The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 14, 2019, 10:15:03 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  General UQM Discussion (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  UQM 'Frenzy' Fork: Melee ideas
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] Print
Author Topic: UQM 'Frenzy' Fork: Melee ideas  (Read 15901 times)
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3834


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: UQM 'Frenzy' Fork: Melee ideas
« Reply #75 on: September 09, 2003, 10:15:49 pm »

The modules already make it ultra-customizable...

What could we do that would have a similar effect but not be as intrusive?

Add modules!

Have the ship's base fleet size be only 4, and add 4 special module slots (one at the front and back of each outrigger). These slots can hold certain modules:
- Field broadening: +2 fleet capacity (current Vindicator has 4 of these, not removable). cost: 150 (cheap so it's not onerous to bulk up the fleet)
- Thrust Regulator: Increase fuel efficiency, but you lose one thrust module worth of speed (can be turned on and off with a device that appears in the devices menu). cost: 500
- The Quasispace portal spawner could become one of these modules (in order to receive it you have to leave one open, they will hold it for you otherwise).
- Afterburner (tech acquired from the Thraddash if you become Great Teacher): Lower fuel efficiency, higher speed. Using an Afterburner and a thrust regulator at the same time should end up the same as or worse than using neither. cost: 3000
- Cargo Tow: very high carrying capacity, but reduces speed and fuel efficiency if it contains anything. costs 1000
- Fuel Pod: Lower capacity than main body fuel pods - say, only 30. costs 400
- Thruster-powered dynamo: Reduces your speed in combat, but increases energy regeneration a la a regular dynamo (still total maxes out at 3). cost: 1250
- Space Elevator: during planet exploration, there is a wandering cable hanging from the Vindicator. Landers which return while touching it don't have to use most of the fuel sent down with them.
This would really change the face of exploration to the easy side, so we need to make it have some disadvantages:
If a lander uses the elevator to get back up, it is vulnerable to hotspots and weather for a second after starting back up. Also, the procedure should take a day (currently, planet exploration is instantaneous). If you have more than one lander and enough crew for the others, you can run missions with the others while waiting for the first one to get back (either normal missions or with the elevator again... perhaps a restriction to only one per elevator at a time?)

Also:
alternate module in a turning slot: strafing thrusters for supox-like maneuvers
alternate module in a thrust slot: counts more towards speed in combat than a regular thruster, but doesn't count as much in hyperspace.
alternate module in a thrust slot: cheapo thrusters: more economical to build, but eventually the price of the regular thrusters will be worth the touch of extra speed.


These additions would certainly make the game easier... which brings up the issue of a series of difficulty settings.
Logged
guesst
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 692


Ancient Shofixti Warrior


View Profile WWW
Re: UQM 'Frenzy' Fork: Melee ideas
« Reply #76 on: September 10, 2003, 04:38:34 am »

Quote
The ideas mentioned about the Mark I present some interesting thoughts:

I'm certain its kind of a goofy thought, but custom frames as well.

Obviously, these modifications to the Mark I would take about a month to do, and cost a (very) large hunk of RU, so it would be the bane of an indecisive captain to keep switching frames. Some people would stay with the old standard, others could shape and bend their craft into the Vindicator they've only been able to dream about up until now.


Hmmm, interesting idea. Storyline wise the MarkI was a Precursor tug, not too flexable on the design except for the moduals. However, I suppose that enough time and a welding torch and I'm sure some engineering geek could outfit even a tug to a more combat ready form.

Interesting.

Maybe the Mark II could be this level of customizable? Hmm? (Any guesses on what the Mark II is to the precursors. Cruse Ship? War ship? Oooh, a Precursor ship designed specifically for war. The possibilities.)
Logged

A new game and it's code each week. Please visit Cymon's Games
Talhydras
Guest


Email
Re: UQM 'Frenzy' Fork: Melee ideas
« Reply #77 on: September 10, 2003, 09:08:32 am »

Work Tug? Service vessel, baby. Two entirely different things. That thing ain't a tug, dammit. True, it's got that nifty hyperspace field, but it's more like a customizable corvette type thing.

Several comments:
I HIGHLY object to the thought of customizing your frame in-game. I was thinking more along the lines of making ALL-NEW derivations of the Mark I, new sprites and all. As far as I can discern from in-game fiction, the really important neat junk is in the spine and major modifications to that would be implausible. Plus, I mean your ship is HUGE. True, it would take a while, but I don't think it would be feasible to implement in the game, and if it was... what's the benefit? I think it's a bit TOO MUCH ability to perfect your ship. The whole point of SC2's original design was that it wasn't GREAT at anything, it had enough inherent customizability to be pretty damn good at just about anything. I was thinking about minor tweaks, but after thinking about it, I may be coming to the decision that maybe all the changes should be graphical only. Like picking variations on the Mark I that best suit your character.

My view on new modules: I also think the original modules shouldn't be tampered with. It's possible to put in *really* hard to find SPECIAL 1 of a Kind precursor modules, somewhat like in Starcon 1. Has anyone here played Stars! recently? I was also thinking a bit like the Mystery Trader modules, multi-purpose things. Maybe a 2-slot module that is a high eff fuel pod, a crew pod, and a cargo bay?

Or a two slot weapon that fires for an extra long range?
My one problem with Zelnick's Vindicator was that it has a medium range gun that means I have to scrap with an Ur-Quan, and if I get sloppy I pay for it. It would be nice to increase range by 50%.

A thought: A choice from the melnorme, choosing Auto Tracking or Increased Range?

Hmmm. I think that would change it too drastically. IMHO, the limit for changes in any "improved" UQM is little tweaks that add to the depth. Somebody made a thread about this a while back. Shoring up the story, it was called. One of the things I remember was adding more space stations and alien colonies. I like that. More depth, more of a "physical" game world. I think one or two hidden "one-use" only artifacts would make a neat side quest. To implement it, you could find lander reports, just so there isn't need for more text to be recorded.

more pipedreams. peace.
Logged
NECRO-99
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 478


Androsynth Combat Tactics Specialist


View Profile WWW
Re: UQM 'Frenzy' Fork: Melee ideas
« Reply #78 on: September 10, 2003, 11:54:54 pm »

So slap one of those two-slot guns on, get the extended range from the Melnorme, 3 Shiva/Dynamos and you've got a Mauler with it's captain on a crack binge.  Grin
« Last Edit: September 10, 2003, 11:55:40 pm by NECRO-99 » Logged

I love being a clone. Everything I do bad gets blamed on the real me!
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!