Proportions Mod Versions 2.5.2 and 2.5.3 available

[PvK]

Ya, gotta watch out for the AI. I'm not sure, but it might work to (do either of the things Fryon suggested) or to give it no Roman numeral, and put it before the other Space Yards.

BTW, yes, of course, I'm glad people apply tweaks to Proportions to suit their own tastes, and it's very interesting to hear about them.

If you come up with a neat new image and a way to get this to work, I might try to include it in some later Version.

PvK

[leo1434]

Hello Mr. PvK:

I would like to know something about the armor platings present in Proportions Mod:

What are the pros and cons of using them instead of the normal small armor components. Has something to do with hit probability (I suppose that as the plating is the bigger component installed in a ship, it will probably take the majority of shots?) Are there any other purpose for it? I would thank you alot if you drop a line about this topic.

By the way, the scale mount concept is a very clever one. It accuartely represents some components wich are directly related to the ship hull size in which they are used. I adapted it to make a cargo/supplies external pod mounting, but it is being tested at the moment. If someone is interested in seeing what is all about. I can upload the CompEnh.txt and Components.txt file fragments (to copy an paste in any mod folder).

I also like Proportions because it makes homeworlds different from new colonies, as a long time inhabited world has to be more developed in facilities that a colony. Real good mod. Keep the good work!

[PvK]

Thanks leo1434!

I'm currently teasing Fryon about not being able to figure out the armor choices, so I'll reply in private and post publically later after he guesses the answer.

PvK

[Fyron]

Well, let's see.

Armored Structure III: 12 HP/kT. 3 emmissive ability.
Armor Plating II: 2.6 HP/kT. 11 emmissive.

Hmm... do I want 182 HP, or 840. Tough decision. 11 emmissive is not enough to justify losing 658 hit points.

Advanced Armored Structure III: 18 HP/kT. 5 emmissive ability.
Advanced Armor Plating II: 4 HP/kT. 13 emmissive.

Still has the same problems that normal armored structure does compared to armor plating. So does Ultra armor.

As 120 is more hit points than nearly anything else (that isn't armor), normal Armored Structure components provide just as good coverage as those Plating components (esp. since there are 7x as many of them).

What is so good about these Armor Plating components?

[ February 20, 2003, 06:42: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[PvK]

leo1434 wrote:
"What are the pros and cons of using them instead of the normal small armor components. Has something to do with hit probability (I suppose that as the plating is the bigger component installed in a ship, it will probably take the majority of shots?) Are there any other purpose for it? ..."

There are several tradeoffs involved, which I really like about the armored platings. It's also interesting that the situation changes with different ship sizes. For the specialized platings like stealth and scattering types, it makes it economical to apply these to small ships, while larger ships will have to make major investments both in resources and in component size to cover themselves.

The main thing to consider about armored plating compared to armored structure, is that they have different purposes. Armored structure's main purpose is to add lots of structure to the whole ship, and to absorb damage that penetrates "hit first" armor - it makes the whole ship take more to destroy, and for the lower tech levels, is very cost-effective. Armored plating has some of the same effect, but its main purpose is different - it's purpose is to reduce damage before it gets to internal components, and to reduce the total damage actually sustained, by deflecting as much as possible, rather than absorbing it. This is a natural consequence of covering the entire outside of the ship (as opposed to general armoring of the interior, or uneven armoring, which is what the armored structure represents).

In game terms, the armored plating has a higher emissive effect than the structure, which subtracts from every hit on the ship until the component is destroyed. Because plating isn't "hit first," and often has less damage resistance than the armored structure (especially if there are several armored structure components), the armored plating often isn't destroyed until the ship has been heavily bLasted. You actually DON'T want the armored plating to take damage itself, because if it gets shot off, you lose its superior emissive effect, which causes all subsequent hits to do more damage (this represents a major breach in the external armor, through which more hits can bypass the shell protection). For this reason, you might want to have more than one armored plating component on some very heavily armored ships.

The strongest armored ship design will probably have a mix of armor types, because their effects are complementary. The power of the opponents' weapons also makes a big difference - armored shells are great against non-armor-piercing light-to-medium hits, especially when backed by a lot of armored structure. Armored shells are not so important against really powerful-per-shot weapons, or anything that "skips armor".

Fryon: The idea is not use the plating to replace structure - you usually just take one (or maybe two) levels of plating, and then get a bunch of structure to back it up. The more structure you get, the more you get out of your one unit of plating, because:

1) The structure makes your ship absorb many more hits, and the plating multiplies the number of hits your structure can take, by reducing the damage per hit.

and

2) The structure makes the plating much less likely to be hit and shot off, which you don't want to happen.

Plating has fairly high structure, but that's not what its for, and can actually be a disadvantage because it makes it more likely to get hit, losing the emissive effect. The fact that the structure varies with the ship size due to the scale mount also makes some sense, because it is more likely that a large ship will develop a major armor breach before being devastated, than on a small ship.

PvK

[Fyron]

11-15 emmissive points doesn't matter much with fighter stacks and weapon mounts. Oh no, I do 165 damage instead of 180! Not that!

[oleg]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
11-15 emmissive points doesn't matter much with fighter stacks and weapon mounts. Oh no, I do 165 damage instead of 180! Not that!

I beg to disagree. Proportions is different from normal SE. First, large mounts have to-hit penalties. This and combat penalties on large ships make small ships valuable throught the game. EA ability of armour platings may become a real factor. Second, most fighter weapons have a top damage of 4 ! Even stack of 20 will be affected (I consider moving 100+ fighter stack around system too cheesy since AI can not do it). High damage fighter weapons have hideius to-hit penalties so it is another interesting trade-off.

[Aloofi]

Yesterday one of my BattleCruisers got pounded to death by 15 Drushocka Destroyers, and by the end the only thing left in my ship was the armored structure. It looked like an empty egg shell....
is it that way how its suppose to work?

By the way, do the AI always build the latest avaliable hull or the most cost efficient, or maybe a balanced mix?
I'm worry cause I added to the price of larger hulls.....
Maybe I should have added maintenance penalties instead of price......

[oleg]

What AI builds is dictated by interplay of Construction_vehicles.txt and design_creation.txt files
Several Proportions' AI are programmed to build a mixture of hulls.

[Aloofi]

Originally posted by oleg:
What AI builds is dictated by interplay of Construction_vehicles.txt and design_creation.txt files
Several Proportions' AI are programmed to build a mixture of hulls.

Hey, that's great news. I'll take a look into those files to see how it works.
Dam, I hate being a newbie....