Jump to content
3000AD Forums

Feld

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Feld

  1. I don't seem able to run hostile marines over over with the mobile command center. The VCF says that collision detect is disabled for flocks and trees. Is it also disabled for marines? Andy P. wtf is a Mobile Command Center? [ 06-06-2004, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]
  2. SC, I read in the VCF some time ago that the STO's are going to get re-enabled. Do you still intend to do that on UC or is that a next-game sort of thing? Andy
  3. D**n!!! I've been compared to [email protected]?!! On second look though, SC, you're right: I was sorta out in the weeds there. I wasn't going out and trying to find crazy stuff to do. I spend 99% of my time on the CC and figured that I was missing alot of the game. So I was playing an IA scenario as an MI and getting my tail kicked. I saw the MFB on the map and figured, hey, at least it's got more armor than I do. So I jumped in to it and tried to shoot the incoming enemy marines with the turrets. I found I could rotate the turrets but not fire them. So I switched to plan B. Plan B was hit them with the vehicle. One of the little buggers grabbed onto the underside and rode around with me until I stopped and got out to shoot him off. That's about when he shot me first Lesson learned: Andy should stay in his CC where it's safe. Anyway, I wasn't trying to nit pick. Just curious. Andy P.
  4. darn, My post is badly named. It should be "unable to damage personnel with vehicles" "wtf is a Mobile Command Center?" double darn, wrong game. Mobile Command Center = Andy talk for what the manual and everybody else calls a "Mobile Forward Base". I'm having trouble just damaging the enemy marines by hitting them with the Mobile Forward Base (MFB). I've tried it on 10 different enemy marines, at speeds from 5 to 25. On one occasion I saw the guy's TTD armor indicator go from 100 to 70. The rest of the time the enemy marine either passed through the graphic of the mobile forward base or grabbed onto the top, side or bottom! (Which was a big surprise when I got out and tried to find the annoying red dot that kept following me every where). So my question now is: should I be having this much trouble damaging enemy marines with a MFB?
  5. So I *CAN* get hit with an STO!!!! WOOO HOOO!!!! I'm gonna go try it out! Later all!
  6. Feld

    Has anyone done this?

    Speaking of STO's...(my favorite topic I did the same staring from ~100 km that Darkreaver1980 did and still never got drilled by and STO. Are they disabled in this rev?
  7. Feld

    UC appendices in printable PDF format

    The VCF mentions an updated EP.HTML file. But I don't see it on the downloads page. Have I missed it's location somehow? In Confusion, Andy P. [ 03-11-2004, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Presby ]
  8. Feld

    New Products Announcement

    SC, Sounds great! I must admit as one of your "niche hard core" fans that news I'm most excited about is the chance at another Battlecruiser title about the time I get my next payraise to support it. But I may need to buy an Xbox in the meantime to play KB Questions: 1. Do you plan to enable the gunship turret weapon positions in UCE2E? 2. Will taking out base power, sensor and comms buildings have an effect on taking the base? For instance, if a crack team of EFM manages to knock out the EWR, does that affect how far away the base will see incoming aircraft and launch fighters? Do you plan to have knocking out the nuclear and solar power systems affect the way the base works? Andy P.
  9. So I got back from three weeks of business travel shaking from UC withdrawl. 1st thing I did, grab the latest patches, jump in to my trusty Aestrom and try to get shot by an STO. Here's what I did: I HJ'd to the moon, sat over an insurgent base and eyeballed a (very red) enemy STO emplacement for 5 minutes without getting shot when I was between 50 and 100 km from the "moon" object in the space region. Question for Someone-In-The-Know: Is this part of the "ground units shooting at air/space craft was disabled to please those Dreamcatcher yahoos who thought UC was just an action game and I'll get around to increasing their fire in a later patch" thing? Thanks, Andy P.
  10. Has anyone been hit by an STO and can they relate to me the circumstances of aforesaid hit? What got me thinking about this was pulling my favorite "tactic" (actually just overkill) of bringing the CC into atmo and destroying base objects from a great distance using the main guns. This worked very well for me in BCMG with my cruiser. When I did it in UC earlier this week it occurred to me that at that moment I was sitting within radar and visual tracking range of two STO batteries. And well within their missile targetting parameters. Yet I did not get hit with an STO. I am now seperated from my game machine for two weeks of work related travel and was thinking about the situation. Hence my question above. Anybody? [ 02-24-2004, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Presby ]
  11. Feld

    starfleet command 3

    Anyone know where I can buy a copy?
  12. Feld

    Universal Combat - First Impressions

    SC I KNOW THAT MY COPY OF UC ISN'T REGISTERED YET, PLEASE DON'T DEACTIVATE ME!!! (I lost my copy of BCMG in a move, didn't replace it 'cause I knew UC was coming out and haven't been able to log into DB. I just informed [email protected] and hopefully will be "legal" shortly) OK, that said: first impressions Overall: A great improvement on games that I loved to begin with! Why? The game's pacing is just about perfect for me. When I say this understand that I have come to every BC title looking to "experience" of combined arms space combat from the combatant commander's viewpoint. Previous BC titles were good in this respect: I felt like I had a crew and a ship rather than a very large fighter with extremely powerful weapons. And Spare Parts! If amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics then the BC's were definitely "professional" quality games because I spent a bunch of time in Logistix. But something about the pacing always bugged me. Maybe the HJ times were shorter for the big ships. Maybe the realspace speeds were higher. Maybe the fighter turnrates were too. I don't know exactly what combination of factors it was because I can't load up BCMG and play it for comparison for reasons which should be obvious. UC has removed that pacing gripe. I've been a naval officer since 1997 and UC's balance between inactivity and action has frequently reminded me of real world ops that I've been in or had related to me by fellow officers. Yeah, really. And I keep playing it. Which might be cause for a psych eval. That's my overall first impression. Andy P. [ 02-20-2004, 07:33 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Presby ]
  13. The more time that I play, the more questions that I have regarding the vilest structure in the universe. The ground base. Pathetic. slow moving. Fun to shoot. Not a good combination if you want to survive in a universe full of angry marines and hostile mile long space battleships. Yet the designer of the universe sees it in his heart to favor them (see here ) with existence. Who am I to argue? After all, they make excellent target practice... Seriously, I enjoy complicated combined arms problems, so I am having a great deal of fun developing anti-ground tactics. There are many threads out there on how to attack ground bases. To avoid repetition I would like to use this thread to post information on how the ground bases actually work so that people like me (there's got to be a few) can perfect our methods. So, the questions: 1. What is the game effect (if any) of: Comms buildings? Barracks? Command and Control Centers? 2. How do ground based launch pads work? Is there an upward limit to fightercraft numbers or are they respawn machines? 3. Why do EWR have a 5000' max height of detection in the appendix? It seems that they'd be better off being able to search higher in an age of OTS weapons and space fighters...
  14. Feld

    How Do Ground Bases Work?

    quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: I had put in STO units into the design, back when I was going to put in a requirement to be in orbit in order to do any planetary ops. Since using OTS weapons are very powerful, the STO units were to be their counter. Since I never did get to implement orbital flight dynamics, I saw no need to implement the AI and tech for the STO units. They'd make base assaults a very interesting affair... Durn it!! If only I'd read the BCG features document I wouldn't have needed to ask that question...Sigh I cannot wait for BCG SC, did you know that, come about September (or, "when it's done") that two full system rebuilds will be to play your games? [ 04-24-2003, 06:42 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Presby ]
  15. Feld

    Learning and learning

    I remember reading something about the EMD becoming less effective if left on too long...
  16. Feld

    How Do Ground Bases Work?

    Roger that about the EWR, that makes more sense. PLEASE DISREGARD THIS POST, STO's DON'T WORK. THANKS TYRN My next bit of ground base confusion is how STOs work. The name indicates that they kill things in orbit. But the listed tracking and engagement ranges are very small on the space map's scale. And the max engagement altitude listed is 150000' =17.6 km which is nowhere near "orbit" (on Earth anyway...) I found this quote in the VCF which seems to indicate that the STO's can't attack air units on a planet anymore: quote:The Surface To Orbit, STO, units now have their own class. Previously used to use the Enemy Air Defense (EAD) class which caused them to attack air units within the planet. By way of a test I flew down to an insurgent base on earth and played with the centaur launcher. It never fired while I was within the stated missile launch envelope and it never tracked me inside the tracking envelope. There wasn't even a TWI for the Centaur on my HUD. Confusedly yours, Feld [ 04-24-2003, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Presby ]
  17. Feld

    BCG - Reality Check

    1. Will naval assets be able to launch STO missiles? 2. How will STO assets sense targets in orbit? They'll just "see" all of TACSCAN? Will they have sensor networks that I can destroy? 3. Does the inclusion of submarines mean that you gloriously crazy people are doing a SONAR model too? 4. Will that big huge "CC" sized sub carry fighters/shuttles/OC's like a real CC? [ 04-24-2003, 08:55 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Presby ]
  18. Well Last night I finally collected my mining drones from Mimas and Atlas. I got decent hauls (~1.6mil Galcreds) and deecided to do something about Radine and plutonium consumption. Couldn't afford any of the available higher level reactors so I settled for a Linear IV shield upgrade and, you guessed it, a whole lot of Radine. My Warmonger, GCV Cygnus, pulled out of Gazer (where I'd gone to buy the upgrades) and I decided that now would be a good time to refit the shield array. Note that on this board there are frequent references to doing this IN A SAFE PLACE. I said, ahhh, heck with it, and kept flying. Not like I didn't have plenty of work that would have kept me busy while my AE's crew was upgrading the shields on some remote moon. Nope. Not me. I resumed operations. That's about when the CRE(?)/RAI SUPERCARRIER SQUADRON showed up to wipe out the one TER/POL (EAR?) Sentry in the region. One Aestrom and one Firestorm vs. a police cruiser and I was too far away to help. Then the Aestrom took a liking to one of the transports over near Gazer and started an HJ. Great! Free targets! That's about when the TER/INS Solnar jumped in and went to attack the raider Aestrom. But I didn't notice the Insurgents' target. I just saw a hostile and attacked the Solonar because it arrived first. I put about six FATAL birds into him and let the PTA/IOD do the rest. By then the Sentry was dead and the Firestorm and Aestrom had both retargeted. Me. Recall that I'd said my shields were under upgrade? Well, my shield efficiency wasn't that great. Like, it took them a very long time to come up. But did I expect that? No. Nor did I expect that the Firestorm's first shot would blow out the shield generators completely. You can imagine how it went from there. I won't bore you with the details, but I was lucky that I was within turret range of a friendly station. Even still, I took massive reactor damage (though no shut down), lost the shuttle bay, both shuttles, 2 OC's and one of my flight engineers. Had crew trapped all over the ship, lost a third of main life support system and most of the solar reactor. But we won. On solar power and with missiles alone. Never could have done it without major fire support from Gazer, but we still won. I've never had to think about a space battle and the orientation of the solar panels at the same time. I think I'll go find a safe place to fix the ship...
  19. General question: How do ground base power supplies work Specific questions: 1. Do any units on ground bases have independent backup power supplies? 2. Do solar supplies on ground bases hold a charge for the base for a set period of time after the nuclear reactor experiences technical difficulty due to a...highly localized massive increase in local radiation flux? Experience which prompts the question: I blow up base power supplies (solar and nuclear) from standoff ranges with my trusty cruiser. Then I fly to the base. The laser turrets don't *seem* to want to play with me anymore. Maybe their lock times are just very long(don't think so). Maybe I was placing my cruiser outside of their slew ranges(don't think so). I conclude that they have no backup power source. The mobile assets kept shooting though. This question is part of my continuing quest to understand operation of ground bases that I might reduce them to rubble more efficiently. Yours in destruction, Feld
  20. Feld

    How Do Ground Bases Work?

    Yeah I'd noticed barracks dumping marines. But I couldn't be sure if it was only the barracks. The bunkers seemed a logical place for them to hide out too. I also sat around a bit and let the darned launch pads do their thing for two flights of starmonks before I got bored and wiped them. Has anybody noticed a pattern to their launches? The ones that I've played with seemed to pick a fighter type and launch that as soon as they saw any of my shuttles. Haven't noticed anybody who wants to kill my OC's though. I guess that that would be the vehicles which were removed for improved performance mentioned in the VCF.
  21. quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: quote:Originally posted by Andrew Presby: [qb] General question: How do ground base power supplies workThey don't quote:1. Do any units on ground bases have independent backup power supplies?No quote:2. Do solar supplies on ground bases hold a charge for the base for a set period of time after the nuclear reactor experiences technical difficulty due to a...highly localized massive increase in local radiation flux?No. That would be too easy don't you think? "ARGGHH, foiled by the very designer of the universe. Curse the pathetic ground base dwellers and their infinite capacity wee little extension cords! CURSE THEM AAAAALLLLLLLLLL!!!!!" -Thanks for the info. That actually simplifies my tactics considerably because there's really no reason to blast power stations if their destruction has no effect on a given base's military capability. Short of experience points. But I like to RP and my AE just doesn't want to wipe out a nuclear reactor and spread a bunch of contamination planetside. Does the destruction of the reactors increase the risk of contamination to your ground teams?
  22. quote:Originally posted by Tyrn: quote:Originally posted by Andrew Presby: This question is part of my continuing quest to understand operation of ground bases that I might reduce them to rubble more efficiently. Yours in destruction, Feld While I can't actually give you an answer as I'm unsure myself, I just had to thank you...the above gave me a good laugh. Excellent! Humor is a mission objective here aboard GCV Cygnus (my Warmonger, Leviathan is my default carrier name). Along with destruction of pesky ground bases... Feld
  23. Feld

    Learning and learning

    quote:Originally posted by Eboda: 5. Does the CTL guidence require me to keep my target in the recticle untill it impacts? Thaks folks [/QB](also replied to other thread) Eboda, There are/were real-world active radar homing missiles which do what I think the SC is trying to simulate with CTL. Keeping the target in your reticle illuminates the target with your own ship/fighter mounted sensors so that the missile can see it. In real world systems this is done to prevent having to carry a heavy/expensive RADAR transmitter in the missile's nose. The design tradeoff lets you carry more warhead or fuel in the missile or it lets you make a smaller missile which you can carry more of. It also tends to make the missile cheaper. You have correctly identified the tactical benefits of this system. There aren't any. It's just apparently what the state of 31st century engineering will allow. Note that the 2 ATA missiles with CTL have either a large range or a large warhead, perhaps implying that their designers needed to save space in the guidance department(?) Or else, it's something that the SC wanted to throw in there to add another wrinkle to the game.. Feld
  24. quote:Originally posted by Eboda: One more question. >>CTL Continuous Tracking Logic >>The target must remain locked until the missile >>hits the target. If the lock is lost, the >>missile will lose the target and fly aimlessly >>until it self-destructs. Does that mean if the target is not in my recticle, the missle goes useless? What good could that be? Eboda, There are/were real-world active radar homing missiles which do what I think the SC is trying to simulate with CTL. Keeping the target in your reticle illuminates the target with your own ship/fighter mounted sensors so that the missile can see it. In real world systems this is done to prevent having to carry a heavy/expensive RADAR transmitter in the missile's nose. The design tradeoff lets you carry more warhead or fuel in the missile or it lets you make a smaller missile which you can carry more of. It also tends to make the missile cheaper. You have correctly identified the tactical benefits of this system. There aren't any. It's just apparently what the state of 31st century engineering will allow. Or else, it's something that the SC wanted to throw in there to add another wrinkle to the game... Feld
  25. Feld

    Iraq WMD - aha! finally the smoking peashooter

    Where are the N thousand plus chemical warheads left over the Iran-Iraq war?
×