Topic: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...  (Read 6044 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SSCF-LeRoy

  • Kim's Clubhouse Painter
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 923
  • Gender: Male
  • Captain
    • SSCF.net
This is just TOO COOL! :woot: :rwoot:

P.S. No coding involved here. Just some interesting photo editing work.

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2004, 04:43:10 pm »
I've already said I will pay for plasma bolts and working G-racks. These two things would be the most useful.

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline FPF-Bach

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 458
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2004, 12:13:03 am »
I've already said I will pay for plasma bolts and working G-racks. These two things would be the most useful.

G-racks seem to work just fine for me.   ;)
Former Federation A/RM SFC2.NET
Former Federation RM SFC2.NET
Hydran A/RM LB4
Interim Federation RM GW3
Federation RM GW4

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2004, 12:28:59 am »
I've already said I will pay for plasma bolts and working G-racks. These two things would be the most useful.

G-racks seem to work just fine for me.   ;)

How'd you like it if we took the drones away and just left you with the ADD function like what was done to the plasma races with plasma-D racks? I'll bet you wouldn't be to winky then, would you?  :P

Seriously though, I'd like to see the plasma races get bolts and real D racks, as well as get the G racks fixed. As much as I'd like the additional races and all races being fighter and PF capable, I find those missing elements the most inexcusable, IMO.
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline SPQR Renegade

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2004, 12:42:41 am »
What could we do with the source code?

How about making drone speeds/dates a server configuration item
Hard coding BOTH fighters and PFs for all races
Finishing the code for the bay restriction of heavy fighters
Better shipyard production controls for the admin
Dynamic racial tensions
Real Drone-G
Real Plas-D
Kzinti drone options.
Varriable overload photons
Varriable mauler discharge
Crash loading multi-turn weapons
Plasma bolts/Sabot
Reserve power arming for Fusion & Disruptors
How about tossingin some error logging on both the client and server side? (we make changes, we WILL make bugs)

And of cource...

REAL Andros & Tholians.

I remember seeing things relating to AI personality in the .gf files. Anyone know if any groundwork was laid here? If so, was if strictly a taunt/reaction thing, or did the varrious AIs have different tactics and skiils?

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2004, 02:07:23 am »
For the references to the server changes, I wonder if it would not just be better to start from scratch with a new server design. It's a lot of code and I don't expect for a minute to be taken seriously, but if one was to make significant changes to the server you may as well start from scratch and try and embrace fully the good things about online multiplayer at the same time as ditching the bad things.

And thats a lot of code ... maybe if it was done in Linux we would have a couple thousand volunteers!

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2004, 02:43:05 am »
     That could be up to Viacom/Paramount as they own all intellectual property concerning Star Trek gaming.They even own the rights to all mods that are made up.This is because they granted the license to the publishing company that sold the games.That is right they owns all the mods that are available for downloading and that are on your HD.They are the ones that allowed the game to be mod able.That is what I heard over at the Tri-Mods forum when the Unity mod was taken.

     If you don't believe me go over there and ask Victor yourself.

     at www.stcd.sgnonline.com/forum/index.php
 
      Ask him Who owns all the intellectual property rights to all Star Trek games.

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2004, 02:49:51 am »
     That could be up to Viacom/Paramount as they own all intellectual property concerning Star Trek gaming.They even own the rights to all mods that are made up.This is because they granted the license to the publishing company that sold the games.That is right they owns all the mods that are available for downloading and that are on your HD.They are the ones that allowed the game to be mod able.That is what I heard over at the Tri-Mods forum when the Unity mod was taken.

     If you don't believe me go over there and ask Victor yourself.

     at www.stcd.sgnonline.com/forum/index.php
 
      Ask him Who owns all the intellectual property rights to all Star Trek games.

But these are SFB mods. Plasma bolts (and plasma sabot) and G-racks are not Star Trek!

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #8 on: July 28, 2004, 03:04:21 am »
     That could be up to Viacom/Paramount as they own all intellectual property concerning Star Trek gaming.They even own the rights to all mods that are made up.This is because they granted the license to the publishing company that sold the games.That is right they owns all the mods that are available for downloading and that are on your HD.They are the ones that allowed the game to be mod able.That is what I heard over at the Tri-Mods forum when the Unity mod was taken.

     If you don't believe me go over there and ask Victor yourself.

     at www.stcd.sgnonline.com/forum/index.php
 
      Ask him Who owns all the intellectual property rights to all Star Trek games.

But these are SFB mods. Plasma bolts (and plasma sabot) and G-racks are not Star Trek!
Viacom and Parmount issued the Licenses not ADB.They own the right to the PC games it is on your game Paramount.They are mods made by the community but Viacom/Paramount own the rights as it is their intellectual Property.

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2004, 03:18:25 am »
They were not made by the community, they (G racks and plasma bolts) were made by ADB and are an integral part of the SFB system, not some slap happy "mod". Nobody else had any input into them.

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2004, 03:36:32 am »
They were not made by the community, they (G racks and plasma bolts) were made by ADB and are an integral part of the SFB system, not some slap happy "mod". Nobody else had any input into them.
They were made by Taldren and published by Interplay who received the license by Viacom/Paramount.I am talking about the PC game.That is what you talk about in here isn't not the board game.

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2004, 04:13:26 am »
They were not made by the community, they (G racks and plasma bolts) were made by ADB and are an integral part of the SFB system, not some slap happy "mod". Nobody else had any input into them.
They were made by Taldren and published by Interplay who received the license by Viacom/Paramount.I am talking about the PC game.That is what you talk about in here isn't not the board game.

Actually if they were made by Taldren then we wouldn't be sitting here asking for them, would we? We would already have them. But we don't have them do we? I mean that's the whole point isn't it.

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2004, 10:42:17 am »
     That could be up to Viacom/Paramount as they own all intellectual property concerning Star Trek gaming.They even own the rights to all mods that are made up.This is because they granted the license to the publishing company that sold the games.That is right they owns all the mods that are available for downloading and that are on your HD.They are the ones that allowed the game to be mod able.That is what I heard over at the Tri-Mods forum when the Unity mod was taken.

     If you don't believe me go over there and ask Victor yourself.

     at www.stcd.sgnonline.com/forum/index.php
 
      Ask him Who owns all the intellectual property rights to all Star Trek games.

What the hell does this have to do with anything??? Paramount doesn't OWN what we think and put up about Trek. Could they claim that when we mod a Trek game that it costs them possible future sales of games? Yeap, I bet that they could do that and stop it, if they wanted. If I made a Trek PC game and offered it for free could they just snatch it up and start selling it? Nope! That gives them the right to protect themselves, not steal from me (you).
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2004, 11:19:31 am »
You need to stop splitting hairs here. If it's related at all to trek, they own it. No ifs or buts about it. Trek is there baby. Paramount can't control what you think about trek, but anything you actually do with it? Their lawyers will kill your lawyers if you want to waste the bucks. You might want to ask J'inn what he thinks your chances are here. (less than none?)
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline FPF-Bach

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 458
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2004, 12:45:10 pm »
I've already said I will pay for plasma bolts and working G-racks. These two things would be the most useful.

G-racks seem to work just fine for me.   ;)

How'd you like it if we took the drones away and just left you with the ADD function like what was done to the plasma races with plasma-D racks? I'll bet you wouldn't be to winky then, would you?  :P

Seriously though, I'd like to see the plasma races get bolts and real D racks, as well as get the G racks fixed. As much as I'd like the additional races and all races being fighter and PF capable, I find those missing elements the most inexcusable, IMO.

No thanks, I'm quite content with the current operation of the G-racks.  :)
Former Federation A/RM SFC2.NET
Former Federation RM SFC2.NET
Hydran A/RM LB4
Interim Federation RM GW3
Federation RM GW4

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2004, 12:54:54 pm »
Give me reverse movement and I don't give a fluck about the G-Racks  :lol:
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Max Power

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 231
  • Old School Hydran/Green Menace Leader
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2004, 01:18:05 pm »
What could we do with the source code?

How about making drone speeds/dates a server configuration item
Hard coding BOTH fighters and PFs for all races
Finishing the code for the bay restriction of heavy fighters
Better shipyard production controls for the admin
Dynamic racial tensions
Real Drone-G
Real Plas-D
Kzinti drone options.
Varriable overload photons
Varriable mauler discharge
Crash loading multi-turn weapons
Plasma bolts/Sabot
Reserve power arming for Fusion & Disruptors
How about tossingin some error logging on both the client and server side? (we make changes, we WILL make bugs)

And of cource...

REAL Andros & Tholians.

I remember seeing things relating to AI personality in the .gf files. Anyone know if any groundwork was laid here? If so, was if strictly a taunt/reaction thing, or did the varrious AIs have different tactics and skiils?

Some missing weapons would be nice. Try doing what I'm doing now:

"Goddammit, we'll have to use missiles in place of the plasma D on fighters because it's broken, and if it wasn't each fighter would have 6 of them"
"Crap, these auxillary drone ships have Drone D racks, I guess Drone B is the closest thing that we can work with"
"Anyone want to guess what the conversion from the type-VI fighter drone to SFC should be?"
"Hmmm...great...what should we replace the D7A in the klingon home fleet with?"

IMO the thing to do if we laid hands on the code would be to first, fix any remaining bugs. Then add plasma bolts. This would revolutionize all plasma races. Sure, the hit ratio sucks, but then again, the threat of a bolted plasma R is a very real thing to a phaserboating fed (FYI: Plasma Bolt: Imagine being able to fire a fusion beam from a plasma launcher that hits for the full force of the plasma launched, out to medium range. Accuracy can be crappy but you cannot outrun it). Plasma Sabot would also go over good, since all you need to do is add in a mode that enables the launcher to fire as a plasma X (though the fact that the plasma X breaks down faster than the sabot would be a problem). Removing bay restrictions, adding in the concept of "effective range" and other such goodies would make a huge difference.

Offline Max Power

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 231
  • Old School Hydran/Green Menace Leader
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2004, 01:19:45 pm »
Give me reverse movement and I don't give a fluck about the G-Racks  :lol:


What some don't seem to realize is the race that would benefit most from reverse is the gorn. Since they almost as many weapons to the stern as the bow, full reversing into battle after losing the front screens is something that gorn do a lot.

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2004, 01:57:43 pm »
They were not made by the community, they (G racks and plasma bolts) were made by ADB and are an integral part of the SFB system, not some slap happy "mod". Nobody else had any input into them.
They were made by Taldren and published by Interplay who received the license by Viacom/Paramount.I am talking about the PC game.That is what you talk about in here isn't not the board game.

Actually if they were made by Taldren then we wouldn't be sitting here asking for them, would we? We would already have them. But we don't have them do we? I mean that's the whole point isn't it.
That is right we wouldn't and we would have it and we wouldn't be sitting here asking for it .What I am referrring to is all the mods are the rights of Viacom/Paramount yes this includes OP+3.3.What is it with the G-racks anyway?I would rather have full reverseing thrusters as well like DH said.I would like full Warp drive as well so the ship go to warp.

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2004, 02:02:03 pm »
You need to stop splitting hairs here. If it's related at all to trek, they own it. No ifs or buts about it. Trek is there baby. Paramount can't control what you think about trek, but anything you actually do with it? Their lawyers will kill your lawyers if you want to waste the bucks. You might want to ask J'inn what he thinks your chances are here. (less than none?)

I never mentioned anything about taking anyone on in court. Making such a statement just confuses tha matter. Just that they don't have the legal right to claim other peoples work, without the authors consent, as theirs. If you come up with a program that works with windows Micro$oft can't just claim it as their own and start selling it. They have a lot of lawyers too.

In truth, Trek based mods are good for Paramount. How long would most people play the stock games? Many people buy and continue to buy games for PC because they get modded. All that the game producers would have to do is have all of the files in the game compiled and they could stop modding really fast. Trust me, if they considered modding a bad thing, that's exactly what they'd do.
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline KAT J'inn

  • CFO - Kzinti War Machine, Inc.
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2294
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2004, 02:08:32 pm »
You need to stop splitting hairs here. If it's related at all to trek, they own it. No ifs or buts about it. Trek is there baby. Paramount can't control what you think about trek, but anything you actually do with it? Their lawyers will kill your lawyers if you want to waste the bucks. You might want to ask J'inn what he thinks your chances are here. (less than none?)

Oh who cares about chances of winning!!   Hey, this is about principle right?!!  RIGHT!!!   So what if it's hopeless.  That will just make the win sooo much more sweeter.    And hey, it'll be a long brutal battle.   Hours and <drool> hours of litigation. 

It'll be worth it.  Trust me.

Let me go prepare a <slobber> retainer and we'll get everything squared away.   

So Cleaven, will this be cash or charge?

<licks chops>

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2004, 02:11:50 pm »
That is right we wouldn't and we would have it and we wouldn't be sitting here asking for it .What I am referrring to is all the mods are the rights of Viacom/Paramount yes this includes OP+3.3.What is it with the G-racks anyway?I would rather have full reverseing thrusters as well like DH said.I would like full Warp drive as well so the ship go to warp.

That's already in SFC3. I for one don't want SFC2 to change/lose it's original ruleset (add reverse, if you want to) I'd like to see all of the other TNG races and systems in SFC3, myself. We were refering to SFC2 with the "what needs to be changed/fixed" posts.

What it is with the G-racks, and all of the other weapons systems mentioned, is that they don't work correctly and some of us would like to see them fixed, that's all.
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2004, 02:15:08 pm »
You need to stop splitting hairs here. If it's related at all to trek, they own it. No ifs or buts about it. Trek is there baby. Paramount can't control what you think about trek, but anything you actually do with it? Their lawyers will kill your lawyers if you want to waste the bucks. You might want to ask J'inn what he thinks your chances are here. (less than none?)

Oh who cares about chances of winning!!   Hey, this is about principle right?!!  RIGHT!!!   So what if it's hopeless.  That will just make the win sooo much more sweeter.    And hey, it'll be a long brutal battle.   Hours and <drool> hours of litigation. 

It'll be worth it.  Trust me.

Let me go prepare a <slobber> retainer and we'll get everything squared away.   

So Cleaven, will this be cash or charge?

<licks chops>


J'inn, you should be prepared to take this on for free. ;) Think of how famous it'd make you and how big that your retainers would be in the future. We'd make you so rich that you'd feel obligated to give us a cut. :rofl:
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline Durin

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2004, 02:24:44 pm »
I'd be happy with a true multi-player dynaverse.The rest I could and have learned to live with.

Just imagine true  fleet battles....   ;D

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2004, 02:29:43 pm »
I'd be happy with a true multi-player dynaverse.The rest I could and have learned to live with.

Just imagine true  fleet battles....   ;D

Oh man, Imagine the pure karnage value or a LEGAL SFB fleet?  10v10   :rwoot:
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2004, 03:19:15 pm »
That is right we wouldn't and we would have it and we wouldn't be sitting here asking for it .What I am referrring to is all the mods are the rights of Viacom/Paramount yes this includes OP+3.3.What is it with the G-racks anyway?I would rather have full reverseing thrusters as well like DH said.I would like full Warp drive as well so the ship go to warp.

That's already in SFC3. I for one don't want SFC2 to change/lose it's original ruleset (add reverse, if you want to) I'd like to see all of the other TNG races and systems in SFC3, myself. We were refering to SFC2 with the "what needs to be changed/fixed" posts.

What it is with the G-racks, and all of the other weapons systems mentioned, is that they don't work correctly and some of us would like to see them fixed, that's all.
Pease explain this a little more thanks.

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2004, 05:03:34 pm »
Age,

I assume that you mean explain what doesn't work correctly with the current G-rack.

The G-rack is supposed to be a combination drone rack/ADD rack. You aren't supposed to get separate racks/hardpoints for the drone and ADD functions.

One difference is that ships equipped with them in SFC get a lot of extra drones and ADDs. They should be limited to 2 reloads of drones max, and then you'd only have spaces for 8 ADD rounds max left. The order that they are loaded into the racks would also limit which type of ammunition was available at any given time (drone or ADD). There's a lot of expounding that could be done on this point alone, but since this isn't the major complaint about G-racks, I'll leave it at that.

The big complaint is that once you fire a drone from a G-rack it shouldn't continue to function as an ADD rack for one turn (the time that it would take for the rack to recycle and be ready to fire another drone). Now, ships with them can use the drone function without losing the defensive capability.

In SFB (flying Fed) when going against Klingons, for instance, you load your G-racks mostly with ADD rounds to defend against the Klingons superior drone capability. The few spaces of drones that you actually carry are normally unloaded from the racks and used to create scatterpacks (one of the reasons that Feds have more shuttles than comparable Klingon ships). You might leave a single drone loaded in the rack for the opportunity to launch a drone offensively. Against Lyrans Romulans, etc. you would take the maximum number of drones allowed since they don't have any drones for you to worry about defending yourself against.
Same goes for Klingons flying against Kzinti (Mirak). Klingon ships with G-racks carry very few offensive drones (they are rather fond of something called an ECM drone though 8)) in SFB when going against a Kzinti ship/fleet. You'll notice that very few Klingon ships use G-racks because of their rather heavy reliance on drones. They usually opt for B-racks and seperate ADD racks.

This messes up the normal flavor and tactics (and balance) when flying G-rack equipped ships. Since so many Fed ships have them, they are the most affected, though.
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline Max Power

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 231
  • Old School Hydran/Green Menace Leader
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #27 on: July 28, 2004, 05:40:19 pm »
(FD3.0) TYPES OF DRONE RACKS

There are several types of drone racks in service; all are listed below. All drone racks are type-A unless specified otherwise in the ship descriptions.  Most type-A drone racks were replaced with improved types in Y175. Players cannot change the drone racks on their ships except as provided in (S7.0). Drone rack types A, B, C, D, and F were in service in Y65. Type-E drone racks entered service in Y160.Type-G drone racks entered service in Y165. Except as noted, no drone rack can fire two drones within 1/4 turn of each other, even if on different turns.

(FD3.1) TYPE-A

The standard "A-rack" or "type-A drone rack" has a capacity of four spaces of drones and can fire one per turn. Unless stated otherwise in the ship descriptions, all drone racks are of this type. Virtuallyall type-A drone racks were replaced with types B or C in Y175.

(FD3.2) TYPE-B

The larger "B" drone rack has a capacity of six spaces of drones and can fire one per turn. The Klingons favored this type of rack for its' increased ammunition supply.

(FD3.3) TYPE-C

The "C" drone rack is designed for "rapid fire." Two drones may be launched from this rack during a single turn. These cannot be launched within 12 impulses of each other (even on consecutive turns). It holds four spaces of drones. The Kzintis favored this type of rack because it could put more drones in flight more quickly.

(FD3.4) TYPE-D

The type-D drone rack is used by battle stations, base stations, and the Kzinti tug and battle pod. It is a single launcher with three separate magazines. The launcher, in effect, moves from magazine to magazine and draws drones from whichever magazine it is adjacent to.

(FD3.41) MAGAZINE SELECTION: The launcher can draw one drone from one magazine on each turn. The magazine used is selected when the drone is launched. The launcher cannot fire two drones within one-quarter turn even if from different magazines. Each of the three magazines holds four spaces of drones. The drones can be of any type, but cannot be anti-drones. Type-D racks cannot hold type-VI drones; see (FD2.51) for the reason why.

(FD3.42) DAMAGE: Each "drone" damage point scored on a ship/basewith a type-D drone rack destroys one magazine (the last one from which the launcher withdrew a drone), but not the launcher itself.(The launcher is destroyed with the last magazine.) The battle station SSDs in Module R1 have their magazine record tracks arranged to facilitate this procedure. The repair cost in Annex #9 repairs the launcher and/or one magazine.

(FD3.43)HANDLING: Any magazine can be taken out of service during a turn for reloading (or unloading) under (FD2.42) without affecting the launcher, so long as the launcher does not draw a drone from that magazine during the turn it is reloaded. While type-D (and type-H) drone racks do not have formal reloads, if reload drones became available (transferred from another ship, purchased as extras, stored in cargo boxes, etc.) they could be loaded into an unused magazine in this manner.

(FD3.44)RELOADS: There are no reloads for type-D drone racks; the reload drones are loaded in the spare magazines. The unit pays the drone upgrade surcharges for one magazine per launcher; the other two magazines per launcher are considered to have proportional free reloads.

(FD3.45) WEAPON STATUS: At the various Weapon Status levels, a unit with this type of drone rack may be presumed to have unloaded enough drones for use in the allowed number of scatter-packs.

(FD3.46) PLASMA RACKS: The plasma-racks on Romulan, Gorn, and ISC battle stations use the same system with three magazines, each holding four type-D plasma torpedoes. A given launcher cannot have drones in one magazine and type-D plasma torpedoes in another. An Orion base can have both types of racks so long as there is an even number of plasma racks, with each "pair" covering the entire 360 arc.

(FD3.5) TYPE-E

The "E" drone rack holds eight dogfight drones. It can carry no other types. Type-E drone racks (and type-VI drones) were originally designed for anti-drone defense, but later proved useful against fighters. Many fast patrol ships carried this version which proved useful in hunting fighters. This rack can fire up to four drones per turn, but cannot fire two drones within 1/4 turn (8 impulses) of each other, even on consecutive turns.

(FD3.6) TYPE-F

The "F" drone rack (known as the "jump rack") was a Klingon invention used to add drones to ships not originally designed for them. The drone racks seen on the B10, C9, C8, D7, D6, F5, and E4 are actually type-F racks replacing shuttles. Type-F racks are functionally identical to type-A racks, except as follows:

They fire out of the shuttle hatch (D17.4) Level E.
They can explode in a chain reaction (D12.3).
They can only fire one drone from each pair of racks (FD4.3).
A drone launched from an F-rack counts against the shuttle launch rate (J1.5).

Other races did not use type-F racks, and Klingon ships with the B-refit have their type-F drone racks replaced with standard type-A racks (often with type-B after the Y175 refits). The only type-F racks in the game are on unrefitted Klingon ships of the types listed above. All of these "differences" cease to exist after the type-F racks are replaced with type-A.

(FD3.7) TYPE-G

(FD3.70) The "G" rack can carry four spaces of drones, and it is equipped with targeting system for anti-drones (E5.0). Each anti-drone takes 1/2 space. The G-rack can carry the 1/2 space type-VI dogfight drones or any other type of drone. Federation ships (which needed anti-drones on the Klingon front but not on the Romulan front) used this type of drone rack extensively. Other races seldom used it. The unique nature of type-G drone racks requires that their loading must always be planned (FD2.421). They do not automatically reload ADDs when empty as ADD racks do (E5.74).

(FD3.71) MODES: The rack can carry a mixture of types and can operate in either of two modes (drone or anti-drone) on a given turn. If fired in the anti-drone mode, it cannot fire normal drones that turn, but can fire one anti-drone per impulse. In the drone mode, it can fire one drone per turn. The decision as to which mode to use is made the first time (each turn) it is fired. The mandatory 1/4 turn delay between subsequent launches from a single rack (FD3.0) includes the last firing on one turn and the first firing on the next. ADD fire counts as a drone launch event for this purpose. Note that the 8-impulse delay applies if the rack is switching from ADDs to normal drones. If it fired as an ADD launcher on Impulse #32 of one turn, it could continue to fire as an ADD launcher on Impulse #1 of the following turn with no delay. If it launched a drone on Impulse #32 of one turn, it could not launch a drone or fire as an ADD until Impulse #8 of the following turn. If it fired as an ADD on Impulse #32 of one turn, and the player wanted to launch a drone from the rack during the following turn, he would have to wait until Impulse #8 to do so.

(FD3.72) RELOADS: Type-G drone racks have two sets of reloads, one of which is entirely anti-drones and the other of which is identical to whatever is loaded in the rack itself. When the type-G was given a third set of reloads in Y175, that set was identical to the loading of the rack.
Typically, a Federation ship on the Romulan border would have drones (with perhaps two anti-drones) in the rack and first reload and eight ADDs in the second reload. A Federation ship on the Klingon front might have 2, 4, or even 6 anti-drones on the rack (and in the first reload) with 8 anti-drones in the second. These are examples; the Federation player may select the actual load (and first reload) at his own discretion.

NOTE: This data is correct; that on the various Federation SSDs in early printings is unclear.

(FD3.8) TYPE-H STARBASE DRONE RACK

This type of drone rack was installed only on starbases. It consists of a launcher and a series of five compartmented magazines. The launcher, in effect, moves from magazine to magazine and draws drones from whichever magazine it is adjacent to.

(FD3.81) MAGAZINE SELECTION The launcher can draw one drone from one magazine on each turn. The magazine used is selected when the drone is launched. The launcher cannot fire two drones within one-quarter turn even if from different magazines. Each of the five magazines holds four spaces of drones. In four of the magazines for each launcher, the drones can be of any type, but cannot be anti-drones. The fifth magazine holds eight type-VI drones; if this magazine is selected, it can fire as a type-E drone rack (FD3.5).

(FD3.82) DAMAGE: Each "drone" damage point scored on a starbase destroys one magazine (the last one from which the launcher withdrew a drone), but not the launcher itself. (The launcher is destroyed with the last magazine.) The starbase SSDs in Module R1 have their magazine record tracks arranged to facilitate this procedure. The repair cost in Annex #9 repairs the launcher and/or one magazine. A repaired magazine will of  course be empty.

(FD3.83) HANDLlNG: Any magazine can be taken out of service during a turn for reloading (or unloading) under (FD2.42) without affecting the launcher, so long as the launcher does not draw a drone from that magazine during the turn it is reloaded.

(FD3.84) RELOADS: There are no reloads for type-H drone racks; the reload drones are loaded in the spare magazines. The starbase pays the drone upgrade surcharges for two magazines per launcher; the other two standard magazines per launcher are considered to have proportional free reloads. The fifth (type-VI) magazine is never charged for speed upgrades. Starbases are treated as CVAs for purposes of allowed racial drone percentages (but do not include their type-VI drones or anti-drones in those calculations).

(FD3.85) WEAPON STATUS: At the various Weapon Status levels, a starbase may be presumed to have unloaded enough drones for use in the allowed number of scatter-packs.

(FD3.86) ANTI-DRONES: The anti-drones on starbases and BATS use an identical five-magazine system; see (E5.53). Each anti-drone launcher has five six-round magazines and can draw from one magazine at a time. It takes 4 impulses to switch from one ADD magazine to another, but these ADD-30s are otherwise treated as type-H drone racks. Base Stations do not use this type of ADD.

(FD3.87) PLASMA RACKS: The plasma racks (FP10.0) on some Romulan, Gorn, and ISC starbases, battle stations, and base stations use the same system with five magazines, each holding four type-D plasma torpedoes.

(FD3.9) TYPE-P
There is no type-P drone rack, but the plasma rack (FP10.0) is often abbreviated P-rack and this entry is provided for the reference of players who mistake it for a type of drone rack. See also (FD3.87).




********************************************************************************************************************

The preceeding concludes drone rack education hour. Thank you for your participation.

Offline KBF-Crim

  • 1st Deacon ,Church of Taldren
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12271
  • Gender: Male
  • Crim,son of Rus'l
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #28 on: July 28, 2004, 06:28:48 pm »
     That could be up to Viacom/Paramount as they own all intellectual property concerning Star Trek gaming.They even own the rights to all mods that are made up.This is because they granted the license to the publishing company that sold the games.That is right they owns all the mods that are available for downloading and that are on your HD.They are the ones that allowed the game to be mod able.That is what I heard over at the Tri-Mods forum when the Unity mod was taken.

     If you don't believe me go over there and ask Victor yourself.

     at www.stcd.sgnonline.com/forum/index.php
 
      Ask him Who owns all the intellectual property rights to all Star Trek games.

Quote
Viacom and Parmount issued the Licenses not ADB.They own the right to the PC games it is on your game Paramount.They are mods made by the community but Viacom/Paramount own the rights as it is their intellectual Property.

Age...you wonder why no one takes you seriously....let me illustrate..

ALL the SFB data in your game that "paramount approved" was licensed by ADB to be used in the game...

Now you probably werent around for the great SFB mod debacle.....suffice it to say.... someone was working on an SFB mod...and was gathering some pretty cool SFB style models to use in the mod....

Bout this time...some butthead decided to approach ADB about it....and somehow got permission to be the "offical liason" from ADB for SFB /SFC models....then went around telling SFC modelers to give up their model rights for anything resembleing  SFB material  or pull them off the net under threat of getting thier ISP hosting dropped or outright lawsuit...

Needless to say....this didnt go over well with most of the community...there was a huge uproar about it that even got Erik , Harry, and Steve Cole himself involved.....

Cut to the chase...

Erik specificlly stated that we{the game community} could mod SFC as we see fit....

Harry said that  Paramount will pretty much look the other way concerning "fair use" of their Intellectual Property so long as such things are only for "NON commercial" use  and freely availble to anyone...

I dont recall Steve's whole issue but IIRC he was kinda miffed about Eriks statement and hasnt been seen on any SFC forums since...

And we still have a few SFB mods...Firesoul's OP+ being one of them...Firesouls mod has been featured in captains log SFB magazine and ADB's official forums have an SFC area...

I dont think anyone will get hot and hairy over SFC mods at this point in time....so long as no one tried to make any money off it...

I know certain modders for other ST games SELL mods...but this has allways been looked down upon in the SFC community...any time anyone has proposed such a thing they pretty much get ignored...

So technically...you're correct....Paramount owns the Intellectual property...but you dont need approval to use it under the "fair use" ......but they can also use what YOU made for their own purposes...as they own the IP it was based on....AND... you WOULD need to buy license to use any of thier IP in a commercial venture...

I dont NEED to ask anyone about it....I was PART of the original conversation...

We can pretty much do as we want...so long as no one tries to make a buck off it...

If anyone does...you can bet they will get stepped on like a bug...


Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2004, 12:05:18 am »
They were not made by the community, they (G racks and plasma bolts) were made by ADB and are an integral part of the SFB system, not some slap happy "mod". Nobody else had any input into them.
They were made by Taldren and published by Interplay who received the license by Viacom/Paramount.I am talking about the PC game.That is what you talk about in here isn't not the board game.

Actually if they were made by Taldren then we wouldn't be sitting here asking for them, would we? We would already have them. But we don't have them do we? I mean that's the whole point isn't it.
That is right we wouldn't and we would have it and we wouldn't be sitting here asking for it .What I am referrring to is all the mods are the rights of Viacom/Paramount yes this includes OP+3.3.What is it with the G-racks anyway?I would rather have full reverseing thrusters as well like DH said.I would like full Warp drive as well so the ship go to warp.

Now you know we wouldn't have full reverse with G-racks. I mean how would that work? Could you imagine the confusion?

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Cleaven

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 375
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #30 on: July 29, 2004, 12:06:56 am »
You need to stop splitting hairs here. If it's related at all to trek, they own it. No ifs or buts about it. Trek is there baby. Paramount can't control what you think about trek, but anything you actually do with it? Their lawyers will kill your lawyers if you want to waste the bucks. You might want to ask J'inn what he thinks your chances are here. (less than none?)

Oh who cares about chances of winning!!   Hey, this is about principle right?!!  RIGHT!!!   So what if it's hopeless.  That will just make the win sooo much more sweeter.    And hey, it'll be a long brutal battle.   Hours and <drool> hours of litigation. 

It'll be worth it.  Trust me.

Let me go prepare a <slobber> retainer and we'll get everything squared away.   

So Cleaven, will this be cash or charge?

<licks chops>


How about half of all the plasma bolts if you win?

Not sure I can be bothered, but as you are the Doc, can you run an AI standard patrol in 2 minutes in a KRC? If so, there is no problem and I am utterly wrong. If you cannot, then the KRC is a worse ship for AI missions than ones I know can.

Offline Age

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2690
  • Gender: Male
Re: A lil' taste of what could be done if we had the source code...
« Reply #31 on: July 29, 2004, 12:26:12 pm »
Age,

I assume that you mean explain what doesn't work correctly with the current G-rack.

The G-rack is supposed to be a combination drone rack/ADD rack. You aren't supposed to get separate racks/hardpoints for the drone and ADD functions.

One difference is that ships equipped with them in SFC get a lot of extra drones and ADDs. They should be limited to 2 reloads of drones max, and then you'd only have spaces for 8 ADD rounds max left. The order that they are loaded into the racks would also limit which type of ammunition was available at any given time (drone or ADD). There's a lot of expounding that could be done on this point alone, but since this isn't the major complaint about G-racks, I'll leave it at that.

The big complaint is that once you fire a drone from a G-rack it shouldn't continue to function as an ADD rack for one turn (the time that it would take for the rack to recycle and be ready to fire another drone). Now, ships with them can use the drone function without losing the defensive capability.

In SFB (flying Fed) when going against Klingons, for instance, you load your G-racks mostly with ADD rounds to defend against the Klingons superior drone capability. The few spaces of drones that you actually carry are normally unloaded from the racks and used to create scatterpacks (one of the reasons that Feds have more shuttles than comparable Klingon ships). You might leave a single drone loaded in the rack for the opportunity to launch a drone offensively. Against Lyrans Romulans, etc. you would take the maximum number of drones allowed since they don't have any drones for you to worry about defending yourself against.
Same goes for Klingons flying against Kzinti (Mirak). Klingon ships with G-racks carry very few offensive drones (they are rather fond of something called an ECM drone though 8)) in SFB when going against a Kzinti ship/fleet. You'll notice that very few Klingon ships use G-racks because of their rather heavy reliance on drones. They usually opt for B-racks and seperate ADD racks.

This messes up the normal flavor and tactics (and balance) when flying G-rack equipped ships. Since so many Fed ships have them, they are the most affected, though.
Thanks for the explanation Rod