[MOD] [TC/AP] X3 Rebalance Mod (XRM) - Total conversion - v1.30d (02.12.13)

[Black147]

Paul, can you check something please:

The sector (19,2) on the XRM map has only 2 gates - east and west, but the sectors above (19,1) and below (19,3) have each a south or north gate pointing to (19,2) respectively. It seems theres 2 gates missing there or two gates too many.

[paulwheeler]

Paul, can you check something please:

The sector (19,2) on the XRM map has only 2 gates - east and west, but the sectors above (19,1) and below (19,3) have each a south or north gate pointing to (19,2) respectively. It seems theres 2 gates missing there or two gates too many.

Well spotted - those extra gates are hangovers from the TC map (19,2 is where Aquata used to be). I have clearly forgotten to delete them.

It doesn't cause any problems as, since their destination gates no longer exist, they do not spawn in a game.

I'll remove them in the next update... or I may join Venturer's Sentinel up... I'll think about it.

[paulwheeler]

paul, this is something I've asked before long time ago but haven't answered

why the hull packs do not just multiply the hull value by a single unified constant? can't we just have that kind of hull multiplier?

in case you don't get it, what I'm saying is that why the hull multiplier use different numbers for multiplying different ship classes? why not just multiply all hulls by 2 or 5 or 10?

can you give us that?


and oh wait, you said about overwriting the RRF script, do they include the vanilla RRF fix already?

btw what is AP SRST?

The hull packs are specifically designed to increase the gap between the classes - making them all the same multiplier will make the M6/M3 situation worse! You want capital ship battles to go on forever, but you don't want dog fights to become too much of a chore - hence the scaled multiplier.

Yes the new RRF scripts include the vanilla fix.

SRST is the director file that controls ship type spawning in missions. I finally got around to adding the XRM added ships into the AP version.

[paulwheeler]

Hi Paul,

Thanks for fixing that file!

I wonder if you plan to change the turrets of Megalodon with the models from Cadius as you did for the Oceanus and Aquata. The change would give a sense of uniformity to the Boron fleet !

Thanks again.

To be honest - even Cadius' turrets stick out like sore thumbs on Boron ships. The issue is though, swapping turret models is a lot of work - especially on the bigger ships. And once you've done one ship, you then have to go and do the rest, and then you have a nervous breakdown from looking at scene files all day!

[paulwheeler]

Kha'ak ships becoming unsellable came with AP; it's the same script (or rather, MD file) that was used on the Xperimental Shuttle in TC.

God knows why they did that... vanilla AP doesn't even include the Kha'ak does it? Any idea what file it is so I can fix it?

[paulwheeler]

quick question besides my annoying one about the song. what t file contains the ship descriptions for this mod? i am merging a mod for personal use and for the sake of compatibility the last thing i need is to get the names to work. any help on this would be great

9950 and 9951.

[nap_rz]

SRST is the director file that controls ship type spawning in missions. I finally got around to adding the XRM added ships into the AP version.

can you bring the khaak back into combat missions?

[swatti]

Sentinel variants of most corvettes are "anti-fighter" ships, atleast give them a fighting chance. Apart from Dragon S and Nemesis S all other Sentinel-variants get shafted.

I'd say theres a room for dedicated anti-fighter-weapon. PAC kinda falls into the "between of things" so why not turn that into a weapon all Sentinels can mount. Increase bullet-size and decrease power down to half.
PAC is about the least used weapon anyways, M4s/interceptors use it mostly so giving them a edge against fighters certainly wont hurt eighter.

Missiles are not exactly the answer eighter, good luck trying to take out a Kea with missiles. Huge shields, front and rear turrets...

Anyone willing to give me a single-post crash-course on how to mod weapons? No offence Paul but it feels you havent tested the 'fighter vs M6' balance very deeply.

[paulwheeler]

Missiles are not exactly the answer eighter, good luck trying to take out a Kea with missiles. Huge shields, front and rear turrets...

Two or three Cyclone missiles will take out a Kea easily, and as long as you launch up close, six or seven Silkworms can be effective too.

Anyone willing to give me a single-post crash-course on how to mod weapons? No offence Paul but it feels you havent tested the 'fighter vs M6' balance very deeply.

Why do people say "no offence" right before they are about to say something that will clearly offend?

There are more people saying they are happy with the balance than not. Just because it doesn't conform to your personal preferences does not make it wrong. To think so shows incredible arrogance.

I've said it before - If you don't like the mod - don't play it.

[Aerex]

hi paul,

is it right that the ATF M3B Norne can't carry rockets?

[paulwheeler]

hi paul,

is it right that the ATF M3B Norne can't carry rockets?

The Norns can carry the standard terran bomber missile - the Phantom.

[paulwheeler]

SRST is the director file that controls ship type spawning in missions. I finally got around to adding the XRM added ships into the AP version.

can you bring the khaak back into combat missions?

SRST only gives the MD a list of ships that can be spawned. The actual choices are made in the mission scripts themselves.

I don't think Kha'ak combat missions have ever existed except for the final fury plot, so they would have to be created from scratch - not something I'd like to take on at this point.

[Aerex]

then there must be a problem possibly on my site because i can't give the norne rockets


and thanks for the great mod

[paulwheeler]

then there must be a problem possibly on my site because i can't give the norne rockets


and thanks for the great mod

Check that you don't have another mod that alters missiles installed.

[Aerex]

i only have the xrm mod installed with lucikes script collection
but i have seen the phantom have XL size but the norne only carry L size

[paulwheeler]

i only have the xrm mod installed with lucikes script collection
but i have seen the phantom have XL size but the norne only carry L size

Then you definitely have another mod that alters TMissiles as the XRM TMissiles has the Phantom set to "L".

Check all your installed cat/dats and your "types" folder for a file called TMissiles.

Or its possible that Part 2 is not installed correctly. You may seeing the correct XRM ships as the hull pack may be installed correctly. But there will be a lot of other things wrong with your universe if part 2 is not installed correctly.

[d_ka]

@nap_rz:
What i ment is that even if the PAC lower the shields of a M3 significantly, the moment the fighter gets out of range of the turrets its shields recharge fast enough to neglate the damage. No hull demage, no speed reduction, no better chances to hit the fighter even more, etc.
The best weapon against fighters proved to be Mass Driver. But that was before i decided to install the "high" hull pack. It was actually the ultimate weapon back then, as i´ve managed ( on plenty occasions ) to take out even heaviest Khaak Corvettes quite fast flying a Drake

If FBL is not an "anti fighter" weapon then what is its purpose then? It range is lower then most of the other weapons, the rate of fire is slow, and it is generaly placed in the turrets of all ships, except the Paranid ones. It is ineffective to hit smaller fighters ( which are too fast ), it might be of interest to hit heavy missiles like Tomahawk ( the "life" factor of those missiles seems to enable them to survive several hits by lighter weapons, i noticed ), but it´s still a waste, unless you are in a very heavy ship with more then enough energy. So, you think it´s an "anti corvette" thing? Sure, one can use it that way, but then you have to get really close. But as i mentioned before: take a Battleclaw, mount 4 FBL in the front and go hunting M3+, and you will see, there is no better weapon then this to take down a heavy fighter faster! ( all you have to do is to hang on it´s back and keep firing ). I thought: Jesus, i take Hyperion/Appolox, mount 8 of them in front and should be able to own the anti fighter engagements; but.... i was wrong, since i couldn´t hit a damn with it ( 5.1 stearing isn´t just enough to "follow" anything small ).

[paulwheeler]

Just a note for people having trouble hitting ships with weapons...

Make sure you have the auto-aim function set to on - not off or semi (which is default) - and that you have both fight command softwares installed. This is especially important if playing with a joystick as its virtually impossible to hit small targets otherwise.

[Black147]

I apologize Paul, I have another one: on the TC map sector 9,7 doesn´t exist so 9,6 and 9,8 have one invalid north or south gate each.

[swatti]

Do software IMPROVE ACCURACY of turrets? As far as i know, no.

Regardless of autoaim or softwares, TURRETS on M6s have low hit-rate. on AI ships. I imagine this is what d_ka means too. "Ai vs Ai" and turreted combat?

I can imagine Paul what you were trying to achieve, you said you wanted "longer fighter-combat" or so. Reducing bullet-sizes certainly did this, but it pretty much killed M6 survival against fighters. Heck, it may even be "realistic" if you think about it, the bullets really do need to hit to make their effect.
Problem is, the (seeminly) hardcoded bullet-spread kills accuracy at long (1km and more) distances. Couple that up with the fighters "twiching" and some basic movements following a target and its nearly impossible to hit a fighter.

Playing from a fighter-seat, you allways end up close to the enemy, in that case you tear up any fighter. But try to shoot at one at 1.6km away, you barely hit it.

To compensate, Egosoft used to make bullets bigger. A cheap way one may say to solve the problem but it does work.

Honestly, tell me, did you really did test M6s against fighters? Were you satisfied?
With your setup, missiles are a must, but since turrets are fairly useless, why even have em there? Why not just add them as missile-turrets, they would work no doubt.

But then, X3editor... -thingy came to rescue! And i did some testing, wanna make know what happened?

I increased your silly 0.05 or so bullet size to more manly "2.0" and voila! It works! Fighters actually get hit by guns, in this case, the PRG.
I reduced the PRG's shield-dmg slightly and hull dmg a bit more to compensate.
There is still noticable miss-rate. When a fighter dodges, changes direction, etc "evades" the shots miss. But when it flies on straight line the turrets do hit, a lot! At maximum range there is noticable dmg inflicted but still visible misses.

Running several tests, my results were far more what one would expect from such fights. Centaur S. vs 3x Susanowas
Results were fairly identical, centaur in poor shape, but fighters toast.

Add one more fighter and centaur toast. Predictable, no more "lucky-shots", genuine "fair fight"

Running these tests has thought me one thing... Damn its hard to really "balance" this stuff and not turn pea-shooters into godly super-waepons.
Il run some further tests and see how player-flown fighter-combat has changed. By respect towards the amzing work you have done, im trying to preserve the goals you have set as well.