Ideas for future CM! Post yours!

Command a squadron of spaceships
vic user
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:25 pm

Post by vic user » Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:52 pm

We have not tried it yet, but a myself and a friend, are thinking about having a campaign against each other.

Since we can exchange files, such as custom ships and missions, we thought it would be a good idea to do something like this...

Each pick a race

Design ships, of the same quantity and point value

Design missions, from the AI point of view, each using the same parameters, but setting it up the way we like

Then swapping the files, and exchanging screen shots of the end of the missions

After that, determine who got the best outcome.

All this could be put on a star map, and we could have an ongoing interstellar war.

I am sure you can go even deeper, having economics play into it, etc..

Hope it happens, as we did something similar with another game, and it turned out well.

umeboshi110
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 1:37 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Post by umeboshi110 » Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:58 am

i think that's a great idea, though i would believe there would be difficulties with the number of credits each person has and choosing the mission, unless you always do each mission from the start with 350 credits or something
(\ /)
(O.o)
(> <)

vic user
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:25 pm

Post by vic user » Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:11 pm

I never thought about that.

Yep, it looks like we would have to do each battle from the starting mission.

the space predator
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: Montr?al

Post by the space predator » Fri Oct 02, 2009 2:01 am

It'S a cool idea! :D I like this!
I need to write something, so i create that signature.

shrike
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:02 am

Energy Weapon

Post by shrike » Sat Dec 19, 2009 3:25 am

I still like the idea of an alternate "missile tube" which does not use ammo, fires a fast moving projectile that inflicts 1 megaton worth of damage and can fire every other turn like a missile tube.
Last edited by shrike on Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Legacy
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 4:34 pm
Location: Wellsboro, PA, USA
Contact:

Re: Energy Weapon

Post by Legacy » Sat Dec 19, 2009 5:06 pm

shrike wrote:I still like the idea of an alternate "missile tube" which does not use ammo, and fires a fast moving projectile that inflicts 1 megaton worth of damage and can fire every other turn like a missile tube.

It would have to be made to not harm shields, as components/shields don't have hit points, and it would make super shields pretty much a waste of credits. I already have a problem with a daycorn being able to take out a super shield just as effectively as a yatari or plectron.
"Every man is my superior in that I may learn from him."

Don't take life too seriously, you won't make it out alive!

the space predator
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: Montr?al

Re: Energy Weapon

Post by the space predator » Sun Dec 20, 2009 7:40 pm

shrike wrote:I still like the idea of an alternate "missile tube" which does not use ammo, and fires a fast moving projectile that inflicts 1 megaton worth of damage and can fire every other turn like a missile tube.


a kind of laser machine gun?
I need to write something, so i create that signature.

shrike
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Energy Weapon

Post by shrike » Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:43 pm

the space predator wrote:a kind of laser machine gun?



Something like that, yeah.

shrike
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Energy Weapon

Post by shrike » Mon Dec 21, 2009 5:48 pm

It would have to be made to not harm shields, as components/shields don't have hit points, and it would make super shields pretty much a waste of credits. I already have a problem with a daycorn being able to take out a super shield just as effectively as a yatari or plectron.[/quote]

The shields in this game seem to be more reactive than static. I tend to think of them like ablative armor, using their stored energy to push away the damaging force, but unable to differentiate between a smaller or larger threat.

the space predator
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: Montr?al

Post by the space predator » Mon Dec 21, 2009 9:21 pm

why not heavy cruiser like in star war? Big ship whit triple shield, 8 missile tube, and slow moves. You can have the mission to destroy them or to escort them...
I need to write something, so i create that signature.

User avatar
Legacy
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 4:34 pm
Location: Wellsboro, PA, USA
Contact:

Post by Legacy » Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:17 pm

I hadn't thought of it that way with regard to the shielding being reactive armor. I guess it makes sense, although any reactive material that can counter a multi-megaton blast being used as armor sounds a bit too close to comfort for me... In any case, if I shoot at a vehicular reactive armor block with a .22, I won't destroy it to the point that it can't still work to counter a larger threat.

I think it would be neat to have a couple different ship "classes." Perhaps two to four size/configuration ranges. At the upper end of the spectrum, a more expensive base price that nets you the capacity to add more than four rocket tubes and have an extra tier of armor/equipment on one or more sides, larger missile rack capacities, etc., and have a light class, for ships in the currently under-75 credit or so range, with only half as many equipment slots(four per side), and a smaller target profile for missiles to lock on to and hit. Maybe have a couple pieces of equipment exclusive to only one or two of the ship classes, with the middle of the road enjoying the broadest variety. Stealth should be more effective per unit for the lighter ship class, and less so for the heaviest. Most current designs would fall into the medium range, and that would effectively be unchanged.

It would look something like this...
Skirmisher Class:
-Similar to current configurations, but with the equipment/armor slots cut in half. A cheaper base price, but a lower ceiling for development. It would give people more bang for their buck in cheap designs, but couldn't be taken advantage of to create cheaper full-service designs that would be able to go toe to toe with the larger classes. Maybe disallow certain components(repair bots?) for this class, and add the aforementioned cannon to be used on such designs. At most, three missile racks. A smaller target profile. Perhaps a slightly higher top speed than current designs.

Fighter/Bomber Class:
-Current configuration options.

Destroyer(maybe cruiser?) Class:
-Larger target, slower top speed and much less agile if fully loaded out and armored. Capable of legally carrying six or eight missile tubes, maybe firing in different directions(depending which side they're mounted to), restricted or incapable of stealth, higher number of working repair bots per turn allowed, and a deeper missile reserve. The larger hull and heavier component requirements would effectively prohibit this class from going anywhere under the 250 credit mark, and some of the game objects(super starbases) could be replaced with ships in class, making them real hard targets for later missions. Larger size with relation to the center of mass, and the lowered agility of hauling so much mass would inevitably make it difficult to evade missiles, though I'm sure at least a half dozen of us would come up with a stripped down, optimized ship design that would squeeze every ounce of mobility out of it. Most of these ships would be more like bombers than fighters, by their very nature.

It's kind of odd seeing a universe where all ships, turrets, star bases, and other objects tend to fall into the same limited size category. It would be fun, and I think somewhat more realistic, to see the occasional swarm of small fighters gallantly charging a pair of heavily armed and armored destroyers, or have the player's lone heavy assault bomber taking hit after hit as it plows through the almost-victorious defenses to hit at an enemy starbase, buying time for ejected comrades to hyperspace out of harm.
"Every man is my superior in that I may learn from him."

Don't take life too seriously, you won't make it out alive!

the space predator
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:09 pm
Location: Montr?al

Post by the space predator » Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:18 pm

An dfinally kamikaz, fast, great turning, minimum shield, 1or two missile tube, 15 missile and a bomb.
I need to write something, so i create that signature.

Bardash Blackridge
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:49 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Bardash Blackridge » Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:46 pm

The idea of having a large warship makes me think about a long forgotten, but awesome game I used to play: Tachyon the Fringe. Some of the vest mission on that game were fighting large warships. I remember quite well approaching those monsters strapped in my little fighter, dodging through its awesome firepower to get underneath its belly and destroy its weapon systems. There were times when I didn't make it, but I remember how fun those missions were. It had a real David and Goliath feel about it. In Critical Mass it may be a little harder to incorporate the same feel because I think stealth ships would easily tear through those ships.
We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. ---H. P. Lovecraft

User avatar
Legacy
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 4:34 pm
Location: Wellsboro, PA, USA
Contact:

Post by Legacy » Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:06 pm

Bardash Blackridge wrote:The idea of having a large warship makes me think about a long forgotten, but awesome game I used to play: Tachyon the Fringe. Some of the vest mission on that game were fighting large warships. I remember quite well approaching those monsters strapped in my little fighter, dodging through its awesome firepower to get underneath its belly and destroy its weapon systems. There were times when I didn't make it, but I remember how fun those missions were. It had a real David and Goliath feel about it. In Critical Mass it may be a little harder to incorporate the same feel because I think stealth ships would easily tear through those ships.

Except a ship with more usable slots would have the advantage of being able to carry eight radar to a side and still have room for awesome armaments. Imagine a large "survey vessel" design, armed more like the fighters we have now, but with a dozen radar on each side. Perhaps give the larger ships a radar boost on top of that, since they can carry larger instrumentation to begin with. They'd turn the tide on anyone expecting to sneak around in the shadows.
"Every man is my superior in that I may learn from him."

Don't take life too seriously, you won't make it out alive!

Bardash Blackridge
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:49 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Bardash Blackridge » Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:29 pm

Very good point. I can imagine the importance of such a ship to have an omniscient eye on the battlefield as its fighter escort engages the enemy. It would indeed add to the immersive gameplay this amazing little program already offers.
We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. ---H. P. Lovecraft

Post Reply