Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[el-Karnak]

When your main tactic is to go spd 31 in your Romulan DNH forcing the enemy DN's to disengage b/c they have to stay at high spd to avoid a plasma enema, I suppose that having a large map is harmful to your strategy too, eh?

Valid tactic. There are many others. You cant tell me that 'Corner Trapping' inst a tactic as well. I wont be minding VLM's this server, I'm flying for the cats.

Too bad you failed to mention how the large maps will negate it in at least a small way....

Not in so many words, no, but corner trapping will no longer be much of an option for the time being. The fact of the matter is that a variety of maps is what is most suitable for everyone because tactics change from one map size to the next, and that is indisputable.

If yer corner trapped, it means it's time to warp-out anyway.  Don't run away so much next time...   Making a larger map just prolongs the chase. 

[FPF-DieHard]

I blaimed you for that, he;s quoting me

So you are spreading lies to peeps about me behind my back?

I call things as I see them

[el-Karnak]

I blaimed you for that, he;s quoting me

So you are spreading lies to peeps about me behind my back?

I call things as I see them

Next time, pour yourself a big glass of STFU, count to 10, talk a walk,  and see if you are right first.  Also, don't ever post when yer mad.  I'm sure everyone knows that it's actually is a good principle to apply at work with emails too; so, try it here.  I think it actually works sometimes.

[FPF-DieHard]

I blaimed you for that, he;s quoting me

So you are spreading lies to peeps about me behind my back?

I call things as I see them

Next time, pour yourself a big glass of STFU, count to 10, talk a walk,  and see if you are right first.  Also, don't ever post when yer mad.  I'm sure everyone knows that it's actually is a good principle to apply at work with emails too; so, try it here.  I think it actually works sometimes.

Put is I never post when mad, I'd never post . . .

[Matsukasi]

Put is I never post when mad, I'd never post . . .

He said ' mad ' , not ' horny ' you dork. 

[Bonk]

I know nothing, I hear nothing, I see nothing! 

http://www.webundies.com/ea71b652.htm   

[Dizzy]

A BONK Sighting! Call the Press!

[Mr.Bad151]

The logic of space being huge, justifying large maps, is flawed in SFC.  While 3D space is indeed huge, SFC uses a fixed 2D space.  The difference between the 2 becomes exponentially (infinitely) larger as you increase the size of "space".  In a fixed 2D space there might be times when the area you have to defend/attack is rather small, IE the sensor gap between 2 starbases, a gap in an asteroid field.  While such places might be rare, they would exist in 2D space where they wouldn't in 3D space.

I agree, the majority of maps should be large/very large, but there should be some smaller maps as well.  Be careful about using real life to justify something with artificial rules.  While it's not a huge deal to me, even tho I am a Gorn player, if people are against small maps because of "real life" examples of space.. perhaps they need to rethink it.

[Dizzy]

Well said.

[CaptJosh]

A thought. Any map with an object that has a noticeable gravity well should probably be larger than empty maps.  Gravity wells require extra distance from the object in order to be able to engage warp drive. Maps with Black Holes would of necessity be huge, nebula maps would tend to be large just due to needing to get clear to warp out. Maps with stars would need to be somewhat large, though not as big as a black hole map. Planet maps where the star is away some some direction off the main combat area. Asteroid maps could vary depending on density of the rocks, and empty space maps could be smaller just because there's no immediate gravity well to attain sufficient distance from to warp out.

[Dizzy]

Gravity wells, Josh??? STFU!

This is about 'corner trapping' tactics. It will go away using exclusively VLMs.

Gravity wells... lol

[KBF-Kurok]

Tracey a little up date to what i posted earlier. The same thing happened while flying rom. If the mission briefing said gorn  were in the battle  they were a no show. Lyrans were no problem. This thime i was a Romulan and flew three different classes of ship.to see if i could get them to show up. Im going to go back and see if i have the same problem with the feds or hydrans Ill keep you posted.

[FPF-DieHard]

Tracey a little up date to what i posted earlier. The same thing happened while flying rom. If the mission briefing said gorn  were in the battle  they were a no show. Lyrans were no problem. This thime i was a Romulan and flew three different classes of ship.to see if i could get them to show up. Im going to go back and see if i have the same problem with the feds or hydrans Ill keep you posted.

TG, we need to expand the range of what the scripts will draft, add these to the next batch.

I guess I'm we're going to hav eto do a 2263 test to see if this gets worse with fewer ships available.

[Hexx]

Like what 95-99% of the servers we've had have had smaller maps.

STFU about it.
Learn new tactics

[el-Karnak]

A thought. Any map with an object that has a noticeable gravity well should probably be larger than empty maps.  Gravity wells require extra distance from the object in order to be able to engage warp drive. Maps with Black Holes would of necessity be huge, nebula maps would tend to be large just due to needing to get clear to warp out. Maps with stars would need to be somewhat large, though not as big as a black hole map. Planet maps where the star is away some some direction off the main combat area. Asteroid maps could vary depending on density of the rocks, and empty space maps could be smaller just because there's no immediate gravity well to attain sufficient distance from to warp out.

A lot of good points here.  Varying the warp eligible exit distances of mission script maps based on terrain makes mucho sense to me.  Then admins. can really influence PvP game styles on the dyna map by deliberately placing the "gravity-well"-type terrain where they want them.

[KBF-Kurok]

ok things seem to work fine if i attack the feds or Hydrans. Like the new missions so far maps are a little big for my taste but that is cool. I look foward to seeing them in actual combat and see how people react to them should be fun.

[SkyFlyer]

I would like a variety of small and large maps...

[Riskyllama]

Being quite young in his community and barely knowing my way around the game much less the game's engine, is it possible to tie muiltiple options to each other?  Say have the option of a large and small map when theres the chance people may be drafted, so that whichever captain is quicker can "choose the field of battle." I was also wondering if anyone knew whether or not the frequency of maulers has dropped yet?

It might mix things up a little bit it might make things rather interesting indeed if it were possible.
Alright I've got my fire retardant suit ready. Flame On guys.

PS As a side note for Tracey, I appreciate you working your butt off to deliver up these really cool maps, frankly they're really cool I applaud your hard work and determination. Variety would be nice, but right now I'll take what I can get.

[CaptJosh]

THe map is generated at the time of script load. There is no way for it to be chosen.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

   

Back to bug reports as the thread title suggests. I just finished TG enemy patrol B mission where my hydran ally dropped his fighters right away about range 50 behind us after warp and the little buggers (my allies) shot at me while I was still in warp, but not after. This reminded me that I had been shot at by the fighters once before while warping in.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

oh and the klink yards were half full of D7Ts still and the Fed yards were mostly DDLs and DNLs.

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Tracey:

You cited SFB's "Floating maps", along with the traditional vastness of space, as the rationales for your map sizes.

However, the original map sizes were determined to balance 2 factors, the above vs. the fact that, theoretically, a captain can "disengage" at will by accelerating to high speeds, or by increasing the separation to such a point that they can't track each other anymore.

While your maps enhance the need to run for the "disengagement by losing tracking" method, there is no means to "readily" disengage by acceleration (short of a long stay at combat speeds).

IIRC, one of SFB's floating map balances was the fact that, after spending 1 turn at your maximum attainable speed, you can elect to disengage instantly.

Yes, this is very true. Perhaps we can implement this in future missions by allowing a player ship a "one-time only" go to warp (and not then be able to drop out of warp) effectively disengaging from the map. This however would then allow any ship just about to disengage at any time, even as they are about to die which really isnt very practical. So... perhaps only allow this tactic to work IF the warp engines are not damaged, or perhaps make it a probability based on the percentage damage to warp engines that warp for disengaging is available, or some other constraint (eg. each time the warp engines are damaged, there is a percentage change the main energisers will go offline). Something to think about and might make for a good discussion.

[KBFLordKrueg]

Like what 95-99% of the servers we've had have had smaller maps.

STFU about it.
Learn new tactics

I totally agree....

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

 

Back to bug reports as the thread title suggests. I just finished TG enemy patrol B mission where my hydran ally dropped his fighters right away about range 50 behind us after warp and the little buggers (my allies) shot at me while I was still in warp, but not after. This reminded me that I had been shot at by the fighters once before while warping in.

This will be fixed next recompile. The warp in part of the script has now been moved to after team relations are set which signifies when all teams are setup. In theory then, the warp in wont start until after all teams are setup and we shouldnt see any possible warp in lag (although this doesnt seem to be much of a problem anyway). Also, at the start of the mission all the AI ships have had their AI fighter officer switched off, which is then switched back on after the ship has finished waroing in. This should stop fighters from being dropped early (assuming the API function for this does as it is supposed to).

[Dfly]

From Josh on page 3 after my posting of a problem in Patrol B missions.

The fighters being dropped during warp in has been fixed already. I tested it myself. My AI allies did not drop fighters/PFs until within range of the targets. It would have been a valid arguement last week, but the Missions as af the 17th fixed that.

Message from Tracy middle(actually end when I posted this) about the fighter problem I posted.

 

Back to bug reports as the thread title suggests. I just finished TG enemy patrol B mission where my hydran ally dropped his fighters right away about range 50 behind us after warp and the little buggers (my allies) shot at me while I was still in warp, but not after. This reminded me that I had been shot at by the fighters once before while warping in.

This will be fixed next recompile. The warp in part of the script has now been moved to after team relations are set which signifies when all teams are setup. In theory then, the warp in wont start until after all teams are setup and we shouldnt see any possible warp in lag (although this doesnt seem to be much of a problem anyway). Also, at the start of the mission all the AI ships have had their AI fighter officer switched off, which is then switched back on after the ship has finished waroing in. This should stop fighters from being dropped early (assuming the API function for this does as it is supposed to).

JOSH<  Please feel free to keep putting up ideas for missions etc, but IF the actual message is not intended for you at all, but only for Tracy as this posting was and should be due to the TOPIC, please bud out.  It seems clear that what you posted about my problem I posted here is totally invalid.

[FPF-DieHard]

Back on topic.    TG, tak a look at this.

Ran Met Allied patrols A B and C w/ a Kling ship in home space no ai draw mission complete 150 pp also happened in neutral space between Rom Kling Gorn same thing happened with with A B C enemy patrols.They all worked fine when in an allied hex or enemy hex.

[KBF-Kurok]

im not seeing any gorn except in the base assults and such. in any of the six new missions. Whule attacking the Lyran  they work great. BTW the missions are ending with around 9 seconds run and a 150 pp point pay out.

[FPF-DieHard]

What ship are you flying when you attack the GORN?   What Race?

We need a Kitty to try the same thing..

Please, attack all of you enemies and make sure this works.  Wee need to know where the bugs are so we can fix them.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

On my way will report back soon.

[Braxton]

im not seeing any gorn except in the base assults and such. in any of the six new missions. Whule attacking the Lyran  they work great. BTW the missions are ending with around 9 seconds run and a 150 pp point pay out.

I think that is the server hinting that you need to attack the Lyrans LOL