Topic: Payout Schedule for Patrols

[Karnak]

Next week, after DOE, I am going to start pushing out patrol scripts that you can try out on ISC Inv. server if you deign to be a beta tester.

For patrols, I will differientiate between "Astounding Victory" and "Victory" levels based on the odds you face (ie. if you beat 2 to 1 odds or higher in a PvP match  you have a better chance of getting "Astounding Victory").  For the most part, I expect the common achievement level to be "Victory".

I can go with one of two payout schemes:

1)  Flat Rate plan:  the pp payout will be the same irregardless of the damage points you inflict on the enemy or the damage you take.  The payout will be graded by victory level.  500 for Astounding Victory, 300 for Victory, 150 for Draw, -75 for loss.  120 bonus for each capture.

2)  Skewed by Damage Points:  the basic PP payout level detailed above will be skewed by the ratio of damage point inflicted to damage points taken.  For example, if you take a lot of damage while winning you get less PP.  If you take little damage while winning you get more PP.

Which payout scheme do y'all like?

Please bear in mind that I will use the "skewed by damage points" payout scheme for fleet actions missions so even if patrols end up being flat rate payouts there will be other choices available in other missions for payout schemes.  

Note:  current supply costs proposed for server will be:
               Marines     10
               Mines         15
              Spares        10

[Gumby]

 Well, myself, I would like to see the flat rate for patrols.  1 reason for that could be stated that persons like myself who tend to run solo more often than not, tend to not make pp quite as fast because we have to deal with un controllable AI on our side.  Another reason, if you get the swiss put into your cheese by your opponent while in battle, you are already going to have to pay PP (pretty penny) to get your ship fixed in the first place.  I would think that the flat rate would tend to reward success, as opposed to the damaged skewed outlook, which would tend to punish failure.  Myself, I think that failure is usually punishment in and of itself.  Just one Rom's opinion.

 

   

[Dizzy]

Flat rate.

And when can we have these missions up for SG3... I'd like to see a majority of ISC Inv missions on SG3, along with a sprinkle of ED and TG missions...

[Karnak]

Will be ready per the schedule you gave me. Just send a list of the ones you want. Looks like you want 'em all.

You can start beta testing them on ISC Inv. server right after DOE ends.

[SSCF_Paladin]

I like how current DOE missions have a base completion amount, and an adjusted bonus/penalty amount.  I think this would be a great way to start.

If parts are going to be very expensive, then a good base amount is important I think.  It's very frustrating for beginners to pull off a win, then have their pp amounts actually subtracted from.  I'd like to see newcomers have a chance to become veterans - (insert ominous voice of doom here)  the future of this game depends on it.

I'd seen it posted elsewhere that the campaign length has something to do with it too.  I am glad to see that things have been refined to the point where it's more cruiser based, instead of the battleships and dreads of old that drove off many who wanted to get into these campaigns.  However, if the campaign does not reward pilots in some way, they tend to go elsewhere after becoming too frustrated.  I am a coder too, and have worked on game development in the past as a hobby... I can appreciate how hard it is to change settings that really don't show their effects except over time, so I know I'm not asking an easy thing, nor something you haven't all thought of before.

I really like the A-B mission concept, so pilots can choose depending on what they think they can handle.  I do think the payouts need tweaking... destroying the entire courier fleet for 180pp, then spending most of it to reoutfit your ship isn't a great way to spend 15-20 minutes.

I am really impressed with the way command variants and carriers were addressed, cost and BPV wise, on DOE.  I think this was a great improvement, and gave people a reason to run a NCL+ instead of CLC's all the time (federation example of course).  Stroke of genius on the developers' parts...

Maybe by increasing the skill difference between A and B mission variants, and the respective rewards might be the way to go.  I know there are problems getting more than two missions to appear without a crash, so working with what is currently viable might be the way to go.

As a side note, the multiplayer stability has been greatly improved, I've had two allies in mission many times with no crashes.

DarkElf's comment on SQL based missions opens huge possibilities as well, with direct access to data variables, our imagination is really our only restraint outside of coding and testing.  I'd really like to speak with anyone involved, if there is anything I can do to help with coding or otherwise I'm up for it.

Anyhow, my two cents worth..
 

[SSCF_Paladin]

After re-reading my post, I realize I left something important out.

Example, the courier mission... most know now that you get the best result from capturing the courier, and anything else you can manage.  That's great, but it doesn't tell you that in the briefing.  It should.  Missions with a trick to them are not fair to those not in the know, and some don't read these forums either.  It should state minimum objectives, with bonus objectives as well.

[Karnak]

Quote:
DarkElf's comment on SQL based missions opens huge possibilities as well, with direct access to data variables, our imagination is really our only restraint outside of coding and testing. I'd really like to speak with anyone involved, if there is anything I can do to help with coding or otherwise I'm up for it.

Great points on PP award, SSCF-Patterson.  I will definitely keep the basic payout at 300 or higher for a simple victory in any mission I write.

This is what you will need to start mission scripting:

1)  A basic knowledge of how the server kit operates.  Best way to do that is to dowloand the SFC2 v2036 server kit and start up a campaign so it shows up in the Dyna2 list.  This will be you test server for trying out missions you code up.  Learn the GF files and how they work.

2)  Purchase/acquire a Microsoft Visual C++ v6.0 (min. Standard Edition) IDE and install Service Pack 5.

3) Download the code for the Taldren stock missions and go through NW's mission scripting guide.

4)  Create a scratch mission on your own. Feel free to ask for help.

Once you have accomplished these 4 steps you will be in a position to write up missions for dyna play.  Then you can assess what kind of missions the community really wants. You won't have to look hard, LOL.  Just watch the posts in this forum.

There a database API for us to use to access SQL, but until a SQL dyna is successfully executed we should hold off on developing SQL-driven mission scripts.  Many of the admins have said that SQL dynas freeze up the CPU of the server after a certain amount of players log onto the campaign.