Adonnay:

I like the enhancements you made to ground combat...this mod is really taking shape.

What do you and the other lads think of the following :

1. Make specialized Storm Troopers buildable. For instance, I know there are already models for Sand Troopers as seen on Tatooine. (Game may auto default to these anyway, so it may be moot)


2. Retexture dismounted Imperial Scouts in black to make them Storm Commandos, with enhanced stats and new abilities such as planting thermal detonators. ( I am not sure if you can give them a new weapon, however, and a pistol would not be appropriate for commando)

3. Make merc units and Wookies buildable for the Rebs.

I think ground combat would certainly benefit from a greater variety of units, and I think most of these changes would be canon (please check me on this, however).

Also, do you think decreasing the speed of ground units would provide an opportunity to employ more tactics. Sometimes it seems as if most ground battles devolve into a "bum rush."

What kind of specialization do you mean? (regarding point 1.)

Wookies for the rebels sounds nice... what about the mercs, what advantage should they have over normal infantry?

What kind of specialization do you mean? (regarding point 1.)

Wookies for the rebels sounds nice... what about the mercs, what advantage should they have over normal infantry?

Storm Troopers automatically appear as Sand Troopers on Tatooine, and have their own model. I think there may be Snow Troopers as well. It looks like the game automatically defaults to these models. However, it might ad more depth to the game if they were buildable units and had certain benefits over normal Storm Troopes (i.e. enhanced survival on desert worlds).

Another thought I had regarding strom troopes was to make Imerial Army Troopers the base infantry for the Imperials. They could use the same model as Rebel Troopers, but with grey textures instead of brown. The stats, cost, and possibly building prerequisites of the Storm Troopers could be adjusted to represent their elite status.

On the Rebel side, I noted in some background literature that they used mercenaries from time to time. The pirate infantry model could be used, with enhanced specs and cost...this could be employed, like the Wookies, to counter the revised Storm Troopers as discussed above.

I would be interesting to see a variety of differnet by canon accurate infantry units to give ground battles some much needed depth.

Storm Troopers automatically appear as Sand Troopers on Tatooine, and have their own model. I think there may be Snow Troopers as well. It looks like the game automatically defaults to these models.
Yes, you do see Snowtroopers on planets such as Hoth.

Umm... didn't you tell me the Venator has assault missile tubes? In your chart above he doesn't...
No, the chart I just gave you is correct. Speaking of charts, per your request:


A-wing: Shields 30, Hull 80, DR 10
X-wing: Shields 30, Hull 120, DR 10
Y-wing: Shields 50, Hull 120, DR 10
Z-95: Shields 30, Hull 120, DR 10
TIE: Shields 0, Hull 60, DR 10
TIE bomber: Shields 0, Hull 130, DR 10
TIE scout: Shields 30, Hull 120, DR 20
Millenium Falcon: Shields 90, Hull 180, DR 20
Slave I: Shields 90, Hull 150, DR 20
Gallofree Medium Transport (rebels): Shields 90, Hull 200, DR 30 (btw, it has one set of lasers worth 4d10x2)
Kappa Shuttle (imps): Shields 30, Hull 120, DR 20 (btw, it has 2 sets of blaster cannon worth 4d10x2)
Lambda Shuttle (imps): Shields 50, Hull 120, DR 10 (btw, it has 3 sets of blaster cannon worth 5d10x2 [2 front, 1 rear])
Tartan: unknown
Corellian Corvette: Shields 200, Hull 300, DR 40
Corellian Gunship: Shields 230, Hull 460, DR 40
Marauder Corvette: Shields 200, Hull 300, DR 40
Interdictor: Shields 300, Hull 500, DR 50
Nebulon-B: Shields 200, Hull 360, DR 40
Acclamator: Shields 240, Hull 320, DR 50
Mon Cal MC80: Shields 300, Hull 600, DR 60
ISD I: Shields 300, Hull 700, DR 60
Victory II: Shields 300, Hull 460, DR 50
Victory I: Shields 330, Hull 400, DR 50
Broadside missile cruiser: unknown
Alliance Assault Frigate (Mark II): Shields 300, Hull 500, DR 60
Venator: Shields 330, Hull 530, DR 60
DR = Damage Resistance (amount of damage subtracted before applying to shields and hull). Example: A single laser bolt worth 500 points of damage (must be from a SSD's superlaser) is headed towards a Venator; first 60 points is subtracted, leaving 440 points to impact the shields, which is enough to completely collapse them, with 110 points remaining; 60 points is subtracted which leaves 50 points to damage the hull. Any damage which is insufficient to overcome DR is ignored.

Wow... that won't work in EAW like that. The Corellian Corvette half the integrity of the MC80 and 2/3rd the shield? Guess I have to figure something out then, especially since there's no damage reduction... ;)

But thanks for your effort in writing all that down!

DR is the critical component. That's why the shield and hull values are so much lower than you probably expected. Also, "critical" hits bypass shields and go directly into hull. As I mentioned before, EAW is much more abstract than the RPG. EAW simply won't allow you to model some of the things you see happen in the movies (and can also do in the RPG). Good luck with your tweaking!

This may be strange but...

How do I revert back to the original Laser Textures? XD; I'm not liking the new ones as much.

Delete the "ART" folder, as well as "PROJECTILES.XML", I believe.

@Adonnay and Tal Odo-Ki

I noticed that a few other mods are featuring Assault Shuttles and Fire Sprays as buildable units for space combat. Were Assault Shuttles used in space engagements, and were Fire Sprays mass produced and used in combat such that they should be represented?

The Firespray was never well-received by the law enforcement agencies it was marketed to, and was only made (by Kuat Systems Engineering) for a few years. However, it was wildly popular with all sorts of scoundrels, who eagerly bought them up.

The Imperial Assault Shuttle is standard on all Star Destroyers and other large capital ships. It can carry 40 troopers and 5 tons of cargo (such as speeder bikes). It mounts 4 turbolasers in turrets (2d10x5), a forward tractor beam, and forward concussion missile launcher (8d10x2). Shields 250, Hull 150, DR 20. (It has greatly overpowered shields, allowing it to fly right into the midst of a capital ship firefight and survive a couple of hits.)

Well but it's actually designed to deliver troops into or through a hot zone... I doubt that they would be used as combat ships. And since there's no kind of boarding or blockade breaking there's (from my point of view) no need for an assault shuttle.

As for the Firespray... right now I couldn't imagine how to implement it... I can't see it flying around in squadrons and as a standalone ship it seems a little small. Any ideas?

And concerning the ground troop revamp... I'm still balancing the space battles according to the new data Tal generously provided (which takes more time than expected) so bare with me... I'll come to that as soon as I'm somewhat content with the space battles (so that they're at least playable again ;) ).

I agree with you regarding the Assault Shuttles. Unless they are implemented as something you might see land on a planet in EAW there's no need for them. They are not used by the Empire as warships for space battles.

Firesprays are uncommon enough that they shouldn't be included, IMO.

There are plenty of other ship types that I would like to see added to the game (such as Skipray boats), but until we get new models that won't be happening anytime soon.


PS - the IPV has 4 light turbolasers (4d10x5 ea.), Shields 250, Hull 330, DR 40, and is 120m long.

First off let me say I really like this mod, and I'm looking forward to more future releases. Ok I recently played the Galactic Conflict on the Rebellion side using 006c. Here are some of my thoughts about the mod (You said you wanted testers).

I liked the unit scale, the tartan ships suprised me though, didn't realize they were so big.
Since the tartan ships are now alot bigger shouldn't they have to fly around asteriod fields, instead of traveling through them without taking damage??

To me Space stations seem pitifully weak. Their hardpoints strength is fine, but their shields and armament seem too weak. Plus they only put out about four fighters. Shouldn't Space stations be able to garrison a fairly large complement of fighters each increasing as the station level goes up?
The shields only seem to last for about 30 seconds then down they go. This is against 3 victory class ships. Against more ships or bigger ships the shields go down lots quicker.
As for armaments a level 1 & 2 station are hard pressed to take out a tartan before it gets destroyed.
Level 3 stations were able to take out a single victory class ship before its desctruction.
Level 4 stations seem to put up a much better fight, I took out a victory, an acclamator, a tartan and almost got another victory.
Didn't get to see what a level 5 station could do.
None of the stations were able to even knock down Peit's ISD Shields (thought a level 4 got close).
I think stations should be ALOT more powerful as they represent the entire planets space defenses.

I think the unit prices are more realistic, but now I have to question the credit amount planets produce, it seems low. For example, I had some 15 to 16 planets and only producing around 1400 credits a day, I tended to play in fast forward mode alot. Didn't have alot of capital ships or level 4 space stations. I don't know maybe increasing the planets credit output defeats the purpose of raising the prices.

The unit cap is great for space battles, but I don't think you increased the overall cap that planets and space stations produce, cause I couldn't build much, barely had anything and was maxed out all the time. Actually you start the game out about 40 points (I could be wrong on the number but I know it was over the cap) over the cap.
Not sure how you did the math to figure the points out but it needs to be applied to the planets and stations.

I don't recall seeing any plex soilders among the rebel infantry.

Wow AT-ST are strong, I like it, but its very hard to take a planet when the empire has 3 light factories and about4-5 AT-ST units on it. Perhaps adding more individual soilders to the rebel soilders (or increasing their damage again), AT-ST go through them like slicing warm butter. Like I said I like it, but the rebels need something to counter it. It is very very difficult to take an Empire controlled planet before tech level 3, without sacraficing lots and lots of troops.

Didn't encounter any AT-ATs. I have a question will the AI sell buildings to build something else, if all the build spots are taken and it has duplicate buildings on a given planet?

Heavy Factoires didn't produce a single garrison unit.

My barracks really didn't produce more infantry after the initial garrison was defeated, maybe only got 1 -2 units. Is this normal, not sure cause this was the first game I ever lost a planet.

I noticed that the build points (for a ground battle) reset after a defeat and then coming back immedatley with more troops. Don't know if this a bug with the game or a change, but in my previous games they remained.

My thoughts on superweapons. I really don't think they should be toned done, perhaps make them more expanisve to buy, but by making them weaker, kinda defeats the purpose of planetary weapons. Though perhaps they should have their range decrease. For example you can't fire on ships across the entire map, perhaps only within the mass showdow of the space station, since the weapon can't be on the correct side of the planet all the time. Perhaps if they build 2 or more than they shoot across the entire map.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Carrack Cruiser included in the mod (not that the empire needs it, just a really cool ship). Perhaps MistenTH would be kind enought to let us borrow his...

Keep up the great work.

Edited for grammer & spelling.

The space stations in EAW are pathetically weak (compared to their RPG counterparts). A L2 station should be a match for a Mon Cal and a L3 should be more than a match for an ISD. (You can imagine how powerful a L4 or L5 station might be.)

As for you not having enough income with 15-16 planets, you aren't building enough mines and probably building way too many military (defensive) structures. If you are attacking, constantly, as you should be doing, then the enemy will be put off-balance. Your "front line" will be steadily advancing and thus making your "interior" worlds safe from attack. Just put modest garrisons on your frontline planets as well as a few frigates or cruisers in orbit to supplement the stations. And then keep moving them forward to defend the new worlds you conquer. After I have built one of each factory at the appropriate worlds, I only build mines on all slots at all worlds, except for one ion cannon (as the Rebels) at each of the four SD-producing planets. I find that if you aren't losing units in battle all the time then you don't need more than 1-2 of any particular type of factory in your entire "empire". A single factory should be able to keep up with your needs for what it produces. (ie: I only have one light and one heavy factory in my entire empire, one Academy, etc.)

I really like this mod, but i have serious trouble with that piett guy(playing as rebellion). One of his turret hardpoints seems undestroyable, it always stays at 100%. Sometimes it works out cause he flees, but just now i lost the home one and another mon cal against him :(. He draws fire on him thats wasted, didnt notice it until it was to late. This happens using the newest version 6c and in galactic conquest mode.

Hope you can fix that cause apart from this your mod is really great, oh and can you beef up the venator a bit? It has imho a really cool design and id like to use it but it even gets killed by an acclamator ... I think the hp are the problem, his shields where down in like 10 seconds, each hardpoint then died pretty fast too. To put this in perspective a mon cal and this venator fought a acclamator and the venator was killed as the acclamator lost his shields. I know its a old design, but maybe its sufficent to reflect that in firepower not in toughness.

P.S. On the other hand that might have been piett again, not sure. I really like your capital ships btw, but ships like the victory sd or venator feel a tad to weak now, if you compare them to lower sized ships. Just killed a victory with tartan support only using two nebulons, going by size that feels a bit wrong.

Thanks for your detailed feedback, that's what I need since I can't really test all in the way it should be tested. Right now I just do space skirmish battles to work out the balance of space battles... so let me answer some of your points.

I liked the unit scale, the tartan ships suprised me though, didn't realize they were so big.
Since the tartan ships are now alot bigger shouldn't they have to fly around asteriod fields, instead of traveling through them without taking damage??
Good point... not sure how it is done but I'll look into it (probably has to do with the ship class).


To me Space stations seem pitifully weak. Their hardpoints strength is fine, but their shields and armament seem too weak. Plus they only put out about four fighters. Shouldn't Space stations be able to garrison a fairly large complement of fighters each increasing as the station level goes up?
The shields only seem to last for about 30 seconds then down they go. This is against 3 victory class ships. Against more ships or bigger ships the shields go down lots quicker.
As for armaments a level 1 & 2 station are hard pressed to take out a tartan before it gets destroyed.
Level 3 stations were able to take out a single victory class ship before its desctruction.
Level 4 stations seem to put up a much better fight, I took out a victory, an acclamator, a tartan and almost got another victory.
Didn't get to see what a level 5 station could do.
None of the stations were able to even knock down Peit's ISD Shields (thought a level 4 got close).
I think stations should be ALOT more powerful as they represent the entire planets space defenses.

Did you test that in skirmish or GC. In GC the stations do get larger (more) garrison units. In skirmish they do not (and did never, that's not my doing ;) ). I suppose it's because you can actually build space units during combat... which is not possible in a GC space battle.

Other than that I just tweaked the space stations hardpoints to do up to twice the damage they did before (also doubled their health). The shields have been increased in the release you tested already. The shields are very powerful already... you shouldn't underestimate the firepower of a VSD because it only has two Turbolaser hardpoints. I adjusted their damage to reflect the much greater firepower this ship actually has. But I'll keep that in mind... I'll probably raise the shields even more, but then you will have serious problems taking planets with a level 5 space station ;) I'd say we first test how much the damage and health increase helped.


I think the unit prices are more realistic, but now I have to question the credit amount planets produce, it seems low. For example, I had some 15 to 16 planets and only producing around 1400 credits a day, I tended to play in fast forward mode alot. Didn't have alot of capital ships or level 4 space stations. I don't know maybe increasing the planets credit output defeats the purpose of raising the prices.
Yes... this was intended to reduce the time needed to build such a spacefortress like an ISD or Liberty. You're supposed to fight a long time with smaller vessels like the Nebulon B or Acclamator (which now has been moved to tech 1 for balance reasons btw). So when you encounter an ISD you'll say "Crap... how the heck did he get that!". Ajustments can still be made though... as in raising the output of mines i.e.


The unit cap is great for space battles, but I don't think you increased the overall cap that planets and space stations produce, cause I couldn't build much, barely had anything and was maxed out all the time. Actually you start the game out about 40 points (I could be wrong on the number but I know it was over the cap) over the cap.
Not sure how you did the math to figure the points out but it needs to be applied to the planets and stations.

I haven't touched the GC caps yet... they will be raised too. Not sure how much though. I want the player to strategically deploy their fleets and not build enough fleets to cover all their planets. This way you (and the AI) will have to keep planets unprotected...


I don't recall seeing any plex soilders among the rebel infantry.

Wow AT-ST are strong, I like it, but its very hard to take a planet when the empire has 3 light factories and about4-5 AT-ST units on it. Perhaps adding more individual soilders to the rebel soilders (or increasing their damage again), AT-ST go through them like slicing warm butter. Like I said I like it, but the rebels need something to counter it. It is very very difficult to take an Empire controlled planet before tech level 3, without sacraficing lots and lots of troops.
Did you try deploying infiltrators with their bombs?
PLEX soldiers should be there... they should actually be one PLEX in every soldier squad... if I haven't messed that up that is ;)


Didn't encounter any AT-ATs. I have a question will the AI sell buildings to build something else, if all the build spots are taken and it has duplicate buildings on a given planet?
Don't think so... that's hardcoded I suppose.


Heavy Factoires didn't produce a single garrison unit.

Which side? Rebel or Empire?


My barracks really didn't produce more infantry after the initial garrison was defeated, maybe only got 1 -2 units. Is this normal, not sure cause this was the first game I ever lost a planet.

Again, which side? Vehicles do not spawn endlessly anymore and it takes alot longer for them to spawn. Troops should however always spawn (slower too though).


I noticed that the build points (for a ground battle) reset after a defeat and then coming back immedatley with more troops. Don't know if this a bug with the game or a change, but in my previous games they remained.

I certainly didn't change anything there... don't think I even can. It's probably a bug...


My thoughts on superweapons. I really don't think they should be toned done, perhaps make them more expanisve to buy, but by making them weaker, kinda defeats the purpose of planetary weapons. Though perhaps they should have their range decrease. For example you can't fire on ships across the entire map, perhaps only within the mass showdow of the space station, since the weapon can't be on the correct side of the planet all the time. Perhaps if they build 2 or more than they shoot across the entire map.

I just doubled the damage of the HV gun... the Ion cannon recharge has been toned down though (not the damage, it still can disable every ship no matter what size).


I wouldn't mind seeing the Carrack Cruiser included in the mod (not that the empire needs it, just a really cool ship). Perhaps MistenTH would be kind enought to let us borrow his...

I suppose it's a modified Tartan or something? Since there's no model for it in the game yet... and I hate to reuse models since it's hard to distinguish between the two then.


I'm getting the feeling the whole mod is growing a little over my head (probably german saying only *g*).

I really like this mod, but i have serious trouble with that piett guy(playing as rebellion). One of his turret hardpoints seems undestroyable, it always stays at 100%. Sometimes it works out cause he flees, but just now i lost the home one and another mon cal against him :(. He draws fire on him thats wasted, didnt notice it until it was to late. This happens using the newest version 6c and in galactic conquest mode.

Hope you can fix that cause apart from this your mod is really great, oh and can you beef up the venator a bit? It has imho a really cool design and id like to use it but it even gets killed by an acclamator ... I think the hp are the problem, his shields where down in like 10 seconds, each hardpoint then died pretty fast too. To put this in perspective a mon cal and this venator fought a acclamator and the venator was killed as the acclamator lost his shields. I know its a old design, but maybe its sufficent to reflect that in firepower not in toughness.

P.S. On the other hand that might have been piett again, not sure. I really like your capital ships btw, but ships like the victory sd or venator feel a tad to weak now, if you compare them to lower sized ships. Just killed a victory with tartan support only using two nebulons, going by size that feels a bit wrong.

Are you sure it was Piett? Cause I replaced him with Tarkin and put Piett in an Acclamator named the Judicator.

EDIT: okay, found the problem already - fixed. Thank you!


I'll see what I can do about the Venator since I tweaked the damage output according to the lore data Tal provided... so there's not much I can do. I can however raise its shield points and/or hard point health.

EDIT2: Inceased both... it should now be a better match for the Acclamator.


And that you killed a VSD with two nebulons seems really weird... the VSD can actually shred through the Nebulons in less than 20 seconds. I'll test that too :)

EDIT3: Found out that the shield of the Victory was a bit weak.

If it was my mod I'd be tempted to remove Piett from the game and give Vader the ISD Accuser. The only problem with it is that in the SP campaign having an ISD (the new, powerful, modded ones that is) at the very beginning as the Empire is horribly unbalancing, so there's no way to add that touch of "realism" without completely screwing up the game. So Vader is consigned to being stuck with a crappy fighter while other heroes get ships which are useful in space combat. Guess it sort of balances out since Vader is awesome on the ground.

PS - the Venator should be able to chew up and spit out an Acclamator without too much trouble. It has almost twice the hull and about 50% stronger shields (not to mention the 20% better DR that you cannot model). And it carries an enormous number of fighters (triple that of an ISD). Against all that the Acclamator's only edge is that its missiles do 2.5x the damage of the Venator's own missiles. Hardly makes up for the HUGE number of fighters and the sheer toughness of the Venator.

Indeed... this is the reason why I gave Piett "only" an Acclamator and moved Tarkin with his ISD further back in the tech-line. Besides... I don't really see Vader as a space commander... he's the right hand of the Sith Lord and things as space battles are not really interesting or important enough for him... he has more importand matters that require his attention. ;)

@Meethos: I think I found the reason why you thought the units wouldn't respawn. The timers were set quite high, obiously too high for the ground battles.

Hehe maybe i should have mentioned that i just kept in its back where it has no weapons :twogun:. Nebulons are pretty fast, but my point was it felt wrong that they could even break its shields, especially that fast. Just noticed you raised the acclamators cost, guess they are fine considering theire new price.

Im not much of a lore person, but i somehow have the feeling the venator should be superior to the acclamator. Ill take the liberty to cite the english wikipedia:

Also known as "Republic Attack Cruisers," Venator-class Star Destroyers were the successors of the successful tradition of the Acclamator-class assault transports and the Victory-class Star Destroyers. While the Acclamator was primarily an armed troop transport and the Victory was a jack-of-all-trades, the Venator was primarily a starfighter carrier/destroyer.


This not only implies that it is a newer model than both the victory and acclamator but also more combat focused. There is also more in the article you can find under
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venator#Venator-class_Star_Destroyer)
Now i know wikipedia isnt always very correct or accurate, but unless they are completly wrong the venator should be comparable to the victory atleast, not inferior to the acclamator.

Please correct me if im wrong but i really like this ship like i said.

@rocketeer: The Venator is actually superior to a Victory, according to canon publications. As I said in my post a few minutes ago, a Venator should be able to chew up an Acclamator almost as easily as an Acclamator can chew up a Nebulon-B. ;)

@Adonnay: You might want to know that Home One, as an unique and very special vessel, was roughly 3,800m long (more than double the length of an ISD). You can check out the research at http://www.theforce.net/SWTC/mcc.html#corvette)

Personally i think the venator should be a the main carrier of the rebellion(its the only ship we have a model for ingame that qualifies as a carrier for the rebellion), the mon cals dont really make much sense as far as carriers go. Perhaps give them only a small escort wing like 2 x-wing squadrons, and maybe a additional a-wing squadron for the liberty class. But if you want real fighter support you would have to use the venator carrier, who could sport a higher number of squadrons and also bombers.

It would also make sense lorewise that the rebellion uses carriers, cause while their ships are jumpdrive enabled they are not really suited for longer jumps(several days in that small cockpit?). And they would need to refuel and get new torps and small repairs anyway if operating in hostile space.

@tal: Thx thats what i wanted to hear, i saw that ship for the first time in this mod, and its my faviorite ship now.

@adonnay: If you make the venator some kind of carrier(he also can carry newer ships btw, no reason a old ship design would launch old fighters), could you please enable bombing runs for it? Like the imperial capital ships do. This would give the venator a real purpose. About the balancing, we could just up the cost accordingly. It should maybe cost 20% more than a victory(if it gets comparable), to reflect the cost of the additional fighters it carries.

FWIW, I agree with rocketeer regarding the Venators. They served the role of carriers even more than they did as battlecruisers (and, at the time, they were second-to-none as battlecruisers). They were truly remarkable and flexible ships. And they LAND on planets!!! They may be severely outgunned by the (much newer) ISDs, but they are more than a match for anything else.

I think a easy fix would be to replace the ion cannons with enhanced turbolasers. Maybe also the laser cannons, cause if im not totally off they are defense against smaller ships, which a carrier has less use for since he has his fighters. Just following what i read and according to my gutfeeling, the venator should have massive shields and hull, yet lack firepower compared to capital ships. But ONLY compared to capital ships :P. He should also have good offense against corvettes/tartans and frigates so he can offer protection against those for his fighters(do enhanced turbolasers qulify for that?).

Now i have no idea where 4 enhanced turbolasers would place this ship in the foodchain, but the current setup of 33% ion cannons 33% laser cannons 33% turbolasers, just feels weird. I think 2/3rd of its armament should be heavy turbolasers, that way we can add a second weapon type in the remaining 2 hardpoints.

Now according to wikipedia again:

8 heavy turbolaser turrets, 2 medium dual turbolaser cannons, 52 point-defense laser cannons, 4 heavy proton torpedo tubes

it would need 2 normal turbolasers in the last hardpoints, and that cool point defense system of yours that i already saw on some other ship.

P.S. Yep i left out the proton torpedo launchers, but many ships that should have them are lacking launchers, lets call it a compromise until we can add new hardpoints to ships :P.

P.P.S I noticed that the missiles of a lvl 3 empire station in skirmish are still shieldpiercing, is that intended?

Rocketeer, the Venator is a capital ship. Not only that, they are Star Destroyers. As such they have hulls and shields that are stronger than a Victory, and almost the equal of a Mon Cal. And a Venator has no ion cannon, so I don't know where you're getting that from. If Adonnay has given the Venator ions, then he's made a serious mistake, which I'm sure he'll fix. As for the mix of weapons and hardpoints, please consider that some hardpoints will be firing more frequently and with more punch than others. It's not a simple 33% this and 33% that. I think you should trust Adonnay a bit more in what he's trying to do ...

Sorry if that came over wrong, but it was indeed taken from ingame. The venator as it is has 2 laser cannons 2 turbolasers and 2 concussion missile launchers. I know that the venator class is a stardestroyer, as is the victory. But i have no idea what relative shieldstrenght these have, since i only found data about their armament, not their defenses. From what i found i understood that these ships should only be inferior to ISDs and mon cals in a direct fight.

While it might not be 33% this and 33% that, the venator shouldnt carry even 1% laser cannons, so the rate of fire on them is pretty much moot. So if the ions and the laser cannons get taken of anyway cause its not canon, we might aswell exchange them for some sort of turbolasers.

P.S. Im only trying to be helpful, if i seem harsh thats not intended and its probably cause im not a native english speaker. I really like this mod and are trying to contribute the only way i can.

You do test the 006c version do you? :P

It seems you're not ;) since the Venator has no ions... I gave it the torpedo launchers Tal provided in his chart. And he doesn't have that much firepower if you again look at his chart. He might be tough, but the Victory has about three times the firepower:
Vicotry: 11000
Venator: 3800
Acclamator: 3600
Nebulon B: 2000

So unless I interpret the list wrong the Acclamator is a good match for the Venator as far as firepower is concerned (the assault missiles do tremendous damage, dont forget that).

Edit: I do appreciate your contributions... please keep it up! :)

Im pretty sure im using the 006c version ... im downloading it again to make sure.
Well i cant say something is wrong or right, but it seems there are contradicting sources. Atleast we(tal and i) agree that in the end the venator should be the 4th strongest ship in the game, after the isd, mc80 and liberty(mc90?). Also according to what i found the laser cannons on the ship are actually point defense, so they might not be the same weapons that are called laser cannons in EaW ...

Anyway keep up the good work ;P

Average damage yields:
Victory I: 9350
Victory II: 6820
Venator: 3344
Acclamator: 3498
Nebulon-B: 1584
But what's deceiving about the list above is that the Venator carries a whopping 420 fighters (an ISD only carries 72)! In gunnery alone the Venator cannot match a Victory, but in a real battle it would eat one up and spit it out without much bother, thanks to overwhelming fighter superiority. Unless Adonnay properly models the huge fighter capacity, then he'll need to increase the gunnery of the Venator to make up for it. Otherwise the Venator won't correctly reflect its historical role.

PS - the Liberty is not a MC90. It is a variant (one of many) of the MC80. Note I said MC80. Not the post-Endor MC80a, MC80b, and MC90 classes.

Wow. It makes you wonder why the CIS was such a threat to the Republic.

If the Acclamator has more firepower than the Venator, and the Venator was able to take down multiple CIS Capital Ships above Coruscant, then what does that say about the CIS warships? XD Piece of junks?

I think so.

I doubt that the V-Wings can really touch a Victory... well in this game at least... they probably can in the RPG since there are some kinds of criticals and probably more weapons than just the simple (and weak) fighter laser.

Unless Adonnay properly models the huge fighter capacity, then he'll need to increase the gunnery of the Venator to make up for it. Otherwise the Venator won't correctly reflect its historical role.

Have the Venator spawn double the amount of fighters the Victory does, and twice as many times before it runs out?

I doubt that the V-Wings can really touch a Victory... well in this game at least... they probably can in the RPG since there are some kinds of criticals and probably more weapons than just the simple (and weak) fighter laser.
A V-wing has 60% of the firepower of a TIE. So 192 of them are equal to 115 TIEs (or 1.6x the firepower of an ISD's wing, 4.8x the firepower of a Victory's wing). And then there are the other 228 fighters the Venator carries ...

Total average gunnery firepower of the Venator's fighter load is 27,720, and the missile firepower (just one salvo) is 3,564.

Total average gunnery firepower of an ISD's fighter load is 3,828, and the missile firepower (just one salvo) is 1,188.

Total average gunnery firepower of a Victory SD's fighter load is 660, and the missile firepower (just one salvo) is 1,188.

As you can see from the above, the fighters that a Victory carries adds a relatively insignificant amount (7%) to the gunnery that the Victory itself puts out. OTOH, the fighters from a Venator put out 8-1/4 times as much laser energy as the Venator itself. Totalled, a Venator SD and her fighters can dish out more than triple the damage that a Victory I can (and that's ignoring the missiles from the Venator's fighters).

Unfortunatly those numbers rely on the ships launching all their fighters at once if im not mistaken, which is not the current gamemechanic. I still think multiple enhanced turbolasers, with lets say double the firepower of those the acclamator carries would suffice. Plus the fighter wing of course. :twogun:

And im not sure it should necessary be V-Wings that are getting launched from the Venator, unless of course we pretend it was a timeshift that transported the ship out of the clonewars into the future :D. Seriously unless im mistaken(happens more often then i like ;)) the V-Wings are not even massproduced anymore at the time the game occurs, doesnt make much sense that the rebellion is using whole carriers full of them.

No, the V-wings are no longer available at all. That just makes the Venators even more powerful if they are launching X and Y-wings ...

Of course, "realistically", there are no more Venators by the time of the Battle of Yavin. Nor Acclamators. ;) (They've almost all been scrapped or sold to private concerns.) And most of the limited number of Victory SDs that were produced are in fringe sector fleets and reserve Imperial Navy units.

@adonnay: Just reinstalled EaW and installed version 006c from page 4, the Venator still uses ion cannons. No heavy launchers to be seen at all ;). And could you provide a small fix for piett? Tried fixing it myself ... that was the reason i had to reinstall, sheesh i should really stay away from this coding stuff :D.

No, the V-wings are no longer available at all. That just makes the Venators even more powerful if they are launching X and Y-wings ...

Of course, "realistically", there are no more Venators by the time of the Battle of Yavin. Nor Acclamators. ;) (They've almost all been scrapped or sold to private concerns.) And most of the limited number of Victory SDs that were produced are in fringe sector fleets and reserve Imperial Navy units.

Hm your sure there are no Venators around at the time of the battle of yavin? I mean the empire obviously doesnt use them anymore, but the rebellion is using modded civil ships ... and it only has been like 20years from the clonewars(luke and leia where born at the end of them right?), 20 years doesnt sound like such a old age for a carrier. It kinda makes sense that the rebellion would scavange those ships from junkyards to put them to service once more as carriers.

The Empire keeps a close eye on warships. Corellian Corvettes and converted freighters slip under their radar. Star Destroyers don't. The Rebels didn't even have the Nebulon-B frigate (their first capital ship) until the Far Orbit mutinied (after Alderaan was obliterated) and thus allowed the Alliance the plans for making their own (in secret).

FYI, all those Gallofree medium freighters that that Rebels use? The company went out of business before the start of ep4, so those aren't made any more. Neither are the common-as-dirt YT-1300s. They've been replaced by newer models. But, unlike small ships, big ships cost a lot of money to own and operate, and are very difficult to hide.

More info: "As the Galactic Republic transformed into the Galactic Empire, the Venator ceased production in favor of the newer Imperator-class Star Destroyer, a warship even more deadly than the Venator. Thousands of ships were procured during the Clone Wars, then slowly mothballed over the succeeding decade."

And: "After the Clone Wars, almost all of the Acclamators underwent serious modifications. Many of the Acclamators were melted down and used for scrap-few modern Imperial Warships lack armor plating derived from a de-comissioned Acclamator. Some of the Acclamators were used as freight transports, and a few of them still served under the Empire to do what they were made for - the transport of ground vehicles and infantry. Unfortunately, the Acclamators that didn't end up becoming parts of another ship were turned into slave ships, known as "slavers", since they were used to transport the thousands of slaves the Empire obtained from various sieges of backwater planets. Because the Acclamators could carry almost double the number of infantry an Imperial Star Destroyer could, they were deemed perfect to shuttle the scum of the Empire's backbone and slave force."

So ALL of the Venators are mothballed (under Imperial control) and no new ones can be built because KDY has the plans and they are very much a pro-Imperial company. And the vast majority of Acclamators no longer exist and, IIRC, the company that made them no longer exists either.

Unfortunatly those numbers rely on the ships launching all their fighters at once if im not mistaken, which is not the current gamemechanic.

But in the game mechanic the Victory spawns 2xTIE fighter and 1xTIE bomber.
If the Venator launched 5 fighter and 3 bomber wings (for example) it would eat the victory for breakfast.

But in the game mechanic the Victory spawns 2xTIE fighter and 1xTIE bomber.
If the Venator launched 5 fighter and 3 bomber wings (for example) it would eat the victory for breakfast.
Thank you for seeing my point! :p

But in the game mechanic the Victory spawns 2xTIE fighter and 1xTIE bomber.
If the Venator launched 5 fighter and 3 bomber wings (for example) it would eat the victory for breakfast.

Actually the venator would be dead before its bombers even reached the victory at the moment :D. And personally i dont think 3 bomber wings will kill a victory cruiser with fighter support in time to safe the Venator. You would have to kill his fighters first, till none are left in the hangar, then you could bring your bombers in to kill it. By that time the venator will be dead unless his HP get seriously increased.

And lets not forget what happens when a venator + corvette meets a victory + tartan, because 1on1s will be pretty rare in normal gameplay. If the Venator would rely on its fighters to do most of the work it would be a pretty gimped ship.

In galactic mode fighters vs. corvettes/tartans even out cause you can get loads of fighters for the price of one corvette/tartan. But if the Venator has the cost value of one corvette out(8 squadrons) and calls that his primary weapon its not worth it simply ;). Even if he can spawn them out like 10times it wouldnt change a few tartans rendering him semi-defenseless(which wouldnt be so bad if the AI wouldnt built them like crazy).

P.S.: The mod already helped alot with the survivability of fighters vs corvettes/tartans. But i dont think a canon fighter carrier would work unless the corvettes/tartans gets a massive change.

Isn't the problem more the tartans/corvettes surviability rather than their ability to kill fighters? After all, according to the RPG stats, if a Tartan is roughly equivalent to a corvette, it should not survive one volley of turbolaser fire from the Venator. (Real mean damage fireing all forward 125*2+180*8)


edit:

and, in my opinion, without Tartans:

A) The Venator could stay at a distance
B) The X-wings can engage all TIE:s while the Y-wings bomb away (no need to wait with a 5-2 fighter advantage)
C) After the first run or so, the Victory would have no engine and be outmanuvered (I use this a lot in vanilla)
D) Then the bombers can take out the shields or the turbolasers pointing at the Venator

edit2:

And besides, if the Venator is a carrier, it should not be left alone either, but have escorts to, for example, kill pesky Tartans.

Alright... here's the news...

- fixed the Judicator bug (Piett)
- changed armament of the Venator (Turbolaser + medium laser + torpedos + point defense laser)
- drastically increased hitpoints and shield of the Venator
- changed fighter load of the Venator and increased the firing speed of the V-Wings to reflect their higher numbers
- changed V-Wing squadron from 5 to 10 units
- continued revamp of the weapon charts
- added regular imperial troops on tech 1
- improved stormtroopers and moved them to tech 2 - gave them their own armor (which is superior to any other infantry armor)
- weakened regular rebel troops
- added rebel elite troops (infantry and PLEX) on tech 2 - gave them their own armortype
- improved space station hardpoints (damage and hitpoints) - including Pirate Asteroid base
- many more minor tweaks

!! Text file included (but not changed yet since v.006c), so backup your original one !!

-> Version .007 (http://www.adonnai.de/eaw/Adonnay_eaw_007.zip) <-

Excellent. Been reading this page from the top; some great contributions from all!

I'll play v7 and then update the MasterTextFile, so Adonnary has it ready to put in the next update (along with my ship name files) :)

Isn't the problem more the tartans/corvettes surviability rather than their ability to kill fighters? After all, according to the RPG stats, if a Tartan is roughly equivalent to a corvette, it should not survive one volley of turbolaser fire from the Venator. (Real mean damage fireing all forward 125*2+180*8)


edit:

and, in my opinion, without Tartans:

A) The Venator could stay at a distance
B) The X-wings can engage all TIE:s while the Y-wings bomb away (no need to wait with a 5-2 fighter advantage)
C) After the first run or so, the Victory would have no engine and be outmanuvered (I use this a lot in vanilla)
D) Then the bombers can take out the shields or the turbolasers pointing at the Venator

edit2:

And besides, if the Venator is a carrier, it should not be left alone either, but have escorts to, for example, kill pesky Tartans.

Yep completly agree with you there, but tartans are there and they would be a problem i think(or better their suvivability like you said). I played a skirmish game just now, and the rebell AI player held the mercenary dock and built a venator, i proceeded to attack it with my victory, and trust me i was not exagerating when i said the Venator dies before its bombers would do a single run. It dies faster then a Nebulon B, it has a tad more shields than it but less hull and less shield recharge.

If battles between a victory and a venator would last as long as the battle between a ISD and a Mon Cal(gotta love those slugfests :D), then you had time for tactics.

The problem with point A) might be the size of some maps, might get difficult to stay at range on the smaller ones, and again the Venator would have to live long enough to turn its sluggy tail around and get to distance. I tried to simply double its shieldstrenght but that didnt make much of a difference. I guess Adonnay has to do his magic ;).

Oh and about C), dont forget most ships/stations with hardpoints seem to have gotten a increase in hardpoint hp, you might need several bombing runs now for a single hardpoint.

And about escorts to kill tartans, if the venator would need escorts against them, whats the point in that ship? Neither ISDs or Victorys or Mon cals need escorts to protect them against corvettes, no frigate sized ship should need escorts against them. Of course i will use Venators in fleets with lots of other ships, but those ships will most likely be busy doing their own stuff without having to babysit my Venator ;).

edit: Yay for version 007, thx adonnay testing it asap :D

Ok first quick test the Venator is absolutly great, gives you this 'i have a really big mean ship' feeling :). Two things that caught my attention about it: first, if you give a acclamator, isd or victory the order to attack a space station for example it will turn towards it, so that a maximum of its weapons can fire at the target. But the venator appears to align vertically to it, like this |o instead of --o this :D. Secondly, if im not completly mistaken it only used its frontmounted turbolasers and the launcher, are the laser cannons supposed to be anti fighter only(noticed some really tiny lasers shhoting down a few ties)?

Edit: The shield recharge is still at 40, personally i would set it 60, which is 5 more than a victory(actually i already did this on my local copy, hope this doesnt mean i have to reinstall again :)). Testing now how it compares to a victory.

Not sure why the Venator behaves differently... has to do with the firing cones probably.

The rear lasers of the Venator are some larger versions of the Anti-Fighter lasers... in addition to the really tiny ones ;)

Ok i got lucky and the skirmish AI actually built several venators so i could play around with them a bit(me being the empire :D). The Venator gets, please excuse the blunt language, absolutly raped by a victory.

Let me describe what happened, so my fleet was at my base with two mines, i patiently waited till the AI built a Venator from the mercenary dock, and then proceeded to attack it ignoring the other crafts around it(I used only a single victory). First thing i noticed is that the Victory has superior range with his ion cannon, so i got first shots. So while my victory starts shooting at the Venator, the V-wings head towards my victory and kill off my bombers and ties pretty fast. At this time though the venator is pretty much already at 50% Shields, now the venator starts shooting, by the time my shields are at 80% the venator is without shields, after that his turbolaser hardpoints die very fast, which reduces his damage against the victory pratically to zero. So at the end the Venator was dead, the victory was at 70% shields, but without fighters or bombers. I then proceeded and shot down the shields of the enemy starbase, which was a lvl 4 station btw :D. The victory was pretty much dead as the starbase shields approached 0, but still i think this ship is a tad bit strong. Maybe its just the ion cannon not sure.

Please just try it out the venator gets totally slaughtered. I had a look at the xml and saw that the Venator actually has stronger shields(plus i gave it a stronger shieldrecharge too), but it just had no chance. That the victory also managed to take down a lvl 4 stations shields didnt suprise me much after this :D.

Another thing i noticed was that nebulons had really big problems destroying(hitting?) my tartans, up to the point i didnt even bother to strengthen my mine defens which consisted of 2 tartans if "only" a nebulon b was attacking. The assault mk II on the other hand kill those tartans really fast.

All in all i still like the venator, its a real nice carrier and a tough ship. The Victory just seems superior though. Oh and the 5 V-Wing squadrons didnt bother the victory much after the venator got destroyed, i put fast forward on and they where pretty fast dead without being able to hurt the victory at all.

P.S. It just occured to me that i had all upgrades for my ships, maybe the skirmish ai used a "stock" venator. Could that explain its bad performance? Ill test around a bit and see. Keep up the good work ;)

Yea, the problem is the fighters don't do nearly as much damage as they should.
1. they somehow don't shoot the missiles (probably the V-Wing doesn't support using hardpoints - bad)
2. the damage of the fighters is pretty low to prevent frigates and corvettes from beeing nailed by fighters (without torpedoes/rockets) too fast
3. the turbolasers of the Venator do about half the damage of the Victory turbolasers... that's a (fictional) fact ;)

So what now... raise the damage of the fighters to the "old" values (about 4 times the damage). But then they do about as much damage as a medium turbo laser (Corellian Corvette type)... not including the X-Wings torpedoes and the A-Wings rockets. That'd be odd, wouldn't it... and would make the Corvettes quite obsolete.

I could try and replace the V-Wings with X- and Y-Wings for the rebels and with TIE-Fighters and Bombers for the Empire. The Pirates would get the V-Wings. I'll upgrade the torpedoes to some heavy ones too... they're simple fighter torpedoes right now... and only 4 of them. I suppose a capital ship can launch something better ;)