Dynaverse.net
Taldrenites => General Starfleet Command Forum => Topic started by: NannerSlug on July 30, 2004, 02:36:58 pm
-
This needs to be addressed. I know that there are plans within D.Net to address this issue - but this is really a community wide discussion that needs to happen. For the longest time those who play sfc3 are considered second tier citizens in this community.
this is not just my feelings, but the feelings of many. If it ain't sfb, its unwelcome.
It is my hope that with taldren gone that we can grow up a little and band together if *any* sort of community is to survive. The question is - do people want this? I sincerly hope so.
Whether it is lack of acceptence of people with differing opinions - or acknolwedgement of the work done with sfc3 mods - i believe that we need to bring everyone together.
-
I know quite a few of us that Play both games, and I for one, Have no Problem Playing both. As for One game to be More community based then another, I don't see It.
I think SFC3 has seen a few Bad sports in the player base, But think about It, so did EAW and OP when It came out. Personaly, I just like the fun that both games offer. are they Different in style? Sure, Does that mean we should be angry at each other because someone likes a differant style of Play? Heck no.
Without arguing the points on either game, I do See us as a Community here, Hell, a Family. The whole arguement of This forum supprting one game over the other is Hyperbola at best, and an outright Lie at worst.
Both platforms are alot of fun, we have people that support both, and I like To play both.
Of course, that's just my opinion, which doesn't amount to a hill of beans, But For theose who want to have two different camps Do It on your own boards. Nanner is 100% correct about the differance of opinions, But I for one feel very welcome in both camps. I think we should do what we can to welcome Legitimate Players of both camps into our lil' Home here.
If we have somehow Marginalized either of the camps, then we need to look and see what we did wrong.
Stephen
-
This needs to be addressed. I know that there are plans within D.Net to address this issue - but this is really a community wide discussion that needs to happen. For the longest time those who play sfc3 are considered second tier citizens in this community.
No, you are citizens of a seperate community. We are not one community, these are 2 seperate games with a few over-lapping players.
this is not just my feelings, but the feelings of many. If it ain't sfb, its unwelcome.
SFC3 is a different game. Most OPers don't play it. We really don't care. it is that simple, it is like asking us to give a fluck about a halflife mod that we do not play.
It is my hope that with taldren gone that we can grow up a little and band together if *any* sort of community is to survive. The question is - do people want this? I sincerly hope so.
We will survive better as sperate communities. This friction is based on an illusion that we are one.
OPers don't care about SFC3. It doesn't matter one way or the other to us. SFC3ers seem to be upset about this. WTF do you want us to do? Play a game that bores us? 90% of us own SFC3 and don't like it.
OPers honestly do not care if SFC3ers care about us or not. We have accepted it is a different game and beyond that, we do not care.
Whether it is lack of acceptence of people with differing opinions - or acknolwedgement of the work done with sfc3 mods - i believe that we need to bring everyone together.
No, we need to get our heads of of the sand. OPers for the most part do not care about SFC3 and never will. Why does that bother you? It is simply a different game, no better, no worse..
-
<Forces Words Out of Mouth> Have <the pain> to agree with <word almost there> Die HArd!!!
Whew that was tough.
-
The thing is Gentlemen, is that This sight has taken up the Banner that Taldren left, and in doing so Supports both Camps. Personaly, I'd like to see everyone get along, and If you don't like one game don't play It. If you like both games play them both.
heck I'm going back to hot topics where things are safe politicly. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Stephen
-
The thing is Gentlemen, is that This sight has taken up the Banner that Taldren left, and in doing so Supports both Camps. Personaly, I'd like to see everyone get along, and If you don't like one game don't play It. If you like both games play them both.
heck I'm going back to hot topics where things are safe politicly. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Stephen
There is nothing worng with supporting both camps, just stop trying to shove 2 square-pegs into a round-hole.
-
This needs to be addressed. I know that there are plans within D.Net to address this issue - but this is really a community wide discussion that needs to happen. For the longest time those who play sfc3 are considered second tier citizens in this community.
this is not just my feelings, but the feelings of many. If it ain't sfb, its unwelcome.
It is my hope that with taldren gone that we can grow up a little and band together if *any* sort of community is to survive. The question is - do people want this? I sincerly hope so.
Whether it is lack of acceptence of people with differing opinions - or acknolwedgement of the work done with sfc3 mods - i believe that we need to bring everyone together.
Nanner, I agree with you on this issue ... But it seems impossible to do. There are two sides of this community and the rift is widening.
The Dyna Admins group fell apart ... We can't police ourselves, apparently.
I like both, but concentrate efforts on SFC3, as do you.
I gotta side, however, with Hangnail on this issue. I think it would be better just to segregate the D-3 to the "back of the bus." Maybe we should take off the Rose-colored glasses and face the reality.
I don't see the so-called community leaders doing it -- I see them making the rift wider with rhetoric.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
-
This needs to be addressed. I know that there are plans within D.Net to address this issue - but this is really a community wide discussion that needs to happen. For the longest time those who play sfc3 are considered second tier citizens in this community.
this is not just my feelings, but the feelings of many. If it ain't sfb, its unwelcome.
It is my hope that with taldren gone that we can grow up a little and band together if *any* sort of community is to survive. The question is - do people want this? I sincerely hope so.
Whether it is lack of acceptance of people with differing opinions - or acknowledgement of the work done with sfc3 mods - i believe that we need to bring everyone together.
What do you mean by "grow up". SFC3 fans tend to be much younger i.e. teens and early 20's, while SFC OP and EAW fans are older and more mature.....maybe late 20's to early 40's.
As far as bringing the SFC3 fans and earlier game fans together...that is probably impractical. Perhaps an "all eras" game could do that.....IF it gave us the gameplay of SFC OP and earlier but expanded that to all eras. The gameplay of SFC3 is boring by comparison.
The problem is that SFC3 and the previous games have very little in common. When Activision made SFC3 it's like they made a totally different game. They should have called it something other than SFC. It's just not the same game. It's no wonder there are two separate communities. I don't see how you can merge these two communities....they're like Apples and Oranges compared to each other.
I don't think there is a survival problem. This community has lasted much longer than almost every other game community I've seen. Most of the one's who have left are SFC3 folks that really don't feel the same loyalty to the game that the SFB fans have to the earlier games.
-
The average age of Unity gamers -- per a poll up -- is 30+.
I believe your statement to be a generalization not based on fact.
<S>
AdmwaterTiger
-
The average age of Unity gamers -- per a poll up -- is 30+.
I believe your statement to be a generalization not based on fact.
<S>
AdmwaterTiger
Earlier polls when SFC3 came out showed younger results. Perhaps the youngest have moved on to other games now leaving mostly older players. Young folks don't stick with the same game for long. Short attention spans.
I may not have hard data....who does? But I'm willing to bet the ones playing OP right now are mostly SFB fans who tend to be older than those playing SFC3.
Anyway, back on topic.
-
I basically agree with DieHard also, BUT: there is no reason we all can't get along - sharing models, ideas, server tips, or even recipies on this forum. We've beaten the dead horse of the differences in the game to a bloody pulp of horseburger, no need to go there anymore. I think we should accept our differences and be civil to each other here and share what we can to maximise the fun for all. (kind of like real-life eh? - though a friend of mine argues that this is part of our real lives and I tend to agree, we should simply apply the golden rule here just as we do our best to do so in the rest of our non-SFC lives...)
-
I think we need a Group HUG with a scatterpack in the middle. rofl
-
Funny you should say "scatterpack"... ;)
-
I gotta side, however, with Hangnail on this issue. I think it would be better just to segregate the D-3 to the "back of the bus." Maybe we should take off the Rose-colored glasses and face the reality.
I don't see the so-called community leaders doing it -- I see them making the rift wider with rhetoric.
The victim role is a tricky one to play. It does better when one is not a community leader himself, allied with a player in the field, STGD, and not involved in what could be termed as a symptom of the problem, misdirection and looking for sympathy.
The point of fact is since you are a leader in the community you have to help make things work together. It does not good to voice innuendo on your own forum, or threats of legal action, flames elsewhere, and to come and push even here. If we're to pull together we have to, well, pull together, not take pot shots at what is considered an appropriate time. For example, a number on a fleet is nothing, just a label. Make the fleet lead by example, and make that example positive and supportive, a nurturing type behavior. That will help keep our current player base and motivate them to work together. There should never be an adversarial atmosphere, and pretense stands revealed because the community is comprised of intelligent perceptive people.
Now that goes for all people and fleets. The DAC fell apart due to politics, threats, laid out to Day in SSCF, and a rapid withdrawal by a few fleets in conjunction with an illegal posting of a post taken totally out of context, one which was made to show how things can be blown out of proportion if we're not careful. How ironic.
These things need to stop. Hell, I've been saying this for months now.
I'd appreciate an acknowledgement of this need by everyone concerned. Once this obstacle has been cleared we can concentrate on making great mods and making sure they all are scheduled in a way to maintain primary interest and activity.
Tit for tat has to stop, NOW!
-
I agree with Die Hard.
Flirted with SFC3, not my thing. Don't care what SFC3 players do. (although the flame wars are entertaining)
Don't see what your point is Nanner. Where are the SFC3'ers getting the short end?
-
Just wanted to say to Nannerslug that I fully agree with part of a statement in that "other thread" that SFC:TNG is the best cannon TNG game out there. It does have a lot of good features for a trek star ship game. I have dug it out and reinstalled it each time a patch has come out and played it for a while just to be sure of how the game plays. As far as games go it was/is good. I did not get ripped off in any way with it's purchase.
BUT there is one thing that drives me away each time, after my initial installation enthusiasm leaves me, and that is the angular velocity thing. Take it out (no - don't even put in SFC's EW instead), just take it out and get rid of the dog fighting aspect of the game and you will get rid of that undelying repulsive force that the game has for me. Personally that one thing (AV) ruins it for me, and all the other good TNG game stuff can't overcome the build up of negative energy about that silly angular velocity and dog fighting.
On the other side I have problems with the D2 and the way it works, or more correctly doesn't work, but those D2 mechanics are not as repulsive to me, such that I can put up with it for the SFC2 style of game combat. Essentially the mechanics of OP are not the best but they don't repel me in the same way as AV does.
Anyway TNG (patched) is a better than okay game but it has one thing which eventually drives me away from it each time I play, and that is a personal preference.
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
its okay for people to like 2 or 3 for what they do - but both games (and fans of each games) should be respected and treated on the same level. instead of making sfc3 fans unwelcome - i hope that everyone can feel welcome.
no one should try to convert anyone to anything - just start treating everyone on the same level. its okay to have different opinions. :)
finally, cleaven, you should really try some mods. whether its fluf's mod, battlezone, or my generations at war mod - its a completely different game.. :)
for
-
Kortez,
As you know I have pledged to try to make things work. I (hate using that personal pronoun all the time) asked for this months ago on Taldren.
I see the D-3 community segregating since the exit of KoraH last November. We have forums up everywhere and moderators for both major forums for SFC3 have been accused of playing favorites. I realize you do your best here, Kortez, but it still comes through, admittedly.
KoraH and ThePelican were the glue that held the D-3 together. Nanner hadn't even come to the scene then with GAW and it was still in the making ... This rift began with the V525 testers version and hasn't stopped since.
Much of the "tit-for-tat" you speak of is one person or another defending themselves against the attacks from other members of the so-called "community." We have all participated in it at one time or another.
I think Emperian put it well the other day (paraphrase) ... We are eating ourselves alive.
I have said for many moons that the "Alpha Male Syndrom" is at work here ...
Maybe that's why we loved Ann so much. She kept us balanced and seeing things in a proper perspective. She always made it feel like home.
Now we have 6 (maybe 7 with Border Wars) solid mods on the street for SFC3 and the D-3 community huddles in their own corners and plays their OWN mod.
Unity was never meant to be that way, and neither was any other mod. I took a step forward as lead admin for Unity and lifted server and forum bans (except for a handful) only to be told that "WT has done this before" and will never change.
It's the classic Catch 22; damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Nanner went through a similar confrontation on his GAW server with ironically the same group of pilots. When they came to our forums to spew trash, we locked the threads and banned the participants.
Kane sits here and babbles about disrespect even last night in the SFC Community TS ... when I think what some expected was an outburst by me, found a calm voice trying to talk some sense. I was even threatened with a ban from TS and was told I -- and other 11th admirals -- were not welcome by 9th members who had SA status. Those in the meeting know I disrespected no one, but only sought to help solve this problem of the dual fleets by urging the 11thFleet Rangers to respect the longstanding -11thFleet- Spartan Vanguard.
It could easily be solved by simply changing their name to the 11th Rangers and skip the 11thFleet portion of the name.
Have you seen Vic's statement on STGD today? He was there: http://www.stcd.sgnonline.com/
Our executive admiral was in a bad mood and rightly so, so perhaps he was a little short tempered. He had just come home from a house fire where a little girl was burned critically. She ran into his arms, seered through the lungs and coughing. She might not be alive today. THAT is real life. It makes d.net and STGD, 9th, 11th and all this rather trivial.
We all huddle with our allies and friends and draw conclusions based on hearsay and innuendo.
I met with IslandBound last night and we worked out a rotation that seemed to make sense ... At least the people who don't hate eachothers guts can rotate 4 servers and fill them up a little.
Did you know I was banned from BattleZone but had never participated in the campaign? Guess why? One word: Kane.
Just some random thoughts ... more later.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
-
finally, cleaven, you should really try some mods. whether its fluf's mod, battlezone, or my generations at war mod - its a completely different game.. :)
for
But they all use angular velocity. If you could mod out AV I'd play it for more than a week or so at a time.
-
whether its fluf's mod, battlezone, or my generations at war mod - its a completely different game..
============
And there you have it, Nanner. You just created a bad impression yourself. :-\
When I mention mods as a whole for the D-3, I try to mention them all in public posts that refer to the D-3 as a community.
You missed a few not supported by BattleClinic. ;) ::)
IslandWars, Unity, Near Distant Future and Border Wars -- not to mention Alternate Universe A/B.
*sigh*
Does that answer your original questions about rifts Nanner? It's not just the split in the OP/SFC3 crowd, but the split in the SFC3 player base that you have helped widen.
<S>
AdmwaterTiger-11thFleet
-
No, WaterTiger, it is you who are trying to find anything to create differences and problems. That argument of yours is the trouble. I see you rejected my attempt to see a change in tune.
Looking for trouble ... not good. I have been asked, ASKED, mind you, if you are here to fight with us.
-
This needs to be addressed. I know that there are plans within D.Net to address this issue - but this is really a community wide discussion that needs to happen. For the longest time those who play sfc3 are considered second tier citizens in this community.
this is not just my feelings, but the feelings of many. If it ain't sfb, its unwelcome.
It is my hope that with taldren gone that we can grow up a little and band together if *any* sort of community is to survive. The question is - do people want this? I sincerely hope so.
Whether it is lack of acceptance of people with differing opinions - or acknowledgement of the work done with sfc3 mods - i believe that we need to bring everyone together.
What do you mean by "grow up". SFC3 fans tend to be much younger i.e. teens and early 20's, while SFC OP and EAW fans are older and more mature.....maybe late 20's to early 40's.
As far as bringing the SFC3 fans and earlier game fans together...that is probably impractical. Perhaps an "all eras" game could do that.....IF it gave us the gameplay of SFC OP and earlier but expanded that to all eras. The gameplay of SFC3 is boring by comparison.
The problem is that SFC3 and the previous games have very little in common. When Activision made SFC3 it's like they made a totally different game. They should have called it something other than SFC. It's just not the same game. It's no wonder there are two separate communities. I don't see how you can merge these two communities....they're like Apples and Oranges compared to each other.
I don't think there is a survival problem. This community has lasted much longer than almost every other game community I've seen. Most of the one's who have left are SFC3 folks that really don't feel the same loyalty to the game that the SFB fans have to the earlier games.
Activision didn't make SFC.3 Taldren did and it is a SFC game.
-
Just wanted to say to Nannerslug that I fully agree with part of a statement in that "other thread" that SFC:TNG is the best cannon TNG game out there. It does have a lot of good features for a trek star ship game. I have dug it out and reinstalled it each time a patch has come out and played it for a while just to be sure of how the game plays. As far as games go it was/is good. I did not get ripped off in any way with it's purchase.
BUT there is one thing that drives me away each time, after my initial installation enthusiasm leaves me, and that is the angular velocity thing. Take it out (no - don't even put in SFC's EW instead), just take it out and get rid of the dog fighting aspect of the game and you will get rid of that undelying repulsive force that the game has for me. Personally that one thing (AV) ruins it for me, and all the other good TNG game stuff can't overcome the build up of negative energy about that silly angular velocity and dog fighting.
On the other side I have problems with the D2 and the way it works, or more correctly doesn't work, but those D2 mechanics are not as repulsive to me, such that I can put up with it for the SFC2 style of game combat. Essentially the mechanics of OP are not the best but they don't repel me in the same way as AV does.
Anyway TNG (patched) is a better than okay game but it has one thing which eventually drives me away from it each time I play, and that is a personal preference.
Cleaven ignore the AV if you don't like it.It can't be removed.
-
No, WaterTiger, it is you who are trying to find anything to create differences and problems. That argument of yours is the trouble. I see you rejected my attempt to see a change in tune.
Looking for trouble ... not good. I have been asked, ASKED, mind you, if you are here to fight with us.
Kortez,
For the love of God, listen.
Go the a Webster's. Understand the word "community." Understand, please the word "fight" and "discussion" ... Know the differance between and "arguement" and a "debate."
It does not mean everyone has to agree with the cops who run the place. That is not a community.
A community is made up of people of all races, all classes, all ages and varying understandings and educations. It is made up of people who percieve things differently.
In answer to the original posters question, NO .. we can't come together. The Alpha Male Syndrom is too alive and the control buttons are just too handy.
Kortez came to SFC Modding forums and baited me the other day ... Launched right into a personal attack. Funny when the person on the other end has the controls. He then asks to be deleted, frustrated.
I have felt like deleting my account here a number of times ... But I suppose I will stick it out.
Or I could take heed to KoraH's words that seem to haunt me:
====
Remember my advice to you Wade, that you should drop SFC and find something else to play. If you
would rather continue with SFC, that's certainly your choice, but you will find that all you have
to put up with to do so is going to sour the sweetness of your hard work.
====
-
Cleaven ignore the AV if you don't like it.It can't be removed.
Okay, I'll bite. I'm willing to learn. How do you ignore the negative effects of angular velocity on hit percentages in SFC:TNG? If you can do this then it won't just be me that you bring back to playing SFC:TNG.
Or are you just trying to be weakly amusing?
-
In SFC1&2 there are some elements to SFB not 100% of it is SFBs.This is on your game when you first boot up your game eg when you first see Empires at War or Orion Pirates look at the lower left bottom of the screen.This is where you see the Viacom/Paramount logo as well read what it says.I like them all SFC1,2&3 but I can't wait for a more accurate 23C. style game like SFC3.
-
Cleaven ignore the AV if you don't like it.It can't be removed.
Okay, I'll bite. I'm willing to learn. How do you ignore the negative effects of angular velocity on hit percentages in SFC:TNG? If you can do this then it won't just be me that you bring back to playing SFC:TNG.
Or are you just trying to be weakly amusing?
I never look at it anyway I just look at the HUD.I only look there for the range and speed of the ship not the AV.
-
I think a lesson to be seen here is that cooperation should transcend such barriers as age group and game type.
Granted you can not unit the two, you can't unite anything that is diametrically opposite. However, cooperation can be attainted across these boarders, the theme that people be able to unite dispite differnences is a theme fight for.
Outside of that, I see no reason the 'cultural' (Yes, its a metaphor) differences here should cause a separation with people in this community with at least one thing in common:
We play a Star Trek Game.
And when you think about it, there are many more than that too. :D
-
I never look at it anyway I just look at the HUD.I only look there for the range and speed of the ship not the AV.
So how does not looking at it remove the effects of the angular velocity modifier?
-
I can't believe some of the statements made here!
Are people that bitter!
I have to say I play both SFC:OP and SFC3. If I had my druthers on how another SFC game came out, I would invariably side with it being more like SFC:OP, but I hardly think that means that I can't get along with others!
-
Activision didn't make SFC.3 Taldren did and it is a SFC game.
Of course Taldren made it. ::)
My point was that Taldren was not originally planning on making SFC3 a TNG game. They wanted SFC3 to be a sequel to EAW.
Activision was the driving force behind what SFC3 became......to my horror and many others. :smackhead:
-
I can't believe some of the statements made here!
Are people that bitter!
I have to say I play both SFC:OP and SFC3. If I had my druthers on how another SFC game came out, I would invariably side with it being more like SFC:OP, but I hardly think that means that I can't get along with others!
Well said Mr. Jones! I agree 100%.
If people REALLY want to 'bridge the gap' between the SFC3 crowd and SFC:OP than perhaps a PURELY TMP Mod for SFC should be made. From an outsiders point of view one might get the impression that the ONLY mods for SFC3 are TNG/Post TNG with a few TMP/TOS models thrown in the mix. BORING IMHO.
Yeah, yeah, not all the "appropriate weapons/effects are NOT available to SFC3" [e.g., Tholian web, MORE fighters/missiles] but so what. One of the great strengths of the community is our ability to improvise.
I know I want to play an SFC3 Mod where its the Andromedans and ISC instead of the Borg and Cardassians and I believe if I really knew how to do it SFC3 could have a REALLY cool Klingon Academy style mod.
One of the things I personally dislike about SFC3 is how difficult it is for the novice to add ships or completely replace the STOCK TNG ones in the two shiplists. Compare that to SFC2/OP...
Failing that Core EDit should be completed.
Finally, IF the source code for SFC:OP is released in the near future, SFC3 may lose more players to an even more mallable game.
Qapla!
KF
-
Finally, IF the source code for SFC:OP is released in the near future, SFC3 may lose more players to an even more mallable game.
Qapla!
KF
Please, stop talking about the source code. It won't happen in a million years. It gives all of us false hope.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
-
Finally, IF the source code for SFC:OP is released in the near future, SFC3 may lose more players to an even more mallable game.
Qapla!
KF
Please, stop talking about the source code. It won't happen in a million years. It gives all of us false hope.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
I understand there are a few obstacles in the road of the OP source code, but nothing insurmountable. As long as those responsible for the IP express a desire to negotiate those abstacles and make it available then I am very optimistic. Plasma bolts and G-racks please.
SFC:TNG source code on the other hand is likely to be locked in legal limbo for quite some time, and even then I don't see a good outcome. And don't think I wouldn't like to see it. The first mod that removes angular velocity as a hit modifier is a winner. Simplest thing to do is lock it to zero, but even a (more difficult) change to the calculations to use delta AV would be a winner.
-
Cleavan,
Why does AV bug you so much? ;)
It makes the game fun. It is another aspect of the game.
On EAW/OP you have similar hit to damage to distance to range systems of calculation.
<S>
-
Cleavan,
Why does AV bug you so much? ;)
It makes the game fun. It is another aspect of the game.
On EAW/OP you have similar hit to damage to distance to range systems of calculation.
<S>
Perhaps you should play OP again. There is no modifier based on the angle of attack for your shot. This is reminiscent of dog fighting games, and starship battles of the sort we expect to see in this game are not about getting on your targets tail and hammering away like Snoopy Vs the Red Baron.
-
There is no modifier based on the angle of attack for your shot
OMG! Sure there is ...
-
I honestly don't see how the bridge can be gapped when even the central community sites of SFC 3 and trek gaming dont even trust each other.
-
It could happen, if all the BS were removed. But more likely, would be to see the SFC3 community cut the garbage out and get along better. However, I keep banging my head into the wall suggesting that and as soon as I am done posting more insults and such are posted. It's dysfunctional, and until it stops, I don't see any hope.
The problem is made worse when posters ignore my warnings thinking I will keep on being generous, but it has to stop ... NOW.
Thanks for your post. Let's hope we can make something work before trouble breaks out AGAIN.
Kortez
-
There is no modifier based on the angle of attack for your shot
OMG! Sure there is ...
Are you seriously saying that you think OP has an angle of attack calculation in it's weapon to hit modifiers?
Because if you are serious it just shows that you don't know the facts with respect to SFC2:OP. This is a discredit to you.
-
Nanner,
What are you talking about? If you want people who like one of the games over the other to start liking them equally, that's not going to happen. If you want disagreements to stop, that's not going to happen either. SFC2 players disagree with each other (as I assume SFC3 players do too). That's not a rift in the community, it's democracy, and sometimes it's hard to handle.
I would recommend, possibly, that people don't post negatively on threads that they have no concern for, and therefore, nothing constructive to add. Also, some people need to stop taking things so seriously. They are just games and you're supposed to have fun playing/modding/etc. them.
The politics are what frigs stuff up for me, at times. Trust me, no matter how influential a person or group gets in the Trek fan community, nobody is really ever going to care. (This is not directed at you personally Nanner, just a general statement.)
-
:notworthy:
-
I think the primary problem is rather age old: SFB vs. the rest of Trek. OP is dominated by SFBers, who can at times act like snobs to SFC3ers or any other Trek gaming community. Unfortunately, I don't see a bridge ever being built. SFBers are on their own little planet in comparison to everyone else and choose to isolate themselves. If they don't want to come out of it, I say fine. No point in trying to force them out; it's wasted energy.
-
Good point Rat Boy
-
Yeah, lots of good points, Rod, too.
-
Aye but Rod makes a valid point.
I would recommend, possibly, that people don't post negatively on threads that they have no concern for, and therefore, nothing constructive to add. Also, some people need to stop taking things so seriously. They are just games and you're supposed to have fun playing/modding/etc. them.
The politics are what frigs stuff up for me, at times. Trust me, no matter how influential a person or group gets in the Trek fan community, nobody is really ever going to care.
-
I think the primary problem is rather age old: SFB vs. the rest of Trek. OP is dominated by SFBers, who can at times act like snobs to SFC3ers or any other Trek gaming community. Unfortunately, I don't see a bridge ever being built. SFBers are on their own little planet in comparison to everyone else and choose to isolate themselves. If they don't want to come out of it, I say fine. No point in trying to force them out; it's wasted energy.
I agree with the heart of your post (not the wording, however). Let us play our game in peace, please. Just because we don't like the same game as you do though doesn't make us snobs. We just don't like SFC3, that's all. We want to play SFB on our PC, and we'll continue to work towards that end for another 30yrs (if us old bastards live that long. ;)) if you just let us. Is that asking too much?
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
I think that might be part of the issue. Some people think that the people here are here for Star Trek <play the music now>, but that is not the case. Many people are here simply because they bought a game that was a lot of fun to play. Others are here because they are a subset of that group because they bought a game based on SFB that was fun to play.
Unfortunately people who like good games are not necessarily star trek fans and vice versa. In fact to look at the history of Star Trek games, one could logically conclude that good games and Star Trek are not usually associated at all. Image the surprise of all concerned when the two groups find themselves in the same place. So I think it would be wrong to think that Star Trek is a unifying thing, when to some it is a distraction
-
Let me voice my opinion as well. A lot of you will know me or at least recognize my alias, so I hope my opinions won't shock you because it doesn't agree with yours.
I'm not interested in ANY of the Trek games, except for the ones that are SFB. Even there, it wasn't enough. Therefore I work hard at improving the game *I* enjoy into what I like.
I never liked SFC3. I tried it. I finished the single-player campaigns on a friend's PC. I don't want it otherwise. I never bought it.This isn't about Trek for me. This isn't about community for me.
I jujst want to play SFB and that's what SFC:OP gives me a chance to do.
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
If it means bringing in more idiots, I'd rather the community be small.
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
If it means bringing in more idiots, I'd rather the community be small.
Attention! it looks like DH has staked out his village. :lol:
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
If it means bringing in more idiots, I'd rather the community be small.
Excuse me? Who in the world are you to decide who is an idiot and who isn't?
THAT right there is part of the problem identified by Nanner.
And that slogan under your name is rather offensive, don't you think? Racist innuendo, right?
I thought there was rules for that here ... I personally find it offensive.
See, we can all like like God behind the computer monitor, sir.
Go down the street carrying a sign that says "Where da' white women at'? and see how far you get in South Central LA.
**snickers**
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
If it means bringing in more idiots, I'd rather the community be small.
Excuse me? Who in the world are you to decide who is an idiot and who isn't?
THAT right there is part of the problem identified by Nanner.
And that slogan under your name is rather offensive, don't you think? Racist innuendo, right?
I thought there was rules for that here ... I personally find it offensive.
See, we can all like like God behind the computer monitor, sir.
Go down the street carrying a sign that says "Where da' white women at'? and see how far you get in South Central LA.
**snickers**
Do you need a phillips head or flat tip?
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
If it means bringing in more idiots, I'd rather the community be small.
Excuse me? Who in the world are you to decide who is an idiot and who isn't?
THAT right there is part of the problem identified by Nanner.
And that slogan under your name is rather offensive, don't you think? Racist innuendo, right?
I thought there was rules for that here ... I personally find it offensive.
See, we can all like like God behind the computer monitor, sir.
Go down the street carrying a sign that says "Where da' white women at'? and see how far you get in South Central LA.
**snickers**
Do you need a phillips head or flat tip?
Flat-tip ..
And Cleavan, I haven't forgotten about your OP angular velocity question, I just gotta get patched -- again. Seems I just patched with 3.2 last week and now I gotta find another load.
Gimmie a minute; headed to Firesouls site in this mess of Trek links.
<S>
-
Excuse me? Who in the world are you to decide who is an idiot and who isn't?
THAT right there is part of the problem identified by Nanner.
And that slogan under your name is rather offensive, don't you think? Racist innuendo, right?
I thought there was rules for that here ... I personally find it offensive.
See, we can all like like God behind the computer monitor, sir.
Go down the street carrying a sign that says "Where da' white women at'? and see how far you get in South Central LA.
**snickers**
I thought I had seen every flame bait ever posted.
Kudo's on your perserverence and ingenuity WT.
I didn't know twat was a racial term. Or are you standing up for all the oppressed castles in the stars?
Thanks for the entertainment!
-
Excuse me? Who in the world are you to decide who is an idiot and who isn't?
THAT right there is part of the problem identified by Nanner.
And that slogan under your name is rather offensive, don't you think? Racist innuendo, right?
I thought there was rules for that here ... I personally find it offensive.
See, we can all like like God behind the computer monitor, sir.
Go down the street carrying a sign that says "Where da' white women at'? and see how far you get in South Central LA.
**snickers**
I thought I had seen every flame bait ever posted.
Kudo's on your perserverence and ingenuity WT.
I didn't know twat was a racial term. Or are you standing up for all the oppressed castles in the stars?
Thanks for the entertainment!
:smackhead:
-
I didn't know twat was a racial term. Or are you standing up for all the oppressed castles in the stars?
Thanks for the entertainment!
I'm staying away from those four-letter buzz words, Likker. I'm not risking my account. Having too much fun debating morality with the KBF and FPF.
And yes, for the oppressed castles in the stars ...
A dreamer-realist, gone Carrie who met the Exorcist lovechild on a street corner. All that blood in the gymnasium made me ill and rather jaded.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
-
And Cleavan, I haven't forgotten about your OP angular velocity question, I just gotta get patched -- again. Seems I just patched with 3.2 last week and now I gotta find another load.
Gimmie a minute; headed to Firesouls site in this mess of Trek links.
<S>
You don't need the modded shiplist to evaluate the games mechanics. It works the same way with any shiplist. Just patch the stock game to 2.5.5.2
-
I didn't know twat was a racial term. Or are you standing up for all the oppressed castles in the stars?
Thanks for the entertainment!
I'm staying away from those four-letter buzz words, Likker. I'm not risking my account. Having too much fun debating morality with the KBF and FPF.
You want to debate morals with me? I don't have any :rofl:
-
And Cleavan, I haven't forgotten about your OP angular velocity question, I just gotta get patched -- again. Seems I just patched with 3.2 last week and now I gotta find another load.
Gimmie a minute; headed to Firesouls site in this mess of Trek links.
<S>
You don't need the modded shiplist to evaluate the games mechanics. It works the same way with any shiplist. Just patch the stock game to 2.5.5.2
I know that, silly bear ... I have it on my F drive and for some reason it is asking me for my keycode again. I have to find the disc under my bed. I just figured while I was at it, might as well put it on the C drive and and fly a few in GSA. It was embarrasing to go in there tonight and see old faces and not be properly patched.
<S>
-
OMG!!!!! Angular velocity in OP??? Let me save you a whole lot of time; It doesn't exist! No way, no how, no where! Hit % in SFC2 is based soley on lockon. ie: range and EW.
-
And yes, for the oppressed castles in the stars ...
A dreamer-realist, gone Carrie who met the Exorcist lovechild on a street corner. All that blood in the gymnasium made me ill and rather jaded.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
I've read that a dozen times.... wow!
Is that Colonel Kurtz or Charlie Manson you are quoting?
Wish I had some 'cid, could be of mind with ya.
-
OMG!!!!! Angular velocity in OP??? Let me save you a whole lot of time; It doesn't exist! No way, no how, no where! Hit % in SFC2 is based soley on lockon. ie: range and EW.
I know it doesn't exist in OP.
I'm trying to find a way for the man with the big moldy head to understand this ...
Ok, bear with me.
You've seen -shift and +shift, right?
OK, Cleavan, try thinking of AV as shift ... as the function serves a similar purpose when firing for accuracy.
I know that is the cheap way out, here. But I had to get a rise for the crowd.
Just mold that big brain of yours Cleavan and make it think shift = AV.
"I think I can, I think I can"
And Likker, that was 'The Little Engine That Could."
Dude, you and I are dangerous together ... what a team, Likker.
I can see the road trip revival in the stars now.
WOODSTOCK RETURNS
<S>
-
This needs to be addressed. I know that there are plans within D.Net to address this issue - but this is really a community wide discussion that needs to happen. For the longest time those who play sfc3 are considered second tier citizens in this community.
this is not just my feelings, but the feelings of many. If it ain't sfb, its unwelcome.
It is my hope that with taldren gone that we can grow up a little and band together if *any* sort of community is to survive. The question is - do people want this? I sincerly hope so.
Whether it is lack of acceptence of people with differing opinions - or acknolwedgement of the work done with sfc3 mods - i believe that we need to bring everyone together.
Nanner, I agree with you on this issue ... But it seems impossible to do. There are two sides of this community and the rift is widening.
The Dyna Admins group fell apart ... We can't police ourselves, apparently.
I like both, but concentrate efforts on SFC3, as do you.
I gotta side, however, with Hangnail on this issue. I think it would be better just to segregate the D-3 to the "back of the bus." Maybe we should take off the Rose-colored glasses and face the reality.
I don't see the so-called community leaders doing it -- I see them making the rift wider with rhetoric.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
When did i say this ? " it would be better just to segregate the D-3 to the "back of the bus."
:screwloose:
-
Sorry Nail. Not you. I had my acronyms KBF and FBF messed up. Don't sue. My apologies.
Copyright notices:
Star Trek, Star Fleet Command, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Voyager
(and the various logo devices used in them) are copyright Paramount Pictures, as are the
characters, related images, and sound from the productions.
Likker ...
"Just another brick in the wall" -- Pink Floyd.
-
Good god. There is someone almost as warped as me.
WT, go get yourself a sex change, win a lottery and I'll marry ya!
You start to plump up though and yer arse is on the curb.
Oh, when you are talking to the doc... big boobies!
Why am I envisioning a trans-gender version of "Natural Born Killers"?
Hmm, time to bic my head again...
-
Well, reading through some threads and this one it seems that the hopes of bridgeing the gap just cant happen. The majority of the folks in here do seem to support SFC 2:OP and have little to no regard for the future of Starfleet Command 3 and when confronted with the premise that Nanner said of trying to bridge the gap they come up with ways of not doing it.
Did ANY of you actually spare the time to REALLY read what Paramount's Harry Lang was saying?
The worry of the SFC community shouldnt be what is happening in the small SFC Series community, it should be whats just round the corner regarding the future of trek gaming. What will it look like when a new game is released and the community sites still have links going to SFC games, they come in here and see a general attitude of "go away, you do not play SFC 2:OP and you do not like SFB". Fleets who want to partake in games dont really worry about the flames, they just flame back, part and parcel of fleet gaming, whats holding a lot of them back is what Nanner touches on to an extent. The feeling that SFC 2 players look down there noses on SFC 3 and what the game itself stands for.
-
Good god. There is someone almost as warped as me.
WT, go get yourself a sex change, win a lottery and I'll marry ya!
You start to plump up though and yer arse is on the curb.
Oh, when you are talking to the doc... big boobies!
Why am I envisioning a trans-gender version of "Natural Born Killers"?
Hmm, time to bic my head again...
Close, but no cigar, Likker.
Actually, "TopGun" with trans-gender changes ...
Ever choked on a hairball? I hate it when I lick my fur and just the white one's get stuck in my throat. Tigers do that a lot.
But Likker ... if we did get married, we would have to get separate ISP's and routers for cookies. Between your site bans and my site bans, we would be seeing white screens a lot. :P
<S>
-
OMG!!!!! Angular velocity in OP??? Let me save you a whole lot of time; It doesn't exist! No way, no how, no where! Hit % in SFC2 is based soley on lockon. ie: range and EW.
I know it doesn't exist in OP.
I'm trying to find a way for the man with the big moldy head to understand this ...
Ok, bear with me.
You've seen -shift and +shift, right?
OK, Cleavan, try thinking of AV as shift ... as the function serves a similar purpose when firing for accuracy.
I know that is the cheap way out, here. But I had to get a rise for the crowd.
Just mold that big brain of yours Cleavan and make it think shift = AV.
"I think I can, I think I can"
And Likker, that was 'The Little Engine That Could."
Dude, you and I are dangerous together ... what a team, Likker.
I can see the road trip revival in the stars now.
WOODSTOCK RETURNS
<S>
So you've given up on the idea of OP having AV effects. Very commendable. I don't know why you had to say it in the first place.
And the attack shifts in OP have a very different effect in the game when compared to the angular velocity modifier seen in SFC:TNG. One leads to a game of Snoopy Vs The Red Baron, and the other leads to a different set of tactics more appropriate to large ships in space. Just take out the AV, force it to zero permanently and you will get rid of the WW1 fighter sim where angular velocity is a targetting factor, and come back into the realm of starships.
-
only point is that instead of picking apart the pros and cons - that this forum needs to bring fans of both games together in a common cause.
What Common cause? This is no spoon.
The continued growth and expansion of the Star Trek gaming community
I think that might be part of the issue. Some people think that the people here are here for Star Trek <play the music now>, but that is not the case. Many people are here simply because they bought a game that was a lot of fun to play. Others are here because they are a subset of that group because they bought a game based on SFB that was fun to play.
Unfortunately people who like good games are not necessarily star trek fans and vice versa. In fact to look at the history of Star Trek games, one could logically conclude that good games and Star Trek are not usually associated at all. Image the surprise of all concerned when the two groups find themselves in the same place. So I think it would be wrong to think that Star Trek is a unifying thing, when to some it is a distraction
I will say it again there some elements of SFB in SFC2OP not 100% of it based on SFB.That is what is said on your screen when it is loaded up please look.I would say that is possibly fear driven that SFC3 is a much faster driven game and most who play it are young and are mostly in Europe where Star Trek is thriving.There are clubs over there in North America clubs have died out.This the way Star trek is headed in terms of gaming imho.The way I intend to play when I am all set to play on line is share my time in D2 and D3.I will play DomWars in D3 and it depends on what the server is like in D2.I heard LB5 was a boring I would been on the lastest D3 server for that.I have been around the D2 community for awhile and you guys are great bunch of guys but so are D3ers when I am over at the Tri Mods boards.They are very helpful and they don't joke at my postings about tactics.The thing is Cleaven is I rely on my Tactical Officer instead of the AV.I always get a better Engineer first to tweak up those Warp Core and Impulse Engines.I can't wait untill they have white skins on this board.This white on black is a strian on my eyes.
-
Just take out the AV, force it to zero permanently and you will get rid of the WW1 fighter sim where angular velocity is a targetting factor, and come back into the realm of starships
Well, I believe this would require source code and .exe changes -- but i might be wrong (I often am).
I'm not even going close to anything that says "code" in modding the game, but I promise you I will look into it. If it can be done without monkeying with code, I will do it.
I always liked that guy with the big brain on TNG Trek. I felt sorry for him. He was sooo smart and sooo technical, but so emotionless. He forgot to have fun!
============
'All Your Trek Belongs to Us"
============
(http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/rough5.jpg)
(firmly) Spock: "When I said 'undress', I meant take EVERYTHING off!"
Kirk ("timidly"): "Even my boots?"
[pause. Kirk and Spock exchange a long look]
Spock: "Well, all right, you may leave the boots on."
Kirk (whining): "Is all this really necessary? It's kind of humiliating. Can't you just take my temperature, check my pulse, things like that?"
Spock ("seriously"): "No, my orders are quite clear. I am to thoroughly examine every square centimeter of your body for evidence of bug bites, and test your reflexes to be sure you have not been adversely effected by your exposure to the alien environment, bites or no."
Kirk (sweetly): "I'd feel better if you'd undress too."
[another pause. Another long look]
Spock: "Well, all right, if it will help you to feel less vulnerable."
Kirk: "I never even heard of this stupid disease you are checking for. Hey! Wait a minute! Where's your doctor's license!? How do I know you even are a real doctor!? HEY! What is that!? That's no medical instrument! MY GOD WHAT DID YOU JUST STICK INTO ME!?"
Spock (reassuringly): "Relax, everything is all right..."
Kirk ("infuriated") : "Relax!? RELAX? You stick God knows what into my a$$ without even a 'Hi, how ya doin'?' and you expect me to just Relax!?"
-
Well, reading through some threads and this one it seems that the hopes of bridgeing the gap just cant happen. The majority of the folks in here do seem to support SFC 2:OP and have little to no regard for the future of Starfleet Command 3 and when confronted with the premise that Nanner said of trying to bridge the gap they come up with ways of not doing it.
Did ANY of you actually spare the time to REALLY read what Paramount's Harry Lang was saying?
The worry of the SFC community shouldnt be what is happening in the small SFC Series community, it should be whats just round the corner regarding the future of trek gaming. What will it look like when a new game is released and the community sites still have links going to SFC games, they come in here and see a general attitude of "go away, you do not play SFC 2:OP and you do not like SFB". Fleets who want to partake in games dont really worry about the flames, they just flame back, part and parcel of fleet gaming, whats holding a lot of them back is what Nanner touches on to an extent. The feeling that SFC 2 players look down there noses on SFC 3 and what the game itself stands for.
Ok, I am missing the point somewhere here.
This negative attitude the SFC3 players get from the OP players... I honestly haven't seen it on this forum. Maybe I missed something but the only time I have heard it mentioned is from yourself, Nannerslug and Watertiger.
I don't know who Harry Lang is, nor do I know what he said.
As was mentioned several times before, a lot of the OP players are still there because it is based on SFB.
Myself, I am not a trekkie or trekker... I only played SFB a couple times. The trek universe has no appeal to me, I play OP because I really enjoy the game and the people I play with. I don't play games because they are trek or star wars or whatever, I play them because I enjoy them.
What is it you people calling for "community bonding" want from the people who play OP? That is the question I have. Maybe I am just dim, but I don't know what you all want, and was happily oblivious to any schism in a community I didn't know existed.
My questions and 0.02$
-
I will say it again there some elements of SFB in SFC2OP not 100% of it based on SFB.That is what is said on your screen when it is loaded up please look.I would say that is possibly fear driven that SFC3 is a much faster driven game and most who play it are young and are mostly in Europe where Star Trek is thriving.There are clubs over there in North America clubs have died out.This the way Star trek is headed in terms of gaming imho.The way I intend to play when I am all set to play on line is share my time in D2 and D3.I will play DomWars in D3 and it depends on what the server is like in D2.I heard LB5 was a boring I would been on the lastest D3 server for that.I have been around the D2 community for awhile and you guys are great bunch of guys but so are D3ers when I am over at the Tri Mods boards.They are very helpful and they don't joke at my postings about tactics.The thing is Cleaven is I rely on my Tactical Officer instead of the AV.I always get a better Engineer first to tweak up those Warp Core and Impulse Engines.I can't wait untill they have white skins on this board.This white on black is a strian on my eyes.
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
-
Likker,
I think I got it after listening a lot to Cleavan today ...
It really is a timewarp thing with OP/EAW and SFC3 ...
A lot of the anger comes from the time the so-called Taldrenites who spend on fixing the darned Orion Pirates -- whose player base is suck beans compared to what is left in SFC3. Look back on old threads, the past arguments (not with me). That anger stems from the first day we bought this game and made the move.
I made that shift as Renegade Demon squad leader for 14g. I crossed the line and didn't look back. It was the drive to bring this game to levels of balance and playability and ship additions and "stuff" that kept me personally going. Sooo much work was never done. We have always felt second fiddle. Even after the V534 patch, the game lacks the balance race to race that were the basics of the game. Just fundamental "stuff." The modders fix that and tweak and try to live with what we got to work with with apparently no assistance form the Taldren powerbase that links everything under the sun for OP, but ignores the SFC3 crowd in comparison.
It's a snob attitude from the OP groupies who knock the work as we do it. They thumb their noses at us. I have tried to foster interest in bringing OP/EAw ships to SFC3 ports.
The mechanics of the game -- being built on the same base source code of OP -- are similar, but you can't get the SFB purists to even dig in to find it.
Before I attempted to delete my account from these forums last time, I asked a question that nobody answered (they deleted the delete key, btw so I am forced to camp here with Likkerpig). ;)
Does anyone remember what MagnumMan said? It is still pertinant to this debate.
<S>
-
Well, reading through some threads and this one it seems that the hopes of bridgeing the gap just cant happen. The majority of the folks in here do seem to support SFC 2:OP and have little to no regard for the future of Starfleet Command 3 and when confronted with the premise that Nanner said of trying to bridge the gap they come up with ways of not doing it.
Did ANY of you actually spare the time to REALLY read what Paramount's Harry Lang was saying?
The worry of the SFC community shouldnt be what is happening in the small SFC Series community, it should be whats just round the corner regarding the future of trek gaming. What will it look like when a new game is released and the community sites still have links going to SFC games, they come in here and see a general attitude of "go away, you do not play SFC 2:OP and you do not like SFB". Fleets who want to partake in games dont really worry about the flames, they just flame back, part and parcel of fleet gaming, whats holding a lot of them back is what Nanner touches on to an extent. The feeling that SFC 2 players look down there noses on SFC 3 and what the game itself stands for.
OK, why is this so hard to understand? WE DON'T LIKE SFC3. :smackhead: Freakin ehh!!! Get over it and move on, please.
-
Likker,
I think I got it after listening a lot to Cleavan today ...
It really is a timewarp thing with OP/EAW and SFC3 ...
A lot of the anger comes from the time the so-called Taldrenites who spend on fixing the darned Orion Pirates -- whose player base is suck beans compared to what is left in SFC3. Look back on old threads, the past arguments (not with me). That anger stems from the first day we bought this game and made the move.
I made that shift as Renegade Demon squad leader for 14g. I crossed the line and didn't look back. It was the drive to bring this game to levels of balance and playability and ship additions and "stuff" that kept me personally going.
It's a snob attitude from the OP groupies who knock the work as we do it. They thumb their noses at us. I have tried to foster interest in bringing OP/EAw ships to SFC3 ports.
The mechanics of the game -- being built on the same base source code of OP -- are similar, but you can't get the SFB purists to even dig in to find it.
Before I attempted to delete my account from these forums last time, I asked a question that nobody answered (they deleted the delete key, btw so I am forced to camp here with Likkerpig). ;)
Does anyone remember what MagnumMan said? It is still pertinant to this debate.
<S>
No you haven't got it. The mechanics are totally different to me because of that one thing. Angular velocity. Take out the AV factor, set it permanently to zero and I won't get that repulsion effect that builds after a few days of playing Snoopy Vs the Red Baron. don't add anything from OP, just take out that one thing and I will be able to make the most out of the rest of what is a good TNG game.
As for the people who just want to play SFB, why do you even think they should play TNG? Just because you say so? Really, if I don't like Warcraft Three because it has elves in it, why can't I keep playing Starcraft?
-
OK, why is this so hard to understand? WE DON'T LIKE SFC3. :smackhead: Freakin ehh!!! Get over it and move on, please.
Bingo!!!!
WHO IS WE? I asked that yesterday@!!
THAT is the issue. This is a damned community board, sir, and WE is all the starships in TracyG's thread who landed here TOGETHER -- all games from Taldren.
I'm going to the back of the bus now ... this makes me sick!
<S>
AdmwaterTiger-11thFleet
-
OK, why is this so hard to understand? WE DON'T LIKE SFC3. :smackhead: Freakin ehh!!! Get over it and move on, please.
Bingo!!!!
WHO IS WE? I asked that yesterday@!!
THAT is the issue. This is a damned community board, sir, and WE is all the starships in TracyG's thread who landed here TOGETHER -- all games from Taldren.
I'm going to the back of the bus now ... this makes me sick!
<S>
AdmwaterTiger-11thFleet
I don't know why it is so hard to understand the answer to your question. "We" is all of those people who play SFC2 but not SFC:TNG because they don't like playing SFC:TNG. I fall into this category.
-
Likker,
I think I got it after listening a lot to Cleavan today ...
It really is a timewarp thing with OP/EAW and SFC3 ...
A lot of the anger comes from the time the so-called Taldrenites who spend on fixing the darned Orion Pirates -- whose player base is suck beans compared to what is left in SFC3. Look back on old threads, the past arguments (not with me). That anger stems from the first day we bought this game and made the move.
I made that shift as Renegade Demon squad leader for 14g. I crossed the line and didn't look back. It was the drive to bring this game to levels of balance and playability and ship additions and "stuff" that kept me personally going. Sooo much work was never done. We have always felt second fiddle. Even after the V534 patch, the game lacks the balance race to race that were the basics of the game. Just fundamental "stuff." The modders fix that and tweak and try to live with what we got to work with with apparently no assistance form the Taldren powerbase that links everything under the sun for OP, but ignores the SFC3 crowd in comparison.
It's a snob attitude from the OP groupies who knock the work as we do it. They thumb their noses at us. I have tried to foster interest in bringing OP/EAw ships to SFC3 ports.
The mechanics of the game -- being built on the same base source code of OP -- are similar, but you can't get the SFB purists to even dig in to find it.
Before I attempted to delete my account from these forums last time, I asked a question that nobody answered (they deleted the delete key, btw so I am forced to camp here with Likkerpig). ;)
Does anyone remember what MagnumMan said? It is still pertinant to this debate.
<S>
Ok, if I am following correctly it is resentment from when Taldren was still an entity, and they didn't patch SFC3 as quickly as OP? (yes I know you never got a patch above beta).
Quite honestly if that is what the resentment is about, it is like one child complaining that another got a bigger scoop of ice cream.
All I know about Magnum Man is that KhoroMag had Taldren's blessing to work on a patch for EAW.
As far as OP, the player base provided a great deal to make the game enjoyable... NW, Karnak, TraceyG, Firesoul, the server admins.... and whoever it was in Taldren who released the final patch... can't remember if it was Farrell or the other guy...
SFC3 has a wide range of talented people as well. As for the OP fixers not wanting to spend time fixing SFC3... well it is their time to spend, if they don't enjoy SFC3 why would they?
All I can really gather from this is some of you folks are upset that the OP crowd didn't jump ship whole heartedly into SFC3. Some do play both, some don't care for it.
By the way, the game insults are not just one way, Wildcard is quite open about his opinion of OP (Boring, etc) as are others. Who cares, if you don't like it, don't play it. That is the attitude of most of the OP'ers that you folks want to "make a community" with. We just don't care about SFC3, and in my case the "trek" community. If they make another trek game that is enjoyable, I'll play it. But I won't buy it just because it says star trek on the box.
Call the OP players that don't do SFC3 snobs and elitists if you want. We just don't care about SFC3. This has been said over and over.... if this is what the whole community building is about then you folks are beating a dead horse. The only common ground is that Taldren made both games.
If the player base of OP sucks beans compared to SFC3 then why do you care what we dead-enders do anyway? Let us fade away with our old game in peace.
-
I will say it again there some elements of SFB in SFC2OP not 100% of it based on SFB.That is what is said on your screen when it is loaded up please look.I would say that is possibly fear driven that SFC3 is a much faster driven game and most who play it are young and are mostly in Europe where Star Trek is thriving.There are clubs over there in North America clubs have died out.This the way Star trek is headed in terms of gaming imho.The way I intend to play when I am all set to play on line is share my time in D2 and D3.I will play DomWars in D3 and it depends on what the server is like in D2.I heard LB5 was a boring I would been on the lastest D3 server for that.I have been around the D2 community for awhile and you guys are great bunch of guys but so are D3ers when I am over at the Tri Mods boards.They are very helpful and they don't joke at my postings about tactics.The thing is Cleaven is I rely on my Tactical Officer instead of the AV.I always get a better Engineer first to tweak up those Warp Core and Impulse Engines.I can't wait untill they have white skins on this board.This white on black is a strian on my eyes.
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
-
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
-
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
Who cares about the show. Geez.
Did Federation BCG's REALLLY have plasma in ANY show? Did BCJ's have REAL rockets?
(http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/spockfrown.jpg)
-
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
I heard Picard say it in TNG.btw Who &What do fly Cleaven?You have never mentioned that.
-
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
Who cares about the show. Geez.
Did Federation BCG's REALLLY have plasma in ANY show? Did BCJ's have REAL rockets?
So you're back. Now what about Starblazers and their first use of the Eleventh Fleet in the 1970's?
-
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
I heard Picard say it in TNG.btw Who &What do fly Cleaven?You have never mentioned that.
Well that makes it okay then. I also assume you are asking which empires I like to fly. That would be Romulan and Lyran.
-
Cleavan,
It was your relatives who tried to whack Kirk in "the show." I have noting more to say to a man -- alien or otherwise -- who refuses to be so technical he has lost the meaning of the game.
You know what you can do with your AV, right? ;)
(http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/kirkhung.jpg)
-
Did you catch the double negative, Cleavan?
-
Cleavan,
It was your relatives who tried to whack Kirk in "the show." I have noting more to say to a man -- alien or otherwise -- who refuses to be so technical he has lost the meaning of the game.
You know what you can do with your AV, right? ;)
I'm assuming it's the same thing your lot have done to the creators of Starblazers.
-
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
Who cares about the show. Geez.
Did Federation BCG's REALLLY have plasma in ANY show? Did BCJ's have REAL rockets?
So you're back. Now what about Starblazers and their first use of the Eleventh Fleet in the 1970's?
Who are you refering to me or WT and who&what do fly for?Cmon Cleaven relax.
-
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
Who cares about the show. Geez.
Did Federation BCG's REALLLY have plasma in ANY show? Did BCJ's have REAL rockets?
So you're back. Now what about Starblazers and their first use of the Eleventh Fleet in the 1970's?
Who are you refering to me or WT and who&what do fly for?Cmon Cleaven relax.
Okay, it works like this and you can take it as a general rule for most other users of the forum. If I have a quote then I am replying to the last quoted person in that quote unless I am making a general statement. So just to be clear, a reply with a quote means that the quoted person is being replied to.
Now if there is no quote then the reply is either to the immediately preceding post or to the group as a whole, but sometimes another reply may sneak in between them.
Now as a class exercise we can look at this post and see that you are the last quoted person and therefore I am replying to you.
Also note that is very bad form to quote somebody who has nothing to do with your reply and it is even worse form to reply in a completely different thread.
-
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
Who cares about the show. Geez.
Did Federation BCG's REALLLY have plasma in ANY show? Did BCJ's have REAL rockets?
So you're back. Now what about Starblazers and their first use of the Eleventh Fleet in the 1970's?
Who are you refering to me or WT and who&what do fly for?Cmon Cleaven relax.
Okay, it works like this and you can take it as a general rule for most other users of the forum. If I have a quote then I am replying to the last quoted person in that quote unless I am making a general statement. So just to be clear, a reply with a quote means that the quoted person is being replied to.
Now if there is no quote then the reply is either to the immediately preceding post or to the group as a whole, but sometimes another reply may sneak in between them.
Now as a class exercise we can look at this post and see that you are the last quoted person and therefore I am replying to you.
Also note that is very bad form to quote somebody who has nothing to do with your reply and it is even worse form to reply in a completely different thread.
Before we get hijacked again, answer my question, Cleavan, Mr. SFB purist, cannon God of all gods..
How did those plasmas get on UFP vessels in EAW/OP?
-
Did you catch the double negative, Cleavan?
But you noramlly post like that. Why should I take any notice of it?
-
Did you catch the double negative, Cleavan?
But you noramlly post like that. Why should I take any notice of it?
Gah! Answer the question, Mr. SFB'er.
-
Did you catch the double negative, Cleavan?
But you noramlly post like that. Why should I take any notice of it?
Gah! Answer the question, Mr. SFB'er.
That's rich, I've been asking about the pinching of Eleventh Fleet from StarBlazers for quite a while now and been expertly ignored by you so far.
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
Sorry but I asked first.
-
<Bangs head on keyboard to make the pain behind the eyes go away>
There is no need to get upset at this Cleaven.I was just saying that I rely on my Tactical Officer just like in the show.
But the show (Which show? Any of them!) does not have angular velocity as a to-hit modifier for starship combat.
Who cares about the show. Geez.
Did Federation BCG's REALLLY have plasma in ANY show? Did BCJ's have REAL rockets?
So you're back. Now what about Starblazers and their first use of the Eleventh Fleet in the 1970's?
Who are you refering to me or WT and who&what do fly for?Cmon Cleaven relax.
Okay, it works like this and you can take it as a general rule for most other users of the forum. If I have a quote then I am replying to the last quoted person in that quote unless I am making a general statement. So just to be clear, a reply with a quote means that the quoted person is being replied to.
Now if there is no quote then the reply is either to the immediately preceding post or to the group as a whole, but sometimes another reply may sneak in between them.
Now as a class exercise we can look at this post and see that you are the last quoted person and therefore I am replying to you.
Also note that is very bad form to quote somebody who has nothing to do with your reply and it is even worse form to reply in a completely different thread.
I am partialy back but I am trying to get to know the D3ers in the Tri Mod forums.That is where most of them are.I am not sure what you mean bt another thread?
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
Sorry but I asked first.
Are you referring to these gentlemen, Cleavan?
(http://home.comcast.net/~jerryfellows/Images/uni100b.gif)
(http://home.comcast.net/~jerryfellows/Images/uni100a.gif)
-
I am partialy back but I am trying to get to know the D3ers in the Tri Mod forums.That is where most of them are.I am not sure what you mean bt another thread?
Well this series of posts is one thread, but if you go back to the General Starfleet Command Forum you will see many other threads as well as this one. To reply to what somebody has posted here, in one of those other threads, or vice versa, is not good form because it is most confusing and distracts one from the topic(s) being discussed in that other thread. Sort of defeats the purpose of having a thread in the first place.
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
Water Tiger is a Moderator at the Tri Mod forums and has had a stressfull week starting on the weekend.That is F-BCF it carries plasma F torps.The F-BCG is strickly a Heavy BC with seeking missles.
-
He won't answer, Age. Mr. Cannon is stumped.
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
Sorry but I asked first.
Are you referring to these gentlemen, Cleavan?
Bit hard to remember, the battles of the original Eleventh Fleet were like 30 years ago.
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
Sorry but I asked first.
Are you referring to these gentlemen, Cleavan?
Bit hard to remember, the battles of the original Eleventh Fleet were like 30 years ago.
Perhaps a refresher?
http://www.the-nest.com/yamato/
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
WaterTiger,
You know exactly where missiles and plasmas come from in SFB. Will you please get real!
-
I am partialy back but I am trying to get to know the D3ers in the Tri Mod forums.That is where most of them are.I am not sure what you mean bt another thread?
Well this series of posts is one thread, but if you go back to the General Starfleet Command Forum you will see many other threads as well as this one. To reply to what somebody has posted here, in one of those other threads, or vice versa, is not good form because it is most confusing and distracts one from the topic(s) being discussed in that other thread. Sort of defeats the purpose of having a thread in the first place.
I am at loss as to what you mean hear?
-
He won't answer, Age. Mr. Cannon is stumped.
Oh, are you under the impression that I'm some sort of Star Trek canon-ist (note spelling). Far from it I'm afraid. As I've already explained I'm not here because of Star Trek, I'm here because of a good game.
-
This place definitely needs a shout box.I am asking Mr.Cue to get one.
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
Sorry but I asked first.
Are you referring to these gentlemen, Cleavan?
Bit hard to remember, the battles of the original Eleventh Fleet were like 30 years ago.
Perhaps a refresher?
[url]http://www.the-nest.com/yamato/[/url]
So you've no excuse then?
-
I am partialy back but I am trying to get to know the D3ers in the Tri Mod forums.That is where most of them are.I am not sure what you mean bt another thread?
Well this series of posts is one thread, but if you go back to the General Starfleet Command Forum you will see many other threads as well as this one. To reply to what somebody has posted here, in one of those other threads, or vice versa, is not good form because it is most confusing and distracts one from the topic(s) being discussed in that other thread. Sort of defeats the purpose of having a thread in the first place.
I am at loss as to what you mean hear?
You asked what "another thread" was.
-
OK, I'll post his here, I posted something similar in another thread but it probably wasn't read.
I'm not a SFB player, and could care less about SFB. I do however vastly prefer OP over 3. I have tried 3 but I just can't get the same enthusiasm for it as I can for any of the older titles. It's not a matter of ship models or race, its just a matter of content, OP has much more for me than 3 and it doesn't have that infernal AV(I'm totally in agreement with Cleaven on that point, AV gives me a sour taste). I didn't buy those games for a Trek game, I bought them looking for a Space ship Battle simulator.
As far a shunning of 3 goes, I don't think its anything more than the fact that most of those still in the OP section have tried it and just don't care much for it to switch, and to be blunt as some have pointed out, some in the 3 crowd don't seem to like us (or rather the game we like, OP) much either and aren't shy of making it known, which to be fair has probably affected my view of 3.
What would be involved in drawing both communities together anyway? I am curious what this means to both you WT and Nanner, what would you like to see thats different now as far as the games go? Other than sharing mod/server-setup ideas perhaps I can't think of anything that would change?
P.S. The BCG doesn't have plasma, the BCF does and rockets are a Cannon weapon in Star Trek, there just aparently obselete by TNG and theres no evidence of them being emplaced on Fed vessels, (though I don't think there's much evidence saying they weren't either ;) ). However I fail to see how this is relevant in the current discussion anyway.
-
Ok, now that you have sufficiently walked yourself into a dead end with no escape, I will answer the question. When I am done, I want a straight answer to mine, if you would.
1.) There is no copyright on a mythical fleet of Japanese cartoon chacters as they apply to the 11thFleet, which is spelled the Eleventh Fleet -- unlike the XI and the image and the actual name of a fleet 1 year short of a decade old founded by FAdmPeers.
2.) The fantasy cartoon Japanese characters were copyrighted for the name Yamato, and no mention is made of the 11th.
3.) A Websearch of the REAL 11thFleet is easy to assertain, which Sandman said he did ... and spiders show links dating back to when the fleet was created. Their images all over the site, including mock hack rip off by Sandman, are copyrighted.
4.) Paramount themselves appears to have cheated us with the Wrath of Kahn and the Return of Spock as it applies to the Star Gazers and their concepts.
5.) Here is a copyrighted article which sheds more light, and nowhere do you see the term "11th Fleet".
6.) Mentions of fantasy fleets without copyrights and the word "Kirk', for example ... is not part of a copyright.
========
Read for yourself: http://www.mediacircus.net/sb.html
Unfortunately, Western audiences would not discover the wonders of "Yamato" for another five years. With interest in space operas high from the monumental success of "Star Wars" the year prior, Westchester Enterprises and Claster Television saw that the market was ripe for "Yamato" and purchased the syndication rights for the first two series in 1978. Finally, in 1979/1980, the after-school crowd got their first glimpse of a revolutionary new animated series, "Star Blazers". Though audiences in the United States were lucky enough to be the first to see the Japanese import, "Star Blazers" quickly made its way around the world, enthralling audiences and establishing cult followings in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and many other countries.
With its high-quality animation (which even included some 3-D effects achieved via rotoscoping), epic story lines, mature writing (including some well-handled pathos and romance), well-developed character arcs, and superb voice acting, "Star Blazers" raised the bar for not only televised animation, but also sci-fi drama in general. The writing found in "Star Blazers" easily outshone the best efforts of the creatively bankrupt sci-fi dramas of the time, including "Battlestar Galactica", "Buck Rogers", and "Space: 1999". In some respects, "Star Blazers" even outshone the ubiquitous reruns of "Star Trek". This didn't happen by accident-- working from translations of the original show, Claster Television had the entire series re-written and re-edited to meet the requirements of Western audiences. In the process of such an undertaking, Claster Television actually improved on the original.
Part of this was due to cultural differences between Japanese and Western audiences, resulting in Claster Television having to make a number of judgement calls during the rewriting and re-editing process. For example, a prologue detailing the sinking of the Yamato during the Second World War was excised, as it spoke to allegorical references found in the Japanese version. In this deleted opening, the original Yamato is sunk by American fighters during a fierce battle, which has numerous parallels, in terms of specific sequences and music, to a later scene in which Gamilon fighters attack the space-faring Yamato. From this, it becomes obvious that the Gamilon's are thinly-veiled Americans, the nuclear planet bombs represent the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the series is a revisionist view of the War in the Pacific (this 'nationalistic' viewpoint is actually quite common in Japanese science fiction, and can also be seen in the "Godzilla" movies that were made by Toho Studios in the 90's). Obviously, the original opening had to go. Other changes reflecting differences in cultural norms included the removal of fleeting nudity, scenes of bloodshed, and transforming Dr. Sane's sake into mineral water (in case you didn't notice, the good doctor was inebriated most of the time).
Despite rebuilding the series from the ground up, the core elements of the "Star Blazers" remained faithful to "Yamato". The first season, "The Quest for Iscandar", takes place in the year 2199, when the Earth is buckling under constant nuclear bombardment by an alien race called the Gamilons, a stellar empire headed by Desslok. The long war with the Gamilons has rendered the Earth's surface uninhabitable, forcing humanity to live in vast underground cities. Furthermore, it is estimated that the Earth will be unable to sustain life within one year.
However, humanity is given hope when they receive a message from Queen Starsha of the planet Iscandar. She offers the people of Earth an element that will restore Earth's ecosystem, CosmoDNA, as well as the technology necessary to make the 148,000 light-year journey in order to retrieve it. Using the hull of the ancient battleship Yamato, a space cruiser named the Argo is built for the long journey. Captain Avatar, a veteran of the Gamilon war, assembles a crew of Earth's best and brightest, including the brash First Officer Derek Wildstar, the lovely radar operator Nova, the fearless navigator Mark Venture, the emotional robot IQ-9, the cyborg Chief Engineer Sandor, and the world-weary Chief Medical Officer Dr. Sane. With an immovable deadline and an untested ship, the Argo begins the long journey to Iscandar, a journey that will become the basis of legends.
The story then continued in the second series, entitled "The Comet Empire", which finds the crew of the Argo violating direct orders when they go out to investigate what may be a new threat to Earth's sovereignty, the Comet Empire. Unfortunately, they quickly learn that the threat is real and that the rebuilt Earth fleet is no match for the military might of the Comet Empire, especially since it has recruited the remains of Desslok's forces.
Unfortunately, few saw the third series "The Bolar Wars", which had the crew of the Argo caught in a war between a redeemed Desslok and the forces of the Bolar Federation. This latecomer was not translated for Western audiences until 1985, and due to lack of funding and interest, the quality of the dubbing and writing was disappointingly inferior to its predecessors. As the years passed, time and new anime imports (namely "Robotech" and "The Transformers") eventually caught up with "Star Blazers", and the last episode aired sometime in the mid-1980s, vanishing from television screens around the world. Though a couple of videotape editions of the three series have been released, the first set by Westchester, followed by the high-quality re-masters issued by Voyager Entertainment (the distribution arm of the company that originally produced "Yamato"), "Star Blazers" never aired again on television. The future of the series became even more doubtful when the Japanese arm of Voyager Entertainment went bankrupt in 1997. Fortunately, the legacy of "Star Blazers" is far from forgotten.
You Have Always Been Here
Since the early 1980s, the influence of "Star Blazers" could been seen in Western sci-fi. For example, a number of interesting parallels to "Star Blazers" can be seen in the second and third "Star Trek" movies. In "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" and "Yamato: New Journey" (a movie that takes place between "The Comet Empire" and "The Bolar Wars"), both captains must go into battle with a ship staffed by a trainee crew, and complications (posts being abandoned) ensue as a result. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock" shared a number of common plot points with "The Comet Empire" series-- both the Enterprise and the Argo undergo refits that automate most of the ship's systems, both captains feel compelled to act against orders and steal their ships out of drydock (while narrowly dodging a closing gate), and are subsequently given chase by the most advanced ship in the fleet (the USS Excelsior in "Star Trek III" and the Andromeda in "Star Blazers").
Even today, almost two decades after it aired, the influence of "Star Blazers" can still be seen in "Crusade", J. Michael Stracynski's follow-up to "Babylon 5". In addition to the similarity in premise alluded to earlier, the central set-piece of "Crusade", the Excalibur, shares some likenesses to the Argo. Like the Argo, which was built using blueprints provided by Queen Starsha, the Excalibur is a ship built with alien technology (a combination of Vorlon and Minbari). Similarly, the Excalibur's main weapon is a powerful main gun that uses up all of the ship's energy upon firing (requiring a significant recharge time) which is not unlike the Argo's wave motion gun, which would direct all the energy from the wave motion engine into a single focused beam, leaving the ship momentarily powerless afterwards. Is it mere coincidence, or is Straczynski subtly paying homage to a classic work as he did for "The Lord of the Rings" and the works of H.P. Lovecraft in "Babylon 5"?
The Dawn of a New Age?
Since the early- to mid-1990s, "Star Blazers" has enjoyed somewhat of a revival. Over the years, a number of fan organizations and Internet campaigns have sprung up around the world on the strength of the series' loyal following, building support for a return of "Star Blazers" to the screen.
One of the biggest stories circulating among "Star Blazers" fans is the possibility of a live-action feature film. Back in 1997, Disney purchased sufficient rights from Voyager Entertainment to allow for the production of a live-action movie, hopefully the first of a new sci-fi franchise. With Oscar-nominated screenwriter Tab Murphy (who wrote Disney's animated "Tarzan") attached to the project to write the script, the live-action film was originally slated for release sometime in 1999 or 2000 (coinciding with the twentieth anniversary of the original series).
The CGI-effects-dominated movie would follow a similar story to the first series, with the Earth close to death in the year 2199 from constant nuclear bombardment by Desslok of Gamelon. The USS Arizona, under the command of Captain Rafe Kogen, heads off to distant Iskandar in the hopes of obtaining a substance that will restore Earth's ecosystem. Along for the ride are hot-shot pilot Derek Wilder, mysterious scientist Nova, and tough-as-nails space marine Sgt. Knox. In essence, it seems that the Disney project would remain faithful to the original concept, with a number of the cosmetic elements (such as character names and the production design) deviating from the original series. However, since that initial buzz two years ago, additional news has not been so forthcoming. Unfortunately, it seems that the "Star Blazers" movie has since fallen into 'development hell', like 90% of the projects in Hollywood, leaving the possibility of a live-action feature uncertain.
More recently, in August of 1999, a partnership between studioNEXT.com and the American arm of Voyager Entertainment (which is still soluble) began broadcasting sample "Star Blazers" episodes over the World Wide Web. This 8-week long experiment was designed to generate interest among fans and non-fans for the series, possibly as a gauge for future "Star Blazers" releases. For example, there still are five feature-length "Yamato" films that are only available in the original Japanese language (with English subtitles), as well as a limited-run series that was only aired in Japan, "Yamato 2520" (which takes place three centuries after the original series and concerns itself with the 17th incarnation of the Yamato). Based on the response to the studioNEXT.com promotion, Voyager Entertainment may reward "Star Blazers" loyalists with new movies and something akin to "Star Blazers: The Next Generation".
A War Without End
Twenty years ago, "Star Blazers" catapulted from being an unknown Japanese import to becoming a cultural phenomenon that forever changed the paradigms of science fiction and animation, endearing a generation of fans in the process. Now, two decades later, "Star Blazers" continues to capture the imagination of audiences around the world with its epic tales of heroism and sacrifice to a new generation. How the rest of the "Star Blazers" story will unfold still remains to be seen, but in the present, the legacy of "Star Blazers" continues to shine brightly.
-
Wow, I leave for a while, and in the morning, this place is exploding and devolving into another war of words!
Who was it who said...
Can't we...all...just get along...
-
I didn't know twat was a racial term. Or are you standing up for all the oppressed castles in the stars?
Thanks for the entertainment!
I'm staying away from those four-letter buzz words, Likker. I'm not risking my account. Having too much fun debating morality with the KBF and FPF.
And yes, for the oppressed castles in the stars ...
A dreamer-realist, gone Carrie who met the Exorcist lovechild on a street corner. All that blood in the gymnasium made me ill and rather jaded.
<S>
AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-
Erm...where again is this "debate" you're having on "morality" with the KBF occurring? Maybe I've missed it...
The other KBF guy walked out hours ago, pummeled with truth and reality until he admitted he hated SFC3. I'm onto TRUE life forms like Cleavan, who actually has a point.
-
Hmmm...it was either when I said:
"Everything WT touches turns to crap"
Or
"Dork"
-
OK, I'll post his here, I posted something similar in another thread but it probably wasn't read.
I'm not a SFB player, and could care less about SFB. I do however vastly prefer OP over 3. I have tried 3 but I just can't get the same enthusiasm for it as I can for any of the older titles. It's not a matter of ship models or race, its just a matter of content, OP has much more for me than 3 and it doesn't have that infernal AV(I'm totally in agreement with Cleaven on that point, AV gives me a sour taste). I didn't buy those games for a Trek game, I bought them looking for a Space ship Battle simulator.
As far a shunning of 3 goes, I don't think its anything more than the fact that most of those still in the OP section have tried it and just don't care much for it to switch, and to be blunt as some have pointed out, some in the 3 crowd don't seem to like us (or rather the game we like, OP) much either and aren't shy of making it known, which to be fair has probably affected my view of 3.
What would be involved in drawing both communities together anyway? I am curious what this means to both you WT and Nanner, what would you like to see thats different now as far as the games go? Other than sharing mod/server-setup ideas perhaps I can't think of anything that would change?
P.S. The BCG doesn't have plasma, the BCF does and rockets are a Cannon weapon in Star Trek, there just aparently obselete by TNG and theres no evidence of them being emplaced on Fed vessels, (though I don't think there's much evidence saying they weren't either ;) ). However I fail to see how this is relevant in the current discussion anyway.
I have never seen or read about missles being used in Star Trek niether TOS or TMP.I have read Star Trek novels.I already answered the F-BCG .
-
Hmmm...it was either when I said:
"Everything WT touches turns to crap"
Or
"Dork"
It was the dork part. It's all good, KBF. It was that part where you admitted there are TWO communities and we should just own up to the fact and stop trying to bring us together. I agreed with you yesterday, but Cleavan actually has the capacity for tri-level thinking and I prefer his debates as opposed to your flamebait.
-
And yes, Age ... I was referring to the BCG. I'm tired, Cleavan has worn me out. I think he took a nap. I never got one.
-
OK, I'll post his here, I posted something similar in another thread but it probably wasn't read.
I'm not a SFB player, and could care less about SFB. I do however vastly prefer OP over 3. I have tried 3 but I just can't get the same enthusiasm for it as I can for any of the older titles. It's not a matter of ship models or race, its just a matter of content, OP has much more for me than 3 and it doesn't have that infernal AV(I'm totally in agreement with Cleaven on that point, AV gives me a sour taste). I didn't buy those games for a Trek game, I bought them looking for a Space ship Battle simulator.
As far a shunning of 3 goes, I don't think its anything more than the fact that most of those still in the OP section have tried it and just don't care much for it to switch, and to be blunt as some have pointed out, some in the 3 crowd don't seem to like us (or rather the game we like, OP) much either and aren't shy of making it known, which to be fair has probably affected my view of 3.
What would be involved in drawing both communities together anyway? I am curious what this means to both you WT and Nanner, what would you like to see thats different now as far as the games go? Other than sharing mod/server-setup ideas perhaps I can't think of anything that would change?
P.S. The BCG doesn't have plasma, the BCF does and rockets are a Cannon weapon in Star Trek, there just aparently obselete by TNG and theres no evidence of them being emplaced on Fed vessels, (though I don't think there's much evidence saying they weren't either ;) ). However I fail to see how this is relevant in the current discussion anyway.
I have never seen or read about missles being used in Star Trek niether TOS or TMP.I have read Star Trek novels.I already answered the F-BCG .
Their existence was mentioned in an early episode of TNG. They were also described as outdated and were of Rekellian origin? some small race at anyrate but were aparently effective enough to destroy completly a Klingon warship with its shields down. I believe it's in the first season, the one with three klingons who are rescued from a drifting derelict freighter (which was evidently armed with said rockets).
-
Well that's a nice long cut and paste, pity you didn't read the rest of the site that you found the link for. You will see though that they created the Eleventh Fleet first.
-
You know, WaterTiger, if you were to take every post that you've ever made on these forums and delete them, nothing constructive would be lost. How sad is that, man?
-
Well that's a nice long cut and paste, pity you didn't read the rest of the site that you found the link for. You will see though that they created the Eleventh Fleet first.
I read it. It is irrelevant.
And you are totallly OTT. This was locked in another thread. It has been asked and answered.
Now, the F-BCG?
Explain that Mr. SFB purist, please, as it applies to the use of plasma on a FEDERATION vessel.
<S>
-
You know, WaterTiger, if you were to take every post that you've ever made on these forums and delete them, nothing constructive would be lost. How sad is that, man?
That is the whole point Rod. The same could be said for every, single one of you.
Get some popcorn. Enjoy the show.
<S> :brickwall:
-
There is no F-BFG in SFB. Please check your references and try again.
-
And yes, Age ... I was referring to the BCG. I'm tired, Cleavan has worn me out. I think he took a nap. I never got one.
If you are referring to your question about canon (note spelling) Star Trek, I've already told you I'm not here for Star Trek, canon or otherwise (but I do like watching the shows).
-
There is no F-BFG in SFB. Please check your references and try again.
EAW/OP, Rod, keep up .. The game as it applies to the show. You just wake up? Go back and read the thread, then catch up. Thanks!
-
Well that's a nice long cut and paste, pity you didn't read the rest of the site that you found the link for. You will see though that they created the Eleventh Fleet first.
I read it. It is irrelevant.
And you are totallly OTT. This was locked in another thread. It has been asked and answered.
Now, the F-BFG?
Explain that Mr. SFB purist, please, as it applies to the use of plasma on a FEDERATION vessel.
<S>
BFG? Did he really say BFG? Damn I coughed tea all over my keyboard. That is so Freudian, I'm dying. What game are we playing again?
-
Why is the fact that the BCF has plasma's relevent to a discussion on why the community needs to come together?
Or for that matter the relevence of Cannon in the community coming together?
PS I saw your post Age but after the fact, I type so slowly that there were too many posts, :-[
sorry, hope I didn't offend
-
You know, WaterTiger, if you were to take every post that you've ever made on these forums and delete them, nothing constructive would be lost. How sad is that, man?
That is the whole point Rod. The same could be said for every, single one of you.
Get some popcorn. Enjoy the show.
<S> :brickwall:
You're wrong, as usual. Many people here contribute to the game. They actually do things that enhance the game and other peoples gaming experience. You, on the other hand, have absolutely nothing constructive to offer. You are here to be a purely destructive and chaotic force.
-
I rather like BFG, it got my nephews interested in tabletop gaming over playing 5-min matches in starcraft ;D
-
There is no F-BFG in SFB. Please check your references and try again.
EAW/OP, Rod, keep up .. The game as it applies to the show. You just wake up? Go back and read the thread, then catch up. Thanks!
Sorry. No F-BFG in EAW or OP either. Keep trying.
-
WaterTiger, the F-BCG doesn't have plasma on it. You've been told that several times, just shows you selectively read stuff addressed to you. You mean the BCF.
As for where in Star Trek do Fed ships have plasma on them, no idea. I don't play this game for Star Trek, I play it for SFB. In fact, I'd be happier if SFB wasn't based on Star Trek at all, then we wouldn't have the "frkkn good duys" attitude and balance problems resulting from that.
-
BCG, BFG -- already edited.
Call it the BFD!
Where did the plasma come from?
You sit here and make it a point back on page 2 somewhere, skirt the answer, talk poor Age into a circle (thanks Age for fixing that) ... and then refuse to get real!
POINT IS NONE OF THIS MATTERS!!
WE ARE A COMMUNITY OF PILOTS WHO PLAY THE TREK SERIES OF GAMES -- AND THE ATTITUDES FROM THE TYPICAL OP/EAW (not all, cuz Mog is one fo the few who doesn't generalize) PILOT FRANKLY SUCKS AS IT APPLIES TO SFC3.
THIS IS A "COMMUNITY" BOARD!
Gah!
We don't even want you to fly SFC3. FBF is right ... two mindsets. Something happened to that head of yours Cleavan ...
Go back to Nanner's original post. Read it again, and get back OTT.
<S>
-
OK, I'll post his here, I posted something similar in another thread but it probably wasn't read.
I'm not a SFB player, and could care less about SFB. I do however vastly prefer OP over 3. I have tried 3 but I just can't get the same enthusiasm for it as I can for any of the older titles. It's not a matter of ship models or race, its just a matter of content, OP has much more for me than 3 and it doesn't have that infernal AV(I'm totally in agreement with Cleaven on that point, AV gives me a sour taste). I didn't buy those games for a Trek game, I bought them looking for a Space ship Battle simulator.
As far a shunning of 3 goes, I don't think its anything more than the fact that most of those still in the OP section have tried it and just don't care much for it to switch, and to be blunt as some have pointed out, some in the 3 crowd don't seem to like us (or rather the game we like, OP) much either and aren't shy of making it known, which to be fair has probably affected my view of 3.
What would be involved in drawing both communities together anyway? I am curious what this means to both you WT and Nanner, what would you like to see thats different now as far as the games go? Other than sharing mod/server-setup ideas perhaps I can't think of anything that would change?
P.S. The BCG doesn't have plasma, the BCF does and rockets are a Cannon weapon in Star Trek, there just aparently obselete by TNG and theres no evidence of them being emplaced on Fed vessels, (though I don't think there's much evidence saying they weren't either ;) ). However I fail to see how this is relevant in the current discussion anyway.
I have never seen or read about missles being used in Star Trek niether TOS or TMP.I have read Star Trek novels.I already answered the F-BCG .
Their existence was mentioned in an early episode of TNG. They were also described as outdated and were of Rekellian origin? some small race at anyrate but were aparently effective enough to destroy completly a Klingon warship with its shields down. I believe it's in the first season, the one with three klingons who are rescued from a drifting derelict freighter (which was evidently armed with said rockets).
This is now TNG you are talking about.How come the Rekellians in the SFC3 don't have them?
-
You mean the BCF.
Thanks, Mog. Yea.
Smacktards know what I mean and avoid the issue.
None of it matters. THAT is the point.
<S>
-
WaterTiger, the F-BCG doesn't have plasma on it. You've been told that several times, just shows you selectively read stuff addressed to you. You mean the BCF.
As for where in Star Trek do Fed ships have plasma on them, no idea. I don't play this game for Star Trek, I play it for SFB. In fact, I'd be happier if SFB wasn't based on Star Trek at all, then we wouldn't have the "frkkn good duys" attitude and balance problems resulting from that.
I think he seriously means BFG, as used in a certain FPS game of some fame.
-
Ok, now I'm confused, I agree, whether the BCF has plasma doesn't matter to the topic on hand. So what was the point of bringing it up?
-
Ok, now I'm confused, I agree, whether the BCF has plasma doesn't matter to the topic on hand. So what was the point of bringing it up?
There is no point. By the time Cleavan talks the thread into a circle and Likker gets involved, then Age, me and Rod -- all reality is lost.
I suggest we all go back and read UncleNanner's original post.
<S>
-
BCG, BFG -- already edited.
Call it the BFD!
Where did the plasma come from?
You sit here and make it a point back on page 2 somewhere, skirt the answer, talk poor Age into a circle (thanks Age for fixing that) ... and then refuse to get real!
POINT IS NONE OF THIS MATTERS!!
WE ARE A COMMUNITY OF PILOTS WHO PLAY THE TREK SERIES OF GAMES -- AND THE ATTITUDES FROM THE TYPICAL OP/EAW (not all, cuz Mog is one fo the few who doesn't generalize) PILOT FRANKLY SUCKS AS IT APPLIES TO SFC3.
THIS IS A "COMMUNITY" BOARD!
Gah!
We don't even want you to fly SFC3. FBF is right ... two mindsets. Something happened to that head of yours Cleavan ...
Go back to Nanner's original post. Read it again, and get back OTT.
<S>
Sorry what point did I make on page 2? As I said I'm not going to make any canon arguements because I don't follow that line of thinking. But if you point me at the post I made which has something to do with BFG's or whatever cannon (note spelling) is bothering you then I will be most pleased to explain what I said.
-
OK, F-BCF. :rofl: Are you really saying that you don't know where Federation plasma tech comes from in SFB? (Please, don't try and say SFC not SFB. If you take SFB out of SFC you'd be looking at your desktop.) Because, if you don't, you need to do as I recommended and check your reference materials. We are not here to educate the unwilling.
-
BCG, BFG -- already edited.
Call it the BFD!
Where did the plasma come from?
You sit here and make it a point back on page 2 somewhere, skirt the answer, talk poor Age into a circle (thanks Age for fixing that) ... and then refuse to get real!
POINT IS NONE OF THIS MATTERS!!
WE ARE A COMMUNITY OF PILOTS WHO PLAY THE TREK SERIES OF GAMES -- AND THE ATTITUDES FROM THE TYPICAL OP/EAW (not all, cuz Mog is one fo the few who doesn't generalize) PILOT FRANKLY SUCKS AS IT APPLIES TO SFC3.
THIS IS A "COMMUNITY" BOARD!
Gah!
We don't even want you to fly SFC3. FBF is right ... two mindsets. Something happened to that head of yours Cleavan ...
Go back to Nanner's original post. Read it again, and get back OTT.
<S>
Sorry what point did I make on page 2. As I said I'm not going to make any canon arguements because I don't follow that line of thinking. But if you point me at the post I made which has something to do with BFG's or whatever cannon (note spelling) is bothering you then I will be most pleased to explain what I said.
**sigh*
While making your point about SFC3 angular velocity and my point about -shift and +shift being similar.
The issue is the attitude towards the game ...
Bottom line: You leave US alone on SFC3 and don't puke on our game (spit on keyboards or anything else) and we will respect your rights to hate our guts and knock the hell out of a good game.
SFC3 -- for all its inherant bugs and imbalances -- is a more complex game than EAW/OP ever dreamed of being. And please, do as Nanner suggested, get one of the mods out there and play for yourself.
And IGNORE AV. I will see if it is a source code issue and can be zeroed out in the meantime. If there is a way to zero out AV just to make Cleavan happy, I am going to do it just cuz you are so fun to debate with.
<S>
-
Ok, now I'm confused, I agree, whether the BCF has plasma doesn't matter to the topic on hand. So what was the point of bringing it up?
There is no point. By the time Cleavan talks the thread into a circle and Likker gets involved, then Age, me and Rod -- all reality is lost.
I suggest we all go back and read UncleNanner's original post.
<S>
Hang on a mo, do you mean this statement of mine?
"I understand there are a few obstacles in the road of the OP source code, but nothing insurmountable. As long as those responsible for the IP express a desire to negotiate those abstacles and make it available then I am very optimistic. Plasma bolts and G-racks please.
Oh dear I'm spilling my tea again. If this is what you mean, then you really crack me up. That is just so funny. Talk about Chinese Whispers.
Of course if it's something else I said just show me and I will explain it too.
-
BCG, BFG -- already edited.
Call it the BFD!
Where did the plasma come from?
You sit here and make it a point back on page 2 somewhere, skirt the answer, talk poor Age into a circle (thanks Age for fixing that) ... and then refuse to get real!
POINT IS NONE OF THIS MATTERS!!
WE ARE A COMMUNITY OF PILOTS WHO PLAY THE TREK SERIES OF GAMES -- AND THE ATTITUDES FROM THE TYPICAL OP/EAW (not all, cuz Mog is one fo the few who doesn't generalize) PILOT FRANKLY SUCKS AS IT APPLIES TO SFC3.
THIS IS A "COMMUNITY" BOARD!
Gah!
We don't even want you to fly SFC3. FBF is right ... two mindsets. Something happened to that head of yours Cleavan ...
Go back to Nanner's original post. Read it again, and get back OTT.
<S>
Sorry what point did I make on page 2. As I said I'm not going to make any canon arguements because I don't follow that line of thinking. But if you point me at the post I made which has something to do with BFG's or whatever cannon (note spelling) is bothering you then I will be most pleased to explain what I said.
**sigh*
While making your point about SFC3 angular velocity and my point about -shift and +shift being similar.
The issue is the attitude towards the game ...
Bottom line: You leave US alone on SFC3 and don't puke on our game (spit on keyboards or anything else) and we will respect your rights to hate our guts and knock the hell out of a good game.
SFC3 -- for all its inherant bugs and imbalances -- is a more complex game than EAW/OP ever dreamed of being. And please, do as Nanner suggested, get one of the mods out there and play for yourself.
And IGNORE AV. I will see if it is a source code issue and can be zeroed out in the meantime. If there is a way to zero out AV just to make Cleavan happy, I am going to do it just cuz you are so fun to debate with.
<S>
Ahh okay that will be where I said this:-
"So you've given up on the idea of OP having AV effects. Very commendable. I don't know why you had to say it in the first place.
And the attack shifts in OP have a very different effect in the game when compared to the angular velocity modifier seen in SFC:TNG. One leads to a game of Snoopy Vs The Red Baron, and the other leads to a different set of tactics more appropriate to large ships in space. Just take out the AV, force it to zero permanently and you will get rid of the WW1 fighter sim where angular velocity is a targetting factor, and come back into the realm of starships. "
Nothing I can see about cannon (note spelling) or BFG's here.
Oh and sorry about the previous post but it was the only place I could see where I made a reference to plasma.
-
Bottom line: You leave US alone on SFC3 and don't puke on our game (spit on keyboards or anything else) and we will respect your rights to hate our guts and knock the hell out of a good game.
<S>
SFC2ers don't hate SFC3ers. It's not personal as you would like to make it seem. We just don't want to play SFC3. Sorry if that makes you feel insecure somehow.
PS. Good night. I have to get up for work in a few hrs. Take care all.
-
Wow, I leave for a while, and in the morning, this place is exploding and devolving into another war of words!
Who was it who said...
Can't we...all...just get along...
It was Rodney King, Dashey.
Answer to his question: NO!
The community is much like the freeway in So. Cali. There will always be someone to flip off.
SFC:TNG. One leads to a game of Snoopy Vs The Red Baron,
Gah! Snoopy. I work with Unity modders to bring EAW/OP ships to attract OP'ers -- make VC's and not scan wars-based garbage -- to have them refer to this as Snoopy vs. Red Baron!
-
Plasma bolts I don't understand them :banghead:There is one thing to AV is put a piece of tape over it on your screen.That solves that.
-
Wow, I leave for a while, and in the morning, this place is exploding and devolving into another war of words!
Who was it who said...
Can't we...all...just get along...
It was Rodney King, Dashey.
Answer to his question: NO!
The community is much like the freeway in So. Cali. There will always be someone to flip off.
SFC:TNG. One leads to a game of Snoopy Vs The Red Baron,
Gah! Snoopy. I work with Unity modders to bring EAW/OP ships to attract OP'ers -- make VC's and not scan wars-based garbage -- to have them refer to this as Snoopy vs. Red Baron!
So you've finally started reading the posts? Well I suppose that explains a few things.
-
This is now TNG you are talking about.How come the Rekellians in the SFC3 don't have them?
It may not have been the Rekellians, like I said I wasn't totally sure, however even if it was, just because something is cannon doesn't mean it automatically makes it into the game, after all fighters are cannon and aren't seen in SFC3.
As far as Nanner's original post goes, from my point of view, some in the SFC3 group disparage OP. Admittedly I am biased because I like OP but referring to ALL OP players as SFB elitists annoys me because it is not true, I'm not one and seeing all 3 players being likewise generalized as being young whipper snappers with no attention span is also annoying. However, from my point of view I've seen more disparaging remarks about OP than 3 and seeing some in the 3 crowd complaining of getting no respect and then putting down the OP crowd seems hypocritical.
Again I'm admittedly biased but you attract more flies with honey than with vinegar and you will have to realize that you're not going to attract everyone anyway no matter what you do. By most of the proponents arguments for SFC3 I should be an avid player of 3. I'm not and probably won't ever be because I just don't enjoy it as much as OP and the rather harsh language thrown by the proponents hasn't helped either.
Age, Cleaven's referring to the fact that though you can ignore the AV indicator, you can't ignore it's effects, it still forces you to fly in a certain manner to get effective shots
-
Plasma bolts I don't understand them :banghead: There is one thing to AV is put a piece of tape over it on your screen.That solves that.
Ahhh, I was wondering how it was done. Thanks for the tip.
-
Angular Velocity is a minor factor in SFC3 - the only time it has any real effect is when you move in to point blank range. The Range & accuracy of the weapon are the major determining factors.
To anyone who has actually watched Trek, knows that Angular Velocity IS a factor in Star Trek. Watch DS9, watch Voyager. You don't see them avoiding enemy fire by jamming the opponents computer, you hear two words "Evasive Maneouvres". If Angular Velocity had no effect whatsoever, then why both with Evasive Maneouvres? It would have no effect whatsoever. In truth, EW is an SFB thing, and to a Star Trek fan, not an SFB fan, Angular Velocity is a far more canon solution. Even if it is overdone in SFC3.
Personally, I like SFC2 & OP, however there are many things that I don't like about it, Missiles are first and foremost, the most anti-Trek thing I have ever seen in a Trek game. Don't waste time pointing to the Romulan Wars or some small Rakellian ship. The Federation, Klingons, Romulans and so on did not use missiles in the timeline that SFC2 & OP is set in. It doesn't even make sense, why use Missiles when you can use Photons?
The other thing I didn't like was EW, it simply didn't make sense in relation to Star Trek. At least not in the way the game presents it. It might be SFB, but it's not Star Trek, and that is why I bought the game in the first place - to play a Star Trek game.
-
SFC:TNG. One leads to a game of Snoopy Vs The Red Baron,
Gah! Snoopy. I work with Unity modders to bring EAW/OP ships to attract OP'ers -- make VC's and not scan wars-based garbage -- to have them refer to this as Snoopy vs. Red Baron!
What on earth makes you think that by putting some ship models into the game, you'll get thoise of us who don't like to play SFC3 to try it? It's not the ships, it's the systems and rules. SFC3 lacks the weapons and rules that we like to use. A Lyran with photons and no ESGs is not a Lyran. It's a Fed with a better paint job.
-
SFC:TNG. One leads to a game of Snoopy Vs The Red Baron,
Gah! Snoopy. I work with Unity modders to bring EAW/OP ships to attract OP'ers -- make VC's and not scan wars-based garbage -- to have them refer to this as Snoopy vs. Red Baron!
As I said earlier, for me and I know for a few others for sure, it isn't the models or the VCs, it's the basic underlying gameplay, it's just not as interesting or as fun as OP in our opinion.
-
Getting back to the sentiment that actually started this thread...
Yes...on the SFC:OP side of things we're dealing with differences between players who want the game to be as close to SFB as possible, those that don't care about SFB at all, and those, like me, who like using SFB as a reference but feel that the game in it's current form is not, cannot nor will it ever be SFB. It's SFC a game based on many of SFB's rules.
We've been debating about and working on our game for a long time. We benefited from numerous patches and while the current version of OP isn't perfect, its the best we've had and most of us are happy with that. The fact the we got several patches and SFC3 did not is hardly any of our fault. It had to do with what Taldren was allowed to do. It seems to me that with regard to patching SFC3, they were hamstrung. I think Taldren continued to support/patch OP mainly because they could and ONE guy made it his mission to do what he could for the game on which he had worked so hard. That's too bad for the SFC3 crew, but they doesn't mean necessarily that OP received preferential treatment. Again, I think Activision had a lot to say about what happened in SFC3 and what did not.
Maybe there are SFB snobs who thumb their noses at SFC3 and it's players. I don't think these folks are in the majority. Some of us play both games. Some who play both like one better than the other and that one] isn't always OP. I think that by and large, people who play OP just don't like SFC3 (if they've bothered to try it at all) and thus just don't get involved with what goes on in SFC3. I can't say there's a lot of people who play SFC3 who care too much about what goes on in OP-land, either. That doesn't mean that the two groups cannot co-exist or explore ways to work and play together. An example is LB5. It was an interesting experiment and was the first time (as far as I know) that a campaign was run across two different dynaverse platforms. Sure it was imperfect...that's to be expected on the first time doing something like that. I'm sure if someone chooses to try it again, it will go better. However, this is proof to me that there are opportunities for prosperous cooperation and friendly co-existence.
Aside from my not like the game (SFC3) quite as well, I've always had a problem with some of the more vocal individuals in the SFC3 group. Frankly, WT, while you've never transgressed against me specifically, you're exactly the type of person that keeps me away from SFC3 to an extent. I've followed your act from Day One and I've grimaced each and every time you've stirred something up. It seems to me you've been a factor in just about every bit of drama that has come to pass in the SFC3 group. I'd be shocked if you cannot see that your behavior is detrimental to how the SFC3 group is perceived as well as some of the rifts from which the SFC3 group suffers. Is it lost on you that you are actually reviled by people who play both games...some of who don't even play SFC3 at all but know about you? How do you figure this has come to pass? Do you take any responsibility? If so, do you intend to do anything to rectify the situation? I don't doubt for a second that you care about the game and want it to grow, but the constant drama that surrounds you and some of your cohorts doesn't do anything to entice people want to become involved in the game. I have little doubt in my mind that if you stopped feeding your persecution complex and just concentrated on playing the game, this entire community (I mean ALL of us from both games) would be much better off.
Hey...I'm aware we have our share of wankers in the SFC2/OP group, as well. We're not perfect. Well, Cleaven is, but that's beside the point. ;)
There is no vast conspiracy among the SFC2/OP group to destroy or hinder SFC3. There is no burning hatred or deep-rooted disrespect among the SFC2/OP group for the game of SFC3 and those who play it. Some dislike SFC3...some just don't care. Some (like me), actually do care and want the best for SFC3 and will continue to dabble in it for as long as it's around. The feelings of dislike or indifference toward SFC3 should not be construed as a disrespect for SFC3. or those who play it and I think it's wrong and completely unfair to try and lay the blame at the feet of the SFBers in the SFC2/OP group. It's not up to those who play SFC2/OP to ensure SFC3's future or salve the hurt feelings of those who play it. I don't believe they're responsbile at all for the state of SFC3.
I do know that there are those of us who want to be involved with both games and that D.net and the DGA are committed to supporting both equally and without bias. We're just trying to get off the ground here and all this BS and drama isn't helping us stay focused on what we need to do.
The twp games are dffierent. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look for ways to bring some crossover and cooperation between the two groups of players and it darned sure doesn't mean we can't respect each other and try to get along.
Here's hoping that at some point, people finally get tired of this stuff and decide to just get back to playing the game(s) and having fun rather than feeding their egos or stoking the fires of their various neuroses...and that you haven't run the rest of us off in the process.
-
Jem,
I will conceed that the "gentleman" factor for OP/EAW seems to be more enhanced. I think the OP'ers are generally more -- shall we say -- 'thoughtful.' I think friedships are more defined and less confrontational (at this time anyway) in EAW/OP as opposed to SFC3.
Now, if we could mae POLITENESS a server checked validated client file, hoorah!
-
Angular Velocity is a minor factor in SFC3 - the only time it has any real effect is when you move in to point blank range. The Range & accuracy of the weapon are the major determining factors.
To anyone who has actually watched Trek, knows that Angular Velocity IS a factor in Star Trek. Watch DS9, watch Voyager. You don't see them avoiding enemy fire by jamming the opponents computer, you hear two words "Evasive Maneouvres". If Angular Velocity had no effect whatsoever, then why both with Evasive Maneouvres? It would have no effect whatsoever. In truth, EW is an SFB thing, and to a Star Trek fan, not an SFB fan, Angular Velocity is a far more canon solution. Even if it is overdone in SFC3.
Actually its not angular velocity but delta AV which should be calculated because that is what is going to make the targetting systems miss. And to a plasma user in SFC:TNG, AV is deadly important.
But I have a serious question, in SFC:TNG does using EM affect the indicated AV for the firer?
-
Getting back to the sentiment that actually started this thread...
Yes...on the SFC:OP side of things we're dealing with differences between players who want the game to be as close to SFB as possible, those that don't care about SFB at all, and those, like me, who like using SFB as a reference but feel that the game in it's current form is not, cannot nor will it ever be SFB. It's SFC a game based on many of SFB's rules.
We've been debating about and working on our game for a long time. We benefited from numerous patches and while the current version of OP isn't perfect, its the best we've had and most of us are happy with that. The fact the we got several patches and SFC3 did not is hardly any of our fault. It had to do with what Taldren was allowed to do. It seems to me that with regard to patching SFC3, they were hamstrung. I think Taldren continued to support/patch OP mainly because they could and ONE guy made it his mission to do what he could for the game on which he had worked so hard. That's too bad for the SFC3 crew, but they doesn't mean necessarily that OP received preferential treatment. Again, I think Activision had a lot to say about what happened in SFC3 and what did not.
Maybe there are SFB snobs who thumb their noses at SFC3 and it's players. I don't think these folks are in the majority. Some of us play both games. Some who play both like one better than the other and that one] isn't always OP. I think that by and large, people who play OP just don't like SFC3 (if they've bothered to try it at all) and thus just don't get involved with what goes on in SFC3. I can't say there's a lot of people who play SFC3 who care too much about what goes on in OP-land, either. That doesn't mean that the two groups cannot co-exist or explore ways to work and play together. An example is LB5. It was an interesting experiment and was the first time (as far as I know) that a campaign was run across two different dynaverse platforms. Sure it was imperfect...that's to be expected on the first time doing something like that. I'm sure if someone chooses to try it again, it will go better. However, this is proof to me that there are opportunities for prosperous cooperation and friendly co-existence.
Aside from my not like the game (SFC3) quite as well, I've always had a problem with some of the more vocal individuals in the SFC3 group. Frankly, WT, while you've never transgressed against me specifically, you're exactly the type of person that keeps me away from SFC3 to an extent. I've followed your act from Day One and I've grimaced each and every time you've stirred something up. It seems to me you've been a factor in just about every bit of drama that has come to pass in the SFC3 group. I'd be shocked if you cannot see that your behavior is detrimental to how the SFC3 group is perceived as well as some of the rifts from which the SFC3 group suffers. Is it lost on you that you are actually reviled by people who play both games...some of who don't even play SFC3 at all but know about you? How do you figure this has come to pass? Do you take any responsibility? If so, do you intent to do anything to rectify the situation? I don't doubt for a second that you care about the game and want it to grow, but the constant drama that surrounds you and some of your cohorts doesn't do anything to entice people want to become involved in the game. I have little doubt in my mind that if you stopped feeding your persecution complex and just concentrated on playing the game, this entire community (I mean ALL of us from both games) would be much better off.
Hey...I'm aware we have our share of wankers in the SFC2/OP group, as well. We're not perfect. Well, Cleaven is, but that's beside the point. ;)
There is no vast conspiracy among the SFC2/OP group to destroy or hinder SFC3. There is no burning hatred or deep-rooted disrespect among the SFC2/OP group for the game of SFC3 and those who play it. Some dislike SFC3...some just don't care. So (like me), actually do care and want the best for SFC3 and will continue to dabble in it for as long as it's around. The feelings of dislike or indifference toward SFC3 should not be construed as a disrespect for SFC3. or those who play it and I think it's wrong and completely unfair to try and lay the blame at the feet of the SFBers in the SFC2/OP group. It's not up to those who play SFC2/OP to ensure SFC3's future or salve the hurt feelings of those who play it. I don't believe they're responsbile at all for the state of SFC3.
I do know that there are those of us who want to be involved with both games and that D.net and the DGA are committed to supporting both equally and without bias. We're just trying to get off the ground here and all this BS and drama isn't helping us stay focused on what we need to do.
The twp games are dffierent. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look for ways to bring some crossover and cooperation between the two groups of players and it darned sure doesn't mean we can't respect each other and try to get along.
Here's hoping that at some point, people finally get tired of this stuff and decide to just get back to playing the game(s) and having fun rather than feeding their egos or stoking the fires of their various neuroses...and that you haven't run the rest of us off in the process.
Word Doggy,
Brutha Chuut
P.S. Don't say too much however Cleaven is giving me the best laugh I've had in a long time.......
Roll on Cleaven :thumbsup:
-
Getting back to the sentiment that actually started this thread...
Yes...on the SFC:OP side of things we're dealing with differences between players who want the game to be as close to SFB as possible, those that don't care about SFB at all, and those, like me, who like using SFB as a reference but feel that the game in it's current form is not, cannot nor will it ever be SFB. It's SFC a game based on many of SFB's rules.
We've been debating about and working on our game for a long time. We benefited from numerous patches and while the current version of OP isn't perfect, its the best we've had and most of us are happy with that. The fact the we got several patches and SFC3 did not is hardly any of our fault. It had to do with what Taldren was allowed to do. It seems to me that with regard to patching SFC3, they were hamstrung. I think Taldren continued to support/patch OP mainly because they could and ONE guy made it his mission to do what he could for the game on which he had worked so hard. That's too bad for the SFC3 crew, but they doesn't mean necessarily that OP received preferential treatment. Again, I think Activision had a lot to say about what happened in SFC3 and what did not.
Maybe there are SFB snobs who thumb their noses at SFC3 and it's players. I don't think these folks are in the majority. Some of us play both games. Some who play both like one better than the other and that one] isn't always OP. I think that by and large, people who play OP just don't like SFC3 (if they've bothered to try it at all) and thus just don't get involved with what goes on in SFC3. I can't say there's a lot of people who play SFC3 who care too much about what goes on in OP-land, either. That doesn't mean that the two groups cannot co-exist or explore ways to work and play together. An example is LB5. It was an interesting experiment and was the first time (as far as I know) that a campaign was run across two different dynaverse platforms. Sure it was imperfect...that's to be expected on the first time doing something like that. I'm sure if someone chooses to try it again, it will go better. However, this is proof to me that there are opportunities for prosperous cooperation and friendly co-existence.
Aside from my not like the game (SFC3) quite as well, I've always had a problem with some of the more vocal individuals in the SFC3 group. Frankly, WT, while you've never transgressed against me specifically, you're exactly the type of person that keeps me away from SFC3 to an extent. I've followed your act from Day One and I've grimaced each and every time you've stirred something up. It seems to me you've been a factor in just about every bit of drama that has come to pass in the SFC3 group. I'd be shocked if you cannot see that your behavior is detrimental to how the SFC3 group is perceived as well as some of the rifts from which the SFC3 group suffers. Is it lost on you that you are actually reviled by people who play both games...some of who don't even play SFC3 at all but know about you? How do you figure this has come to pass? Do you take any responsibility? If so, do you intent to do anything to rectify the situation? I don't doubt for a second that you care about the game and want it to grow, but the constant drama that surrounds you and some of your cohorts doesn't do anything to entice people want to become involved in the game. I have little doubt in my mind that if you stopped feeding your persecution complex and just concentrated on playing the game, this entire community (I mean ALL of us from both games) would be much better off.
Hey...I'm aware we have our share of wankers in the SFC2/OP group, as well. We're not perfect. Well, Cleaven is, but that's beside the point. ;)
There is no vast conspiracy among the SFC2/OP group to destroy or hinder SFC3. There is no burning hatred or deep-rooted disrespect among the SFC2/OP group for the game of SFC3 and those who play it. Some dislike SFC3...some just don't care. So (like me), actually do care and want the best for SFC3 and will continue to dabble in it for as long as it's around. The feelings of dislike or indifference toward SFC3 should not be construed as a disrespect for SFC3. or those who play it and I think it's wrong and completely unfair to try and lay the blame at the feet of the SFBers in the SFC2/OP group. It's not up to those who play SFC2/OP to ensure SFC3's future or salve the hurt feelings of those who play it. I don't believe they're responsbile at all for the state of SFC3.
I do know that there are those of us who want to be involved with both games and that D.net and the DGA are committed to supporting both equally and without bias. We're just trying to get off the ground here and all this BS and drama isn't helping us stay focused on what we need to do.
The twp games are dffierent. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look for ways to bring some crossover and cooperation between the two groups of players and it darned sure doesn't mean we can't respect each other and try to get along.
Here's hoping that at some point, people finally get tired of this stuff and decide to just get back to playing the game(s) and having fun rather than feeding their egos or stoking the fires of their various neuroses...and that you haven't run the rest of us off in the process.
Good post, Dog. Excellent perspective, well thought and carefully worded.
I'll try to answer the WT stuff after some sleep. Cleavan wore me out ... Is he always this way? ;)
-
I'll try to answer the WT stuff after some sleep. Cleavan wore me out ... Is he always this way? ;)
Nope he usually doesn't cut people so much slack.
-
But I have a serious question, in SFC:TNG does using EM affect the indicated AV for the firer?
Yes, Cleavan, as far as I know it does. But firing a probe counter balances EM affects for the shooter or just the simple use of good hot keys.
-
Word Doggy,
Brutha Chuut
P.S. Don't say too much however Cleaven is giving me the best laugh I've had in a long time.......
Roll on Cleaven :thumbsup:
Heheh...I've said it before (a few times) and I'll say it again. Cleaven is my hero. :D
-
Far more Eloquent then I could ever be, Dogmatix has hit the head as far as I'm concerned.
-
But I have a serious question, in SFC:TNG does using EM affect the indicated AV for the firer?
Yes, Cleavan, as far as I know it does. But firing a probe counter balances EM affects for the shooter or just the simple use of good hot keys.
Okay, it's just that a while ago (a year ago?) somebody did an analysis and concluded that SFC:TNG EM wasn't worth using so I never have. Anyway I should test it at some stage and see how much it does.
-
Word Doggy,
Brutha Chuut
P.S. Don't say too much however Cleaven is giving me the best laugh I've had in a long time.......
Roll on Cleaven :thumbsup:
Heheh...I've said it before (a few times) and I'll say it again. Cleaven is my hero. :D
Sort of feel like Noel Coward's character, Mr Bridger, in his final scene in the Italian Job.
-
What on earth makes you think that by putting some ship models into the game, you'll get thoise of us who don't like to play SFC3 to try it? It's not the ships, it's the systems and rules. SFC3 lacks the weapons and rules that we like to use. A Lyran with photons and no ESGs is not a Lyran. It's a Fed with a better paint job.
I was naive, Mog. I guess that's why I made the assumption that adding ships from EAW/OP to SFC would make a difference.
I have read the General War rules and the camp layout ... It really looked looked like fun.
The VC's and roleplay on recent SFC3 camps has greatly increased ... maybe we are coming along. Cozbo does a very good job of making it interesting in Unity.
But the rules of General war -- and the complexities -- would be mass anarchy on an SFC3 server. We can't force feed the baby or it will get sick.
Unity was actually one of the very first campaigns -- along with ThePelican -- to come up with a map-to-map carry over in VC's and points and roleplay the limited race aspect of SFC3.
We try, but it never seems enough to collect the Taldrenite player base from OP/EAW.
I swear, Cleavan, I am asking the AV question of other admins as it applies to source code. Maybe it can be zero'd out -- I don't know -- without rearranging the .exe. I'll keep you posted.
These guys love you so much, if I could actually win you over, maybe FPF or KBF would join in for a server run.
<S>
-
But I have a serious question, in SFC:TNG does using EM affect the indicated AV for the firer?
Yes, Cleavan, as far as I know it does. But firing a probe counter balances EM affects for the shooter or just the simple use of good hot keys.
Okay, it's just that a while ago (a year ago?) somebody did an analysis and concluded that SFC:TNG EM wasn't worth using so I never have. Anyway I should test it at some stage and see how much it does.
Cleavan,
The modders for SFC3 have totally changed the game from the ground up as it applies to EM and its affects. This can be done with changes to common settings or base weight (miss factors) and ship profile.
Speed of a ship also greatly increases AV. ThePelican was the first to discover this -- by accident, I might add -- and Unity followed his lead.
There was a campaign where a ship had a neagative -100 profile and we actually pointed this out, and he and Ferrell cracked it over, I think, in some discussions. The faster a ship goes and the lower its profile, the better the AV affects. I was kind of happy to be a part of that discovery.
<S>
-
Ummm, don't look at me to have any influence on what anybody else does, especially not fleets of which I am not associated with (because I can't handle the nasty red and black interface, and I only fly coalition).
-
What on earth makes you think that by putting some ship models into the game, you'll get thoise of us who don't like to play SFC3 to try it? It's not the ships, it's the systems and rules. SFC3 lacks the weapons and rules that we like to use. A Lyran with photons and no ESGs is not a Lyran. It's a Fed with a better paint job.
I was naive, Mog. I guess that's why I made the assumption on adding ships from EAW/OP to SFC would make a difference.
I have read the General War rules and the camp layout ... It really looked looked like fun.
The VC's and roleplay on recent SFC3 camps has greatly increased ... maybe we are coming along. Cozbo does a very good job of making it interesting in Unity.
But the rules of General war -- and the complexities -- would be mass anarchy on an SFC3 server. We can't force feed the baby or it will get sick.
Unity was actually one of the very first campaigns -- along with ThePelican -- to come up with a map-to-map carry over in VC's and points and roleplay the limited race aspect of SFC3.
We try, but it never seems enough to collect the Taldrenite player base from OP/EAW.
I swear, Cleavan, I am asking the AV question of other admins as it applies to source code. Maybe it can be zero'd out -- I don't know -- without rearranging the .exe. I'll keep you posted.
These guys love you so much, if I could actually win you over, maybe FPF or KBF would join in for a server run.
<S>
You misunderstand me. When I say rules, I mean the rules the engine uses, not those that we have developed to conduct a campaign. For example, overloaded weapons unable to fire beyond range 8.99, any ship that has the power can use a level 5 tractor etc. ie it uses a big chunk of the SFB ruleset. That is what makes me prefer the game.
In the Lyran example above, putting photons on a Lyran model does not make it a Lyran ship. It won't have the same characteristics, in other words, it is a Fed ship in smarter clothes.
There are other things that put me off SFC3. No seeking weapons - I ENJOY fighting against seeking weapons. They make me have to concentrate more, and maneuver better. I dislike reverse, I dislike tactical warp, I dislike the AV and I dislike the refit thing. Doesn't exactly leave a lot for me to like (resupply at allied bases I like).
-
and I dislike the refit thing
Moggy,
Refit is EVERYTHING in SFC3. You can create better AV just in a refit. You can reduce overall mass, add warp power, change tractor strength -- w/e.
Man, I never understood any of this either in 14g. Then a guy showed me the inner tricks -- some still yet to be learned -- about the affects of refit. It has as much affect as setting speed or weapons power 1-5 on OP/EAW.
<S>
-
EM in SFC3 is Erratic Maneouvres, NOT evasive Maneouvres - they are two separate things. Evasive Maneouvres is a combination of Erratic Maneouvres and changing the Speed & Direction of your ship.
With Primary Weapons, Phasers & Disruptors, AV has little effect, in fact I believe Primaries have a 90% chance of hitting, regardless of AV. All bar 1 Heavy Beam Weapon also has the same properties as Properties as Primaries (the Klingon Ion Cannon is that weapon). I don't have the source code, so I can't prove this. But after 18 months of testing, I've yet to see AV truly affect Primary Weapons.
AV only really affects Heavy Weapons, specifically Torpedoes, and for those weapons, it DOES make sense. We are told in Trek Canon that a Photon Torpedo has only limited fuel for adjusting it's course. If a two ships are travelling straight towards each other at 1/4 impulse, one fires a Torpedo and the other executes a 90 degree turn and accelerates to full impulse at the same time - then that Torpedo now has to track the ship itself, as the change in Speed & Direction happened AFTER the firing of the weapon(the computer will have fired it along the the best possible course it can calculate). It doesn't mean the Torpedo is going to miss, but the actions of the ships pilot in engaging that evasive maneouvre increased the chances of the weapon missing it's target.
If you change the situation, two ships are flying parallel, but in opposite directions. The same Torpedo is fired, but the defending ship has to make far less effort to avoid the torpedo, because even a small change in direction makes it difficult for the Torpedo to adjust it's course and hit it's target.
In SFC3 - Angular Velocity is not the primary determining factor in weapon accuracy, two factors are, Range - and the difference in Size between the two ships. If a Fighter is flying against a Battleship - the Fighter is unlikely to miss, as he has such a huge target to hit, but the Battleship can miss the Fighter, because the Fighter has vastly superior speed & maneouvrability, it can evade fire quite easily.
In truth, the biggest issue with Weapons is in both SFC3 & SFC2 - and that is Accuracy at Range. Why does a Torpedo miss a stationary target because the weapon is being fired at Range 30? The computer is advanced enough to calculate the correction direction to fire the weapon, so why does it still have a chance of missing?
If you want to play a game that actually gets Starship on Starship physics right, then play Bridge Commander. Phasers & other Beam Weapons never miss in Bridge Commander, but with Torpedoes & Pulse Weapons, you have to make sure you fire them in the right direction, Torpedoes have a limited tracking facility, which can compensate somewhat for evasive maneouvres & a bad angle of fire - but if your torpedo tube is perpendicular to your opponent, that torpedo is going nowhere near your target.
With Mods, you can create anything, a weapon that can loop around and home in on it's target every time is quite doable.
-
I played the LB5 side of SFC3 some, so my experience with 3 is rather up to date. In fact I didn't even try to get it until sometime after the Mods appeared (due to bugetary concerns, I had to fix my comp and had trouble justifying $50 bucks for a game, especially considering I was unemployed).
I do intend to try one or two other mods for it just to be fair but I don't hold out much hope for it to capture my interest over OP, after all, there's only so much the mods can do to change the gameplay, and it would be counterproductive to change it too much. After all it has it's own playerbase that does like the current setup and changing it in an attempt to woo the OP crowd would likely put some off.
-
EM in SFC3 is Erratic Maneouvres, NOT evasive Maneouvres - they are two separate things. Evasive Maneouvres is a combination of Erratic Maneouvres and changing the Speed & Direction of your ship.
Which is why I was asking if EM (eratic) affected AV.
With Primary Weapons, Phasers & Disruptors, AV has little effect, in fact I believe Primaries have a 90% chance of hitting, regardless of AV. All bar 1 Heavy Beam Weapon also has the same properties as Properties as Primaries (the Klingon Ion Cannon is that weapon). I don't have the source code, so I can't prove this. But after 18 months of testing, I've yet to see AV truly affect Primary Weapons.
AV only really affects Heavy Weapons, specifically Torpedoes, and for those weapons, it DOES make sense. We are told in Trek Canon that a Photon Torpedo has only limited fuel for adjusting it's course. If a two ships are travelling straight towards each other at 1/4 impulse, one fires a Torpedo and the other executes a 90 degree turn and accelerates to full impulse at the same time - then that Torpedo now has to track the ship itself, as the change in Speed & Direction happened AFTER the firing of the weapon(the computer will have fired it along the the best possible course it can calculate). It doesn't mean the Torpedo is going to miss, but the actions of the ships pilot in engaging that evasive maneouvre increased the chances of the weapon missing it's target.
If you change the situation, two ships are flying parallel, but in opposite directions. The same Torpedo is fired, but the defending ship has to make far less effort to avoid the torpedo, because even a small change in direction makes it difficult for the Torpedo to adjust it's course and hit it's target.
This is why delta AV should be used if anything relating to angle of attack must be used.
In SFC3 - Angular Velocity is not the primary determining factor in weapon accuracy, two factors are, Range - and the difference in Size between the two ships. If a Fighter is flying against a Battleship - the Fighter is unlikely to miss, as he has such a huge target to hit, but the Battleship can miss the Fighter, because the Fighter has vastly superior speed & maneouvrability, it can evade fire quite easily.
In truth, the biggest issue with Weapons is in both SFC3 & SFC2 - and that is Accuracy at Range. Why does a Torpedo miss a stationary target because the weapon is being fired at Range 30? The computer is advanced enough to calculate the correction direction to fire the weapon, so why does it still have a chance of missing?
This is a good question and deserves much more attention than it is given.
If you want to play a game that actually gets Starship on Starship physics right, then play Bridge Commander. Phasers & other Beam Weapons never miss in Bridge Commander, but with Torpedoes & Pulse Weapons, you have to make sure you fire them in the right direction, Torpedoes have a limited tracking facility, which can compensate somewhat for evasive maneouvres & a bad angle of fire - but if your torpedo tube is perpendicular to your opponent, that torpedo is going nowhere near your target.
With Mods, you can create anything, a weapon that can loop around and home in on it's target every time is quite doable.
I don't think you understand what happens when you fire at a target traversing your firing arc. If you correctly predict the point the target will be occupying and have your torpedoes fire at that point, you will hit the target. A high or low AV will not have any practical effect on that prediction, whereas the delta AV will have a serious effect.
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
It did not come from the show EAW/OP are based from SFB..thats where they came from.
-
I don't think you understand what happens when you fire at a target traversing your firing arc. If you correctly predict the point the target will be occupying and have your torpedoes fire at that point, you will hit the target. A high or low AV will not have any practical effect on that prediction, whereas the delta AV will have a serious effect.
Angular Velocity would not be relevant AFTER the point of firing, but at the point of firing, it is relevant, because it will determine how difficult it is to make that prediction.
If you can correctly predict where a ship is going to be, you will always hit the target, simple logic tells us that!!
Neither SFC2 or SFC3 gets it right, though SFC3's angular velocity is much closer than EW.
Erratic Maneovres would be used to make it difficult to predict the speed & direction a ship is heading in by constantly changing direction & speed, even if it's only minor changes. 1 degree in space would make you miss by miles. Though SFC3 only changes the direction, and even then it's not a real direction change, just a visual effect.
All that would really matter is the evasive maneouvre you took after the Torpedo was fired, and the range that it was fired from (gives you longer to move). That's why a smaller, faster more maneouvrable ship could avoid the torpedo far more easily than a larger ship. Example, a Defiant is the most maneouvrable ship in the Federation fleet (that's canon by the way). It can change direction quickly, and is a small ship, so the distance is must travel in it's "evasive" direction is much smaller than what say a Galaxy Class would have to do.
I doubt very much that something like a Galaxy Class or Sovereign could avoid a Torpedo easily, they're just too big.
Like I said before, Bridge Commander gets it spot on, it simplifies it for the player, by using vertical and horizontal crosshairs to line up your target. But if you fire when you have a perfect lock, the only way a ship can avoid the Torpedo is if it CHANGES direction & Speed. You can still fire torpedoes "blind" - i.e. by not locking on to your target, but unless they have uber tracking capabilities, they miss everytime, unless a ship is stupid enough to fly into one of them!!
-
What does it mean for the community to "come together?" There are those of us who love the SFB ruleset whether or not we ever played SFB, and those who like SFC3. What are we supposed to agree on? This topic just turns into a flame war.
-
What does it mean for the community to "come together?" There are those of us who love the SFB ruleset whether or not we ever played SFB, and those who like SFC3. What are we supposed to agree on? This topic just turns into a flame war.
Actually, wasn't a war at all. Some healthy and interesting debate.
Cleavan is fascinating.
<S>
-
I just can't understand for the life of me how making rifts wider and having people quit can be construed as healthy but so be it. jmho
The needs of the few outweight the needs of the many.lol
Rattler
-
OK, you tell me where the darned rockets come from in the "show" and what the plasma is doing on Federation BCG's and I'll answer your silly question ...
It did not come from the show EAW/OP are based from SFB..thats where they came from.
I will say it agian not 100% of SFB is in SF1,2EAW&OP only some of the elements when you load up the game and see the 2036 or 2552 above the Paramount sign look over to the lower left hand corner where the copyrights are.I thought an Admin would know this.I think an Admin would be supportive of both communities.
-
BFG? Did he really say BFG? Damn I coughed tea all over my keyboard. That is so Freudian, I'm dying. What game are we playing again?
Hey! Of course the F-BFG exists. Here's what it looks like.
(http://www.starwars.jp/machine/image/death_star.jpg)
Beats the hell out of the KHK any day of the week. It might have a problem with Caveat-3's though, as they will fly faster than our turbolaser phaser turrets can easily handle.
The specifications for the vessel are here: http://www.smileylich.com/sfb/ssd/swe-ds1.gif
Suprised you haven't seen one yet; at 1.4 trillion PP most nutters have two by late.
-
I just can't understand for the life of me how making rifts wider and having people quit can be construed as healthy but so be it. jmho
The needs of the few outweight the needs of the many.lol
Rattler
:thumbsup:
I agree. I know those who play SFC2 and SFC3 and we all get along fine. It strikes me as odd that those in the forums cannot do the same thing.
-
look, the only point of this thread (for me at least) was not to debate the differences of the game, but to ask what could be done to bridge the feelings between the two groups. Someone was correct in noting that sfc3 players do not call d.net home. A lot of that reason is because they do not feel welcome here.
i know d.net and the dga is working toward doing some things. at the same time, though, there needs to be a community effort to make them feel welcome.
that is all i was wanting people to think about.
people have differences in what they want to play - that is no big deal and is a reality of life. people see different things and enjoy different things.
there are also perceptions about the sfc3 community which are false (like most people who play sfc3 are teens and are dumb) which need to be dispelled. are people here willing to grow up and accept someone who has a difference of opinion.
Dogmatix has a good point in his post. so does katie (believe it or not) - about the long term consequences.
the whole point of this thread was to try and foster somthing positive.
-
Nanner, I still don't see what your goal is. On the OP side of the house I haven't seen any SFC3 bashing since long before Taldren went under.
I really am missing something here, what is this community healing you are after? What is it you want the OP people to do? I don't see rampant SFC3 bashing, never even thought of it until these community posts started popping up.
Just a dazed and confused piggy....
-
In truth, the biggest issue with Weapons is in both SFC3 & SFC2 - and that is Accuracy at Range. Why does a Torpedo miss a stationary target because the weapon is being fired at Range 30? The computer is advanced enough to calculate the correction direction to fire the weapon, so why does it still have a chance of missing?
This is a good question and deserves much more attention than it is given.
The answer is because these are games. All games that I can think of, with the exception of Chess, each have a certain amount of luck designed into them. Its what makes them fun and its what makes them games. Some games, like the Olympics, have more skill than luck designed into them. Others, like casino style games, have more luck than skill designed into them, but superior skill or dumb luck can bring you a win in both types at times. Removing luck makes it just a mathematics problem that you can do on paper. No need to program a computer simulation to prove what you already know the outcome of. ;)
-
i never heard of SFB before i played any Trek game, My favourite (at 1st) was "Klingon Acadamy", but i soon began to realise that playing on the inside of a ship looking thru the viewscreen may be true like, but not good for overall tactical moves etc
(Its much better the SFC1/2/OP/3 way
When i 1st got into SFC2/OP it was like WOWEEEEEE, This is great i finally understand it (EW and all)
There seemed so many way to fight your enemy with so many tactics,
I waited for 3 with baited breath and bought the game _ oh Dear what a dissapointment (for me personally that is)
There were simply no perameters how to play, to me its simply point and shoot, and has lost so miuch of its richness that SFB provided SFC with
And lets face it SFC3 is not cannon either
There are so many inconsistencies in all trek space battles even using ST DS9 which has the most battles of any series,
Thats why we all like SFC/SFB so much - It puts the meat on the bones, if only Paramount had,nt hated SFB so much
The SFC series could of been sooooo much more fulfilled where trek space battles were concerned
I,ve tried hard to like SFC3 - played a lot of it - but it died within me everytime, and sadly its not on my HD any more (and wont be)
It could of been so much more,
I personally hope we see SFC4 sometime with all what we want, sure there are SOME things from SFC3 i like (reverse, true cloak) but thats about it
Anyway GW3 is coming soon and i hear the cry of my Kzinti Brethren - to arms and Victory over the Hated Klingon Empire
-
i never heard of SFB before i played any Trek game, My favourite (at 1st) was "Klingon Acadamy", but i soon began to realise that playing on the inside of a ship looking thru the viewscreen may be true like, but not good for overall tactical moves etc
(Its much better the SFC1/2/OP/3 way
When i 1st got into SFC2/OP it was like WOWEEEEEE, This is great i finally understand it (EW and all)
There seemed so many way to fight your enemy with so many tactics,
I waited for 3 with baited breath and bought the game _ oh Dear what a dissapointment (for me personally that is)
There were simply no perameters how to play, to me its simply point and shoot, and has lost so miuch of its richness that SFB provided SFC with
And lets face it SFC3 is not cannon either
There are so many inconsistencies in all trek space battles even using ST DS9 which has the most battles of any series,
Thats why we all like SFC/SFB so much - It puts the meat on the bones, if only Paramount had,nt hated SFB so much
The SFC series could of been sooooo much more fulfilled where trek space battles were concerned
I,ve tried hard to like SFC3 - played a lot of it - but it died within me everytime, and sadly its not on my HD any more (and wont be)
It could of been so much more,
I personally hope we see SFC4 sometime with all what we want, sure there are SOME things from SFC3 i like (reverse, true cloak) but thats about it
Anyway GW3 is coming soon and i hear the cry of my Kzinti Brethren - to arms and Victory over the Hated Klingon Empire
You won't see any SFB material in it as you stated above in a SFC4 game.
-
You won't see any SFB material in it as you stated above in a SFC4 game.
Why is that ?
If its sales results they want - they dont want to go barking up the SFC3 tree, an SFB related game will sell much better
wanna compere SFC1/2/OP to 3 in retail sales ?
-
The included text in this post contained nothing productive or relevant to D.Net. Insulting, flaming, or otherwise derogatory statements that are posted in a manner that attempts to convey Dynaverse.Net's attitude, approach or policy by anyone not a member of the Dynaverse.Net Admin group or the DGA Board of Directors is strictly prohibited.Only authorized members of the Dynaverse.Net staff are allowed to make such comments or posts that might be construed by the community as statements of policy or preference of Dynaverse.Net and it's representatives.
Thank you.
Warning number 1, btw.
We will not permit your attacks, your postings from other forums, whatever you think may bring strife here. I hope you understand.
-
You won't see any SFB material in it as you stated above in a SFC4 game.
Why is that ?
If its sales results they want - they dont want to go barking up the SFC3 tree, an SFB related game will sell much better
wanna compere SFC1/2/OP to 3 in retail sales ?
The reason is that Viacom/Paramount do not want anything to do with ADB.They pulled the license from them and don't want anything to do with them.You said it your self.
-
"The reason is that Viacom/Paramount do not want anything to do with ADB.They pulled the license from them and don't want anything to do with them.You said it your self."
Understood, and that my friend is the biggest loss to the SFC gaming series, >:(
They threw away the rulebook that gave the game the greatness that SFC1/2/OP has,
SHAME ON THEM
-
The included text in this post contained nothing productive or relevant to D.Net. Insulting, flaming, or otherwise derogatory statements that are posted in a manner that attempts to convey Dynaverse.Net's attitude, approach or policy by anyone not a member of the Dynaverse.Net Admin group or the DGA Board of Directors is strictly prohibited.Only authorized members of the Dynaverse.Net staff are allowed to make such comments or posts that might be construed by the community as statements of policy or preference of Dynaverse.Net and it's representatives.
Thank you.
Warning, Chucky. I will not make it a final one.
-
The answer is because these are games. All games that I can think of, with the exception of Chess, each have a certain amount of luck designed into them. Its what makes them fun and its what makes them games. Some games, like the Olympics, have more skill than luck designed into them. Others, like casino style games, have more luck than skill designed into them, but superior skill or dumb luck can bring you a win in both types at times. Removing luck makes it just a mathematics problem that you can do on paper. No need to program a computer simulation to prove what you already know the outcome of. ;)
Once, a long time ago, a Roman was bored. There were dead legionaries everywhere, as there always was at the time, so he stole some knucklebones while stealing a pair of boots.
He was arrested for stealing the boots, and had nothing else to do but roll the bones on the ground with his fellow prisoners, who were quite comfortable with this new passtime as it gave them something else to do other than tame the rats and lice and make them do tricks, by this time old hat.
It is a well known fact that rats liked to hoard things, and so it was that the rats had stored an immense amount of Greek silver. When the rats gave this silver to the prisoners, the only logical course was to buy the prison they were in and open a casino. Thus gambling was born.
Meanwhile, a Chinese noble had taken the marbles from his head. Unlike modern practice, where they are placed in a small bag connected just below the belt, the Chinese noble decided to use them to teach his son patience, who was killing peasants to pass the time. Thus, board games were born.
Very soon after someone suggested combining the random elements of knucklebones with a board game, adding enough mathematical record keeping to make the game as protected as alchemy and suggesting a premise of futuristic star-ship combat. Of course, this man was quickly burned as a heretic, witch and all 'round crazy nut, but it was little known at the time that this form of game would eventually re-emerge.
-
:rofl:
Thanks for the very amusing post Holocat, it made my day. :)
-
Good one Holocat :goodpost:
-
Well, reading through some threads and this one it seems that the hopes of bridgeing the gap just cant happen. The majority of the folks in here do seem to support SFC 2:OP and have little to no regard for the future of Starfleet Command 3 and when confronted with the premise that Nanner said of trying to bridge the gap they come up with ways of not doing it.
Did ANY of you actually spare the time to REALLY read what Paramount's Harry Lang was saying?
The worry of the SFC community shouldnt be what is happening in the small SFC Series community, it should be whats just round the corner regarding the future of trek gaming. What will it look like when a new game is released and the community sites still have links going to SFC games, they come in here and see a general attitude of "go away, you do not play SFC 2:OP and you do not like SFB". Fleets who want to partake in games dont really worry about the flames, they just flame back, part and parcel of fleet gaming, whats holding a lot of them back is what Nanner touches on to an extent. The feeling that SFC 2 players look down there noses on SFC 3 and what the game itself stands for.
[Edited out], we don't PLAY SFC3. That is why we do not care about it. How fricking dense are you people?
It is that simple. We do not look down on SFC3, we simply do not play it. We do not care, we do not care, we do not care.
Go bother some quake players you fricking troll.
Admin edit: Diehard, do not call people names in here!
-
A lot of the anger comes from the time the so-called Taldrenites who spend on fixing the darned Orion Pirates -- whose player base is suck beans compared to what is left in SFC3. Look back on old threads, the past arguments (not with me). That anger stems from the first day we bought this game and made the move.
Again, us INDIVIDUALS who work on the technical side of OP DO NOT PLAY SFC3.
WE DO NOT CARE ABOUT A GAME WE DO NOT PLAY
-
We will not be fooled by an apparent intent to say that a certain group speaks for has a special relationship or access to Mr. Lang. Mr. Lang's words stand on their own. He does not impress me as a fool. Quite the contrary, in fact, as I see him as an intelligent person, someone I doubt will be taken by attempts to hurt others while they promote themselves.We do not need people to act as if they are innocent. We don't need those same people to act as if they only care for the community. I suspect all they do is hurt the community, not help themselves.
I would suggest some people mature.
-
It is that simple. We do not look down on SFC3, we simply do not play it. We do not care, we do not care, we do not care.
Go bother some quake players you fricking troll.
die hard, i want you to think about this statment carefully and how it someone might take it. this is at the very heart of the matter. how would you like someone to say the same thing toward your self. imo, the statment is contradictry. if you do not look down on those who play a game (which is different), then why the back handed slap about bothering "quake" players. (some people would take that as an honor, but i know enough to understand that was a slap)
you guys need to not associate one or two people as a whole group. i think that is fair for everyone. my only purpose here was to try and bring people together. i know the dga is making strides to do this, but i was hoping that some would say - "okay, maybe we can agree to disagree about things but still be friends on the same level."
that is all i was hoping for. is it really too much?
it is okay for someone to believe that (a) game is better than another game. where i have issues - and others feel uncomfortable is when people are not grown up enough to understand that it is only a better game from their perspective.
different people, different taste - everyone needs to be respected on the same level.
*please*
-
The included text in this post contained nothing productive or relevant to D.Net. Insulting, flaming, or otherwise derogatory statements that are posted in a manner that attempts to convey Dynaverse.Net's attitude, approach or policy by anyone not a member of the Dynaverse.Net Admin group or the DGA Board of Directors is strictly prohibated.Only authorized members of the Dynaverse.Net staff are allowed to make such comments or posts that might be construed by the community as statements of policy or preference of Dynaverse.Net and it's representatives.
Thank you.
Admin note: You should realize, Nicola, that people don't spend 100% of their time reading the same forum. Some of us actually lead lives. I took care of DieHard's name calling, but you already came back with your insults and what can only be taken as a threat. That will not be permitted. See my PM to you.
This thread is locked.
-
NOW it's edited, i tried Kortez.
-
Well, reading through some threads and this one it seems that the hopes of bridgeing the gap just cant happen. The majority of the folks in here do seem to support SFC 2:OP and have little to no regard for the future of Starfleet Command 3 and when confronted with the premise that Nanner said of trying to bridge the gap they come up with ways of not doing it.
Did ANY of you actually spare the time to REALLY read what Paramount's Harry Lang was saying?
The worry of the SFC community shouldnt be what is happening in the small SFC Series community, it should be whats just round the corner regarding the future of trek gaming. What will it look like when a new game is released and the community sites still have links going to SFC games, they come in here and see a general attitude of "go away, you do not play SFC 2:OP and you do not like SFB". Fleets who want to partake in games dont really worry about the flames, they just flame back, part and parcel of fleet gaming, whats holding a lot of them back is what Nanner touches on to an extent. The feeling that SFC 2 players look down there noses on SFC 3 and what the game itself stands for.
[Edited out], we don't PLAY SFC3. That is why we do not care about it. How fricking dense are you people?
It is that simple. We do not look down on SFC3, we simply do not play it. We do not care, we do not care, we do not care.
Go bother some quake players you fricking troll.
Admin edit: Diehard, do not call people names in here!
With regard to what Nicola Venra said in the quoted portion above...I just don't agree that SFC2 players look down their noses at SFC3 players. The gist of Nicola's point is off-target completely.
I agree with you, DH, in that some of the SFC2 players just don't care about SFC3 and therefore pay little or no attention to it. There's obviously nothing wrong with that.
However, this does NOT mean that the majority of SFC2 players look down on SFC3 or its player base. It also does not mean that SFC3 players are not welcome here. They most certainly are. Those that wish to continue (or start, as the case may be) cross over between the two games are encouraged to do so. SFC3 players are at least as welcome here as SFC2 players.
I am unaware of any movement afoot among players of SFC2, the admins of D.net or the members of the DGA to tell or otherwise make SFC3 players feel they are not welcome here. They are most assuredly welcome here. There is an SFC3 Dynaverse Experiences forum. There is a models forum in which artists from both games (and some who actually play either) post their work.. There is an SFC3 testers forum. There is an SFC3 D3 admins forum. There's a section of fora for SFC3 campaigns and strategies. The fora (homes) are here. The support is here. If the SFC3 playerbase chooses not to be a part of things here, then that is their prerogative. It seems the people who play SFC3 have spent a lot of time creating factions and staking out their own bits of territory. If there is a lack of unity in the SFC3 world, it hardly has anything to do with those NOT in the SFC3 world.
If the SFC3 playerbase has fragmented itself with a bunch of different forum communities, groups or mods, that is not the fault of SFC2 players or the people of D.net and the DGA and it does not mean that SFC is not wlecome here. With a few exceptions, I'm sure everyone here is more than iwilling to have you here and to peacefully coexist. Furthermore, there are even those who look forward to future cooperation and community building activities.
Geez..I've spent my entire afternoon on this topic. :o