Topic: FYI: work in progress: OP+ 4.1

[Corbomite]

Pirates weren't playable in EAW? Any ship with 6 drones or more should have 12 drone control.

It's been a long while since I played, but I'm pretty sure I don't wholly agree with that.

[FireSoul]

trying it but it still has alot of problems ie: powercurve on pirates, probes on pirate races they have none, drone control on ships such as Fed DNM ( 7 drone racks yet can only control 6 drones doesn't make sense) these are just a few to name. also how about the continuing refits minus X technology on ship list .

there is more but this is a start hope FS is feeling better
DIFJoshCUGS
your friendly SFC Community Angel

- powercurve on pirates is more a question of changing weapon loadouts. I acknowledge I made poor choices for some loadouts. This needs a lenghty review.
- pirates not having probes: not a bug, unless you want to sacrifice a weapon for one.
- Fed DNM with drone control of 6: there's no mention of double-drone control on the SSD. Nor are there any erratas for R2.124 F-DNM. The bug's in the ship design, not the data entry.

[DIFJosh]

Such anger shadow  I dont know what went on yet but I will very soon. Peeps do get emotional over stuff but usually not me, I try to keep on truckin. CUGS has been here and while I'm still around it shall be. I do say CUGS is not a Joke thou and we are tryin 4.1 and do still play 4.0 amongst other 4.0 variations. Im sure someone did take offense to something you said, did or printed and kicked you from team speak for that I'll investigate and hope you'll understand their angst but for now we'll still try to be a constructive member of the SFC Community and a friend to all

DIFJoshCUGS
your Friendly SFC Community Angel 

[FireSoul]

WOW......

I just got banned for life from Cugs......for what? I don't know no-one will tell me....for stating an opinion online, for the privet PM I sent to FS......Voidwar was my teammate, he asked what version I was playing, I told him 4.1..he left the TS3 room joined Whippet in another room and in 20 seconds I was banned..hehehe.....

Got news for you fellas......I've lived my whole life without Cugs, ban me I don't care...make rooms like "Firetrolls new bitchen shizz"
I don't care!  there are so many VoiP out there...it's a joke....your a joke.

I see... 
My sympathies, Shadow.

[ShadowDiver]

Firesoul...

I'm sorry for everything!

[FCM_SFHQ_XC]

Very nice work Firesoul, and interesting 16 pages of readings too, I finally have some time on my hands this weekend so I'll explore the Release Candidate this weekend and let you know if I see anything in my day-long reuniting with OP lol.

[FireSoul]

trying it but it still has alot of problems ie: powercurve on pirates, probes on pirate races they have none, drone control on ships such as Fed DNM ( 7 drone racks yet can only control 6 drones doesn't make sense) these are just a few to name. also how about the continuing refits minus X technology on ship list .

there is more but this is a start hope FS is feeling better
DIFJoshCUGS
your friendly SFC Community Angel

- powercurve on pirates is more a question of changing weapon loadouts. I acknowledge I made poor choices for some loadouts. This needs a lenghty review.
- pirates not having probes: not a bug, unless you want to sacrifice a weapon for one.
- Fed DNM with drone control of 6: there's no mention of double-drone control on the SSD. Nor are there any erratas for R2.124 F-DNM. The bug's in the ship design, not the data entry.

Re: drone control. I've written some detection code:
# ship F-DNM: drone control (6) is less than # drones. (7)
# ship F-DNMx: drone control (6) is less than # drones. (7)
# ship K-C10K: drone control (6) is less than # drones. (
# ship K-C10x: drone control (6) is less than # drones. (9)
# ship K-C8x: drone control (6) is less than # drones. (7)
# ship K-WD5x: drone control (6) is less than # drones. (

So... I've been giving it some thought:
The K-C8x and the K-WD5x: I can remove the extra drones, and just leave them as ADD on the refitted ship. The partial X refit does not upgrade the drone control rating. The end result would be a cheaper ship.
The K-C10 and F-DNM: Both ships have a DC of 6.

Based on Grognar's somewhat inaccurate but useful BPV page, I could increase the BPV by 3 and make it DC of 12.  I think I will do that.

[FireSoul]

Very nice work Firesoul, and interesting 16 pages of readings too, I finally have some time on my hands this weekend so I'll explore the Release Candidate this weekend and let you know if I see anything in my day-long reuniting with OP lol.

You read ALL my notes? ;p

[Dizzy]

Do what you want for the drone control, FS, the Slave Girl shiplists change things around a little for playbalance considering how 3v3 pvp matches are setup. Your shiplists are always as true to sfb as they can be and while that is great in many aspects, that isnt always the best thing for server play.

[Voidwar]

So... I've been giving it some thought:
The K-C8x and the K-WD5x: I can remove the extra drones, and just leave them as ADD on the refitted ship. The partial X refit does not upgrade the drone control rating. The end result would be a cheaper ship.
The K-C10 and F-DNM: Both ships have a DC of 6.

Based on Grognar's somewhat inaccurate but useful BPV page, I could increase the BPV by 3 and make it DC of 12.  I think I will do that.

This trouble is systemic, and if fixed, the fix probably needs to be applied systemically to the whole shiplist.

All ships, need to have control channels at least equal to their racks, plus six, to control a scatter.

The Fed DNM is probably just the most glaring example, but it is only one example of the systemic problem.

[FireSoul]

So... I've been giving it some thought:
The K-C8x and the K-WD5x: I can remove the extra drones, and just leave them as ADD on the refitted ship. The partial X refit does not upgrade the drone control rating. The end result would be a cheaper ship.
The K-C10 and F-DNM: Both ships have a DC of 6.

Based on Grognar's somewhat inaccurate but useful BPV page, I could increase the BPV by 3 and make it DC of 12.  I think I will do that.

This trouble is systemic, and if fixed, the fix probably needs to be applied systemically to the whole shiplist.

All ships, need to have control channels at least equal to their racks, plus six, to control a scatter.

The Fed DNM is probably just the most glaring example, but it is only one example of the systemic problem.

The added test that generated that output was systematic.
Ships with drones will have either 6 or 12 DC. There are now no ships with more than 6 drones with a DC of 6 (yet unreleased). There are no ships with a DC higher then 12 in SFB anyway, so that's a given automatic loss.

[Voidwar]

The added test that generated that output was systematic.

Was that list complete ?  If that is all the ships that have more racks than channels, I understand.

I think channels must equal racks plus six for scatter use.

I say this in the interest of a fun workable COMPUTER game, and with no regard for whether SFB likes it or not.

This aint a board game.  I aint rollin dice.  We are playing a real time computer game, and having ships, able to make scatters, that will invariably waste drones is silly and makes no sense.

The proper number of channels, to improve our computer game, is racks plus six, NO MATTER WHAT SFB SAYS on the topic.

[knightstorm]

Actually, its quite useful.  For instance, you could use a spread of drones from your rack to tie up their phasers, and then nail them with a SP faster than your drone racks can reload, or you could make a few scatterpacks as preparation for later in the match where some of your racks will be destroyed.  Personally, I'd prefer to see ships like the DNM lose their extra racks as opposed to gaining more drone control since that wouldn't substantially alter their level of combat effectiveness, but would make it so you don't get the annoying missile losing lock on message whenever you fire a full spread.

[FireSoul]

The added test that generated that output was systematic.

Was that list complete ?  If that is all the ships that have more racks than channels, I understand.

I think channels must equal racks plus six for scatter use.

I say this in the interest of a fun workable COMPUTER game, and with no regard for whether SFB likes it or not.

This aint a board game.  I aint rollin dice.  We are playing a real time computer game, and having ships, able to make scatters, that will invariably waste drones is silly and makes no sense.

The proper number of channels, to improve our computer game, is racks plus six, NO MATTER WHAT SFB SAYS on the topic.

I completely disagree. OP+ will remain as it is.

[Corbomite]

We are playing a real time computer game, and having ships, able to make scatters, that will invariably waste drones is silly and makes no sense.

The ships aren't wasting the drones. Players are.

[762_XC]

SFC does not (yet) allow for transfer of drone control between ships. Having single drone control on a dreadnought is far less of an issue in SFB, since a dreadnought always has other ships with it that can take up drone control as needed.

If SFB intended for dreadnoughts to fight duels as they do in SFC pickup games, I have no doubt whatsoever those ships would all have double drone control.

[Voidwar]

I completely disagree. OP+ will remain as it is.

As it is ?  I thought it was a beta being playtested right now.

Your "disagreement" doesn't have much in the way of specific detail, does it ?

If you don't want to fix things, make improvements, or take input from players, then what is this all about ?

[FireSoul]

I completely disagree. OP+ will remain as it is.

As it is ?  I thought it was a beta being playtested right now.

Your "disagreement" doesn't have much in the way of specific detail, does it ?

If you don't want to fix things, make improvements, or take input from players, then what is this all about ?

Ok. Well. Let's take that over then, since you're doing a good job of being a f*ing troll. 

At the risk at estranging myself from the player community, I will not be applying your suggested change. It's not that I don't care, it's that I actually enjoy people having to play within the limits of their ships.
It's called tactics.

[FireSoul]

SFC does not (yet) allow for transfer of drone control between ships. Having single drone control on a dreadnought is far less of an issue in SFB, since a dreadnought always has other ships with it that can take up drone control as needed.

If SFB intended for dreadnoughts to fight duels as they do in SFC pickup games, I have no doubt whatsoever those ships would all have double drone control.

I agree that drone transfers would be nice to see in SFC. I am not, however, going to compensate for its lack: I actually like the limits.

Similarly, I wish stuff like fleet Control Ratings would work in SFC too.

[Voidwar]

Ok. Well. Let's take that over then, since you're doing a good job of being a f*ing troll. 

Who is calling who names ?

I stated a well thought out opinion on the overall drone control problem, with detailed reasoning, and you unilaterally dismissed it, with no counter-reasoning.

I mentioned this lack of detail, and now I'm a troll ?

You are blowing up at me, and calling me a troll, for feedback and input.

Your behavior is inappropriate.

At the risk at estranging myself from the player community, I will not be applying your suggested change. It's not that I don't care, it's that I actually enjoy people having to play within the limits of their ships.
It's called tactics.

Is this some attempt to question my skills as a pilot ?

If it is, it is a really good way for you to let the community know you got no idea what you are talking about.