Meredith
Donator
 Offline
Posts: 298
^Seraphim^
|
 |
« on: January 06, 2008, 09:48:12 AM » |
|
I was wondering about a secondary hull today I was wathing TNG and thought that their should be a secondary hull. so what do you think this is what star trek wikie says On many Federation starships, the secondary hull (also known as the engineering hull, the engineering section, the stardrive section, or the battle section) is a major component of the overall hull structure. The secondary hull is generally located behind and below the primary hull.
The secondary hull is usually dedicated to engineering and support functions, especially in starships built after the mid-23rd century. It is the home of the warp drive, Main Engineering, and other engineering support systems. Separating these potentially dangerous systems from the majority of the crew, located in the primary hull, allows the secondary hull to be abandoned in the event of catastrophic damage to the warp core or a loss of antimatter containment. http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Secondary_hullso what do you guys think about a Secondary hull  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Optec
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2008, 01:16:37 PM » |
|
hmm, i think we go well with one hull hitpoint bar, as nearly all starships feature a secondary hull, its no use to threat it as an individual element in my opinion |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ewm90
Good old dyslexic
Offline
Posts: 5503
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2008, 05:50:10 PM » |
|
What about armer on some ships?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Blade
Offline
Posts: 301
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2008, 07:47:20 PM » |
|
is it even possible 2 get a second health bar if so it could be used to show sheild health as some weapons ignore shields and/or it could b used 4 armour
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ewm90
Good old dyslexic
Offline
Posts: 5503
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2008, 07:57:42 PM » |
|
Well if its not what one could do is make the hall bar health go past %100.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Meredith
Donator
Offline
Posts: 298
^Seraphim^
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2008, 09:08:36 PM » |
|
armer would be good for the borg and it would be easy cause they dont have shields you could use one as a armor and the other as the hull and dont have a shield be displayed when you fire at the ship  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dominus_Noctis
Offline
Posts: 1985
'Tis braver to live than to die.
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 07, 2008, 12:22:34 AM » |
|
I think what the team did though was just make the maximum health of Borg ships much greater... with a tiny amount of shielding.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I have not yet begun to fight! -John Paul Jones
We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Strength is irrelevant, resistance is futile.
|
|
|
ewm90
Good old dyslexic
Offline
Posts: 5503
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 07, 2008, 03:44:03 AM » |
|
But dose it show that its bigger at a glance?
I mean I wont ships with armer to slow there health is bigger not just that its bigger.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Optec
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 07, 2008, 09:22:34 AM » |
|
well a percentage reading does only make sense in relation to a certain value. lets say the defiant - well armored - starts with 150% hull, then what is 100% supposed to be? the reference is missing.
i'm happy with the current percentage values, cause they show you the damage of your ships, rather then their armor value (a defiant with 127% hull could be anything, cause its not easily understandable what the maximum is).
In my opinion armor should add damage reduction, rather then additional hitpoints. hitpoints are already symbolized by the defense value. Borg Tactical Armor for example will add damage reduction against beam-type weapons.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ewm90
Good old dyslexic
Offline
Posts: 5503
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 07, 2008, 04:49:38 PM » |
|
%100 of stander hall integrity. armer adds to hall integrity making it more than normal more than %100 of normal.
I see you point it all gos to how one looks at it if one sees armer as just more hall than %100 makes scents. But if one looks at it ass armer extra than you will need more than normal.
Ok it was just a idea.
For me I would prefer a secondary bar in the health readout section.
---
Hmm Heres a another ply off the idea.
What about if the helth bar stays at one %100 but thares some thing added on top of it.
I mean I know some of the limitations of the source code so which prevents one from adding a new health bar, But with putting a new # on top of the hall bar which would be armer. Hall would not be effected or would be pertected by this nubbier until the nubbier reaches 0.
What about that?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dominus_Noctis
Offline
Posts: 1985
'Tis braver to live than to die.
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2008, 09:04:11 PM » |
|
I don't think that would make much sense Ewm, because then you would be essentially targetting armor independently of the ship's health. I.E. First you destroy armor, Then you destroy health. However, this is not very realistic because armor will still be there regardless (you will be just attacking one portion of it, not stripping the whole ship of it). The reduction aspect fits much better, especially if you consider that the entire ship is being armor reinforced, not just as an outer shell that is easily removed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I have not yet begun to fight! -John Paul Jones
We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Strength is irrelevant, resistance is futile.
|
|
|
Meredith
Donator
Offline
Posts: 298
^Seraphim^
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 08, 2008, 01:54:39 AM » |
|
yes but with the reduction the armor cant be destroyed its always there. which is not realistic it is in all star trek what it should do is reinforce the ships systems so they have more health but I can think of how to use it so it also increases the health, or we could do your reduction as well. ya that sounds good a ship with armor (or when it is.... enabled?) has reduction to damage as well as increased health on ships systems I.E. weapons, life support, engines ect. so they are more difficult to destroy think that would support both of our ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ewm90
Good old dyslexic
Offline
Posts: 5503
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 08, 2008, 03:21:54 AM » |
|
All I am saying is make the armer more visible in the health indicator thats all Dominus_Noctis.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dominus_Noctis
Offline
Posts: 1985
'Tis braver to live than to die.
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 08, 2008, 03:33:03 AM » |
|
Hmm... Do you have any other suggestions Ewm how to accomplish that though without making it a wholely seperate (and thus individually destroyable) section of the ship?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I have not yet begun to fight! -John Paul Jones
We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Strength is irrelevant, resistance is futile.
|
|
|
ewm90
Good old dyslexic
Offline
Posts: 5503
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 08, 2008, 04:01:11 AM » |
|
Well the idea I just posted what to have to health indicators on the same bar one for stander hall as normal the other would be on the bar its self it would be for armer.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Forum 