Topic: Webmap question

[CaptJosh]

It'd have to be a pretty damn good telescope, like...you know, the fricken Argus Array subspace telescope, to see planets around other stars. Even our best optical telescopes only let us infer planets from oddities in stellar motion.

[Dizzy]

our best optical telescopes only let us infer planets from oddities in stellar motion.

They'd detect Kroma!

[FPF-DieHard]

It'd have to be a pretty damn good telescope, like...you know, the fricken Argus Array subspace telescope, to see planets around other stars. Even our best optical telescopes only let us infer planets from oddities in stellar motion.

Actually, you are right.   As per the scale of space, every star visible from the earth's sky resides in on Hex in Federation and Empire.

[762_XC]

A little fog of war is good. Showing players on the webmap is not a good idea IMHO, and showing bases is just silly.

Remember LB5? There was literally no point in putting a base down.

[GDA-S'Cipio]

I think planets should show up, though. THere's no way that everyone doesn't know where everyone else's planets are. Espionage is not that difficult.

Initial planets should show.  Now, if Bonk has gotten that terraforming procedure to work, then maybe "new" planets should not show.   (But that's requirement creep, and probably way too much trouble for too little game payoff.)

-S'Cipio

[Hexx]

It'd have to be a pretty damn good telescope, like...you know, the fricken Argus Array subspace telescope, to see planets around other stars. Even our best optical telescopes only let us infer planets from oddities in stellar motion.

Actually, you are right.   As per the scale of space, every star visible from the earth's sky resides in on Hex in Federation and Empire.

Actually one of those amusing points- all of these hexes on the F&E board are pretty big, and take a while
to traverse. Yet the Starfleet of the SFB universe would have less than 1000 ships to guard teh whole thing..

Anyone else find it strange that there empires can maintain borders at all?

[FPF-DieHard]

Actually one of those amusing points- all of these hexes on the F&E board are pretty big, and take a while
to traverse. Yet the Starfleet of the SFB universe would have less than 1000 ships to guard teh whole thing..

Anyone else find it strange that there empires can maintain borders at all?

You are correct, F&E has the Trek universe set as unbeleivably big.  ony the speed of the ship allows for any sense of control. 

[SkyFlyer]

think about this though... If a base is within say four or five hexs, lets say of another, enemy base, the two would surely dectect each other very quickly.

[CaptJosh]

Simply via supply traffic, if nothing else.

[FPF-DieHard]

Simply via supply traffic, if nothing else.

Makes sesne.   As per SFB technobable, a non-cloaked ship travelling at warp is easily detectable from a great distance.

[CaptJosh]

As I understand it, a ship at warp generates a significant realspace disturbance. That's why they're so obviaus and why the sensors on a ship at warp are impaired, too.

[Hexx]

Simply via supply traffic, if nothing else.

Makes sesne.   As per SFB technobable, a non-cloaked ship travelling at warp is easily detectable from a great distance.

As I understand it, a ship at warp generates a significant realspace disturbance. That's why they're so obviaus and why the sensors on a ship at warp are impaired, too.

Well, now that we've determined the technobabble of our fiction game supports your thesis we'll get somewhere... 

[Dfly]

I also agree that we should not be able to see people where they are when they are, on the webmap.  It takes the fun out of trying to figure what actual ships are AI and what are peops.  The news gives you an idea of where they were, and then you follow the paper trail from there.  To actually be given the answer before the question(checking webmap before loggin on, etc) seems OTT.

[LordSaxon]

Glad I posted this question, as it has brought out many interesting ideas about intel in the Dynaverse.
So we should:

1)  Phase out the player locations on the webmap
2)  Delete the reporting of new bases in the news (if possible) and showing of bases on the map.
3)  New Terraformed planets show on the map after "X" amount of turns (due to interstellar traffic, etc.)
Yes?

[Dizzy]

Glad I posted this question, as it has brought out many interesting ideas about intel in the Dynaverse.
So we should:

1)  Phase out the player locations on the webmap
2)  Delete the reporting of new bases in the news (if possible) and showing of bases on the map.
3)  New Terraformed planets show on the map after "X" amount of turns (due to interstellar traffic, etc.)
Yes?

1. I'd like to see a 2 turn delay... A two turn delay on everything is preferable. Map updates, all of it. Dunno if thats possible. We ought to at least trt it for a server. We might like it.
2. yes if possible.
3. Probably not possible.

[Hexx]

There's no reason to have player's location displayed. (delayed or otherwise)
There's no "real" way anyone could get that information, in wartime
all sides would hide their movement, plus it can easily be used for the
harrasment of players who don't want PVP.
-What's the point of giving someone a BCH who's never flown one before
if he's trackable.
- it's a (somehwhat common) -if stupid practice to go afk for a few with a ship parked somewhere
"behind the lines" where it's safe. With this there is nowhere safe, possible DS on VP ships
and arguments over draft dodging.

I'll be more than happy to use it if it's left in, but it's something I really think should go.
The only thing it does (while being a neat feature) is permit the targeting of individual players
for PVP purposes.

[Dfly]

You know what would be really neet?  What if each player could either turn his position on or off?  lets say I want PvP, then I turn it on for the duration of the time I want it.  When I no longer want just PvP, I turn it off.  To start campaign, all players would be turned off.  That way only the guys wanting it on would do so.  If only it were possible(dreams).

[Dizzy]

Those were my reasons initially, Hexx. Thanks for restating them for me. But alas, it is true, and I'm glad Hexx agrees with me. Player location, while extrememly tempting to leave in, prolly shouldnt be.

[Bonk]

So do we have a consensus? Disable player location and base display on the webmap? (no problem to do, I figured this would be desired anyway)

I cannot disable base placements in the normal server news without editing the serverkit code, and we are not mandated to change gameplay with the serverkit code, only stability. Nor can I disable mission reports in the news, or add a delay to their report, they will report in the news as soon as the mission is complete, as they always have.

[762_XC]

Here is one thought...

Showing where peeps are on the map would make deepstriking a lot harder, and destructable bases would be more survivable.

Unless of course it's late at night and there's no opposition on.

Things that make you go hmmmmm......