Topic: Dave please read this (Read 6527 times)

3dot14 · « **Reply #20 on:** August 17, 2003, 10:15:58 pm »

I must STILL be missing something...

Lepton and Tar, what are you talking about when you say "fire at"? and Lepton, when you say "not much damage", do you mean the cloaker actually received a pulse?

I saw the "lock-on" search beam. But I have not yet managed to archive a wave lock on a fully cloaked target. i.e. All I had was the lockon search beam, Never a pulse. I am at true range 4, and no EW. (my I-CSP v. AI's R-SNA, in single-player-skirmish)
How did you guys manage to hit cloak with a pulse, if you have?

BTW tar, that was funny.

Lepton1 · « **Reply #21 on:** August 17, 2003, 11:16:04 pm »

I'm hitting cloaked ships very easily. Range 4??? Can you even fire a PPD at range 4 unless it is an underload or overload? Just fire a standard PPD at any old cloaked ship from range 10 or more. It should work. By little damage I mean I was only seeing internals of one or so per pulse.

Lepton1 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 17, 2003, 11:53:03 pm »

Ok, now we have something to test. It appears that PPDs are suffering lockon checks but cloaked ships need to be going very slow, maybe below speed 2 just like with the seeking weapons. 3dot was testing PPDs with an SNA which goes speed 0.7 when cloaked and if I know Tar and myself we were both using WEs which go a good deal faster 9 or so when cloaked. Tar and I were always able to hit with PPD because we had passed the lockon check while 3dot could not as his cloaked AI was going too slow. When I used the SNA I got the same results as 3dot, then as the cloaker when I was able to get the stupid AI to fire PPDs at me, pulse lock was broken by going slower than speed 2, but I did not test speed 2 to see if that broke the lock as well. Indeed I got hit by a PPD pulse going above speed 2 probably around 5, then when I slowed to 1.4 the pulse lost lock and PPD did not lock back on. I would bet the same formula for seeking weapons check is being used for PPDs or something very close to it. If this was known already, then I never knew about it. So Tar , the PPD cloak interaction may be closer to correct (i.e. more SFB) than you think as lockon can be broken and each pulse does seem to be checked. It could again be the multiplication factor messing things up. I am up for testing on GSA tomorrow if anyone is game to try this out.

TarMinyatur · « **Reply #23 on:** August 18, 2003, 12:18:46 am »

Quote:

...I know Tar and myself we were both using WEs which go a good deal faster 9 or so when cloaked...

My test subject is fully cloaked, immobile (turn mode H) WarEagle with no shields and no ECM. VollyInfo shows volleys of 6,6,6 from range 4.01.

TarMinyatur · « **Reply #28 on:** August 18, 2003, 06:15:01 pm »

Lepton, I've been using turn mode "H" for literally years of testing ever since AIMove=0 was disabled. It is harmless.

Anyways, I removed the WarEagle's warp engines and impulse drive (so that it can't move) and get the same results: Cloak chart is not applied to PPD damage.

Edit: PPD damage is affected by Cloak Chart if the PPD is used normally. It is not applied when the PPD is used abnormally, which can happen unintentionally. I'd like to be more descriptive but this may never be fixed, so I won't define "abnormally".

Lepton1 · « **Reply #29 on:** August 18, 2003, 08:32:23 pm »

Yes, but if speed matters as to whether PPD can lockon to a cloaked ship then it does matter if you are using a stationary weirdo target, HEHE. Check out my thread for results of testing.

JMM · « **Reply #32 on:** August 17, 2003, 01:04:08 pm »

I'm pleading with you for one more patch to fix the cloak and fighter issues. It should not take that much time, and we have the first major campaign on the new OP coming up. Rom players? Next to none. Fighter races? Not very happy campers.

You fix these things and I guarantee you should there ever be a SFC4 it will be much easier to sell and will be a best seller. I know black 9 is your baby, but to be honest, it just does not interest me the way SFC did. Our numbers proved it.

Chris Roberts NEVER left his gamers hanging, is why he left Origin (which was in Austin BTW), he made enough off 1 and 2 to retire if he wanted. Sid Mier is creating a Pirates game from hell utilizing the latest technology in programming.

Please fix these problems ASAP and put yourself on the level of those game designers. I mean this not as a flame or insult, but if I buy a brand new car and it does not work, I expect corrections to be made ASAP. Ignore these problems and SFC will go the way of Wing Commander and others, just another oldie game that had it's day...

OP has a LOT of potential, please do not ignore it...

David Ferrell · « **Reply #33 on:** August 17, 2003, 02:33:15 pm »

Trust me, I'm not ignoring it. I am currently weighing my options.

Thanks,

Dave

FireSoul · « **Reply #35 on:** August 17, 2003, 02:54:21 pm »

There are other issues, such as the problem with when med-speed drones appear on D2 servers. (It's always +1 year, no matter when the server started). There are also a couple of bugs Testers found some while ago, but weren't discovered 'in the field'.

Well.. I am VERY happy with the state of OP right now. I won't be asking more than what I got so far, but i'll take all I can get.
-- Luc

TarMinyatur · « **Reply #39 on:** August 17, 2003, 05:34:21 pm »

My wishlist:

1. PPD damage would be affected by Cloak Chart (applied to main element or splash, whichever is easier to code)
2. FusF ready to fire 1/4 turn after launch

Op 2.5.5.0 has a nice ring to it, don't you think?

News:

Topic: Dave please read this (Read 6527 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

3dot14

Lepton1

Lepton1

TarMinyatur

KATChuutRitt

FPF_TraceyG

Lepton1

Dogmatix!

TarMinyatur

Lepton1

Harold Nez

Toasty0

JMM

David Ferrell

Corbomite

FireSoul

3dot14

ActiveX

Strafer

TarMinyatur

Topic: Dave please read this (Read 6527 times)