whatever you like.
But I have no presentation of Supercarrier or Modular destroyer.
In real life, what is larger? Dreadnaught or Battleship? (I'm not working on it right now, I'm just asking.) Is it alright if the BS will be larger than Dreadnaught?
Given that the terms Battleship and Dreadnaught have - to my knowledge - never been used in the same era, this is only speculation. I'd say the dreadnaught is larger.
But I really don't know to be honest.
Path To Victory
- I can count to 1024 on my fingers! -
Well, to me dreadnaught is an all out super ship.
Battleship seems to be a bigger version of the battle crusier
so, yeah, dreadnaught, but i wouldnt use that term, because it was used in HW2 Campain, just go with BS, like i have.
in historic terms (wet navy, iron hulled ships, late 1800's to WW2) stats were roughly so:
Battle Cruiser: a little bigger than and faster than a normal (heavy) cruiser, but with bigger guns and less armor than you'd expect.
Dreadnaughts (DN): bigger than a BC, with more armor and a wider range of guns
Battleships: really what Dreadnaughts evolved into, they were generally a little bigger, a little better armored, but had a narrower range of guns (basically, someone realized that having all those smaller guns and ammo on a DN was a waste of space and weight)
eg: a CA (heavy cruiser) usually sported several 5-6in batteries, a BC would have several 10-14in batteries. Dreadnaughts would have a couple 10-14in batteries, a handful of 5 or 6in batteries, maybe a few other sizes that were popular that year, or in that country (they were really kinda hodge-podge, guns sticking out all over...). BB's (Battleships) had several 10-18in batteries (plus all the extra armor, making a navy's BC/BB choice "fast and fragile, or slow but tough?)
At some point SF (or hollywood) decided words like "BattleCruiser" and "Dreadnaught" sounded bigger and scarrier than plain ol' "battleship", and so they became.
/end history rant. Hope this helps.
Last edited by geofreitag; 27th Apr 10 at 7:43 AM.
thanks geofreitag, that was essentially what I was going to post.
Pouk, I want to second geo on this: I think its great that you have the battleship (BB) as larger than the dreadnaught (DN) and battlecruiser (BC). The battleship is what the dreadnaught morphed into at a time when battlecruisers of that day were much bigger than the dreadnaughts of the past let alone the battlecruisers of the dreanaught era.
Since the BB and DN did not exist at the same time it could be argued either way as to which designation should go to the larger/vastly tougher ship and the BC should be smaller than either of them.
1) If you wanted it to be more historical, I would suggest that BB is the largest and DN is the older, smaller, but still formidable classification.
2) If you wanted to be a little more systematic and allow for a class larger than these (which might be called a SuperDreadnaught or SD), there is some fiction that goes SD, DN, then the historical BB, BC, CA (the standard cruiser -- I don't remember what the "A" designation represented) and CL (Light Cruiser).
I strongly suggest that you work through a consistant classification system and then stick with it. As with geo, I am frustrated when SF and hollywood toss out classifications at random and then don't even follow the system they devised.
10% of life is what happens to you and 90% is what you DO about it
KeyBored: I personally have nothing against calling the ship Dreadnaught from this point of view. I can't really see the fact that the term was used in SP as relevant at all. I just can't see where the problem is. Where I do see the problem is that I've draw my Battleships a three months ago and I keep call them Battleships ever since. It's not easy to suddenly just switch to Dreadnaughts.
geofreitag: That's perfect, exactly what I wanted to know.
To me, from some reason, the Battleship sounds larger than Dreadnaught (most likely because I'm not native english speaker and the word dreadnaught doesn't really mean anything to me). If technically isn't wrong to make BB's larger than DN's, then it's great, because that's exactly what works for me, I would need it to be that way.
One more question: From your point of view, if I make it like BC < DN < BB, what size difference do you think would be more significant/bigger? Between BC and DN or between DN and BB? Do you see DN and BB like almost the same things or would you place DN size somewhere in the middle? (If you count the WH2 game logic somehow into this calculation. I know my way how I see it and the way how HW2 did it may both not be historically correct).
Also out of curiosity, how would you call a ship class in between corvette and frigate. I know naming this is pretty impossible task, I had a long discussion about it and I think we have found the name (not very exact, but non of the possible choice doesn't actually sound good).
gthompsn: I was writing this too long and I wasn't aware of your post when I sent it.
Ok, I understand now what the Dreadnaught is. The idea of actually make DN to be older in HW2 is very nice. I can try to consider it when I'll be designing some Dreadnaughts, it can give some interesting results.
And don't worry, I won't change the ship classes randomly.
Also one question. Light cruiser < Heavy cruiser < Battlecruiser. Is there any just Cruiser or those three are all I need?
Personally I would have dreadnoughts be bigger than battleships, since battleships were around before the HMS Dreadnought was built, which was basically a superbattleship. Battlecruisers were just battleships with less armor but more speed and they were designed to outgun anything smaller than them and outrun anything bigger than them. Think of battlecruisers as cruiser-killers.
And I think going from light cruisers to heavy cruisers is fine.
1) I don't think you need another cruiser designation than those three. The "CA" historical designation goes for the ship that is the normal/standard cruiser. I guess this is the slot that you are calling a Heavy Cruiser. I like that b/c even though it is not what they were historically called, it does seem to be more a more meaningful and consistant name.
2) Ship sizes: Just consider that the HW2 BattleCruiser is roughly 8x the mass of a destroyer (2H x 2W x 2L). If we were to follow along those lines, I think a good size/toughness breakdown might be CL as 2x Destroyer, CA/HeaavyCruiser as 4x Destroyer, BC, DN as maybe 12x Destroyer and BB as 16x Destroyer. In the StarWars universe, the StarDestroyers are not really intended to fight head to head against other ships of the same size/class. The Empire's assumption seemed to be that they would always have the bigger ships and being hunting down smaller ships. In wet-navy terms, a BB couldn't pack in enough armament to fight everything well so it had escorts for that and its main job was to punch it out with the BBs from the other side.
3) In WW2, there was a class of ship called Destroyer-Escort (which often just got called an Escort) that was between a corvette and a frigate. It wasn't big enough to do much on its own, but it could help a destroyer do its job in protecting a convoy.
This has already been answered thoroughly, but let me add my two cents if it's not too much of a bother. There is one era where both terms were used, though granted, that era doesn't really exist. According to some Star Trek class definitions I've seen, the Galaxy-class is a Dreadnaught, and the Sovereign-class is a Battleship. Sovereigns are newer, longer, and more advanced, but Galaxy's actually have more total mass. That probably doesn't help much though...In real life, what is larger? Dreadnaught or Battleship? (I'm not working on it right now, I'm just asking.) Is it alright if the BS will be larger than Dreadnaught?
Dreadnaught stands for a ship with a new kind of design, or weaponry, which is feared as the enemy has no idea what will come to them, aka : the progenitor dreadnaught is the first ship with the terrifying phase beam for example.
Besides, larger doesn't mean more powerful, in WW2 there were small battleships which were far more advanced than larger ones, a smaller hit profile is deadly after all.
Last edited by MelvinVM; 25th Apr 10 at 11:34 PM.
about the ship sizes, i would be happy to explain a bit more, as I know alot naval history from that period cause i'm making a mod about it and always had an interest in this kind of stuff. btw people, i'm new, hi you all .
well, lets start in the 1800's, there was a common type of ship in these times called the Line-of-battle ship. these were essentialy big wooden ships with alot of guns on their sides. this is where the name "Battleship" comes from, as it is a shorter version of Line-of-battle ship.
from 1850 there was a new sort of Line-of-battle ship, the Ironclad, these were essentialy wooden ships, with a metal plating, making them more resistent against enemy fire.
from 1850-1880 the ironclad evolved into the (as we now call them) Pre-Dreadnoughts, of which most had 2 main double turrets of 12" guns, and alot of smaller guns, ranging from 9.2" to 2-3"
then from 1880 till 1905 was the area of the pre dreadnoughts. because in 1906 the battleship HMS Dreadnought was launched by england, a new ship with a radical design that had a main battery of 10x12" gun housed in 5 double turrets, and some of smaller guns with a 5" caliber or lower, this was because they couldn't aim their guns properly with the mixed caliber main armament as they could not see the difference between the splashes of the 12" guns and the 9.2" guns. this is where the term "Dreadnought" comes from, as all ships from 1905 were build along the same lines as HMS Dreadnought were named "Dreadnoughts".
alongside the Dreadnoughts there was another design, which later became known as the Battlecruiser, it was essentialy a Dreadnought, stripped from most of its armor, and the now freed up displacement was used for bigger engines, therefor a battlecruiser is a fast Dreadnought with not alot of armor.
the terms Destroyer(DD), Light Cruiser(CL) are a bit vague till 1922, so i won't go into that in detail because that gets a little bit to complex.
the term Heavy Cruiser didn't even exist till 1922, as it was know as the Armored Cruiser (ACR), which is where the A comes from
1922 is a very important date in naval gunboat history, as that was the time of the washington naval treaty, were it was decided that a destroyer (DD) was a fast ship with a main battery no larger than 6", and no tonnage over something like 2500 tons, a Light Cruiser(CL) was also a max main battery of 6" and no bigger then 10.000 tons. the Armored Cruiser(ACR) became a new class, namely the Heavy Cruiser(CA) with guns being not bigger than 8" and also a max tonnage of 10.000 tons.
Battleships (which included the Dreadnoughts, Super-Dreadnoughts and Battlecruisers) were now limited to 35.000 tons displacement and guns not bigger than 14".
in the following years the term Dreadnought became less and less popular, as the newer batteships looked nothing like the HMS Dreadnought anymore and were way more advanced, also they were about twice as big as HMS Dreadnought, which was (only) 18.000 tons.
finaly the last chapter of this little history was the escalator clause in the treaty, which said that if any nation in the world that made a battleship bigger than 35.000 tons and had bigger guns than 14", the rules would allow all the other countries to create battleships with 45.000 tons and 16" guns. japan kind of went over the top with their yamato class, having a displacement of 72.000 tons and 18" guns, all the other countries were now allowed to build ships according to the escalator clause.
this was the situation at the start of world war 2. although with the start of that war, the treaty was abandoned and everybody could build as they like, although they generaly kept the names that the treaty gave to them.
i hope this gives some insight in the naming of classes, if anyone has any questions, just ask.
Last edited by Jaep; 27th Apr 10 at 7:03 AM.
Just call it theOr plain ol' heavy BC, either will doCode:"OMFGitsagiganticshipthatsheadingtowardsuswithsomanygunsitlookshairymegaship"
Very good history class, Professor.
This is a very interesting theme, may be it should have a new thread with all this info as Sticky, because some people like me, trying to understand this sort of things in Wiki sometimes get stuck.
Thanks to all those that have posted any info about it.
LOL what! ^above^
Jaep: Welcome to the forums!
WooHoo, history by Jaep!
as to the Corvette/ frigate question, Gthompsn is pretty close, Destroyer Escort is probably the closest analog you're going to find, though it's still a lot closer to destroyer sized than corvette. Though with HW, you could skew things a bit. (after all, in "modern times" frigates and destroyers were/ are roughly equivalent, the main differences being uses- frigates tended toward anti- surface and air fighting, destroyers towards anti- submarine. in the last few decades though, newer destroyers are making frigates obsolete. I guess you could say we're moving toward the HW representation with those classes)
Welcome indeed Jaep!
-Pouk, I have another one of those random ideas, depends on if it's even possible.
Spawned by the 'Minelayer' discussion over at ModDB.
Would a Radiation Cloud dispensing ship be possible?
Corvette sized at least.
Big, ugly, industrial looking ship with lots of pipes and vents and intakes and a big vent out back that spews Rad Clouds.
Use Rad Clouds for Area Denial.
Ahh, Ultimate Area Denial, meaning you can't go there either, unless you have a Rad-Shield Module on board.
Ship has only a weak flak turret for defense, heavily armoured?
Perhaps the ship has an innate immunity to Radiation, so it doesn't become it's own victim?
*Besides being possibly impossible to implement, I haven't thought if such a thing would even suit either race as a tactic or a technology they would even develop. Just an idea. Plus I don't know enough about Radiation Clouds etc in HW2*
EDIT- Hmm, thinking a wee bit more, I'm guessing that spawning a Radiation Cloud may have to be linked to a button, as a special attack?
So you're cruising along in your rusty old Rad-Bucket and you find an RU patch you want to deny the enemy.
For whatever reason you aren't ready to harvest that patch yet, perhaps it's a little too close to the bad guy?
You could set up a Mine-trap or two but you decide that you don't want ANYONE coming here yet, so you hit the button and spew out some Rads.
Now that whole RU patch is off-limits until late-game when you (and your enemy) get research for Radiation Shielding Modules.
I dunno, was trying to think more in terms of gaming.
P.S.~ Is there any way for Rad Clouds to Drift within the map?
Slowly drifting across a map, maybe hitting you, maybe not
(If it sounds like I've got the wrong idea about Rad Clouds, please feel free to enlighten me, anyone. )
Last edited by tadamir; 29th Apr 10 at 3:40 PM.
Rad clouds would only affect humans. AFAIK Radiation has no impact on technology just the squishies that use it.
You could have an unmanned ship that is slow and its one and only use, like a probe, would be to go to an area and spew out clouds of radiation.
Only once the Rad ship is there it is no longer moveable (Like a probe) and is worth nothing to the creator. Its sole purpose is to deny an area to the opponent or funnel him into an area you control.
HOWEVER...The other side would need a counter to it. Like the movers in the campaign. They (and they alone) can carry the shields strong enough to handle it.
Or you could use a defence field frigate as a bodyguard.
Another suggestion I would like to see in game is a scrapper ship.
Its a frigate sized ship that hoovers up all the debris left after a larger ship is destroyed. Rather than employ multiple collectors that often only want to take the debris to the mother ship then sit around doing nothing until told to gather again.
If a single ship (after research) could do the job on its own.
BTW...this ship would NOT be able to mine asteroids. Only salvage ship debris.
Last edited by Kalamain; 29th Apr 10 at 12:54 AM. Reason: added something.
I actually quite like this radiation probe idea.
Could I possibly use this idea for my own mod?
Also, some mobile salvage collector seems like a good idea. Not sure how you'd implement it though.
As stated on Moddb, the EMP mines make a lot of sense too, especially for the Vaygr. However maybe they should be an upgrade for the minelayer and not an entirely new ship to avoid clutter in the build menus?
(Meaning EMP Mines would still deal damage but have the EMP Effect)
Um, machines can indeed be destroyed by radiation. One of NASA's probes almost got fried when it went too close to Jupiter... a Pioneer I think. Granted, humans are more susceptible, but machines, especially delicate scientific equipment (which you would find on a probe... or any remote controlled vehicle). For mild radiation like NASA deals with, a bit of gold or lead will suffice. But a HW2 radiation cloud would have much more radiation emitting. End rant.
Hi people, I'm back. What I mean by this is that the spare time is something that finally exist again in my life.
Thanks for all the Battleship / Dreadnaught informations, it was really helpful.
What I've decided for is that the Battleships will be larger, will have more mass and will be longer. But Dreadnaughts will be somehow the ultimate killers, the ship you want to throw in the middle of every fight and just watch and enjoy how badass it is. While Battleships will be bigger, slower and most likely will have some weakness or something. I'm not saying they need to have less firepower, I want so say that Dreadnaughts will be in some way more practical.
I know I sound like I don't have it all figured out, and I really don't have that much, but that's what I'll try to do, I hope you understand at least something from what I've said. Maybe it's not what some of you are saying, but that's how I feel it in the HW2 point of view.
Jaep: yeah, welcome to the forum and thanks. Very interesting.
The rest of you: I do want to do some radiation experiments, but a little different.
I personally like this decision. It seems to fit quite well with the established HW2 system and can be easily understood, in my eyes.
All the luck with this I know you'll do a good job.
Any luck solving the OSX compatibility issue?
the better question would be any time, not any luck. I didn't have any spare time, which means I would have to be very lucky to solve it. I just didn't touch the mod for few weeks.
But Is i said, I'm back.
Thats a fast firing sequence....Is it a dedicated missile ship or will it have other guns too?
Hey Pouk,I checked out your mothership debris test and wanted to know if after the explosion,can you look into the open part of the MS and see levels,rooms and stuff.
Another thing is to put burn and blast marks on the ship so that it looks as if a really big explosion just happened.
Right now the ship looks to clean after the blast.
-15 heavy fusion missile tubes
-2 forward pulse cannon
-2 point defense lance beams
-slot for 2 artillery tubes or the drone production facility (minetraps)
-some normal kinetic point defense
It's not done yet, but I'd like to do that, it would be so nice.
And of course there will be burns and it will all look more damaged. Right now it's just a piece of mothership.
Nice. Now, I want to see the smoking firing event for each of those missile tubes looks like you're gonna be busy soon...
If you want to retexture those debris parts, remember that you can dig up the impact textures used by the game in the art/battlescar folder.
Nice indeed, but I noticed that a few of the nav/position lights on the Missile Battlecruisers rear half are floating above it in the video.
MatthCoFreak: I didn't think about the battlescar folder, great idea.
AncientRemains: The ship obviously isn't finished yet.
Edit: Next time I'll clearly say that it's still WIP.
Last edited by Pouk; 15th May 10 at 3:56 AM.
I knew it's a WIP (and a really good one), I just thought i'd point it out.
Hey Pouk, I like the look of this new BC.
That said- how can one destroy it? Are you planning to make that massive missile launcher a subsystem once it leaves W.I.P.? If not, how do you expect an opponent to destroy it (other than simply building another one)? It seems a little invincible at the moment.
It was the subsystem since it learned how to shoot.
Please have a little faith in the matter of balancing, this is not an invincible beast, it wasn't intended to be:
Missile BC vs. BC
+ a little more firepower
- less armor
+ special attacks, one more weapon subsystem slot
- the missile launcher is a single subsystem, damaging it will be a serious problem
You mean...If you knock out the sub-system first it won't rebuild it?
Brilliant...It means you need tactics!
Send in the bombers to kill the subsystem them pick it apart....Good idea!
i also like the idea of the glass hammer....Its powerful..but can be killed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)