|
|
|
Hey guys,
I am thinking of a mod and I am really interested in your opinion on how to take homeworld to an other level. It's a brainstorming thread, so every idea is appreciated.
Besides I am interested in your likes and dislikes. What is that really kicked ass in the series, and what wasn't that good?
What would a Homeworld game looks like in 2012?
Last edited by Thecain; 20th Apr 12 at 2:13 AM.
Although this topic has been discussed in another thread, here are my thoughts:
1) Being able to rotate on all 3 axis would be cool (not just move, but rotate and change your orientation). I'm imagining fleets coming at each other upside down or something.
2) Keep formations as they were in HW and HW:C. Formations in HW2 just suck.
3) Siege cannons (HW:C) are awesome.
4) Either don't have supply counts, or have a generic supply count and allow free development of the fleet.
That's all I got for now.
Thanks! I appreciate!
Where can I find that thread?
In my opinion Cataclysm was better in a lot of things than the Relic made originals. Supply count is definitelly one of them.
#4
You'll find me the first to disagree. Cataclysm had good music but I could comment on everything else. The supply system was too restrictive. The player-fleet had a lot more to be desired. The storyline... is a whole separate argument. Cataclysm stands better alone as its own game than insisting on being an installment of the Homeworld series.
All that aside, the one thing I would ask for to improve Homeworld 2 is to move away from the RU system. The first part of a skirmish feels really quiet as you're building up your RU supply. You're also limited by how many harvest points each asteroid in your control has, and disruption of the RU lines can hamper your productivity. I got more enjoyment out of fleet actions and target selection than rock-hauling. If you can find some method of getting around this then I can be happy.
But please leave the Siege cannon and other toys at home.
Native Taiidani
Author: Children of Kadesh, Children of Kadesh (book 2), The Taiidan Civil War, The Fire ,Tradition, Outcry (oneshot), Chronicles of the Nadiim-Basad,
and maker of the Map of the Homeworld universe, and the Homeworld 2 Grand Strategy Game. Responsible for Cataclysm 2nd. Also has a running short story collection.
i am a fan of cataclysm AND homeworld... but:
1- i agree that the support units was very restrictive and annoying. 2- the player fleet had some undesired ships (i just never understood mimics as kamikaze ships) but in this case homeworld had tons of undesired and never used ships. 3- i agree with you about the story...(even the voice acting was done in a way to reflect a diverse approach to the story line)...
overall... cataclysm has been, is and will be part of the homeworld series forever.
i'm totally with you about the HW2 resourcing... it was a pain in the ***.!
leave the siege cannon!!!??... so the toys should be left at home???... what about the phased cannon array?... the siege cannon is a pea shooter compared to a PCA.
So you mean use no resource at all? And no building as well?a
Hmm... about Cataclysm.: I liked more the voice acting. It was more believable. You could feel more the story. They had emotions. It was pretty weird at sometimes, that's true. The Bentusi's role in the game was a mistake, that's sure, but overally it was way better, than the emotionless technical speech of Homeworld. It is just empty. It isn't lifelike.
It is the graphics and the gameplay dynamics kicked ass in Homeworld 1. The speech was a weekpoint in my opinion. You just didn't feel that it is a ship with thousands of people.
In cataclysm you experienced the characters much more.
What about the dynamics? What do you thing of sizes of the maps? The speed of the game?
I ignore Cata when discussing the Homeworld universe. Some terrible gameplay elements (there are no words to express how much I hate energy cannons), nearly all the new ships look like utter crap, the the story wasn't HW, the worldbuilding had some interesting elements, but was overshadowed by other parts.
It's by far the worst installment in the series, IMO, and I'm very happy HW2 pretty much completely ignores it. Like Norse said, it's much better when viewed in a vacuum than as a part of HW, where it just doesn't fit.
As for HW2, 3d rotation, more varied formations (especially for capital ships), bigger roles for point-defense weapons, that sort of thing.
I would like to see a more varied 3D environment. Such as ships don't align to some universal plane, but rather each mothership sets the plane for each fleet, and the fleet aligns to that plane when required (as in parade formation) but otherwise stays in the orientation they end up in. Example: when you find your friend's mothership in a multiplayer game, you find that its 180 degrees upside down from yours, but your friend would say the same to you from his prospective.
An option to remove gimbal locking would be nice too, perhaps a quaternion based camera. But then again, gimbal locking does help to orient yourself to the plane of your mothership.
@Aesaar
yeah i hated energy cannons too (they were just stupid)... also, i hated mimics and their role as kamikaze ships and beast infection attacks
but,, ships looked like crap???!!!..... somtaaw ships EEEEAAAATTTT kushan ships in design and sleekness (erm... leave out the MBF and the mimic... and the leech).... i mean how can you even compare an archangel dreadnought with the avatar cruiser in design. or worst than that... a deacon destroyer with the revelation destroyer.
from the story point of view, HW2 took into account 1 thing from HWC... "the great harbor ship of bentus.... the last of the bentusi"
from the game play point of view, well; 1- subsystems 2- research modules 3- BIG guns 4- upgrading 5- combination of repair ships with harvesters...etc
@thecain
not like that... resourcing is a key factor in homeworld games... i liked the HW1 approch and gameplay more regarding resourcing
The Revelation looks awesome. RobC agrees (he actually stated in an interview that it was his favorite HW design). The Avatar doesn't look that good, but it's still miles better than that stubby Archangel. I'll take Kushan ships over Somtaaw ones any day. Won't even try to compare them to the godly Taiidan or HW2 ships.
I'll be honest, I like the idea of the siege cannon (long range artillery), but the execution left a lot to be desired. There were no non-construction/research related subsystems in Cata (so none of the ones that positively add to gameplay). Construction systems have no business being outside a military ship's hull. HW1's approach there was better. Story wise, the Bentusi thing was the only thing HW2 cared about, and they made it work. Easy to imagine they left for other reasons.
Infection attacks were actually something I liked, since it fit with the whole Beast thing, but the Beast had no place in HW. But Somtaaw capital ships aren't vulnerable while others are for some contrived reason.
Last edited by Aesaar; 1st May 12 at 4:27 AM.
revelation is not bad... it's actually beautiful... BUT deacon is better...
it's just a matter of personal taste after all.... in my opinion, some ships have some awesome and exotic designs like: Super Acolytes - Archangel - emperor class carriers - Acolytes - Tempest class multigun corvette - tai kudaark assault frig - progenitor dreadnought - progenitor drone - progenitor mover - kadeshi Adv.Swarmer
the beast could do well with the cruise missiles only!
the invulnerability of somtaaw super capitals was to reflect their MODULAR design (referenced in HWC manual) which was enabling them to actually flush a part of a ship out without doing massive damage to the ship structure.
yeah the bentusi could have left for any reason... but we all know why they left, don't we??
Last edited by Navid_A1; 1st May 12 at 12:51 AM. Reason: edit
Well, I think the ships different aligning can be made by making the gamemap of a sphere, and every player owns a different plane of the sphere. But all planes intersects in the center, so all player have equal area.
I liked the gimbal lock in HW2. Maybe make it optional. First it was a little strange after Cataclysm, but it really helps to orient yourself.
What about the map dimensions? Isn't it too little? I always think that in multiplayer the enemy ships, or my ships get to their location too quickly. You can't really attack your enemy's weakpoint, because the rescue forces are there in 20 seconds from the other side of the map. In some ways it is too quick, in other aspects it is too easy compared to other installments (HW1 and Cata).
What about the life in the ship? Do you want to see more the inner happenings of the mothership? I liked more HW1 and Cata building manager even it was just a blue window. You was inside the ship, when you ordered the construction.
And what about pilot view?
life in the ship will be awesome.... in any form... (same as pilot view even if it's a 2D overlay)
in single player, being able to see cut scenes in the hanger (yes, inside the hanger with people and super structures) will be a dream come true to me.
Navid_A1: Except any ship should be modular, to allow for isolation in cases of fire or hull breach. That's just common sense, and it's seen in most, if not all modern large naval ships, especially submarines (which I think would be similar to starships). No reason whatsoever for Somtaaw capital ships to be immune to infection while others aren't.
Somtaaw ships just aren't long enough compared to their width. It's entirely possible to make a utilitarian design without having it look like a box, but I think Cata failed completely. The worst of the bunch is the Shaman, but the Deacon and Archangel still have the same problem.
There is not a single HW1 or HW2 design I hate. There are some ugly ones (Avatar, for one), but they're ugly in a likeable way. I hate most of Cata's ships, with only a few exceptions here and there.
#15
somtaww ships are not unilaterally immune to infection. only capital ships. being that since cap ships had so much extra mass the infection would go slower and they had the crew numbers they could afford to sacrifice them by venting drive plasma through the infected areas. ya i hate the siege canon as well despite the glorious destruction it can cause. hated energy cannons as well strike craft could no longer evade. also modular internal compartments would not be common sense for kushans based on nval design since they never had a wet navy and would have had to deal with such problems. also since their ships were contructed as a whole internal modules do not make sense. Aesar the Kuuna lan was never meant to be military hull. it was meant to be a mobile resource harvesting base.
hw2 the maps were to small and everything delt with the universal eliptic plane.
So what about this for different planes? Just a concept.
Last edited by Thecain; 1st May 12 at 1:01 PM.
yes.
just like that.
also one may think that fleets always orient themselves regarding the galaxy plane... this may explain why all ships in HW/HWC/HW2 were in horizontal planes or in " z = cte " planes
Last edited by Navid_A1; 1st May 12 at 10:21 PM.
#18
in sci fi in general ships as a standard orbit to the solar systems plane of electic that they are in.
#19
TheCain: I'm no programmer but my guess is that would require a subsystem to manage displaying different plains for different players. It's easier to project everyone the same data from the host, but that arrangement means modifying each player's perspective, commands, and inputs based on what kind of random plain they have. It would be easier just to turn off auto-allign for all the starships ingame so when they finish movement, they don't righten to the player's plain.
I don't like the idea of moving around inside the ships. Homeworld, to me, was all about the starships. I don't care about being required to manage the people inside them nor would I want to be required to focus my attention on them to win.
I'm gonna offer some commentary on catalcysm. If you don't want to hear it skip past it and go to the next post, but here it is to help frame what I didn't like about the game, and possibly help the discussion on what a future Homeworld installment would look like.
I won't disagree that Cataclysm was very thematic... I just think it was the wrong theme. Barking Dog had the impression that Homeworld was just another space game and didn't take much care to retain what made Homeworld special. For example Homeworld had a unique treatment on space weapons (Limiting energy weapons to impractical Plasma Bombs and Ion Cannons), and a semi-detailed explanation of how Hyperspace works in the manual (making the Beast, as described by Cata, impossible). While some of the concepts introduced by Cataclysm don't seem out of place with the feel of the first Homeworld (Inter-kiith Conflict after landfall, missile armament on fighters), others stick out when you sit down and think about it (Miners with better warships than an interstellar navy, Nano-horrors from beyond space).
My disagreement over the Somtaaw fleet isn't so much form (Actually the Somtaaw look is very distinct), but function. Whenever I play Cataclysm about the only ships I ever use are the Acolytes, the Destroyers, and the Dreadnoughts. Even as far back as my first play of the game I didn't understand why the multi-beam frigates had to dance. I bought a ramming frigate in the campaign expecting it to have some kind of weapon... but discovered later its only utility was its special function.
The Somtaaw fleet suffers with what I call gimmickry. Homeworld 1 ships are very straightforward in how they are used: a ship has guns, it shoots things. Some are inherently better at shooting things because their guns are naturally designed to do that thing better. Catalcysm frigates seem to require some kind of flashy trait in order to succeed at what they do. The Multibeam frigate for example, about the most straightforward of the frigates, keeps moving around and by design uses its ions contrary to how they are supposed to be used (great against strike craft, poor at anti-capital). The Hive Frigate is another contender but to be really effective with it, it has to launch drones. As a result almost every ship in the Somtaaw inventory succeeds by some kind of special effect. Since real navies don't have them, they're a turn-off for me. They've become the equivalent of Asian anime superheroes calling out their attacks as they perform them.
Of the siege cannon... on top of being perhaps the biggest bit of bling in the somtaaw fleet, it reduces the want for a combined-arms approach to playing the game. Why attack the enemy with two or three different kinds of vessels when you can just hammer the enemy at a distance with the massive super gun? The awe at the cannon and so many people in reverence of it also gives me a sense of hype backlash. Homeworld 1 wasn't about the biggest gun in the game and neither was Homeworld 2. I'd be happier loosing to an opponent who used a combined-arms approach to take apart my fleet, instead of a troll who finishes me off with a blast from teh big gun.
The Dreadnought and Sajuuk are exceptions to my aversion to superweapons for several reasons. Foremost is that they are campaign units unavailable to multi-player and unlikely to have multiple copies affecting the universe. Second, their main weapons appear as integrated and organic to the starships as ion cannons are to their frigates.
So when I say, "No toys, no seige cannons", I hope that further ship designs are balanced like Homeworld 1 and 2 ships, and not equipping every vessel with an enhanced special ability or super special unique weapon system.
I think this is what you meant to say?n sci fi in general ships as a standard orbit to the solar systems plane of electic that they are in.
In science fiction, in general, ships tend to orient themselves to the system's ecliptic.
Yes, I would say so. I think different planes would complicate control schemes a little too much.
My 2 cents for this discussion will certainly be controversial.
I think we should get rid of the zoomed-out strategic overview. I think HW2 was designed to be played only in this view, and because of this it ruined the game for me. I hardly ever got to see those beautiful ships beating the stuffing out of each other close-up!
i am convinced by some of your points norsehound.
- techno organic nano-bots just can not fit in homeworld universe...
- the execution of a siege weapon in cata was not the best idea... it could have been better. it's just like nuclear weapons in the battlefields of today. one thing i liked in the times of playing HW1 was the simplicity of the game (not that it was easy..!). i mean, HW1 is like chess. you have different ships with different functions just like in a chess game (king=mothership) (queen=cruisers) (rocks=destroyers) (pawns = strike crafts) (knights and bishops = corvettes and frigates)... you play by the rules... you win the game. winning such a game is way more pleasurable. the same could not be said about HW2, as it was a race to who has the first battlecruiser... BUT with all that aside... having an edge (even a small one) in battle is always a nice thing to have.
- hives were a stepped up kushan drone frigates... but again i agree it could do it's job more straight forward.
but i still insist on some other matters
- the only problem i had with MBFs was their design... i think they do their job simply (those fancy moves were part of their job).
- actually somtaaw were miners... but mining in space has one small difference... in order to mine in space, a kiith should first be good explorers. and the very basic soul of exploring is traveling light, efficient, ready and always being on alert. and that means having more specialized and somewhat powerful ships (again i agree that demonstrations of the word "specialized" in HWC were not the best idea).
- even with a much worst (yeah i said it) story than HW1... the voice acting in HWC is miles ahead of the monotonic computerized voices of HW1.
i agree with you on this Part............... I think HW2 was designed to be played only in this view, and because of this it ruined the game for me. I hardly ever got to see those beautiful ships beating the stuffing out of each other close-up!
Last edited by Navid_A1; 2nd May 12 at 5:30 AM.
There was a zoom out limit in HW1. That was better, I agree, but HW1 has smaller fleet. At least for the fighter crafts.
I am thinking about deepening the strategy of the game. Making it a little more complicated. For me HW2's strategy is just too straightforward. You harvest resource, build a fleet, beat the enemy with your superior numbers and firepower. It isn't really about tactics, but speed.
Other things are the movable asteroids. Both for resourcing and military purposes. What do you think?
Last edited by Thecain; 2nd May 12 at 12:58 AM.
#23
I actually liked the zoomed out tactical view. Between the sensors manager and commanding the ships at normal view I really felt like a space battle commander. No other RTS gave me that feeling better than Homeworld 2. If I wanted to go in-depth about the ships themselves, I'd play Starfleet Command. I think the sensor manager should stay.
Battlecruisers are tough nuts to crack, but they can be defeated. As vaygr I swarm them with too many strike craft for them to handle and they go down eventually. Use bombers to prioritize which systems to hit, then they're sitting ducks for the rest of your ships. The siege cannon has no defense to stop it except to either hit it directly before it fires (by somehow getting past all the ships in the player fleet AND the newest builds), or being equipped with a repulsor pod within LOS of the incoming projectile and time it perfectly to bounce it back. Otherwise...heh.
Ion cannons were specifically outlined to be a large, impractical, anti-capital gun. They shouldn't be used against fighters. The Bentusi only get a pass because of how advanced they are. I don't care how 'hip' it is to re-purpose them. It's almost as strange as lightsaber bullets.
"specialized" doesn't mean, "construct a ship that can out-fight the peak product of a fully-supplied interstellar navy". The Exiles get a pass because several times they could examine enemy cruisers and possibly capture a few to reverse engineer. The Somtaaw, in the span of a few months, get a leg-up from the Bentusi (just 'cuz), and produce a superior ship that the Kushan and Taiidan couldn't do in the fifteen years after landfall. I don't believe it. I could believe them putting out a light cruiser, but a Dreadnought?
The way I reconcile this in my head is that such ships broke down after wartime conditions because even though they were great in a fight, the trade-off was becoming a maintenance nightmare.
Homeworld VA was clam and level, like professionals. Ever heard the phrase 'hamming it up?' You can call cataclysm that. I'd almost call it cliche as well. But I'll point to my earlier remark that Cataclysm is full of theme sure... just the wrong one.
Can I make a vote thread in this forum? I want make some survey based on our discussions.
Anyway I see a lot of truth in Norsehounds words. There was a lot of ships in cataclysm which you didn't use and they did a lot of mistake, but with all it's flaws it was a great game.
everyone likes the tactical view or the sensors managers. it is a must for any homeworld game (who told it should be get ridden of... ermm.. wait... i said that??!!)... but not all of the game should be played through that view.. players should have some visual pleasure from a massive battle between two fleets rather than listening to bip-bips and seeing green-red dots dancing. i use sensor managers for tactical movements or management of the fleet...like planning a scouting route... or positioning the fleet in the right angle to hit as hard as i can on the enemy weak spot.I actually liked the zoomed out tactical view. Between the sensors manager and commanding the ships at normal view I really felt like a space battle commander. No other RTS gave me that feeling better than Homeworld 2. If I wanted to go in-depth about the ships themselves, I'd play Starfleet Command. I think the sensor manager should stay.
you can never micro-manage target acquisition for your strike fleet from the sensors manager. you have to do that in the normal view. and when you do that, you have no time to see the outcome because you should get back to sensors managers to keep watching your six for any ambushes.!
speaking of battlecruisers... have you ever seen vaygr use their strike crafts as kamikaze ships... (just out of curiosity) because i was once the victim as i lost TWO BC's to vaygr suicide crafts in less than a minute when the makaan's flagship was nearly destroyed by the mentioned BC's (single player- mission 14).
Last edited by Navid_A1; 2nd May 12 at 5:46 AM.
I know only Somtaaw capitals are immune to infection. The reason for why they're immune while other capitals aren't is what doesn't make sense. Compartmentalisation isn't tricky, and it doesn't require much thought. I refuse to believe that over the 60 years needed to build the Mothership, the Kushan didn't realise that they'd lose fewer people in the event of a fire or hull breach if they had a bunch of isolated areas. Hell, the manual says that the entire point of research vessels rather than labs aboard the mothership was to prevent damage in case of research gone wrong. Modern submarines are constructed as a whole, and there are internal hatches precisely to contain flooding. You don't need a bunch of separate pieces to have compartments. And the Taiidan have had a space navy for, what, 3000 years? You're telling me they didn't think of compartmentalising the Qwaar-Jet or the Saarkin? Please.somtaww ships are not unilaterally immune to infection. only capital ships. being that since cap ships had so much extra mass the infection would go slower and they had the crew numbers they could afford to sacrifice them by venting drive plasma through the infected areas. [...] also modular internal compartments would not be common sense for kushans based on nval design since they never had a wet navy and would have had to deal with such problems. also since their ships were contructed as a whole internal modules do not make sense. [...]
I found half of Cata's ship-specific voice acting to be annoying as hell. HW1/2 VA sounded a lot more like one would expect comms officers to sound.the voice acting in HWC is miles ahead of the monotonic computerized voices of HW1.
Norsehound keeps saying things I'm thinking.
Oh, and the sensors manager is a great part of HW gameplay.
Just remembered something I make a big deal about in my reimagining project: tactical jumps. I'd really like to see them as an ability for capital ships (frigates could wakeride, but not jump on their own), with a cooldown of 5-10 minutes (depending on the ship, with a tech allowing a second jump with a reduced cooldown). Coupled with bigger maps, it could add a whole new strategic dimension to games. Sure, you can send a battlecruiser to an engagement, but you risk getting hit by an enemy Jump Five team and possibly losing the ship. This would mean you'd need to be careful with your ship deployments, and would make keeping ships in reserve important.
Of course, it would also be necessary to make capital ships not disposable.
I've been playing too much War in Heaven.
Last edited by Aesaar; 2nd May 12 at 8:11 AM.
Hey, nobody said to dump the sensor manager. It's a must. It is like breathing for the gameplay. We spoke about the zoom limit of HW1 and 2. In HW 2 you can zoom out a lot more, and therefore you just lost the connection with the game experience.
Tactical jumps? In skirmish it's available in HW2 except for destroyers. Capital ships can make tactical jumps.
Why would it? Or do you mean internal code would be complicated? From a player's perspective, all they would see is how the ships are oriented.Originally Posted by PetarB
For a multiplayer game, each player would have some personal plane and there would be a universal plane between all players. Ships would just update their universal pitch, yaw and roll. The personal plane is defined from the universal plane. Personal planes would give players their own viewpoint. Say from player A's perspective, player B is above player A, but from player B's perspective, player A is to the right of player B.
Yeah. I don't think that recalculating the coordinates is that big deal. You can do it by hand. So for a computer it is nothing.
who says that somtaaw dreadnoughts are more powerful than avatars and qwaar-jets?"specialized" doesn't mean, "construct a ship that can out-fight the peak product of a fully-supplied interstellar navy". The Exiles get a pass because several times they could examine enemy cruisers and possibly capture a few to reverse engineer. The Somtaaw, in the span of a few months, get a leg-up from the Bentusi (just 'cuz), and produce a superior ship that the Kushan and Taiidan couldn't do in the fifteen years after landfall. I don't believe it. I could believe them putting out a light cruiser, but a Dreadnought?
because it's actually weaker in terms of firepower. the only thing that gives it an edge in battle is it's ability to maneuver around it's target and still having 75% of it's weapon systems locked and firing. this is called specialization in design and tactics. a dreadnought easily goes down if it goes head to head with an avatar or qwaar jet.
and this design was quickly adopted by the hiigaran navy in their mighty battlecruiser design philosophy... (the HW2 battlecruiser clearly has it's roots in somtaaw dreadnought...)
i agree with you that somtaaw ships were a result of emergency and urgent needs... it's totally understandable if all of their ships designs have stopped being produced after the war.
----------
Compartmentalisation does not necessarily means being able to Jettison a part of a ship.... ( while the beast itself was an stupid idea but the beast cells were not like water or toxins they could not be contained in a sealed place) and as a result of this all somtaaw ships had weaker hull integrity and armor than hiigaran navy ships.The reason for why they're immune while other capitals aren't is what doesn't make sense. Compartmentalisation isn't tricky, and it doesn't require much thought. I refuse to believe that over the 60 years needed to build the Mothership, the Kushan didn't realise that they'd lose fewer people in the event of a fire or hull breach if they had a bunch of isolated areas.
i doubt that the mothership was designed with such thing in mind.
----------
also, at the end of the final cut scene in cata the narrator says:
"soon after the advancements in designs rendered the HIIGARAN ships immune to the infection"
#31
I have been able to execute tactical orders very easily in the sensor manager. In fact sometimes it's how I direct my vessels to attack targets outside the viewing range before I return to focus on other things. This ability was possible in Cataclysm and Homeworld 2, IIRC. I don't think it should be changed or removed in any way. I like the blips and icon wars actually.
I should point out kamikaze tactics were removed for Homeworld 2. I'm not sure if I miss them. I recall a popular tactic was to make your scouts into missiles and ram the enemy but it's something I never did, and I was never online to witness it. Frankly if I knew my dying interceptor group was going to do more hurt ramming things than shooting them, I'd pull it off and take out the greatest strategic asset in the area to my enemy.
The Somtaaw Dreadnought has a battery of missiles which cancel out the traditional counter to Super Capitals. It also has a clip-on super power. Both these things in my opinion give it a leg-up against the traditional heavy cruiser even if specific armament is in dispute. My point however is that I feel the Somtaaw shouldn't have the capability to build ships this powerful. I can believe in the Somtaaw making compromises and stand-ins, but these should always be weaker than the ship types they are emulating. Part of the challenge should have come from making do with these inferior vessels against the superior ships of the Homeworld era. That tension was never played upon. In fact you might say that all the Somtaaw ships are superior to their direct counterparts (if any) of Homeworld. Interceptors for example get missiles in somtaaw hands. Destroyers get upgunned to four cannons and a missile battery, etx. Quite incredible for a handful of miners with no combat experience. Were they they only kiith blessed with magical insight to make these wonder weapons? And so my disgust for Catalcysm remains.
So long as the multi-planar effort isn't a problem coding-side I wouldn't mind testing the results if they were implemented.
the missiles fired by the somtaaw dreads were actually very clumsy and could not track fighters (hit chances was around 5%); unlike taiidan missile destroyer.The Somtaaw Dreadnought has a battery of missiles which cancel out the traditional counter to Super Capitals.
the anti fighter systems on dreadnought were the stupid energy cannons (which avatars and qwaar jets had 6 of them, two more than the dreadnought)
the dreadnought's repulsor weapon was also a useless gimmick rather than an effective weapon... it was actually giving the enemy bombers a re-chance to do their bomb run again.
the main idea behind the dreadnought was it's attack style... maneuvering around the target.!
at the expense of not having any bombers... somtaaw actually had temporary bombers... if the missiles were fired then that was it.! (this clearly shows that the somtaaw designs were something resulted by an state of emergency)Interceptors for example get missiles in somtaaw hands
with two of them never firing a single shot.Destroyers get upgunned to four cannons
indeed.!Quite incredible for a handful of miners with no combat experience.
yep. me too.So long as the multi-planar effort isn't a problem coding-side I wouldn't mind testing the results if they were implemented.
That's not what Somtaaw ships do though. The Naar directive involves isolating specific compartments and flooding them with drive plasma. No jettisoning involved. Since the Deacon could do it without modification (it was an improvised solution the first time), it stands to reason that other ships should be able to do it too.Compartmentalisation does not necessarily means being able to Jettison a part of a ship.... ( while the beast itself was an stupid idea but the beast cells were not like water or toxins they could not be contained in a sealed place) and as a result of this all somtaaw ships had weaker hull integrity and armor than hiigaran navy ships.
i doubt that the mothership was designed with such thing in mind.
It does? I don't see it at all.(the HW2 battlecruiser clearly has it's roots in somtaaw dreadnought...)
you're kidding.. right?It does? I don't see it at all.(the HW2 battlecruiser clearly has it's roots in somtaaw dreadnought...)
also:
who said they could not. the naar directive was an act of desperation which later became a standard defensive reaction in the final stages of beast wars. and later on was used by all of the hiigaran super capitals (as the narrator confirms at the end of the game)Since the Deacon could do it without modification (it was an improvised solution the first time), it stands to reason that other ships should be able to do it too.
Who said they couldn't: The fact that my captured Qwaar-Jets were vulnerable to infection while my Deacons were not. The crews come from the same ship, in the same fleet, fighting the same enemy.
And no, I'm dead serious. The only thing the Hiigaran Battlecruiser and Somtaaw Dreadnought have in common is the firing arc of their Ion Cannons (and even there, the DN's repulsor blocks the bottom IC). General turret layout and weapon loadout is closer to the Qwaar-Jet and Avatar, and chassis shape doesn't take from any of them.
Last edited by Aesaar; 2nd May 12 at 10:01 PM.
Hey guys, how to make a poll here? I want to make a survey based on our discussions.
#37
Suffice to say being unable to keep my Taiidan prizes and save them from being vulnerable to the beast was a great turnoff. It's what moved me to go find the original Homeworld, and from there came to depreciate the "sequel".
Aesar's not kidding because I agree with him. You can take the general curving hull and circular mid-section as elements from the Somtaaw DN, but the former is an aesthetic for all Hiigaran ships and the latter is washed out by the length of the BC. I see no relation without having to stretch for it. Personally I'm glad Homeworld 2 ignored Cataclysm.
Guys, PLEASE!!!
We discussed all this. No more Cataclysm ships vs. Homeships speech! PLEASE! This is off-topic.
It might be off topic, but the Homeworld forum sees so little activity I think it can be excused. It's just nice to be talking about HW again, like we did years ago.
Last edited by Aesaar; 3rd May 12 at 4:15 AM.
#40
And from all that we can take the lessons of what Cataclysm did wrong, for any further Homeworld sequel.
Which given the state of Relic may never happen. Even if it did, the creative team has moved on. Without their blessing I'd be afraid any continuation from Relic would turn out just as bad as Cataclysm did and completely miss the point.
Okay, then.
I think Cataclysm did good job at a lot of aspects. Maybe it ignores realism at some point, and the dreadnought is little too much. Some point it is a little childish, but I don't agree, that the beast is that crappy idea. It is a good enemy. It gives me the creeps. And they exploit the idea fully. I wanted to get them back, but they did such a great job with it, that I can't add anything new to it.
Ship designs are at least irrelevant to me. Not good, but not that bad either. I like the acolytes. Especially the concept drawings.
Anyway for me it is much better, that cataclysm being made, than not. It was an experience.
true.! you have a point.! (but one may say that commandeering a ship does not mean that you have control over it's every element... it's a established fact!... but again, one may say: what about the revelation destroyers under your control. and again one may say: they are not manned by somtaaw crews.)Who said they couldn't: The fact that my captured Qwaar-Jets were vulnerable to infection while my Deacons were not. The crews come from the same ship, in the same fleet, fighting the same enemy.
--------------
Suffice to say being unable to keep my Taiidan prizes and save them from being vulnerable to the beast was a great turnoff. It's what moved me to go find the original Homeworld, and from there came to depreciate the "sequel".
exactlyIt might be off topic, but the Homeworld forum sees so little activity I think it can be excused. It's just nice to be talking about HW again, like we did years ago.
that's the whole point i'm trying to make. the thing that gave the dreadnought it's edge in battle was exactly the placement of it's weaponry ( the bottom IC turret was a design flaw of somtaaw/barking dog) and their coverage. and the same goes for kinetic turrets... they have also the same coverage area as the dreadnought's cannons.The only thing the Hiigaran Battlecruiser and Somtaaw Dreadnought have in common is the firing arc of their Ion Cannons
as long as it means getting rid of the stupid ideas of the beast or energy cannons. then i'm in.And from all that we can take the lessons of what Cataclysm did wrong, for any further Homeworld sequel.
i mean, why beast...! there are tons of other enemies out there... in my opinion it would have been better if the beast was replaced even by some ancient reactivated AI race (like progenitors).
always sad to remember... very sad.!Which given the state of Relic may never happen. Even if it did, the creative team has moved on. Without their blessing I'd be afraid any continuation from Relic would turn out just as bad as Cataclysm did and completely miss the point.
i still remember when i first saw the homeworld announcement in a magazine back during my high school days... the day i first played HW1 ..HWC... HW2.
----------
i remember around 3 years ago, i was determined to recreate the somtaaw ship designs with a touch of hiigaran/progenitor elements...
i was a pro (or at least i think) 3ds max modeler... so i decided to go on, was pleased with how the acolytes and recons turned out... but life is not giving you anymore time outs these days (damn.. it goes fast)... just good memories of the past.!
my favorite..!I like the acolytes. Especially the concept drawings.
Last edited by Navid_A1; 3rd May 12 at 12:10 PM.
What models did you do?
they were never released... was planing to make a mod for my own use....
wait...
i may have an un-textured rendering of the acolyte in one of my old e-mails...
this was a very first stage of the acolyte model i sent to one of my friends for his opinion.... oh man... i'm very sad now i have seen this again... completed model of this and the recon died with my old laptop (along with lots and lots of other important stuff).
the final model was slightly modified actually... (mostly around the cockpit... to move it away from the progenitor drone design-wise)
Last edited by Navid_A1; 3rd May 12 at 12:17 PM.
Good old memories. It looks alien enough.
Are there any guys who interested in modding except for complex 8?
yeah.
very good memories...
and this debating with Norsehound and Aesaar is not just debating for me... it's remembering lot's of cool stuff from howeworld.
during first years of university... reading homeworld fan-fiction and watching fan-art (norsehound is a legend in this part) was quite fun.
Yeah, great old university. There is not a single day I don't miss it. I would give one of my arms just to relive it again. I miss it so much.
I'm recalling that Homeworld 2 did not have any collisional damage. Am I recalling that right? I know it didn't have kamikaze, but seeing ships accidentally run into each other and not getting damage doesn't quite make much sense.
Homeworld 2's weapon system was chance based whereas Homeworld's was physics based. I once had a fighter fly in front of a heavy cruiser that was firing its ion cannons at some other target and got caught in the crossfire. Chance based just doesn't have that sort of thing happen.
homeworld 2 had kamikaze attacks... it was just not under player's control... it was a scripted act of desperation...!
the only occasion that you may see this attack type is mission 14 in single player (if i recall it right) when you and makaan are fighting over sajuuk... when the makaan flag ship's health goes under 10% - 20%, the flag ship starts launching all sorts of fighters for the sole purpose of kamikaze attack on your most powerful ships... and let me tell you... the damage they deal is DEVASTATING..!! you can loose a full health BC in just 7-8 kamikaze attacks from 7-8 full squadron of strike crafts.
One nice bit of completely unecessary but cool things in Cataclysm: when you captured an enemies ship, some little spraypainting robots came out and painted the ship in your own fleet's colours. That was a very nice surprise. I like my fleet uniform.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
