Post by: ZTempest on March 25, 2003, 10:55:25 am
This server uses Firesoul's OP Plus shiplist (excellent job, Firesoul!) and the new missions from Nuclear Wessels, known as the famous "Evil Dave" mission scripts. To play on this server you need to download both.
Everything you need, to include the shiplist download and the Evil Dave missions can be downloaded at the SFCX website, in the downloads section for Orion Pirates.
The URL for SFCX is:
http://www.sfcx.org/
You do not have to be registered to get the downloads -- but I would encourage you to register.
Hope to see some of you there. Once again -- this is not a campaign. There are no victory conditions, etc, just a map, players, and some stress relieving fun
Additionally, this is not the "Reclamation" campaign project that we are currently working on either. We just want to see how the new shiplist works out, and how it interacts with with the mission scripts.Regards,
Tempest
Post by: Maxillius on March 25, 2003, 11:17:23 pm
Post by: FireSoul on March 25, 2003, 11:50:19 pm
3 times now I've had THIS after a BattleStation Assault on the Badlands server.
This occurs after:
- I've returned from the mission
- saw no news about the results
- accepted a new mission
- crashed to desktop
I wonder if it's 2538, and not the ED missions.
-- Luc
Post by: FireSoul on March 25, 2003, 11:51:12 pm
Maulers are only in SFC:OP, right?
Post by: jdmckinney on March 26, 2003, 06:46:23 am
Post by: FireSoul on March 26, 2003, 10:28:38 am
Post by: ZTempest on March 26, 2003, 12:02:08 pm
I am documenting things as I come across them as well. This is good feedback and it will definitely help us research and fix potential issues before Reclamation comes online.
Please keep the feedback coming. It is very valuable.
I was on Badlands last night but had to leave because of a thunderstorm rolling into my area. I was drafted once but got the countdown so I restarted my system (that usually fixes it). I will be on tonight as well, and hopefully can do some coop or PvP to test connectivity.
Regards,
Tempest
Post by: FireSoul on March 26, 2003, 12:06:10 pm
I am Lyran, playing a L-STJ mauler, attacking the Mirak base at 6,1. The pirates underneath are Camboro. I have not seen them once. Maybe if someone starts up a Lyran player and attempts to attack the same base, we could have more results?
-- Luc
Post by: RogueJedi_XC on March 26, 2003, 12:13:07 pm
What time will you be on this evening, Tempest? Maybe you can help knock off the rust SFC3 has built up on my skills...
PPDs and T-bombs...yeah, baby! I have missed my Frogs.
Post by: FireSoul on March 26, 2003, 03:14:49 pm
Hey Dave,
Would you mind backing up the Defensive starting positions in Met_NW9PlanetaryAssault? I wouldn't want to be drafted in a defensive posture by this mission.
Picture worth 1000 words:
-- Luc
----------
Additional info:
Sector 6,3 DV:60 Planet: Mirak
Attempts: 2. Once appeared in news. DV remained unchanged in both attempts.
Pirate cartel underneath: Camboro.
Post by: FireSoul on March 26, 2003, 04:56:44 pm
-- Luc
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 26, 2003, 04:57:54 pm
In single player I haven't been able to reproduce the crash you're experiencing, which is making it more difficult to tell if fixes are helping any, but I have found a couple of things to clean up in the 7BattleStation script that weren't in the other base assault scripts, so there's definitely a chance they're the source of the problem.
I'm also cleaning up some other bits and pieces as feedback comes in from DOE, so I'll likely be releasing updated versions of both the EAW and OP packs by the weekend.
dave
Post by: FireSoul on March 26, 2003, 07:15:46 pm
-- Luc
Post by: FireSoul on March 26, 2003, 10:51:52 pm
Post by: CptCastrin on March 27, 2003, 12:44:35 am
Quote:
Is Badlands set up to remove destroyed bases?
-- Luc
Yes.
Post by: CptCastrin on March 27, 2003, 12:46:47 am
Quote:
I need help confirming problems with the base assaults.
3 times now I've had THIS after a BattleStation Assault on the Badlands server.
This occurs after:
- I've returned from the mission
- saw no news about the results
- accepted a new mission
- crashed to desktop
I wonder if it's 2538, and not the ED missions.
-- Luc
Well not sure if it's related but the server suffered a really wierd crash. It's back up now but I'd be interested if anyone reports any problems with the server after running that script.
Post by: FireSoul on March 27, 2003, 01:04:53 am
Post by: FireSoul on March 29, 2003, 01:11:53 am
.. the hex stayed neutral. Neutral Coop Bug?
-- Luc
Post by: FireSoul on March 29, 2003, 01:29:05 am
I don't know WHY it's like this for this ship now. The ship seemed good when I double-checked the shiplist.
.. if you encounter MORE ships with such problems, let me know. The more ships I know that suffer from this issue, the easier it will be for me to track problems down and fix them.
-- Luc
Post by: Dizzy on March 29, 2003, 01:58:54 am
My record is 1 and 5, lol. Damn ED!
I'll log on later and do more testing.
Oh, and Castrin... Give the players 50,000 pp. That way we can test ships faster and such.
Also, lets not wait for our ship we buy in the shipyard. Have it delivered the same turn.
Faster shipyards wouold be nice too.
And I didnt see an option for the command chair coffee mug holder... WTF?
Post by: CptCastrin on March 29, 2003, 02:04:41 am
Well be glad I didn't leave in the stock 6x multiplier on costs.
Just a FYI to all: Badlands will be run through the weekend, all day and night. So get out there and have some fun while helping us test the kit.
Post by: FireSoul on March 29, 2003, 02:15:12 am
.. there's more Boarding Parties on the stock ship than its MAX boarding parties value.
Let me write a quick perl script here....
There are more BPs than MAX BPs on ship F-PRES
There are more BPs than MAX BPs on ship L-LTTG
There are more BPs than MAX BPs on ship L-LTTG+
There are more BPs than MAX BPs on ship L-LTTGF
Well.. that's it.
I think I'll start updating the shiplist for a future release. I will chat with my friends whose input was crucial to the creation of this shiplist tomorrow night.
-- Luc
Post by: jdmckinney on March 29, 2003, 02:50:47 am
Long story short, I couldn't get any meaningful data due to mission success ratio, length of missions, having too few hexes ready for boosting, etc. Plus, when I tried to team up with Tempest, we absolutely could not get into each other's missions. We'd get drafted, but then fail to connect (countdown and kicked to map). I'm hoping it's an isolated phenomenon.
I may put together a testing map with hexes ready-made for capture and boosting (i.e., more neutral/neutral hexes, more empire/neutral hexes).
Post by: IndyShark on March 29, 2003, 11:29:02 am
I hope this is a temporary problem!
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 29, 2003, 12:17:11 pm
Just by way of explanation, changing the modifiers in the scripts results in ridiculously easy missions in SP, since the SP game engine behaves differently than the server kit in that regard. I figure it's easier for 3 or 4 server admins to change the setting than for everyone who plays the missions SP (esp. since the server admins have to be much more familiar with the .gf files anyway).
Recommended MissionMatching.gf settings for servers:
Code:
//modifier based difficulty setting
[Diff]
CaptainDiff =0.7 // reduced from the 0.85 for SP
CommodoreDiff = 0.8 // reduced from the 1.0 for SP
AdmiralDiff =0.9 // reduced from the 1.15 for SP
dave
Post by: FireSoul on March 29, 2003, 12:25:13 pm
There are many ships in the shiplist with less deckcrews than fighters. That will need to be fixed.
Here's the output from a perl script I wrote to find these errors. Note that many of these ships are in the stardard shiplist, so the errors exist there too.
-- Luc
Code:
F-FFV has more fighters than deck crews. 4 :
F-FFV+ has more fighters than deck crews. 4 :
F-CVB has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
F-CVLT has more fighters than deck crews. 9 :
F-CVLT+ has more fighters than deck crews. 9 :
F-BSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
F-BSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
F-BTSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
F-BTSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
F-SBF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
F-SBFR has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
F-SBZ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
H-PICV has more fighters than deck crews. 6 : 3
H-PICV+ has more fighters than deck crews. 6 : 3
H-FQS has more fighters than deck crews. 2 :
H-BS has more fighters than deck crews. 4 : 2
H-BS+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BSR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BATS has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BATS+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BATSR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 : 2
H-BTSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 12 : 2
H-BTSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 12 : 2
H-SB has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
H-SB+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
H-SBR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
H-SBF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
H-SBFR has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
H-SBS has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
H-SBX has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
H-RNT has more fighters than deck crews. 12 : 9
H-SBZ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
I-BBV has more fighters than deck crews. 16 : 6
I-BBVZ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 : 6
I-BTSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
I-BTSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
I-SBF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
I-SBFR has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
I-SBZ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
K-D7N has more fighters than deck crews. 1 :
K-BSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
K-BSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
K-BTSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
K-BTSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
K-SBF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
K-SBFR has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
K-SBZ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
Z-CLV has more fighters than deck crews. 7 :
Z-BSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
Z-BSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 8 :
Z-BTSF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
Z-BTSFR has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
Z-SBF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
Z-SBFR has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
Z-SBZ has more fighters than deck crews. 16 :
Z-WZFF has more fighters than deck crews. 1 :
Z-WZFF+ has more fighters than deck crews. 1 :
Z-WZDF has more fighters than deck crews. 1 :
Z-WFZX has more fighters than deck crews. 1 :
O-BB1 has more fighters than deck crews. 12 :
Post by: jdmckinney on March 29, 2003, 12:31:01 pm
Post by: IndyShark on March 29, 2003, 09:56:28 pm
Just a point of interest, I have never seen a BC or DN in the shipyard. Perhaps the Federation shipyard isn't building any?
I will have to log on as another race to see if they are getting any BC's or DN's.
Post by: IndyShark on March 29, 2003, 10:08:58 pm
Post by: FireSoul on March 29, 2003, 10:48:22 pm
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 09:24:15 am
Indy, on that mission, did you check the news afterward? If there's no report of a battle there, then it was recorded as a draw somehow. Were there any pirates in the mission? I've found neutral non-cartel Orions seem to mess things up, but I don't have enough data to prove it.
Speaking of which, there are way too many non-cartel Orions showing up in scripts. They really don't add anything, and tend to complicate the results. Is there a way to cut them out of the scripts, or severely reduce their chance to spawn? The good news is so far the only cartel Orions I've seen have been in Surprise Reversed. Without any AI cartel ships on the map, they tend not to appear in the missions.
I was able to boost a cartel-neutral Romulan hex (captured from Fed) with a Fleet Action. The next mission had no DV change, but was reported in news, so I think it would have boosted, but the hex must have been at full health. That one was the Met_NW17Patrol. More info is needed.
Castrin may be swapping in a new testing map I threw together that uses more neutral space and mostly cartel-neutral space. All the DVs are equal to economy, so it will be easy to tell when a hex is full health or not.
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 09:35:27 am
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 10:11:40 am
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 10:21:18 am
I think there may be a problem with the planet assault mission. It's a lot of fun, but a lot of work for no impact on the defense!
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 10:35:19 am
I just ran a Courier Intercept as Romulan in a Fed/Orion Cartel hex. Roms and Orion Cartel are friendly. I got no news item, no DV change, but won by killing the courier and all 3 escorts. I lost one AI wingman, but one survived. By all rights I should have won the hex, and flipped it neutral (it is a starting DV of 5). It seems pretty clear to me friendly cartels will negate your wins against enemy hexes.
Hopefully Castrin will be able to put up the new test map today so we can see if blanket cartel-neutral hexes will fix this problem. The key will be if boosting works OK on cartel-neutral hexes, regardless of the political tension with the "neutrals." If it does (and I've seen good indicators so far), then we may have a workaround that will suffice for empire-only games.
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 11:26:36 am
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 01:40:03 pm
Post by: Dizzy on March 30, 2003, 01:45:14 pm
So thats 5 max and they go neutral at 0 and they increase and decrease per mission by 1.
And give us 50,000 pp so we can better test these missions with decent ships not having to worry about dying.. ED missions with my CLC take me anywhere from 8 to 25 mins. I dont have that kinda time to run a single mission to test things.
Oh, and I noticed that I tried to trade in a FF after I had been damaged in combat. Spacedock charged me 50 pp just to take it back!
Is the trade in set to 100%? Be good if it were.
Post by: Maxillius on March 30, 2003, 01:49:25 pm
I'll stick with my KE for a while though. I'm having fun even if it IS broken.
Post by: FireSoul on March 30, 2003, 02:37:35 pm
-- Luc
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 30, 2003, 02:46:05 pm
Quote:
The Federation distrusts the Korgath, but I don't think that's the problem. I ran a fleet action mission in the hex next to the planet I mentioned. Both hexes were Klingon/Korgath. I was able to reduce the defense for the fleet action and an appropriate message appeared in the news section. I think there may be a problem with the planetary assault missions.
Thanks Indy, I'll look into it.
Was it the modified Taldren script (Met_9) or the fully custom assault (i.e. with orbiting bases, defsats, FRDs etc) ?
dave
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 02:52:23 pm
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 06:26:23 pm
Friendly cartel under enemy hex prevents you from hurting it.
Enemy cartel under your hex prevents you from boosting it.
Neutral cartel under a hex seems to have not adverse effects.
Neutral coop seems not to work with same-race players.
Neutral coop does seem to work with players from allied races. (Tempest as Rom and me as Klingon flipped a neutral hex to Klingon with a Data Recovery that I initiated -- I was also first to get data and cross border.)
ED version of Data Recovery still shows old script bug where AI tries to pilot a player ship that gets to the platform in a multiplayer mission. (Dave, is this a bug that's even squashable?) Solo mission doesn't have this bug.
So far, it looks like the ED missions tend to work with a blanket neutral cartel map (I'd put in minor cartel space out of the way just so server doesn't get confused by a race having no territory). Coop may be possible with allies, but not players of the same race.
Also, the current Badlands settings have ISC as enemy to Romulans and Gorn, yet Rom missions against AI hex near Gorn space were drafting ISC as allies and Gorn as enemies (Gorn are more of an enemy than ISC). Dave, is there any way for the scripts to properly handle multiple teams? They seem fine when dealing with non-cartel Orions, yet when an empire group tries a 3-way, the game gets confused. I don't know if this is a kit problem or a script problem.
More testing to come after dinner.
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 06:54:00 pm
Does anyone have an idea when it will be back up?
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 30, 2003, 06:59:08 pm
The fact that neutral coop works with allied races but not your own race is very interesting - I'll do some searching along those lines and see what I can come up with.
Three-way fights, on the other hand, are very difficult to handle correctly -- to the point where I'm not inclined to fight with it. You can only specify tensions relative to the drafter, and if told to draft enemies of the main player, it doesn't care what other relationships should be present, only that they're enemies of the drafter.
You can get around this by writing specific missions for specific alliances - e.g. write the mission scripts specifically for a F/G v L/K/R v M/H/I (or whatever) server, but those scripts would give completely bogus results for any other alliance. (And I'm not ambitious enough to sculpt different mission packs for all the different common alliances
) EDIT: BTW the reason it usually works ok for non-cartel Orions is because those are (usually) scripted in as NPCs which don't report results of their own when the mission ends.
If anyone's got some bright ideas on this one I'd love to hear it, but for now I think three way (or four way) servers will have to live with some oddness when you draft enemies who also happen to be enemies of each other.
dave
Post by: Dizzy on March 30, 2003, 07:02:38 pm
Quote:
Some results:
Friendly cartel under enemy hex prevents you from hurting it.
Enemy cartel under your hex prevents you from boosting it.
Neutral cartel under a hex seems to have not adverse effects.
I get mostly similar results.
Its obvious that OP D2 is broken concerning the DV relationships with cartel pirate layers.
So in lieu of this, I request a new map with these modifications:
Standard F&E map, same size as before, with one Pirate cartel hex under each races HW to leave the rest of cartel space neutral.
All Hex values are 5 and go neutral at 0 and are maxed at 5, including the HW hex. Place all economy in the HW hex (will this work) and give instructions to not take economy hexes. All hex value changes are by increments of one.
And give us all 50,000 pp, set trade in to 100%, lower cost of supplies.
I would also like to suggest we seperate mission packs into A and B and take one set off the server so we can focus on the smaller mission packs better, then once all testing is done, try the other pack. Right now, its too difficult getting the same missions in order to keep track of testing properly.
Just some thoughts...
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 07:23:16 pm
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 07:28:40 pm
Post by: jdmckinney on March 30, 2003, 08:19:33 pm
Post by: FireSoul on March 30, 2003, 08:42:05 pm
Post by: IndyShark on March 30, 2003, 08:42:29 pm
While the defense does not seem to work too well, the shiplist and missions are a blast! I love the courier mission! I just wish there were some easy way to identify the courier. I see the name and the starting location, but it is a GREAT mission. I love it.
As far as the shiplist is concerned, can we tweak the rarity factors? I run into K-TGA, K-TGAK and D-5 carriers all the time! I have never seen a D7 and only one D6 (D6M). I would think the carriers and tuggs would be rare and the D7 and D6 much more common.
Don't get me wrong, I love this server. I'd just like to make a few adjustments to make it more realistic.
Post by: FireSoul on March 30, 2003, 09:26:29 pm
.. can it be done via the server?
-- Luc
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 30, 2003, 09:44:05 pm
Quote:
I was, strangely enough, having trouble LOSING missions just now. A Base Defense on a Romulan/cartel neutral hex didn't drop DV even after I died and self-destructed the base against the AI attackers. Another mission didn't drop DV on a self-destruct loss, either, but I don't remember which it was (it wasn't a standard patrol -- maybe recharge?). On the third try, in a Met_NW17Patrol, I managed to lose by hitting a rock after taking out some of my allies the same way. DV did drop that time. Then a Met_NW10Patrol loss by the same method also dropped DV.
Actually, the unchanged DV on losing a base mission may have been deliberate. (Outdated, but deliberate
) I seem to recall, wayyyyyy back when the ED base missions were first created, that folks were frequently taking (and losing) missions in the hexes they first spawned in, hence decimating their own base hexes early in a campaign. This is a real fuzzy-hazy-vague memory, but I think I may have actually set it to not report a DV loss for players losing against the AI in base defense missions - it's entirely possible I never updated that, but since the base defense is so much easier now people rarely lose so it hasn't been reported. Anywho, I'll definitely check it out tomorrow.As for the other mission, if it was one of the OP-only ones (Met numbers 20-31) then it's entirely possible there are DV issues - those scripts haven't had anywhere near the level of testing the Met 1-19 have.
Keep the info coming!
dave
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 30, 2003, 09:50:09 pm
Quote:
I found a few more problems. Windy an d I tried a base assault and a fleet assault in a base hex. We won both in a Klingon/Korgath hex with no impact on defence. We ran several courier misions with the same result in a hex with no base.
It makes sense that the same problem would exist in both - the courier mission is pretty much the base mission with the courier replacing the base. I'll see if I can figure out what's going on.
Quote:
While the defense does not seem to work too well, the shiplist and missions are a blast! I love the courier mission! I just wish there were some easy way to identify the courier. I see the name and the starting location, but it is a GREAT mission. I love it.
Glad to hear it - in the next pack there should be a bit more variety in the number of escort ships the courier gets. I'm hoping the "big game" mission goes over well too - you and a couple of other ships band together to go after a substantially larger enemy ship.
dave
Post by: FireSoul on March 30, 2003, 10:06:15 pm
-- Luc
Post by: Dizzy on March 30, 2003, 10:37:23 pm
Very difficult to get missions in your own hex.
Neutral hex mission variety is only 3x, courier intercept, convoy raid, holding action.
Friendlly hex missions I get patrols and some others missions that never appear on neutral hexes.
Noticed that Impedance varies on the map sometimes 1 and then .75. Wonder why?
Shipyard variety has a lot of Tugs and FF's. Finding a good ship is difficult. Also noticed that firesouls shiplist apparently doesnt phase out older ships further clogging the shipyards.
Several game bugs maybe... I had 6 marines on a klingon ship I was about to capture and my Hydran AI ally shot at it and killed it. IIRC, when you have marines on board a ship, the AI switched to disable weapons mode.
I think that I may have seen a system repair not completed as the mission ended.
There is also no coffee mug holder option for the command chair... WTF?
Saw Katcroup on the server and he didnt even say hi...
Post by: Maxillius on March 30, 2003, 11:39:57 pm
Quote:
How is your KE borked? Is it something in the shiplist?
-- Luc
Sorry, Fire, I was unclear. The 'it' I was referring to is the DV problem. My KE works fine
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 06:33:27 am
About rarity of ships, that should be due to .gf settings. My guess is for normal Badlands play, Castrin doesn't want BCHes and DNs to appear that often, since the prices are set very low.
Dizzy, how much more testing do you think you need before you decide whether OP can handle SG3? If we need to get up a better testing environment, we'll have to do it quickly. Also, I'm generally not free for testing as much during the week. We could use more players. Are any SG3 players/RMs/etc. interested in helping out?
Post by: CptCastrin on March 31, 2003, 10:22:46 am
Starting PP up to 5000.
DN+ sized ships more frequent and cheaper.
Ship delivery will be instant.
New test map (thanks to Nomad).
Missions in friendly space turned on (was off).
There have been a few questions as to the map and why is it the way it is. Actually this is the Taldren MiddleMap(.mvm) with some modifications to some neutral areas. Beyond that it's stock. I used this map for a few reasons but mainly because for a "fun" non-campaign server there really wasn't a reason to remake the wheel so to say (i.e. I was lazy
). The server will be back up around 8pm.
Thanks to all that have come out and tested things or just came out to have fun.
Post by: CptCastrin on March 31, 2003, 10:29:51 am
Quote:
So in lieu of this, I request a new map with these modifications:
Standard F&E map, same size as before, with one Pirate cartel hex under each races HW to leave the rest of cartel space neutral.
All Hex values are 5 and go neutral at 0 and are maxed at 5, including the HW hex. Place all economy in the HW hex (will this work) and give instructions to not take economy hexes. All hex value changes are by increments of one.
All good suggestions Diz.
The max econ for a hex is 255 (generally the max value of anything in a hex actually). Better would be all econ be concentraited on planets but spread out. In either case I see what your getting at.
I've also sent a message off to Nomad about the pirate cartels and removing them from the majority of the map.
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 31, 2003, 10:40:45 am
Quote:
Server will be reset tonight with the following changes:
Starting PP up to 5000.
DN+ sized ships more frequent and cheaper.
Ship delivery will be instant.
New test map (thanks to Nomad).
Missions in friendly space turned on (was off).
There have been a few questions as to the map and why is it the way it is. Actually this is the Taldren MiddleMap(.mvm) with some modifications to some neutral areas. Beyond that it's stock. I used this map for a few reasons but mainly because for a "fun" non-campaign server there really wasn't a reason to remake the wheel so to say (i.e. I was lazy
The server will be back up around 8pm.
Thanks to all that have come out and tested things or just came out to have fun.
Oooooo ... not to cut things close or anything, but I'll try to have the updated mission pack ready by about 3:30 (PST)
Just doing last minute testing and tweaking now ...
dave
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 10:49:26 am
-- Luc
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 10:58:07 am
1. Very few (1-5) hexes of territory per cartel. This can be either under an empire toward the map edges to stay out of the way of blanket neutral hex testing, or in empire neutral space toward the map edges or combined under empire and neutral to give us the option of testing cartel interaction.
2. DV ranges to vary with a maximum of what? Originally I put 100 DV on HWs, 30 on core worlds and BATS, 20 on BSes, 10 on 6 hexes around HWs and some of the empire neutral hexes, and 5 for the balance of empire and neutral "blank" hexes. With a per-mission DV effect of 1 to better measure results, high DVs would take too long for just a few players to flip. Maybe we don't need to worry about flipping, though, since the real question is boosting. If we lose in empire hexes under PvP to weaken them, that will allow us to concentrate on boosting them as defenders. For neutral hexes, I'm thinking lower DV is better so we can test neutral coop and flipping at the same time.
3. Economy should be high on HW, but spread out econ to all hexes to make sure we have plenty for ship production. DVs and econs should match so it is easy to tell a full-health hex from a weakened/restored one.
I think I recall the DV flip threshold is hardcoded, and not changeable via .gf settings. If memory serves, the flip was at roughly .2 of starting DV, though I am not certain. If this is true, DV restore percentage must be at least .2 to avoid having a hex that flips even if you win a boosting mission when the boosted value would still be under .2 of total. I recommend a .25 restore just to be safe. If the kits were changed at some point to allow flips to happen at 0 instead of .2, then we don't need to worry about this. I've never seen mention of this having been changed, though I would frankly prefer to have the ability to determine flip percentage.
So, what do we need?
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 01:57:45 pm
-- Luc
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 02:11:10 pm
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 02:18:58 pm
http://klingon.stasis.ca/OP_plusrefit/op_plusrefit_shiplist-20030331.zip for the OP+ version 1.21
Post by: Dizzy on March 31, 2003, 02:45:11 pm
Post by: Dizzy on March 31, 2003, 02:50:12 pm
I.E. All hexes have a maximum DV of 50, the hex goes neutral on zero, and the missions change the hex DV by increments of one. All this while having the map use different start DV's such as a HW starting with 40, and a coreworld with 30 and neutral or empire space at 10. All these hexes would still max at 50, flip at zero, etc...
There was a trick to get it to do so, cuz before on RT's the DV's never behaved properly. They all had different Maximum values, flipped at different DV levels and just wernt uniform...
Lemee see if I have that info here somewhere... Boy will you owe me if I find it
Post by: Dizzy on March 31, 2003, 03:00:28 pm
Ok, to start with, if you want hexes to start with DV's in the range of 10-40 but be raisable to 50 you need to edit the DB to adjust the max DV levels for each hex. When you create a hex with a start DV of 40, it is stored as:
28 00 00 00 28 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 F0 3F , 28 is hexidecimal for 40
this must be edited to read:
32 00 00 00 28 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 F0 3F , 32 is hexidecimal for 50
now its easy to make the changes, you just need to keep track of what hexes you want to have what DV's, and then do a find/replace with a hex editor to make a big sweeping change.
it is possible to have a different max DV level for each hex, but would advise against it. When a hex is taken by a new race the server checkes the HHRR (HexHealthResetRatio) which is expressed as a percentage and assigns the hex a DV based on that % of the hexes max DV. so if a majority of your hexes have a max DV of 50 to get the DV the go up and down by 1 point, and flip to a value of 1 you use a HHRR of 0.02. when you start using different max DV's sometimes you get strange results, hexes jumping up to DV's higher than 1 when flipped, hexes which refuse to STAY flipped (going back to a neutral state when someone tries to raise the DV etc etc etc) It can get ugly. Stick with a max DV of 50 for all hexes and you will not have a problem.
it sounds harder than it actually is, since we use a find and replace function we can change the max DV for every hex with a value of 40 at once. It just requires that the person who creates the map keeps track of all the DV's he has used
50DV is probably the easiest to coordinate the HHRR and the amount a DV drops or rises after a mission, you could use a lower number if you wanted, you would just need to figure out the percentages that will work for it.
Now I dont know how different the OP server kit is, but I'll wager its very close. GL...
you have the EAW crew and server admins to thank for this info. They worked hard to get this straightened out. Shame on Taldren for not including the artifex tools or help guide. Bad Taldren!
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 03:16:38 pm
Quote:
wtg firesoul... Question... Did you phase out all older ships when their newer refits appear? This would help TREMENDOUSLY!
That still needs to be done.
Problem is, I have little or no information as to when older ships should stop appearing from SFB material, so I kept using the Taldren method of putting in '999' for YLA..
Any suggestions? Often, there are comments in SFB about refits: "Not all ships of this class recieved this refit."..
-- Luc
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 03:20:30 pm
http://208.57.228.4/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=54232
-- Luc
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 04:27:16 pm
Luc, I always like to phase out ships the year before a sweeping refit (like Y175 refits) since mostly SFB treated these as available immediately. Any players with unrefitted ships would represent the portions of the fleet who hadn't made it back for refits. The only negative is that the AI can't use unrefit ships, which deprives them of some variety. So, I would generally pull a lot of drone race ships by year 11 to make it a clean sweep for the Y175 refits. In other more floating refits, a couple years overlap seems plenty to allow for all ships in the field to get back to dock. In some cases, the SFB material does a decent job of saying "all ships received this refit by Y???" but that is the exception rather than the rule. Does anyone else miss the SFC1 refit option?
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 31, 2003, 04:28:01 pm
http://www.sfcx.org/downloads/mirrors/NuclearWessels/OPMissions.zip
Lots of small changes, plus one new mission (Met_NW13BigGame.scr)
dave
Post by: Dizzy on March 31, 2003, 04:37:33 pm
I noticed the ones I get 90% of the time in enemy space are Holding actions, Convoy Raids, and Surprised reversed... I think I saw another mission a cpl times...
But thats about it. Then when I go back into friendlky space, there is a lot of variety...
I'd like to see some fleet actions and patrols show up in neutral and enemy hexes.
Have you considered customizing the missions with a map maker? I.E., team up with JD so you guys can set a preference for missions and where they are to appear... For instance, JD in making the map, could use shipping lane hexes in jkey strategic areas to get missions that trigger on those hexes other than the standard convoy raid.
It just seems that having a particular type of terrain as a trigger would be the only way to see more than a cpl mission types pop up in the commone empty neutral or enemy hexes. Those hexes which are the most common on the map should get the most variety, yet they do not.
Obviously you see the problem with repetitious missions.
Post by: Corbomite on March 31, 2003, 04:40:37 pm
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 31, 2003, 04:59:28 pm
Quote:
Dave, why do some missions only appear in neutral space and others in friendly... such as the patrol mission. I would think you would get more variety of mission choices in enemy or neutral space. Are there too many missions?
I noticed the ones I get 90% of the time in enemy space are Holding actions, Convoy Raids, and Surprised reversed... I think I saw another mission a cpl times...
But thats about it. Then when I go back into friendlky space, there is a lot of variety...
I'd like to see some fleet actions and patrols show up in neutral and enemy hexes.
Have you considered customizing the missions with a map maker? I.E., team up with JD so you guys can set a preference for missions and where they are to appear... For instance, JD in making the map, could use shipping lane hexes in jkey strategic areas to get missions that trigger on those hexes other than the standard convoy raid.
It just seems that having a particular type of terrain as a trigger would be the only way to see more than a cpl mission types pop up in the commone empty neutral or enemy hexes. Those hexes which are the most common on the map should get the most variety, yet they do not.
Obviously you see the problem with repetitious missions.
You should see a better mix in enemy space with the new pack - there were a couple of hiccups in the terrain settings with the last pack. As it currently stands, 23 of the missions can appear in enemy space, 15 in allies' space, and the other 17 or so in player space. All 38 ally/enemy missions can theoretically pop up in neutral space. (Rough counts there, I'm probably off by a couple in there someplace.)
One catch though, I've moved the 8 or so missions which are susceptible to the neutral coop bug out of neutral space - which also means out of enemy space unfortunately. It was a choice between that and having people unable to fly coop in neutral territory.
It is possible to customize specific missions to appear in specific terrain on a given server, but I REALLY don't want to have to commit to totally rewriting the mission pack for every single server - I just can't guarantee I'll have that kind of time available. I don't mind doing up a few missions or revisions here or there, but even doing a clean recompile of the pack takes close to 6 hours, and that doesn't include any of the time spent actually changing anything or testing the changes. Too much customization of mission location makes it very difficult to share missions between servers (never mind people's own single player campaigns) with very different terrain mixes.
Actually, on that note, the mission diversity is much better if given a map with diverse terrain -- i.e. if the map actually uses dust clouds and shipping lanes, and all 5 or 6 types of asteroid hexes, all 5 or 6 types of black hole hexes, etc etc. The default maps actually have very little variety in them.
dave
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 05:26:12 pm
Does this eliminate some patrols from enemy and neutral space? Do you have a list handy?
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 05:39:45 pm
ie: 3 years?
For example:
If a F-CA+ becomes a F-CAR in Y175, the F-CA+ should still be available until Y178..
What do you think? Something like this will take some time.
-- Luc
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 05:41:59 pm
Quote:
Cool. Thanks Dave. It's raining mods today. Looks like FireSoul will have to redo his .mct's though.
Yeah.. yeah...
-- Luc
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 05:43:27 pm
I don't envy you the task of trying to go through that entire list to edit the YLA. More power to you.
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 05:47:14 pm
Quote:
I only suggested my guideline when I work on a list. I try to err on the side of less overlap, but I could see a number of good reasons to overlap refit versions to provide more variety.
I don't envy you the task of trying to go through that entire list to edit the YLA. More power to you.
I tried 1 year.. and it didn't seem enough. I suggest 3. I want people's opinions.
-- Luc
Post by: jdmckinney on March 31, 2003, 05:49:06 pm
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 05:49:42 pm
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 05:59:27 pm
Quote:Quote:
Cool. Thanks Dave. It's raining mods today. Looks like FireSoul will have to redo his .mct's though.
Yeah.. yeah...
Done. You'd have to start a new game to be able to play the new mission.
I'll echo the announcement when NW posts to the general forum.
-- Luc
Post by: Corbomite on March 31, 2003, 06:42:55 pm
Quote:
For refits, what I suggest is a little bot of overlap, and apply it everywhere:
ie: 3 years?
For example:
If a F-CA+ becomes a F-CAR in Y175, the F-CA+ should still be available until Y178..
What do you think? Something like this will take some time.
-- Luc
Some ships already have specific cut off dates. The Fed - CA/CC lines are a good example. A lot of your tugs seem to have cut off dates before 3262, which I guess is as far as it goes. I'd say 3-5 years of overlap is a good place to start though. Some ships should never stop being produced, but that would have to be on a case by case basis. Dave's list sure makes it easy to look at though.
Post by: Corbomite on March 31, 2003, 06:45:53 pm
Quote:
Done. You'd have to start a new game to be able to play the new mission.
I'll echo the announcement when NW posts to the general forum.
-- Luc
Does that mean it's up on your site now or you are waiting until Dave does his official announcement?
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 06:59:15 pm
Post by: NuclearWessels on March 31, 2003, 07:04:35 pm
dave
Post by: CptCastrin on March 31, 2003, 08:40:43 pm
Quote:
Ok, to start with, if you want hexes to start with DV's in the range of 10-40 but be raisable to 50 you need to edit the DB to adjust the max DV levels for each hex. When you create a hex with a start DV of 40, it is stored as:
28 00 00 00 28 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 F0 3F , 28 is hexidecimal for 40
this must be edited to read:
32 00 00 00 28 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 F0 3F , 32 is hexidecimal for 50
now its easy to make the changes, you just need to keep track of what hexes you want to have what DV's, and then do a find/replace with a hex editor to make a big sweeping change.
This will have to wait for now. Remote editing a hex file is a pain in the butt and we need info fast so we'll just have to go with the defaults.
Big thanks though to those that got this info for the rest of us to use.
They (whom ever) should put it in a HOWTO or some such format for general use in editing EaW/OP hex databases.
Post by: FireSoul on March 31, 2003, 09:07:32 pm