Topic: Convoy Raid mission

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Again not sure why speed's a problem. If you want to do speed 4 or speed 0 at warp out then just slow down.

Well, the issue that has been raised is not so much the starting speed, since as you say, you can just slow down to charge weapons. Its speeding back up again once weapons are charged which takes much longer. A ship that does not have to slow down much can maintain its speed, thereby not losing time having to speed up, thus reaching the enemy faster and completing the mission quicker. While slowing down and the distance ensures that all players will have all weapons charged when they come into range, the issue is the mission time, which has been suggested will favour droners over plasma chuckers since drones take no power to arm. To evaluate the impact this has, we need to run tests to see just how much faster drone ships can complete the mission compared with plasma ships. It is expected that in all cases, irrespective of the mission, some ships will always be able to complete a mission faster than other ships, and some ships are better suited one type of mission than other. The question is just how much disparity there is and does it need addressing.

[el-Karnak]

People need to make a disparity between impulse speed and warp speed and how it applies in the SFC universe. There are two different theories floating around

First, if you are a SFB purist then you are saying that Warp one is speed 1, Warp 2 is speed 4, Warp 3 is speed 27.

Second, if you follow the SFC manual then Warp One is some obsure speed value that is not available. All we know is that all combat takes place at impluse speed. I think Plasmas go speed 34, so you could say Warp One is somewhere above the speed 34 mark.  Taldren maintained this philosophy with SFC3 where only torpedo-based weapons could be fired at Warp. All energy-based weapons dwell in the Einstein realm.  Additionally, Star Wars universe follows the same philosophy where all the energy-based weapons can only be used at sub-light speeds.  So, it follows that all SFC combat takes place at sub-light speeds as is specifically stated in the SFC manual that comes with the game.

So, if you follow SFC guidelines then a different engine type is needed to power the ship when involved in combat. Namely, the impulse weapons, not the warp engines. Obviously, the impulse engines are not used at trans-light speed so it follows that a ship coming out of warp is not going to instantaneously have their impulse engines all fired up and taking effect at the precise nano-second emergence from Trans-light velocity occurs.  There's realistically going to be a latency time for the ship power up from speed zero.  If it's micro-seconds then a low-ball starting speed would make sense. If it's seconds then a speed of zero at mission start is an imperative.  I would tend to think it's more realistic for a ship to come out at warp and be starting off at the low end of the speed 1 to 31 range rather at the other end.  Since, this is all pseudo-science you kind of go with your gut in such matters.

Michael Okuda once said when someone asked how the transporters are working on the Star Trek shows. He meekly replied: "Very well, thank you."

Oh yeah, in conclusion, DH and Dizzy like ships to start out slow too.  Since they are EEK mission packs best clients, I tend to agree with them on mission design matters more often than not.

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

In SFC, you are correct, Karnak, missions are played at sublight speeds. I don't follow your argument about the impulse engines having to be shut down when leaving warp though. I don't recall the Enterprise coming to a complete stop whenever it came out of warp. If you want to quote other science fiction, another good example is from Babylon 5 where ships coming out of hyperspace, whether it be using their own jump engines or a jump gate, were always at speed as well.

DieHard does prefer to start missions at speed zero, true, but this preference is based purely on game balance and a focus on PvP. DieHard would be happy to have just a few patrol missions and the necessary base and planet assaults and prefers the 'drama' of the game to come from PvP. This is fine if you like PvP, however, a lot of players also like to run interesting missions as well, and to play the same old patrol 50 times in a row to flip a hex can be become a bit tedious.

If game balance requires that the ships be started slower, then that's what we have to, but I want to explore other avenues first. Since not all other avenues have been exhausted yet, it is premature to have to go back to the normal mission start with speed zero (which I always thought of as odd, unless you are sitting at a base or something and it makes sense in the context of the mission itself to begin stopped in space). Since the 'speed' bug is no longer an issue, we can freely start missions with ships at speed and in my opinion lends itself well to many missions and makes the mission more realistic. It is just a question of game balance, hence the need for testing.

[Klingon Fanatic]

Tracey, Well done and thank you. I like it the way it currently is. I had a CTD but I suspect it was due to me not using Bonk's shiplist at the time I played it...

Any word on the Doomsday Machin mission you were working on?

Qapla!

KF

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

I've restarted on the Doomsday Machine script, yes 

[Dizzy]

Speed is less a concern than in what hex the server will offer this mission. I need to do some terrain seeding to control where this mission occurs. This needs to be tested asap.

[el-Karnak]

In SFC, you are correct, Karnak, missions are played at sublight speeds. I don't follow your argument about the impulse engines having to be shut down when leaving warp though. I don't recall the Enterprise coming to a complete stop whenever it came out of warp. If you want to quote other science fiction, another good example is from Babylon 5 where ships coming out of hyperspace, whether it be using their own jump engines or a jump gate, were always at speed as well.

DieHard does prefer to start missions at speed zero, true, but this preference is based purely on game balance and a focus on PvP. DieHard would be happy to have just a few patrol missions and the necessary base and planet assaults and prefers the 'drama' of the game to come from PvP. This is fine if you like PvP, however, a lot of players also like to run interesting missions as well, and to play the same old patrol 50 times in a row to flip a hex can be become a bit tedious.

If game balance requires that the ships be started slower, then that's what we have to, but I want to explore other avenues first. Since not all other avenues have been exhausted yet, it is premature to have to go back to the normal mission start with speed zero (which I always thought of as odd, unless you are sitting at a base or something and it makes sense in the context of the mission itself to begin stopped in space). Since the 'speed' bug is no longer an issue, we can freely start missions with ships at speed and in my opinion lends itself well to many missions and makes the mission more realistic. It is just a question of game balance, hence the need for testing.

In the movies and on TV episodes, you'll definitely see, more often than not, the ships in Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon 5, BSG universes come out of warp into a moving start; generally on the slow side. 

But, if you take a look at the computer games on the market, especially the current ones, like Freelancer and Star War Galaxies:Jump to Lightspeed you'll find that all the ships are coming out of warp and starting at speed zero.  In fact, every space simulator game I've ever played has had the ships coming out of warp at speed zero. I suspect that all these commercial-grade game developers are doing this to avoid multi-player bugs; otherwise, they would try and do it the "Hollywood" way.  So, I tend to err on the side of caution and let the other people be the guinea pigs. *snicker* 

[FPF-DieHard]

The starting speed of 12 in the ED missions seems fine to me. 

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Speed is less a concern than in what hex the server will offer this mission. I need to do some terrain seeding to control where this mission occurs. This needs to be tested asap.

Its a simple matter to recompile the mission for a specific hex or hexes (it only requires one line to be changed). Let me know what you find and we'll do some experimenting.

[762_XC]

FYI Tracey, I have started PvP missions out of sync with other players, usually after a long load for someone, and was able to fix it by having everyone go to speed 0. I don't think that bug is quite dead yet.

Starting at speed is never a good idea IMHO. Even if there's only a 1% chance of it FUBARing the mission, is it really worth it?

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

FYI Tracey, I have started PvP missions out of sync with other players, usually after a long load for someone, and was able to fix it by having everyone go to speed 0. I don't think that bug is quite dead yet.

Starting at speed is never a good idea IMHO. Even if there's only a 1% chance of it FUBARing the mission, is it really worth it?

Can you rmember which missions this hapenned in? As far as I know, this bug was killed by Taldren some time ago. It occurred because of the lag that some players experienced when the mission was loading up and hence each client would start its own version of the mission at different times thus players would become out of sync. It was solved by making sure the mission did not start until all teams were set up. I have not seen this occur again myself, and you are the first to mention it.

[762_XC]

Certainly I'll make a note of it the next time it happens.

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

Thanks :-)

[Dizzy]

Damn, Tracey's posts are always so on target, insightful, all business and the like. She makes us other topic posters look like amatuers. +karma to Tracey. I dig strong chicks.

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

The race of the drafted convoy and/or the race of the definding ships, its possible that I can make this race the same as the race who owns the hex the mission was drafted in (as opposed to be being determined by which is the nearest enemy base as it usually is).  This could actually be done for a lot of missions actually. eg. if taking a mission in friendly space, your AI allies could be determined by the race who owns the hex rather than the nearest base, although the enemy AI would still be determined in the usual way. Conversely, when taking a mission in enemy, the enemy AI could be determined by the owner of the hex, but your AI helpers will be determined by the nearest friendly base.

Opinions?

[762_XC]

KISS

[FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC]

KISS

"Brain the size of a planet and what have they got me doing... parking cars." - The HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy

[el-Karnak]

KISS

"Brain the size of a planet and what have they got me doing... parking cars." - The HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy

How Wude!!  ???

[Bonk]

The race of the drafted convoy and/or the race of the definding ships, its possible that I can make this race the same as the race who owns the hex the mission was drafted in (as opposed to be being determined by which is the nearest enemy base as it usually is).  This could actually be done for a lot of missions actually. eg. if taking a mission in friendly space, your AI allies could be determined by the race who owns the hex rather than the nearest base, although the enemy AI would still be determined in the usual way. Conversely, when taking a mission in enemy, the enemy AI could be determined by the owner of the hex, but your AI helpers will be determined by the nearest friendly base.

Opinions?

This might be an interesting workaround for "total war" missions in some cases. I think it is an idea worth exploring. Any additional control over AI draws is a help.

Have you considered making some of these kinds of features (warp-in, hex-AI) configurable?

[762_XC]

Features are nice, but scripts that work are nicer. How far off is SGO4, and GW5 after that?