Topic: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made  (Read 27567 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KBF-Dogmatix_XC

  • Pimpmaster General
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 401
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #160 on: July 31, 2004, 04:51:33 am »


Word Doggy,

Brutha Chuut

P.S.  Don't say too much however Cleaven is giving me the best laugh I've had in a long time.......

Roll on Cleaven :thumbsup:



Heheh...I've said it before (a few times) and I'll say it again.  Cleaven is my hero.  :D


Dogmatix, XC, KBF
yo' aj, Klingon Black Fleet
Director, XenoCorp Tactics and Strategy Division
DGA Board of Directors
SFC2.Net Administrator

Offline FPF-Jem

  • D.Net VIP
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 149
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #161 on: July 31, 2004, 04:55:54 am »
Far more Eloquent then I could ever be, Dogmatix has hit the head as far as I'm concerned.
Capt. Jem


Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #162 on: July 31, 2004, 04:56:05 am »
Quote
But I have a serious question, in SFC:TNG does using EM affect the indicated AV for the firer?

Yes, Cleavan, as far as I know it does. But firing a probe counter balances EM affects for the shooter or just the simple use of good hot keys.

Okay, it's just that a while ago (a year ago?) somebody did an analysis and concluded that SFC:TNG EM wasn't worth using so I never have. Anyway I should test it at some stage and see how much it does.

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #163 on: July 31, 2004, 05:00:02 am »


Word Doggy,

Brutha Chuut

P.S.  Don't say too much however Cleaven is giving me the best laugh I've had in a long time.......

Roll on Cleaven :thumbsup:



Heheh...I've said it before (a few times) and I'll say it again.  Cleaven is my hero.  :D


Sort of feel like Noel Coward's character, Mr Bridger, in his final scene in the Italian Job.

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-

  • Unity Admin
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • Veni vidi vici
    • Spartan Vanguard
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #164 on: July 31, 2004, 05:04:40 am »
Quote
What on earth makes you think that by putting some ship models into the game, you'll get thoise of us who don't like to play SFC3 to try it? It's not the ships, it's the systems and rules. SFC3 lacks the weapons and rules that we like to use. A Lyran with photons and no ESGs is not a Lyran. It's a Fed with a better paint job.

I was naive, Mog. I guess that's why I made the assumption that adding ships from EAW/OP to SFC would make a difference.

I have read the General War rules and the camp layout ... It really looked looked like fun.

The VC's and roleplay on recent SFC3 camps has greatly increased ... maybe we are coming along. Cozbo does a very good job of making it interesting in Unity.

But the rules of General war -- and the complexities -- would be mass anarchy on an SFC3 server. We can't force feed the baby or it will get sick.

Unity was actually one of the very first campaigns -- along with ThePelican -- to come up with a map-to-map carry over in VC's and points and roleplay the limited race aspect of SFC3.

We try, but it never seems enough to collect the Taldrenite player base from OP/EAW.

I swear, Cleavan, I am asking the AV question of other admins as it applies to source code. Maybe it can be zero'd out -- I don't know -- without rearranging the .exe. I'll keep you posted.

These guys love you so much, if I could actually win you over, maybe FPF or KBF would join in for a server run.

<S>

« Last Edit: July 31, 2004, 05:25:14 am by AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet- »
http://www.spartanvanguard.com/
http://www.stcd.sgnonline.com/users/trimodyards/



KoraH: "Remember my advice to you Wade, that you should drop SFC ...  you will find that all you have to put up with to do so is going to sour the sweetness of your hard work."

Offline AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-

  • Unity Admin
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • Veni vidi vici
    • Spartan Vanguard
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #165 on: July 31, 2004, 05:08:01 am »
Quote
But I have a serious question, in SFC:TNG does using EM affect the indicated AV for the firer?

Yes, Cleavan, as far as I know it does. But firing a probe counter balances EM affects for the shooter or just the simple use of good hot keys.

Okay, it's just that a while ago (a year ago?) somebody did an analysis and concluded that SFC:TNG EM wasn't worth using so I never have. Anyway I should test it at some stage and see how much it does.

Cleavan,

The modders for SFC3 have totally changed the game from the ground up as it applies to EM and its affects. This can be done with changes to common settings or base weight (miss factors) and ship profile.

Speed of a ship also greatly increases AV. ThePelican was the first to discover this -- by accident, I might add -- and Unity followed his lead.

There was a campaign where a ship had a neagative -100 profile and we actually pointed this out, and he and Ferrell cracked it over, I think, in some discussions. The faster a ship goes and the lower its profile, the better the AV affects. I was kind of happy to be a part of that discovery.

<S>
http://www.spartanvanguard.com/
http://www.stcd.sgnonline.com/users/trimodyards/



KoraH: "Remember my advice to you Wade, that you should drop SFC ...  you will find that all you have to put up with to do so is going to sour the sweetness of your hard work."

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #166 on: July 31, 2004, 05:10:33 am »
Ummm, don't look at me to have any influence on what anybody else does, especially not fleets of which I am not associated with (because I can't handle the nasty red and black interface, and I only fly coalition).

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Mog

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 610
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #167 on: July 31, 2004, 05:26:10 am »
Quote
What on earth makes you think that by putting some ship models into the game, you'll get thoise of us who don't like to play SFC3 to try it? It's not the ships, it's the systems and rules. SFC3 lacks the weapons and rules that we like to use. A Lyran with photons and no ESGs is not a Lyran. It's a Fed with a better paint job.

I was naive, Mog. I guess that's why I made the assumption on adding ships from EAW/OP to SFC would make a difference.

I have read the General War rules and the camp layout ... It really looked looked like fun.

The VC's and roleplay on recent SFC3 camps has greatly increased ... maybe we are coming along. Cozbo does a very good job of making it interesting in Unity.

But the rules of General war -- and the complexities -- would be mass anarchy on an SFC3 server. We can't force feed the baby or it will get sick.

Unity was actually one of the very first campaigns -- along with ThePelican -- to come up with a map-to-map carry over in VC's and points and roleplay the limited race aspect of SFC3.

We try, but it never seems enough to collect the Taldrenite player base from OP/EAW.

I swear, Cleavan, I am asking the AV question of other admins as it applies to source code. Maybe it can be zero'd out -- I don't know -- without rearranging the .exe. I'll keep you posted.

These guys love you so much, if I could actually win you over, maybe FPF or KBF would join in for a server run.

<S>



You misunderstand me. When I say rules, I mean the rules the engine uses, not those that we have developed to conduct a campaign. For example, overloaded weapons unable to fire beyond range 8.99, any ship that has the power can use a level 5 tractor etc. ie it uses a big chunk of the SFB ruleset. That is what makes me prefer the game.

In the Lyran example above, putting photons on a Lyran model does not make it a Lyran ship. It won't have the same characteristics, in other words, it is a Fed ship in smarter clothes.

There are other things that put me off SFC3. No seeking weapons - I ENJOY fighting against seeking weapons. They make me have to concentrate more, and maneuver better. I dislike reverse, I dislike tactical warp, I dislike the AV and I dislike the refit thing. Doesn't exactly leave a lot for me to like (resupply at allied bases I like).
Merriment is All

Fear the Meow!

Offline AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-

  • Unity Admin
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • Veni vidi vici
    • Spartan Vanguard
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #168 on: July 31, 2004, 05:32:23 am »
Quote
and I dislike the refit thing

Moggy,

Refit is EVERYTHING in SFC3. You can create better AV just in a refit. You can reduce overall mass, add warp power, change tractor strength -- w/e.

Man, I never understood any of this either in 14g. Then a guy showed me the inner tricks -- some still yet to be learned -- about the affects of refit. It has as much affect as setting speed or weapons power 1-5 on OP/EAW.

<S>
http://www.spartanvanguard.com/
http://www.stcd.sgnonline.com/users/trimodyards/



KoraH: "Remember my advice to you Wade, that you should drop SFC ...  you will find that all you have to put up with to do so is going to sour the sweetness of your hard work."

Offline The Pelican

  • DomWars Creator
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Gender: Male
    • Dominion Wars
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #169 on: July 31, 2004, 05:35:24 am »
EM in SFC3 is Erratic Maneouvres, NOT evasive Maneouvres - they are two separate things. Evasive Maneouvres is a combination of Erratic Maneouvres and changing the Speed & Direction of your ship.

With Primary Weapons, Phasers & Disruptors, AV has little effect, in fact I believe Primaries have a 90% chance of hitting, regardless of AV. All bar 1 Heavy Beam Weapon also has the same properties as Properties as Primaries (the Klingon Ion Cannon is that weapon). I don't have the source code, so I can't prove this. But after 18 months of testing, I've yet to see AV truly affect Primary Weapons.

AV only really affects Heavy Weapons, specifically Torpedoes, and for those weapons, it DOES make sense. We are told in Trek Canon that a Photon Torpedo has only limited fuel for adjusting it's course. If a two ships are travelling straight towards each other at 1/4 impulse, one fires a Torpedo and the other executes a 90 degree turn and accelerates to full impulse at the same time - then that Torpedo now has to track the ship itself, as the change in Speed & Direction happened AFTER the firing of the weapon(the computer will have fired it along the the best possible course it can calculate). It doesn't mean the Torpedo is going to miss, but the actions of the ships pilot in engaging that evasive maneouvre increased the chances of the weapon missing it's target.

If you change the situation, two ships are flying parallel, but in opposite directions. The same Torpedo is fired, but the defending ship has to make far less effort to avoid the torpedo, because even a small change in direction makes it difficult for the Torpedo to adjust it's course and hit it's target.

In SFC3 - Angular Velocity is not the primary determining factor in weapon accuracy, two factors are, Range - and the difference in Size between the two ships. If a Fighter is flying against a Battleship - the Fighter is unlikely to miss, as he has such a huge target to hit, but the Battleship can miss the Fighter, because the Fighter has vastly superior speed & maneouvrability, it can evade fire quite easily.

In truth, the biggest issue with Weapons is in both SFC3 & SFC2 - and that is Accuracy at Range. Why does a Torpedo miss a stationary target because the weapon is being fired at Range 30? The computer is advanced enough to calculate the correction direction to fire the weapon, so why does it still have a chance of missing?

If you want to play a game that actually gets Starship on Starship physics right, then play Bridge Commander. Phasers & other Beam Weapons never miss in Bridge Commander, but with Torpedoes & Pulse Weapons, you have to make sure you fire them in the right direction, Torpedoes have a limited tracking facility, which can compensate somewhat for evasive maneouvres & a bad angle of fire - but if your torpedo tube is perpendicular to your opponent, that torpedo is going nowhere near your target.

With Mods, you can create anything, a weapon that can loop around and home in on it's target every time is quite doable.

Offline FPF-Jem

  • D.Net VIP
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 149
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #170 on: July 31, 2004, 05:46:02 am »
I played the LB5 side of SFC3 some, so my experience with 3 is rather up to date. In fact I didn't even try to get it until sometime after the Mods appeared (due to bugetary concerns, I had to fix my comp and had trouble justifying $50 bucks for a game, especially considering I was unemployed).

I do intend to try one or two other mods for it just to be fair but I don't hold out much hope for it to capture my interest over OP, after all, there's only so much the mods can do to change the gameplay, and it would be counterproductive to change it too much. After all it has it's own playerbase that does like the current setup and changing it in an attempt to woo the OP crowd would likely put some off.
Capt. Jem


Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #171 on: July 31, 2004, 06:06:28 am »
EM in SFC3 is Erratic Maneouvres, NOT evasive Maneouvres - they are two separate things. Evasive Maneouvres is a combination of Erratic Maneouvres and changing the Speed & Direction of your ship.

Which is why I was asking if EM (eratic) affected AV.

With Primary Weapons, Phasers & Disruptors, AV has little effect, in fact I believe Primaries have a 90% chance of hitting, regardless of AV. All bar 1 Heavy Beam Weapon also has the same properties as Properties as Primaries (the Klingon Ion Cannon is that weapon). I don't have the source code, so I can't prove this. But after 18 months of testing, I've yet to see AV truly affect Primary Weapons.

AV only really affects Heavy Weapons, specifically Torpedoes, and for those weapons, it DOES make sense. We are told in Trek Canon that a Photon Torpedo has only limited fuel for adjusting it's course. If a two ships are travelling straight towards each other at 1/4 impulse, one fires a Torpedo and the other executes a 90 degree turn and accelerates to full impulse at the same time - then that Torpedo now has to track the ship itself, as the change in Speed & Direction happened AFTER the firing of the weapon(the computer will have fired it along the the best possible course it can calculate). It doesn't mean the Torpedo is going to miss, but the actions of the ships pilot in engaging that evasive maneouvre increased the chances of the weapon missing it's target.

If you change the situation, two ships are flying parallel, but in opposite directions. The same Torpedo is fired, but the defending ship has to make far less effort to avoid the torpedo, because even a small change in direction makes it difficult for the Torpedo to adjust it's course and hit it's target.

This is why delta AV should be used if anything relating to angle of attack must be used.

In SFC3 - Angular Velocity is not the primary determining factor in weapon accuracy, two factors are, Range - and the difference in Size between the two ships. If a Fighter is flying against a Battleship - the Fighter is unlikely to miss, as he has such a huge target to hit, but the Battleship can miss the Fighter, because the Fighter has vastly superior speed & maneouvrability, it can evade fire quite easily.

In truth, the biggest issue with Weapons is in both SFC3 & SFC2 - and that is Accuracy at Range. Why does a Torpedo miss a stationary target because the weapon is being fired at Range 30? The computer is advanced enough to calculate the correction direction to fire the weapon, so why does it still have a chance of missing?

This is a good question and deserves much more attention than it is given.

If you want to play a game that actually gets Starship on Starship physics right, then play Bridge Commander. Phasers & other Beam Weapons never miss in Bridge Commander, but with Torpedoes & Pulse Weapons, you have to make sure you fire them in the right direction, Torpedoes have a limited tracking facility, which can compensate somewhat for evasive maneouvres & a bad angle of fire - but if your torpedo tube is perpendicular to your opponent, that torpedo is going nowhere near your target.

With Mods, you can create anything, a weapon that can loop around and home in on it's target every time is quite doable.

I don't think you understand what happens when you fire at a target traversing your firing arc. If you correctly predict the point the target will be occupying and have your torpedoes fire at that point, you will hit the target. A high or low AV will not have any practical effect on that prediction, whereas the delta AV will have a serious effect.

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline FVA_C_ Blade_ XC

  • Forum Czar
  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 55845
  • Gender: Male
  • Yep,I did it.
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #172 on: July 31, 2004, 10:31:51 am »
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...


It did not come from the show EAW/OP are based from SFB..thats where they came from.
FVA_C_Blade_XC
XenoCorp Fleet Operations
www.xenocorp.net
ISC Race Moderator
Visioneer
S.S.Blade


See Wade,See Wade post like an arse,See Wade get banned.
Dont be a Wade!

Offline The Pelican

  • DomWars Creator
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Gender: Male
    • Dominion Wars
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #173 on: July 31, 2004, 11:03:59 am »
I don't think you understand what happens when you fire at a target traversing your firing arc. If you correctly predict the point the target will be occupying and have your torpedoes fire at that point, you will hit the target. A high or low AV will not have any practical effect on that prediction, whereas the delta AV will have a serious effect.

Angular Velocity would not be relevant AFTER the point of firing, but at the point of firing, it is relevant, because it will determine how difficult it is to make that prediction.

If you can correctly predict where a ship is going to be, you will always hit the target, simple logic tells us that!!

Neither SFC2 or SFC3 gets it right, though SFC3's angular velocity is much closer than EW.

Erratic Maneovres would be used to make it difficult to predict the speed & direction a ship is heading in by constantly changing direction & speed, even if it's only minor changes. 1 degree in space would make you miss by miles. Though SFC3 only changes the direction, and even then it's not a real direction change, just a visual effect.

All that would really matter is the evasive maneouvre you took after the Torpedo was fired, and the range that it was fired from (gives you longer to move). That's why a smaller, faster more maneouvrable ship could avoid the torpedo far more easily than a larger ship. Example, a Defiant is the most maneouvrable ship in the Federation fleet (that's canon by the way). It can change direction quickly, and is a small ship, so the distance is must travel in it's "evasive" direction is much smaller than what say a Galaxy Class would have to do.

I doubt very much that something like a Galaxy Class or Sovereign could avoid a Torpedo easily, they're just too big.

Like I said before, Bridge Commander gets it spot on, it simplifies it for the player, by using vertical and horizontal crosshairs to line up your target. But if you fire when you have a perfect lock, the only way a ship can avoid the Torpedo is if it CHANGES direction & Speed. You can still fire torpedoes "blind" - i.e. by not locking on to your target, but unless they have uber tracking capabilities, they miss everytime, unless a ship is stupid enough to fly into one of them!!

Offline Tulwar

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1328
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #174 on: July 31, 2004, 11:06:48 am »
What does it mean for the community to "come together?"  There are those of us who love the SFB ruleset whether or not we ever played SFB, and those who like SFC3.  What are we supposed to agree on?  This topic just turns into a flame war.
Cannon (can' nun) n.  An istrument used to rectify national boundries.  Ambrois Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

Offline AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-

  • Unity Admin
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 492
  • Gender: Male
  • Veni vidi vici
    • Spartan Vanguard
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #175 on: July 31, 2004, 11:12:34 am »
What does it mean for the community to "come together?"  There are those of us who love the SFB ruleset whether or not we ever played SFB, and those who like SFC3.  What are we supposed to agree on?  This topic just turns into a flame war.

Actually, wasn't a war at all. Some healthy and interesting debate.

Cleavan is fascinating.

<S>
http://www.spartanvanguard.com/
http://www.stcd.sgnonline.com/users/trimodyards/



KoraH: "Remember my advice to you Wade, that you should drop SFC ...  you will find that all you have to put up with to do so is going to sour the sweetness of your hard work."

Rattler

  • Guest
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #176 on: July 31, 2004, 11:50:30 am »
I just can't understand for the life of me how making rifts wider and having people quit can be construed as healthy but so be it. jmho


The needs of the few outweight the needs of the many.lol


Rattler

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2689
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #177 on: July 31, 2004, 11:55:35 am »
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...


It did not come from the show EAW/OP are based from SFB..thats where they came from.
I will say it agian not 100% of SFB is in SF1,2EAW&OP only some of the elements when you load up the game and see the 2036 or 2552 above the Paramount sign look over to the lower left hand corner where the copyrights are.I thought an Admin would know this.I think an Admin would be supportive of both communities.

Offline Holocat

  • An even siller cat than Even SillierCats. ;3
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 216
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #178 on: July 31, 2004, 11:57:54 am »
Quote
BFG? Did he really say BFG? Damn I coughed tea all over my keyboard. That is so Freudian, I'm dying. What game are we playing again?


Hey!  Of course the F-BFG exists.  Here's what it looks like.



Beats the hell out of the KHK any day of the week.  It might have a problem with Caveat-3's though, as they will fly faster than our turbolaser phaser turrets can easily handle.

The specifications for the vessel are here: http://www.smileylich.com/sfb/ssd/swe-ds1.gif

Suprised you haven't seen one yet;  at 1.4 trillion PP most nutters have two by late.

Offline Dash Jones

  • Sub-Commander of the Dark Side
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6477
  • Gender: Male
Re: Community Gap - sfc2/3 a bridge that needs to be made
« Reply #179 on: July 31, 2004, 12:11:24 pm »
I just can't understand for the life of me how making rifts wider and having people quit can be construed as healthy but so be it. jmho


The needs of the few outweight the needs of the many.lol


Rattler

:thumbsup:

I agree.  I know those who play SFC2 and SFC3 and we all get along fine.  It strikes me as odd that those in the forums cannot do the same thing.
"All hominins are hominids, but not all hominids are hominins."


"Is this a Christian perspective?

Now where in the Bible does it say if someone does something stupid you should shoot them in the face?"

-------

We have whale farms in Jersey.   They're called McDonald's.

There is no "I" in team. There are two "I"s in Vin Diesel. screw you, team.