How about missile/buster storage? - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  How about missile/buster storage?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   How about missile/buster storage?

Arcane posted 03-17-99 01:01 PM ET
Maybe I'm missing something here.. But other than carrier decks, busters/missiles need to be stored at say a homebase. How about some sort of unit add on so I can stick some missiles on my ground units or grav-ships?
And why can I have my Buster's do an Orbital Insertion? Hmm yeah its kind of nasty but realistic and would be highly amusing.
Spoe posted 03-17-99 08:36 PM ET
Yeah, I wouldn't mind a missile tube mode, similar to the carrier deck, that would allow a transport to only carry missiles. Don't know about allowing it for planes, but then again you can launch cruise missiles and even ICBMs from planes today, so maybe you should be able to...
MrSmily posted 03-17-99 08:59 PM ET
Yet it would be realistic but kinda unbalanceing dont you think? Unless your in a cold war stat then your all just screwed.
Gebhard Blucher posted 03-17-99 09:04 PM ET
Why not use an Airbase? PBs & missiles can use them.
GB
Puterdan posted 03-18-99 11:16 PM ET
This Raises an interesting question...
If a PB is caught in an airbase by an enemy unit an attacked, will it detanoate? If so, who gets hit with the atrocity? The manufacturer, or the attacker?
Just a question...
Danny
Fiannaidh posted 03-19-99 11:24 AM ET
Nuclear warheads detonate only when told to detonate. For example, if you manage to blow up a nuclear warhead inches awat from its target, there will be no nuclear explosion, only the explosion of the anti-missile you used to destroy it.
Spoe posted 03-19-99 03:09 PM ET
Gebhard Blucher:
Yes, but that is a fixed installation. Compare the Russian SS-25 and SS-27 or the proposed US Midgetman. These are essentially single warhead ICBMs on a truck. Even if you just look at the mobile SCUD launchers that proved so survivable in 1991, it makes sense. I think the ability to put a PB/conventional missile on a rover/hovertank would be advantagous without unbalancing the game(particularly in a MP game). The air launched version might be a bit much, I admit; the program of dropping a Minuteman out the back of a C-5 never got past the test ing phase, to my knowledge.
Fiannaidh posted 03-19-99 08:21 PM ET
or did it ...
Gebhard Blucher posted 03-20-99 03:10 AM ET
One way to allow land transports to use the carrier bay ability is to change the alpha.txt. Look under "#ABILITIES" where you'll find the "Carrier Deck" ability. The string of numbers in the 5th column needs to be changed from "00101101010" to "00101101011". The last place determines if an ability is allowed to land units ("0" = no, "1" = yes).
That is an interesting idea. I wonder if the AI will use it? I doubt it as I've never seen the AI use carriers at all. Might be great for multiplayer though.
GB
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: How about missile/buster storage?
Arcane	posted 03-17-99 01:01 PM ET Maybe I'm missing something here.. But other than carrier decks, busters/missiles need to be stored at say a homebase. How about some sort of unit add on so I can stick some missiles on my ground units or grav-ships? And why can I have my Buster's do an Orbital Insertion? Hmm yeah its kind of nasty but realistic and would be highly amusing.
Spoe	posted 03-17-99 08:36 PM ET Yeah, I wouldn't mind a missile tube mode, similar to the carrier deck, that would allow a transport to only carry missiles. Don't know about allowing it for planes, but then again you can launch cruise missiles and even ICBMs from planes today, so maybe you should be able to...
MrSmily	posted 03-17-99 08:59 PM ET Yet it would be realistic but kinda unbalanceing dont you think? Unless your in a cold war stat then your all just screwed.
Gebhard Blucher	posted 03-17-99 09:04 PM ET Why not use an Airbase? PBs & missiles can use them. GB
Puterdan	posted 03-18-99 11:16 PM ET This Raises an interesting question... If a PB is caught in an airbase by an enemy unit an attacked, will it detanoate? If so, who gets hit with the atrocity? The manufacturer, or the attacker? Just a question... Danny
Fiannaidh	posted 03-19-99 11:24 AM ET Nuclear warheads detonate only when told to detonate. For example, if you manage to blow up a nuclear warhead inches awat from its target, there will be no nuclear explosion, only the explosion of the anti-missile you used to destroy it.
Spoe	posted 03-19-99 03:09 PM ET Gebhard Blucher: Yes, but that is a fixed installation. Compare the Russian SS-25 and SS-27 or the proposed US Midgetman. These are essentially single warhead ICBMs on a truck. Even if you just look at the mobile SCUD launchers that proved so survivable in 1991, it makes sense. I think the ability to put a PB/conventional missile on a rover/hovertank would be advantagous without unbalancing the game(particularly in a MP game). The air launched version might be a bit much, I admit; the program of dropping a Minuteman out the back of a C-5 never got past the test ing phase, to my knowledge.
Fiannaidh	posted 03-19-99 08:21 PM ET or did it ...
Gebhard Blucher	posted 03-20-99 03:10 AM ET One way to allow land transports to use the carrier bay ability is to change the alpha.txt. Look under "#ABILITIES" where you'll find the "Carrier Deck" ability. The string of numbers in the 5th column needs to be changed from "00101101010" to "00101101011". The last place determines if an ability is allowed to land units ("0" = no, "1" = yes). That is an interesting idea. I wonder if the AI will use it? I doubt it as I've never seen the AI use carriers at all. Might be great for multiplayer though. GB