Dynaverse.net
Taldrenites => Dynaverse II Experiences => Topic started by: Dizzy on January 12, 2008, 12:49:26 am
-
(http://home.satx.rr.com/arachne/SG9_Main.jpg) (http://home.satx.rr.com/arachne/main_theme.WAV)
Could Start this month.
Start Date: 2268
Runs 2 weeks ends on 2293 or so.
Featuring:
Alliance Mirak, Hydran
(http://home.satx.rr.com/arachne/Alliance1.jpg)
Vs:[/list]
Coalition Klingons, Lyrans
(http://home.satx.rr.com/arachne/Coalition1.jpg)
DH and I need RM's for the two sides so if we could get the Alliance and Coalition peeps to discuss it on their boards and respond here that'd help us get it started this month mb.
-
Bout damn time! :whip:
-
Re: Announcing Slave Girls of Orion IX (are we up to 9 already?)
It'll do, at least 'til we get up to Slave Girls 69 :thumbsup:
dave
-
Yey Dizzy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :woot:
-
Oh Wow! I'll have to watch my mailbox for my copy of op... It's supposed to get here between 4-14 days. It's been 4 now. GPF Lord of the Rings shall descend onto Kzin territory with a vengeance! It's good to be back
-
Woo Hoo!!!!
-
Forums are set up on SFC2.Net.
Lord Krueg is Moderator of the Coalition, usergroup access is SGOC
Need a Moderator for Alliance (I will let people in for now), usergroup access is SGOA
Thanks ;)
-
Thanks Jeff!
-
Forums are set up on SFC2.Net.
Lord Krueg is Moderator of the Coalition, usergroup access is SGOC
TY sir.
You know the drill gents....
-
Awesome :D .. should be fun :)
-
Hey guys. I'm getting multiple requests for players to RM. That's why on the first post I asked if you all could discuss it collectively on your respective forums. Here are the links to the Alliance and Coalition on SFC2net thanks go to CaptJeff for setting that up. ;)
http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163378945.0.html
http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163378941.0.html
-
CANT FREAKING WAIT! SG Servers are so much fricking fun 8)
-
Will there be a wild geese section for this server? A probe at how many will fly for either side (I know those aren't accurate)?
-
Good question. I think we are responsible enough to know to switch sides to even it out. I'm gonna leave that up to the RM's, so I'm not leaning toward using the WG this server.
-
Isn't this number 8? I have messages from the last one titled sgo-7.
-
Dunno for sure. I may offer a ship based edit reward for the one who can name all the Slave Girls...
-
This is number 8
-
Hi all
It's been some time since I've played and in reflection...I've missed it. I'm running Vista now (big mistake) and have seen in another thread there are fixes...I'm going to see if I can find my OP disc and see if I can get this running and get back into this game. Is Teamspeak Vista compatible? Any idea when this server will start(not that I'm pushing...the later the start date the more time I have to get fixed up)
KHH- MiniMe
-
If you got Vista, then you probably won't be able to play on this one, (edit: very well), unless Pestalence finds a fix.
http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163378693.0.html
-
Is Teamspeak Vista compatible?
As far as I know yep.
-
I've played on the dynaverse with Vista. It's not a great experience but it is doable.
-
We will be using a 2 to 1 scale of the F&E Map. I'll post a pic tomorrow, map's almost done.
We will be using SQL.
Since it will be possible, I believe, to relocate anywhere on the map from a Friendly Planet to another Friendly Planet and as you can use just one account to accumulate pp, change race or ship, etc., then the dynamic of having the Hydran and Mirak Empires seperated by the Lyrans and Klingons will not matter as we will be using non-destroyable, but capturable embassy bases. This setup should be pretty fun.
-
OK, concerning Vista..
Some things I have documented so far.
1. Networking is different from XP is that Vista auto adjusts your connection on the fly as you are playing. XP auto adjusts when you connect and then remains static. Vista auto configures to give best through put for online, however it starts slow, then throttles up to gain maximum speed. In a way it is superior to XP for web use and DLing things, but for gaming on something like the Dynaverse server that only sends out updates after a battle is done or when the news generates, Vista shows lag on its end.
The problem that this poses is that on a server with few players, Vista will sometimes move fast, then other times crawl.. I have not tested it yet on a full server to see how networking works.
Microsoft does have a method to turn of "Auto Tuning" to allow you to somewhat manually set Netshell in Command Prompt to increase Upload and DL capabilities in Vista.. however I have not found the reversion commands to reset it back to auto, but that is'nt really necessary if you are getting good through put.
2. Vista has a tripple (maybe quadruple) level firewall built in. Windows Firewall in XP is only Single layer.. in Vista, there are 3 adjustable firewalls that you can manage on different levels.. more levels if you have multiple user accounts.. I recommend turning off all Windows Firewall levels in Vista and use a router or a 3rd party firewall to save headaches. I have found that turning off the Firewall Service only disables 1 firewall in Vista, but does not effect the other 2 main levels, this may cause some issues with online play.
3. User Accounts. By default Vista comes with User Account Management enabled. It is considered a security feature, however games hate it tremendously. Basically your OS creates a shadow account and over lays it on your current account.. any changes you do to a game takes place in the Shadow layer and not the main layer, thus causing games to corrupt on launch, improper settings, unable to change settings via 3rd party software, etc.
Turning off User Accounts in the control panel does not mean that you remove different user accounts, what it does is shut off the auto shadow of the account and allows you to work on your main layer directly without the shadow layer hindering you.
4. Direct X. Direct X in XP will not increase past Direct X 9.0LE and will not get the capabilities of Vista's Direct X 10.1. Vista is now able to take advantage of the newest Direct X (10.1) in the Vista SP 1 Beta. XP is still waiting for Direct X 9.0 LE, which is supposedly able to make Direct X compatible between the 2 systems. However XP is still running Direct X 9.0c and there may be a direct Play issue, not with other players, but with the server itself. PVP using Vista, I have had no issues with lag or anything else.. in fact it has seemed more stable. I have only had 1 CTD in a PVP with Razaal on the Boneyard, but it was when the Directory server went down.. so I'm not sure what to attribute the CTD with.
on GSA and in TCP/IP games, I have not had any games CTD or drop. Some games I hosted, some games I just ride along.. but out of over 60 games PVP on GSA. TCP/IP, and Dynaverse, I have only had 1 CTD. this leaves a possibility of a Direct Play issure between the server and Vista based OP client. It seems more of a problem outlined in #1.
4. Compatibility Mode. on XP SFC OP will work natively without changing compatibility mode.. with some video cards, you may have to disable Visual Themes. In Vista, you have an enhanced desktop layer to make your main programs look better, sort of a psuedo HD upgrade. OP suffers random CTD when you do not disable Desktop Composition. with the newer Vid Cards and drivers for Vista, Visual Themes does not seem to hinder OP's performance, but I think it is best to disable it as well just to be safe. In Vista, Compatibility Mode actually works the way it is suppose to. As such on Vista, OP should be set to Win 2K compatibility (the platform in which it was built). game operates just fine in this mode.. in XPSP 2 mode and Vista Native modes, OP will operate, but will not shut down properly.
5. Going back to Networking. I would suggest that Vista users use the Release Candidate for the Service Pack 1. Networking is much improved, however the server lagging is still present. but you can get on the Dyna Servers fairly quickly... You can actually participate in a campaign, however I would limit Vista players to limited PVP due to lagging of the client on the server.. I would assign Vista users to mainly Hex Flipping or set a rule of 1 min 30 seconds wait time to move after a battle is complete.. this will give Vista enough time to re-sync with the server.
I am still working on getting Vista compatible with the Dyna servers.. this campaign will give me more research into the networking issue and allow me to make a Tweak CSS file for the netshell to be added for Vista players in the OP Enhancement Package and in a single download format. I need to make 2 CSS rules for netshell, OP compatibility and Normal.. this way you can reset Vista back to it's native mode, which is naturally very fast for browsing. The Tweak may have the advantage of setting your Networking to have faster throughput for Dling and Uploading, which will also increase browsing speed, however there may be applications coming out that will utilize Vista's Auto Tweaking in the future that will be invaluable to gaming on newer titles (I have seem marked performance increase using Vista in EVE in the networking under the Auto Adjust mode)..
Anyhow I hope that this sheds some light on Vista Players..
I will attempt some PVP on this server to check the networking of Vista to Server connections when the server is loaded.. hopefully the new network settings will help with the Server Lag seen in the Vista client.
hope this helps.
-
Dunno for sure. I may offer a ship based edit reward for the one who can name all the Slave Girls...
Well,... there was Trixie, Mindy, Muffin, Star, and Little Miss Sally Rottencrotch.
Frankly, I think I shoudn't have done the last one.
-S'Cipio
-
OK, concerning Vista..
5. Going back to Networking. I would suggest that Vista users use the Release Candidate for the Service Pack 1. Networking is much improved, however the server lagging is still present. but you can get on the Dyna Servers fairly quickly... You can actually participate in a campaign, however I would limit Vista players to limited PVP due to lagging of the client on the server.. I would assign Vista users to mainly Hex Flipping or set a rule of 1 min 30 seconds wait time to move after a battle is complete.. this will give Vista enough time to re-sync with the server.
No one is gonna wanna wait a minute and 30 seconds after a battle. So Vista users can forget it if we can't get that fixed. Dunno if anyone remembers playing a campaign, but getting your ass out of a hex right after a battle as fast as you can is part of the tactics playing this game. So is jumping people when they light up after a mission. These tactics are integral to the game. If we decide to wait a minute and 30 seconds we might as well setup to arrange to have all our battles fouht on GSA.
Nice writeup Pesty. Let's work together to figure this out. Let me know what you need.
-
Dunno for sure. I may offer a ship based edit reward for the one who can name all the Slave Girls...
Well,... there was Trixie, Mindy, Muffin, Star, and Little Miss Sally Rottencrotch.
Frankly, I think I shoudn't have done the last one.
-S'Cipio
Yeah, did that cream solve that itch problem on you lower lip?
-
Dunno for sure. I may offer a ship based edit reward for the one who can name all the Slave Girls...
Well,... there was Trixie, Mindy, Muffin, Star, and Little Miss Sally Rottencrotch.
Frankly, I think I shoudn't have done the last one.
-S'Cipio
Yeah, did that cream solve that itch problem on you lower lip?
I thought Gorns shed their skin?
-
Good question. I think we are responsible enough to know to switch sides to even it out. I'm gonna leave that up to the RM's, so I'm not leaning toward using the WG this server.
Me and Kroma were talking last night about playing for whoever has the lest amount of people. 8)
-
Good question. I think we are responsible enough to know to switch sides to even it out. I'm gonna leave that up to the RM's, so I'm not leaning toward using the WG this server.
Me and Kroma were talking last night about playing for whoever has the lest amount of people. 8)
Welcome to the alliance! ;)
-
Actually SG08 "On the BACK of the Slaves"
it is where we are now ;)
-
What I have noticed is slow hex movement when the server updates the news for the shipyard.
Slow Hex movement after battle until the server updates.
slow hex movement if moving hexes quickly (like the server lags behind)
I'm starting to wonder if it is the server kit itself that is slowing the Vista players down and not the game since players on Vista can pay GSA no problem, but only have problems when connected to the server (not in battle). I think it is time to recheck the networking code in the server kit.. maybe too many process sent through too few ports, or maybe needing to set the Server Kit to Win 2K compatibility mode before launch. Many game companies had to "Patch" their servers to be Vista compliant (along with some client software as well, but OP is not showing signs of that need on the Client end).
I can't seem to find any problem on the Vista end other than connection with the server.. so if XP player and Vista Player can play TCP/IP, GSA with no issues, but logging on to a server causes movement and updating lag, then it may be the server kit itself.
The results are consistant on all servers.. Boneyard, the Total War server, and the Test Setver using OP Stock shiplist.
The problem does not seem to be client side, but server kit side.. the servers all have 1 thing in common.. Build 37 of the kit. Maybe I can talk Bonk into looking into the Server Kit Code and maybe make a friendlier build to work with both Vista and XP.. but that may take a while with his schedule.
I'll look in to it.
-
Dizzy, I think we are on SGO8 not 9. :)
-
May I make a suggestion? I'd like to propose making all ships dirt cheap like 10 pp and supplies dirt cheap, so that everyone can fly what they want without having to wait to get the pp by missioning. Keep fleeting rules in place. Keep heavy metal limits. Lose a cap ship, can't fly one for a day or some such to keep newbs like me from screwing with the PvP-based VC points. This way people can log on, grab their favorite ships, and start right in with PvP. This will lower the bar for people entering PvP and willingness to engage in PvP.
Concerns about suiciders and disposable ships?? I don't people are terribly apt to go all nuts just because ships will be free for all intents and purposes. We are a relatively mature group here. I don't think anyone is here to exploit a loophole like free ships. They want a good fight so I think they will be apt to fight in a manner that creates those conditions.
I personally really just hate having to pay for the ship I want with my time. I just want the ship I want so I can get on with it.
Like it? Hate it?
-
I like it but dont think it's needed. You may have more than one account, but the OCI makes that unecessary since one account can go anywhere on the map, change race and change ship. So your one bank account affords all purchases. Lets see what DH has to say. As far as the 24 hour penalty box for losing a big ship, I've not decided. What do you all want?
-
I like it but dont think it's needed. You may have more than one account, but the OCI makes that unecessary since one account can go anywhere on the map, change race and change ship. So your one bank account affords all purchases. Lets see what DH has to say. As far as the 24 hour penalty box for losing a big ship, I've not decided. What do you all want?
UM, OCI? Are we going to try to go SQL with this?
-
Oh, thought u signed off on that already. Yeah, SFHQ has been helping me along. He went thru the entire OCI code to make sure it's solid for this server. I think we should give it a shot. I'm about to D/L the config file for the OCI soon and tweak it then pass it along to you for review.
-
Oh, thought u signed off on that already. Yeah, SFHQ has been helping me along. He went thru the entire OCI code to make sure it's solid for this server. I think we should give it a shot. I'm about to D/L the config file for the OCI soon and tweak it then pass it along to you for review.
I got no problem with using SQL, just that I won't be able to do much. I say we go for it, the player base will be so small at this pont that I can't imagine us crashing the server.
-
Good question. I think we are responsible enough to know to switch sides to even it out. I'm gonna leave that up to the RM's, so I'm not leaning toward using the WG this server.
Okay. I'm asking because I was considering flying Coalition (Klingon most likely.. been wanting to do a tour with them a long time... but I can fly Lyran in a pinch) this server. I've only ever flown Alliance... not a bad thing mind you :P But also, I was the EFF team captian for Hydrans way back in the GSA days and if numbers go the way of past servers I see myself running around in a H-PAL or H-BAR again (and no, Paladin in my nick isn't from using that ship.. that nick predates most videogames made for anything above a 286) to stem back the tide.
I kind of see how the OCI account versatility will help make switching sides to balance things easier though.. fingers crossed on that.
-
Good question. I think we are responsible enough to know to switch sides to even it out. I'm gonna leave that up to the RM's, so I'm not leaning toward using the WG this server.
Okay. I'm asking because I was considering flying Coalition (Klingon most likely.. been wanting to do a tour with them a long time... but I can fly Lyran in a pinch) this server. I've only ever flown Alliance... not a bad thing mind you :P But also, I was the EFF team captian for Hydrans way back in the GSA days and if numbers go the way of past servers I see myself running around in a H-PAL or H-BAR again (and no, Paladin in my nick isn't from using that ship.. that nick predates most videogames made for anything above a 286) to stem back the tide.
I kind of see how the OCI account versatility will help make switching sides to balance things easier though.. fingers crossed on that.
The OCI should not allow you to switch sides with your account. I'll post some sort of OCI interface FAQ post in this thread in the next several days so u can see what you can and cant do. With DH and I having a master OCI account, we can setup Federation and Romulan Expeditionary Strike Accounts if need be. I dont think we will have the playerbase for that tho, but we probably will be able to switch players accounts from one side to the other upon request once we see what the numbers look like. I dont think it'd hurt doing a signup so peeps get an idea who is flying for who so we dont start the server with a 3 to 1 landslide. Here's the link, go ahead and vote: http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163378991.0.html
-
Fed Expeditionary? :huh: Uh you mean fed ships?
Yes and a how to on the OCI would be awesome.
-
Oh, thought u signed off on that already. Yeah, SFHQ has been helping me along. He went thru the entire OCI code to make sure it's solid for this server. I think we should give it a shot. I'm about to D/L the config file for the OCI soon and tweak it then pass it along to you for review.
I got no problem with using SQL, just that I won't be able to do much. I say we go for it, the player base will be so small at this pont that I can't imagine us crashing the server.
*Points for reference* http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163378365.0.html
-
Want some feedback if DH and I rewrite this rule.
Disengagement/Destruction Rule
- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.
- If you draft or are drafted while moving out of an area you have been banned in, the mission is to be played out normally, but any outcome for purposes of disengagement/destruction is voided and the banned time from the previous mission and hex doesnt begin until the current mission concludes.
- Black Hole hexes are free hexes and the Disengagement/Destruction doesn't apply to these hexes.
- One turn is 4 minutes.
That is the current rule. What if we changed it so that the player that lost points in that hex (got a ship destroyed that was worth points) can come back into it if they fly a smaller class ship than the one they lost and are drafted by an ally? Just throwing this out.
-
No to banning in adjacent hexes please. With frequent low numbers this can be too big a penalty to a side. Smaller class sounds interesting, but policing might be an issue and if you lose a frigate do you have to fly a freighter? :o
-
Well, yeah, the area ban rule might not be a good idea for this map. It is a tad smaller.
-
Want some feedback if DH and I rewrite this rule.
Disengagement/Destruction Rule
- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.
- If you draft or are drafted while moving out of an area you have been banned in, the mission is to be played out normally, but any outcome for purposes of disengagement/destruction is voided and the banned time from the previous mission and hex doesnt begin until the current mission concludes.
- Black Hole hexes are free hexes and the Disengagement/Destruction doesn't apply to these hexes.
- One turn is 4 minutes.
That is the current rule. What if we changed it so that the player that lost points in that hex (got a ship destroyed that was worth points) can come back into it if they fly a smaller class ship than the one they lost and are drafted by an ally? Just throwing this out.
no ban rule for this one and frigate is the smallest you can go (no jumping into a drone frigate or the like)
-
will will have a disengagement rule of some sort until the day where battles on the sql server can correctly adjust the DV values in multiples for pvp engagements. Too easy for a single frigate to engage 3 players sitting rock so a couple frigate hex munchers can run missions under them and then rinse and repeat. That's not my idea of a fun server and unfortunately without this rule, we do have a bunch of unscrupulous players who'd horribly abuse it.
-
the sleeper has awakened! i got the dyna to work! my friend Jason works for Quantum something or other and he got my firewall problem to go away lol. i was set to dmz and it still didn't work. he opened the ports w/out going to dmz and tada! he's worth every penny they pay him and more. 200K i'm in the wrong business lmao oh well... IT is the way to go i guess. I look forward to this server. 2 days playing single player campaign and I'm killing AI like crazy as Lyran again. I"M BACK!!!! i remember how to do t-bombs again finally.
I've missed you guys and gals ;) more emphasis on gals hehe
I look forward to playing again... "Let the hunt begin!"
-
will will have a disengagement rule of some sort until the day where battles on the sql server can correctly adjust the DV values in multiples for pvp engagements. Too easy for a single frigate to engage 3 players sitting rock so a couple frigate hex munchers can run missions under them and then rinse and repeat. That's not my idea of a fun server and unfortunately without this rule, we do have a bunch of unscrupulous players who'd horribly abuse it.
sorry was speeking of the ban rule got confused you know us old guys it to us easly ;D
-
Want some feedback if DH and I rewrite this rule.
Disengagement/Destruction Rule
- If you are forced to yada yada yada.
That is the current rule. What if we changed it so that the player that lost points in that hex (got a ship destroyed that was worth points) can come back into it if they fly a smaller class ship than the one they lost and are drafted by an ally? Just throwing this out.
Some worried about having to come back in as a freighter. Would not happen had you read it right :o . Check out the "(got a ship destroyed that was worth points)" IF they made sure all ships worth points were bigger than a frigate. IE make the dronechuckers fit into the LIGHT CRUISER class, since there are some small ships worth points. Just a suggestion.
-
What I have noticed is slow hex movement when the server updates the news for the shipyard.
Slow Hex movement after battle until the server updates.
slow hex movement if moving hexes quickly (like the server lags behind)
I'm starting to wonder if it is the server kit itself that is slowing the Vista players down and not the game since players on Vista can pay GSA no problem, but only have problems when connected to the server (not in battle). I think it is time to recheck the networking code in the server kit.. maybe too many process sent through too few ports, or maybe needing to set the Server Kit to Win 2K compatibility mode before launch. Many game companies had to "Patch" their servers to be Vista compliant (along with some client software as well, but OP is not showing signs of that need on the Client end).
I can't seem to find any problem on the Vista end other than connection with the server.. so if XP player and Vista Player can play TCP/IP, GSA with no issues, but logging on to a server causes movement and updating lag, then it may be the server kit itself.
The results are consistant on all servers.. Boneyard, the Total War server, and the Test Setver using OP Stock shiplist.
The problem does not seem to be client side, but server kit side.. the servers all have 1 thing in common.. Build 37 of the kit. Maybe I can talk Bonk into looking into the Server Kit Code and maybe make a friendlier build to work with both Vista and XP.. but that may take a while with his schedule.
I'll look in to it.
How can you say it's the serverkit when XP users, windows 2000 users, and win98 users have no issues with the campaign? That just doesn't make sense. Now, don't take these words as criticizing you, your effort is greatly appreciated, but throwing it back on the serverkit without any real EVIDENCE is kinda fruitless.
I keep telling you, it's a directplay issue with DirectX 10. Has ANYONE put a packet tracer on the interface in VISTA to see what, exactly, is happening?
I've heard it's the Vista networking interface, then it's the Vista this and that. The bottom line is that if you use VISTA, WITH DIRECT X 10, the game shows issues. If you use WINDOWS XP or ANY OTHER OS, it doesn't.
Has ANYONE contacted Microsoft on this?
-
Want some feedback if DH and I rewrite this rule.
Disengagement/Destruction Rule
- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.
- If you draft or are drafted while moving out of an area you have been banned in, the mission is to be played out normally, but any outcome for purposes of disengagement/destruction is voided and the banned time from the previous mission and hex doesnt begin until the current mission concludes.
- Black Hole hexes are free hexes and the Disengagement/Destruction doesn't apply to these hexes.
- One turn is 4 minutes.
That is the current rule. What if we changed it so that the player that lost points in that hex (got a ship destroyed that was worth points) can come back into it if they fly a smaller class ship than the one they lost and are drafted by an ally? Just throwing this out.
IMOPO...The rule is fine, except for the part about the 7 hex ban.
I rather see it a single hex ban.
I possibly would be willing to go with an adjacent hex ban around planets and possibly bases since it could be said they are capable of controlling a fixed position with it's better abilities over starships.
-
Pesty should be making an announcement soon in regards to our need for some help in testing the VISTA issue with online campaigns.
We'll derail that particular conversation to that thread, so please continue to post here in regards to the original intent of the poster.
Regards,
-
What box did AOTK3 run on? Those gf files are the ones we need to setup this server. I believe the racial alliance settings will change... and maybe a very few other things. Who has them?
-
Probably Thor... I'll have a look here in a couple of minutes.
-
Greetings All-
I am extremely interested to to get involved with SFCOP gaming community, am a long-time Mirak (Kzinti back in the SFB board game days). I am asking for someone to point me in the direction of any Mirak group. As an aside, I am also prepping for GenghisCon here in Denver next month. Thanks loads for any response.
-
Alliance contains the Mirak race for this server
-
Greetings All-
I am extremely interested to to get involved with SFCOP gaming community, am a long-time Mirak (Kzinti back in the SFB board game days). I am asking for someone to point me in the direction of any Mirak group. As an aside, I am also prepping for GenghisCon here in Denver next month. Thanks loads for any response.
You should go here:
http://www.sfc2.net/forums/
Register there, if you havn't already, and then request access to the SGOA forums (under "usergroups" ) to be in contact with your team and get voice comm info and operations during the campaign. ;)
-
You should go here:
[url]http://www.sfc2.net/forums/[/url]
Register there, if you havn't already, and then request access to the SGOA forums (under "usergroups" ) to be in contact with your team and get voice comm info and operations during the campaign. ;)
Good place to go, but remember to log in often anough, seems if you are off for about a month your account goes inactive (had my machine down recently, account went inactive etc). But it is the main area for talking of fleet action so I would suggest it also.
-
sees the available races, yawns and crawls back under a rock...
no isc and no romulan = no stoneyface i guess.. :(
-
Ok, OCI config is complete for testing. This is how the testing version of the OCI is being implemented. DH and I reserve the right to alter it in any fashion before the server starts.
Here are some of the goodies you will currently be able to do with the OCI:
- Admins can do about anything... ;D
- Change races. You can change from either of your two allied races whenever you are at an allied base or planet.
- Online shipyards. Bats, SB's and everything from FF to DN will be able to be purchased. (BS are restricted)
- Warpoints. You may change your location on the map from one allied starbase or planet to another allied starbase or planet.
- RM's may assign any allied ships including BB's which are currently restricted to any allied player.
- Players may transfer pp to to other allied players. Minimum transfer is 6k, max is 25k and there is a one time transfer cost of 5k charged to the player doing the transfer.
- something else, I forget. I'll post it later.
-
...
Here are some of the goodies you will currently be able to do with the OCI:
...
- something else, I forget. I'll post it later.
Paypal bribes to admins and RMs? ;D
dave
-
- something else, I forget. I'll post it later.
Use your forum email address for your account you want to use on the OCI otherwise it won't work.
Don't complain to the management if said email account isn't what you use, because, in such case, the OCI is, in fact, not broken. (Yes, it happens many a time whenever the OCI is used, so it still has to be said. :smackhead:)
-
- something else, I forget. I'll post it later.
Use your forum email address for your account you want to use on the OCI otherwise it won't work.
Don't complain to the management if said email account isn't what you use, because, in such case, the OCI is, in fact, not broken. (Yes, it happens many a time whenever the OCI is used, so it still has to be said. :smackhead:)
We should include this part in the rules section, not AS a rule, just so players don't have an excuse why they don't know...IMHO...
-
The first line in any SQL campaign info/rules thread should be "The OCI will not work unless you are logging into D2 with the SAME exact e-mail as the one you currently have as your forum e-mail. "
:)
-
Thanks for the replies, guys! getting hooked up now.
-
Can we have an up date on the server please :huh:
-
Want some feedback if DH and I rewrite this rule.
Disengagement/Destruction Rule
- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.
- If you draft or are drafted while moving out of an area you have been banned in, the mission is to be played out normally, but any outcome for purposes of disengagement/destruction is voided and the banned time from the previous mission and hex doesnt begin until the current mission concludes.
- Black Hole hexes are free hexes and the Disengagement/Destruction doesn't apply to these hexes.
- One turn is 4 minutes.
That is the current rule. What if we changed it so that the player that lost points in that hex (got a ship destroyed that was worth points) can come back into it if they fly a smaller class ship than the one they lost and are drafted by an ally? Just throwing this out.
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
-
eg . Say you were outnumbered and trying to take a hex.They have 7 you have 3. You're flying with both your allies.In PvP you kill 4 and in a mission with last 3.This rule gives you time to do your mission without the other 4 from running under you and flipping the hex ruining all that work defending the hex in the first place.As you can see the ban for dying isn't really that long.You would be suprised that quite a few fight to the bitter end and take the death ban over running away.
-
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
There hasn't been OoB for a number of campaigns now. Anyone can fly the larger stuff, so long as the total number of points is below whatever the max is.
-
Want some feedback if DH and I rewrite this rule.
Disengagement/Destruction Rule
- If you are forced to Disengage in a PvP match, then you are banned from the hex you either took the mission in or were drafted in and all the hexes adjacent to that one for 15 turns. If your ship was destroyed then you are banned from that hex and all adjacent hexes for 8 turns.
- If you draft or are drafted while moving out of an area you have been banned in, the mission is to be played out normally, but any outcome for purposes of disengagement/destruction is voided and the banned time from the previous mission and hex doesnt begin until the current mission concludes.
- Black Hole hexes are free hexes and the Disengagement/Destruction doesn't apply to these hexes.
- One turn is 4 minutes.
That is the current rule. What if we changed it so that the player that lost points in that hex (got a ship destroyed that was worth points) can come back into it if they fly a smaller class ship than the one they lost and are drafted by an ally? Just throwing this out.
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
I think the reason is is to keep people with inexpensive ships from constantly attacking a hex, at least for a time. It's only an 8 turn ban if you lose you ship in that manner which forces the Hex flipping specialist to move elsewhere.
-
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
There hasn't been OoB for a number of campaigns now. Anyone can fly the larger stuff, so long as the total number of points is below whatever the max is.
Are there VC's for bagging kills or can you get destroyed as much as you like?
-
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
There hasn't been OoB for a number of campaigns now. Anyone can fly the larger stuff, so long as the total number of points is below whatever the max is.
Are there VC's for bagging kills or can you get destroyed as much as you like?
On most SGO servers Capitol ships have been worth points, but nothing is for sure until Dizzy releases a rules set for this one. ;)
-
The list of capital ships and ships that are worth points has expanded from the standard BCH to BB .
-
Sorry if I missed it, but has a time for the start of the server been set yet?
-
Sorry if I missed it, but has a time for the start of the server been set yet?
"Soon"
-
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
There hasn't been OoB for a number of campaigns now. Anyone can fly the larger stuff, so long as the total number of points is below whatever the max is.
Are there VC's for bagging kills or can you get destroyed as much as you like?
As an example, here is the PvP kill section of the rules from SGO7:
PvP Kills: (PvP Points)
- You earn PvP (Player vs. Player) Points when you kill enemy players. Report kills here: SGO7 Kills Thread
- Total PvP points will be calculated at the end of each week to determine VC's. See below.
- PvP kills are worth the following points:
I-CCX 6 (1 move cost)
All other CCX/CAX 4 (1 move cost)
I-CLX 3 (.67 move cost)
CLX 2 (.67 move cost)
FFX/DDX 1 (.5 move cost)
BB: 16 (2 move cost)
CVA: 8 (1.5 move cost)
DN: 6 (1.25 and 1.5 move cost)
BCV/T - Carrier, Casual (2 PF's) or Full Tender (3+ PF's): 4 (1 and 1.25 move cost)
BC/H: 3 (1 and 1.25 move cost) (Includes all Lyran BC's with 2 PF's)
N/CA, N/CL, HDW's are worth 1. (.67 and 1 move cost)
Smaller class types with 8 ftrs or 3+ PF's are worth 1.
Ships with a move cost of .5 or less are exempt unless they are involved in a fleet action with a live player wing, or used in a Multi-Ship Fleet, or deep striking in which case they are worth 1.
PF Flotillas are exempt unless they are involved in a fleet action with a wing in which case they are worth 1 only if the PF-(Flt) Leader is destroyed.
FF Squadrons are worth 1 if any two of the three FF's are destroyed.
- PvP kills do not apply in Black Hole hexes.
Line Ship Addition:
- A line ship(s) is exempted from the disengagement penalty unless opposed by another line ship(s).
- A line ship is worth no points if faced on a 1v1 by a BCH or larger ship.
-
Why does a person who's ship gets destroyed have to be banned at all? I thought the initial intent of the Disengagement Rule was to discourage people from running and promote PvP by providing a penalty that might be worse than attacking. The loss of an expensive ship is bad enough or do you no longer use Cost of Build OOB?
There hasn't been OoB for a number of campaigns now. Anyone can fly the larger stuff, so long as the total number of points is below whatever the max is.
Are there VC's for bagging kills or can you get destroyed as much as you like?
As an example, here is the PvP kill section of the rules from SGO7:
PvP Kills: (PvP Points)
- You earn PvP (Player vs. Player) Points when you kill enemy players. Report kills here: SGO7 Kills Thread
- Total PvP points will be calculated at the end of each week to determine VC's. See below.
- PvP kills are worth the following points:
I-CCX 6 (1 move cost)
All other CCX/CAX 4 (1 move cost)
I-CLX 3 (.67 move cost)
CLX 2 (.67 move cost)
FFX/DDX 1 (.5 move cost)
BB: 16 (2 move cost)
CVA: 8 (1.5 move cost)
DN: 6 (1.25 and 1.5 move cost)
BCV/T - Carrier, Casual (2 PF's) or Full Tender (3+ PF's): 4 (1 and 1.25 move cost)
BC/H: 3 (1 and 1.25 move cost) (Includes all Lyran BC's with 2 PF's)
N/CA, N/CL, HDW's are worth 1. (.67 and 1 move cost)
Smaller class types with 8 ftrs or 3+ PF's are worth 1.
Ships with a move cost of .5 or less are exempt unless they are involved in a fleet action with a live player wing, or used in a Multi-Ship Fleet, or deep striking in which case they are worth 1.
PF Flotillas are exempt unless they are involved in a fleet action with a wing in which case they are worth 1 only if the PF-(Flt) Leader is destroyed.
FF Squadrons are worth 1 if any two of the three FF's are destroyed.
- PvP kills do not apply in Black Hole hexes.
Line Ship Addition:
- A line ship(s) is exempted from the disengagement penalty unless opposed by another line ship(s).
- A line ship is worth no points if faced on a 1v1 by a BCH or larger ship.
I can feel my brain start to leak out from my ears already. ;) ;D