Topic: GW3 Bug and Issue reporting thread thingy

[KBFLordKrueg]

2 hexes away means one hex space in between the bases, not 2 hex spaces with it being in the 3rd hex. That is the way it worked in GW2 as well.
And I thought the adjacent bases on the test server map had been corrected...DH?

[FPF-DieHard]

2 hexes away means one hex space in between the bases, not 2 hex spaces with it being in the 3rd hex. That is the way it worked in GW2 as well.
And I thought the adjacent bases on the test server map had been corrected...DH?

J'inn handles tha map, I'm not touching the bases.

[KBFLordKrueg]

Ah, well if Jinn handles it, that explains much... 

[FPF-DieHard]

I'l just leave bases really expnesive so we don't have to worry about a rulling for a few days.

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

How about simply saying that bases cant be 'adjacent' to each other, you must have free space around them (1 hex).

[KAT J'inn]

There is no problem with the some starting bases being adjucent.   Just no new builds due to the effect they have on DVs.   As for the wording it can be changed to be clearer.

[FPF-DieHard]

There is no problem with the some starting bases being adjucent.   Just no new builds due to the effect they have on DVs.   As for the wording it can be changed to be clearer.

i came form J'inn.  it's not a bug, it's a feature! 

[FireSoul]

You may not place a base adjacent to any other base or planet (allied, enemy, or neutral).

Thank you.

[Kroma BaSyl]

You may not place a base adjacent to any other base or planet (allied, enemy, or neutral).

Thank you.

hehe...to many threads

[GDA-S'Cipio]

So like, <crosses finger claws> please tell me the Fed PF's were just for testing during the test server, and there will be no Fed PF's in the real General War server.   You know; in keeping with the General War.

-S'Cipio the hopeful stickler

[FPF-DieHard]

So like, <crosses finger claws> please tell me the Fed PF's were just for testing during the test server, and there will be no Fed PF's in the real General War server.   You know; in keeping with the General War.

-S'Cipio the hopeful stickler

Sure, we'll leave out all conjectual ships to

[KBFLordKrueg]

It's not going to be so bad, Scippy...
Always fun trying things out...
I better not hear anyone complaining about a lack of cheese on this server, that's fer dang sure! 

[Cleaven]

So like, <crosses finger claws> please tell me the Fed PF's were just for testing during the test server, and there will be no Fed PF's in the real General War server.   You know; in keeping with the General War.

-S'Cipio the hopeful stickler

Sure, we'll leave out all conjectual ships to

Best idea I've heard this month.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

So like, <crosses finger claws> please tell me the Fed PF's were just for testing during the test server, and there will be no Fed PF's in the real General War server.   You know; in keeping with the General War.

-S'Cipio the hopeful stickler

Sure, we'll leave out all conjectual ships to

That would be perfect, and in keeping with the original concept of the GW server series.

It's not going to be so bad Scippy

Well, good or bad, it wont be the General War.  We had a *huge* thread over Fed PF's in GW3 a couple of months back.  The consensus and DH's decision was to try to keep GW historic in setup (thus the name) and leave out the Fed PF in GW3.

-S'Cipio

[Holocat]

It might be a bit late to mention this now, but there's an couple oddities with the Karnak missions i've been flying.

First and most seriously is the fact it seems the scripts are drawing from ships that don't, technically, exist yet.  Specifically, i've begun encountering klingon War Destroyer variants that do not come out until 2280.  At the point of this posting, it is 2275.  Seems the basic point value is stronger than release dates.  Then again, this could be a server issue, I don't know.

Secondly and less importantly is the prophency for doubles to show up;  Two of the same (or at least very similar, such as differing HDW variants) ships showing up in some of the missions.

I apologize for not knowing which missions are doing this, but I cannot be sure at this stage.

[Dizzy]

Yeah, those are the 'Yesterday's Enterprise' Missions. Blame Karnak.

[FPF-DieHard]

Karnak has already been yelled at for the "Time warp" with the AI in the missions.   Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about it at this time.

[Commander Maxillius]

9:10 am: server's down

[FPF-DieHard]

is it back up?   I connected to the box via remote and the applicaiton was running.

kroma, J'inn?   Did one of you restart it?

EDIT:   Saw that the app had not progresses in about 5 minutes.   Restarted it.   Should be back up now.

[FireSoul]

It might be a bit late to mention this now, but there's an couple oddities with the Karnak missions i've been flying.

First and most seriously is the fact it seems the scripts are drawing from ships that don't, technically, exist yet.  Specifically, i've begun encountering klingon War Destroyer variants that do not come out until 2280.  At the point of this posting, it is 2275.  Seems the basic point value is stronger than release dates.  Then again, this could be a server issue, I don't know.

Secondly and less importantly is the prophency for doubles to show up;  Two of the same (or at least very similar, such as differing HDW variants) ships showing up in some of the missions.

I apologize for not knowing which missions are doing this, but I cannot be sure at this stage.

Unfortunately, there isn't much that can be done at this time. There isn't even a working method to fetch the date from within the script so it's somewhat difficult to gave the year correctly.

However, I worked out an algorithm that *may* work if implemented. It has 2 downsides:
1- it's just an estimate
2- it depends on Magnumman's shiplist API which can slow down the script's startup (and cause problems) if improperly used.

Rules:
- If *any* of the ships has drones of a certain speed, then it's at least a certain year.
- The results need to be saved onto the HD and reset if the game is exited and restarted (doable). This way the results can be further refined between missions.
- the mGetEra function from within the API is accurate. It will tell you if it's "Early", "Med", "Late" or "Advanced" era.

So,...
Logic of date refinement:
-------------------------
Early: -999 to 0. Slow drones all.
Mid: 1 to 7. Slow drones from 1 to 3. Medium from 4 to 7.
Late: 8 to 36. Medium drones from 8 to 16. Fast from 17 to 36.
Advanced: 37 to 999. Fast drones all.


Method:
What you do is you look at all the player ships in the mission and check out the YFA for it. You cross reference with the Era that the script can supply. You then reference some more with the dronespeeds used, if any drone ships are present.

Because of the slowdowns such calculations may cause, it might be best to do this after the script has already started to save the results for the next mission to use.


-- Luc