Updated for version 2.0.0, not yet updated for Heralds tree.

Not yet. However, because you commented three of my things simultaneously, now I'm aware that there is a major new version that might require an update!

It might happen. I'm not guaranteeing anything, not with (*sideways glance, slightly hushed voice*) Stellaris releasing in just over a week, but I might have a look soon.

Finally updated for new tech tree. I'm surprised nobody out of the silent majority complained, but if you were silently hoping for an update here it is. (I would have done it much earlier if anyone actually asked, though - just forgot about it for a while :) )

Bah - Keep forgetting to actually lock Nova Bombs behind a tech unlock hex. Oh well - until then, everyone can blow up stars from day 1, if they can afford the (high!) energy and money costs... Enjoy!

Heh, I had a funny bug once, too.

I was trying to make Crystalline Armor's energy and explosive resistances grow the denser it was. So, because it's supposed to be related to density, I get the bright idea of using the same mechanic that lets (or used to let) armor buff the HP of nearby hexes - with a subsystem stat.

Needless to say, the armor's introduction into ABEM was somewhat delayed because it had an 'unexpected' and gargantuan buff to its energy/explosive resistances. Which, due to the way the ChannelDamage effect was scripted, also meant that even the slightest nudge from a laser, missile, or flak cannon would instantly supercharge the ship's shields. The fact that it worked precisely as intended against railguns didn't immediately tip me off...

Glad I tested before uploading the new version - almost had an amusing boolean inversion where -only- weak guns could pierce armour (instead of everything except them). That would have been funny, but also terrible :)

A custom effector would definitely be a part of it, but you'd have to write up a new damage script and edit ResistDamage or whatever the resistances are called in server/combat.as. If you don't do that, the effector would still be using existing damage scripts, which would in this case beat the point of making a custom effector in the first place.

Mmm, I might turn the DPS down a bit more, or see if I can make a custom effector for it that would ignore maximum damage resistance (but I doubt it since it's done at the armour side).

Well, 'anything with damage resistance' can only shrug off a certain percentage of damage. 1/6th of the damage always gets through, if I remember the stats correctly.

A notable exception is ABEM's Powered Armor, which compensates for its 100% damage mitigation by having a fairly low damage resistance to mitigate it with.

It's not that they're better against shields as such, it's that they (are supposed to) suck against anything with damage resistance - which tends to be most things. Since everything is equally effective against shields, they get to apply their full DPS against them and in that use are therefore better (assuming you're in range) than a railgun battery of equal size.

They're certainly meant to be better against targets smaller than themselves, ideally supports which can't mount ablative armour.

I'm aware many of the future plans are unknown or impossible, but that's half the fun! :) These modules I have at the moment are either low hanging fruit or stuff I thought was notably missing that fills an otherwise empty tactical role. A somewhat more achievable additional thing I thought of was an activatable repair unit for flagships, similar to the emergency resupply, with similar energy cost. I shall add it to the list...

Also, the part about PD arrays being effective against shields is a bit silly; all weapons are equally effective against shields. It's their effectiveness (or lack thereof) against damage resistance that tends to be noteworthy, and in that respect they should fare better against superior-scale ships than a normal railgun. :P

Interesting ideas so far, but most of your current 'Future plans' are treading into unknown territory, or the outright impossible.

I didn't forget, I just deliberately misused it a teensy bit. :) What should it be called instead? It can't be internals, because they're typically external. It's not armour or anything that suggests reinforcement. Just 'structure' on its own is bad because that sortof refers to the whole ship or at least the bits where nothing special is happening... Bulkhead would be perfect, but that name is taken.

My intended purpose for superstructure is building interesting shapes without having to pay a lot, or to support module pods on sticks, or that sort of building-onto-the-outside usage, so I thought it was close enough. That being said, if you have an idea I think is even better, I'll gladly change it.

And again you forgot what a superstructure is ... without it no ship (in space as well as on earth) could handle even gravity so ... either rename it or buff the HP of the entire ship when using it

Superstructure -could- be used to produce gigantic brick shaped ships for cheap. Unless you -reaaaally- feel you want to, I suggest you don't do that, it just isn't much fun. (It'll also weigh more than using proper armour, with less damage resistance).

(Thanks GGLucas - just found that out myself after a bit more experimenting. I'll update the forum question I have asking this also)

If you open data/materials/subsystems.txt with a text editor or in the mod editor's "materials" mode, you can create a new material to use with your subsystems. Just copy the way Material: PlateArmor is defined, then refer to it as the name you put behind "Material:".