+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Intended changes with 4.87 (/showthread.php?tid=105023)
Intended changes with 4.87 - BattleHammer - 09-17-2013
So, with all the new changes in 4.87 and lots and lots of bugs, I can't really tell what's working as intended and what's a bug. I was wondering where I might find the information on intended changes.
For example, the liberty assault carrier was drastically changed in 4.87. The model is different, the hull shows that it's been reduced by 200k, it can only mount 2 heavies and 4 primaries now which leaves 21 secondary turrets. Is all this working as intended? Why on earth would anyone need 21 secondary turrets? I think the carrier would be more balanced with 3 heavy, 5 primary and maybe 16 secondary.
Anyway, the lib carrier is just an example but I think it would be very helpful if there was a list of all intended changes somewhere to make it easier to decipher the difference between an intended change and a bug. If there is such a list somewhere, can someone please point me in the right direction?
Thanks!
RE: Intended Ship Info? - a7om - 09-17-2013
if you think of the liberty assault carrier as a carrier used in the modern world and in WW2 and such then you would know that they have ALOT of fighter defenses but not very much anti cap protection. The USS Enterprise from WW2 is a pretty good example of this from this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CV-6)
if you look at its armament you can see that it has plenty of different kinds of mg's or flak guns and can carry 90 planes at any time. anit cap ships (battleships or dreadknoughts) used 14 inch (360mm) deck guns and 5 inch (127mm) deck guns to destroy other large ships while carriers supported the battleships with fighters and suppression against hostile fighters.
carriers arent anti cap ship ships. They are meant to carry fighters. IMO the liberty assault carrier is working as intended.
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - Joker - 09-17-2013
After you install the mod, there will be a Readme.txt in the game folder which contains the changelog.
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - BattleHammer - 09-17-2013
(09-17-2013, 02:15 AM)hmmm Wrote: if you think of the liberty assault carrier as a carrier used in the modern world and in WW2 and such then you would know that they have ALOT of fighter defenses but not very much anti cap protection. The USS Enterprise from WW2 is a pretty good example of this from this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CV-6)
if you look at its armament you can see that it has plenty of different kinds of mg's or flak guns and can carry 90 planes at any time. anit cap ships (battleships or dreadknoughts) used 14 inch (360mm) deck guns and 5 inch (127mm) deck guns to destroy other large ships while carriers supported the battleships with fighters and suppression against hostile fighters.
carriers arent anti cap ship ships. They are meant to carry fighters. IMO the liberty assault carrier is working as intended.
I understand that but it still doesn't make sense to me in freelancer, a game. I don't really care how many secondaries there are, i just feel that it should have at least 1 more heavy and 1 more primary. Either way, I still love the new version of the ship and I was just using that as an example because it's my favorite ship.
This thread was actually just intended to try and locate a list of intended changes so that it would be easier for me to bug report things that actually weren't working as intended.
(09-17-2013, 02:20 AM)Joker Wrote: After you install the mod, there will be a Readme.txt in the game folder which contains the changelog.
Thx, i've read through the entire 4.87 release notes readme file but it's very generic and does not list specific changes, just general ones.
Thx for the responses guys.
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - AeternusDoleo - 09-17-2013
(09-17-2013, 02:07 AM)BattleHammer Wrote: For example, the liberty assault carrier was drastically changed in 4.87. The model is different, the hull shows that it's been reduced by 200k, it can only mount 2 heavies and 4 primaries now which leaves 21 secondary turrets. Is all this working as intended? Why on earth would anyone need 21 secondary turrets? I think the carrier would be more balanced with 3 heavy, 5 primary and maybe 16 secondary.
Intended. Carriers are weak versus other heavies, but have strong anti-snub capabilities. This translates into fewer heavy and main guns on a larger model, but tons of antisnub guns. Also, don't stare yourself blind on the count - most of the weapons have restricted arcs.
If you want a Liberty capital ship bent on fighting other capital ships, use the LibDread or the LABC.
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - Yber - 09-17-2013
Where's the mass center? Did anybody try kitting and not tanking just yet?
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - BattleHammer - 09-17-2013
(09-17-2013, 09:10 AM)AeternusDoleo Wrote:(09-17-2013, 02:07 AM)BattleHammer Wrote: For example, the liberty assault carrier was drastically changed in 4.87. The model is different, the hull shows that it's been reduced by 200k, it can only mount 2 heavies and 4 primaries now which leaves 21 secondary turrets. Is all this working as intended? Why on earth would anyone need 21 secondary turrets? I think the carrier would be more balanced with 3 heavy, 5 primary and maybe 16 secondary.
Intended. Carriers are weak versus other heavies, but have strong anti-snub capabilities. This translates into fewer heavy and main guns on a larger model, but tons of antisnub guns. Also, don't stare yourself blind on the count - most of the weapons have restricted arcs.
If you want a Liberty capital ship bent on fighting other capital ships, use the LibDread or the LABC.
Ok thanks for the clarification on the Lac. While that news does bum me out, I still love the ship but considering I bought it specifically for cap vs cap, I suppose I will have to go back to the dread. Having 21 secondary turrets really doesn't help much with anti-snub since all they ever do is fly around out of range while launching a barrage of torpedoes. Well, maybe I could put 10 flaks on it.
I will have to mess around with it before the rollback.....there IS going to be a rollback right?! (09-17-2013, 09:24 AM)Yber Wrote: Where's the mass center? Did anybody try kitting and not tanking just yet?
I will test it out when I get home from work. Haven't done much with it as a bug made half my guns disappear.
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - Highland Laddie - 09-17-2013
10 flaks and 11 Solaris Gats... you'll hit something for sure.
RE: Intended changes with 4.87 - sindroms - 09-17-2013
(09-17-2013, 09:10 AM)AeternusDoleo Wrote: Intended. Carriers are weak versus other heavies, but have strong anti-snub capabilities.
.......
WHAT.
Okay, seriously dude, you made me actually pause, look up at the wall, look back down at the screen, re read it again before I would hit the reply button.
Mind you, you almost made me knock over my beer while doing so.
Aet. Over the years you devs and balance peeps have hammered in a lot of things in our minds and one of those was to stop whining about anti-snub weapons such as solaris and type4 trans turrets just because that they rely too heavily on two aspects such as the ship size and the turret placement. That we will never have an equally good anti snub protection for any ship utilising the dedicated tools for that job just because how Freelancer calculates its aiming circle. Fine. Fair enough. We learned not to blame you for that.
Then tell me this. Why, why, WHY.
(09-17-2013, 09:10 AM)AeternusDoleo Wrote: have strong anti-snub capabilities.
Why would you say that. Why would you say that a ship longer from nose to butt than the RANGE of the turrets in question would have strong anti-snub capabilities. Why.
Just.
No. No. It does not work that way and you guys very well explained that to us.
The LAC was good just because of its powerplant and armor. That is all. Its size, speed and turret mechanics utterly remove any sort of chance for it to have ANY defense from snubs. Let alone allow someone to tell it has capabilities.
The LNDread has less firepower, sure. But its size and agility compared to the LAC actually made it perhaps a tad more difficult to shoot it with bombers. Just a little.
Please, just do not say such things. If you perhaps placed all the turrets in one spot on that thing, THEN it might live up to its rumored anti snub capabilities. Right now, no. It does not. It simply does not.