|
Re: Bugs ?
I couldn't model closed warp points for several reasons. Off the top of my head; The AI will still path even if a warp point is given a "cloak" sort of ability/effect. Any player that comes out at the closed end of a warp point still won't be able to see it, they would need to write down its location and keep track of it that way. That would be a pain in the butt! Also a player can cheat to find closed wp's the same way the AI would, just give a ship movement orders and wait to see if it passes through the closed end of a wp.
That's a nice model, if you are feeling generous I could really use some art and beta testing help. An opening logo or even ship sets would be too sweet. As it stands now I am using stock items and not looking at learning the art side until later next year. Can I still say next year with only an hour and ten minutes left or should I say this year? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif |
Re: Bugs ?
Oh, by the way, as soon as I can get SE5 working on my computer, I wouldn't mind helping you with beta.
Dave |
Re: Bugs ?
PM me once you get it up and running.
|
Re: Bugs ?
In case you haven't noticed I have started a story line based on this mod. The story is called simply enough "Empires". If you have read the books but never played the game most items won't ring a bell at this point. I think Crusade is the first book in the story line chronologically. The books themselves aren't in order with the game history. Anyway if you have Crusade that takes place around High Tech 6 and the Tal-Re Republic; which the story line revolves around, is only high tech 1 right now.
|
Re: Bugs ?
I didn't make that ship, it's from the SE4 Army of Darkness set, that's just how I always imagine them, rectangular with sensor spires, but with a vaguely organic look.
Edit: A new book came out a few weeks ago. Aliens with STL city ships discover the allies but consider them unintelligent because they communicate differently. http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/1416520...226699-0228445 |
Re: Bugs ?
I heard about that book around spring '06. I am a little worried since Webber isn't working on the project. White didn't start working with Weber till after Weber had remade StarFire back when it was still owned by TFG. Besides White's writing style can get a little *ahem* tedious. It's still published by Bean which of small comfort to me. I have read the synopsis that comes with the book and it sounds too much like an attempt to remake the glory days of crusade. A race of zealots that are willing to sacrifice themselves in the name of a cause... The more I think of it the more I think I will pass this one up. Although it does make me wonder what type of Uber-technology they will write into this book. I doubt White will have been concerned with any of the "gaming" aspects. At least Weber made valiant attempts to keep the new books in perspective with what players could add to the game.
|
Re: Bugs ?
If I remember correctly there arent closed warp points, but one-way warp points are possible...I believe this was possible in SEIV, so you would assume it might be possible in SEV, of course I have not proof to either of these statements...
|
Re: Bugs ?
SE5 has one-way wp too, although I haven't toyed with them to see if they are working or not. I don't recall them working in SE4; however, I never tried them out. One way wp would never work anyway. The obvious problem is that you can lose an entire fleet if you jump and can't get back home.
Edited: I said closed when I meant one-way |
Re: Bugs ?
Well if you could do one-way, and closed/invisible Warp Points would be very SF, and if you could get them to work it would be cool...
|
Re: Bugs ?
You will have to flesh that idea out for me a little more. One way wp aren't in StarFire and closed wp won't work unless the path finding hard code can be changed to only use wp it has actually seen. Once that is fixed it is just a matter of figuring a way to make closed wp hidden but still visible once used. Hum, that will be a challenge I can't see a way around right now. I am thinking that will only be possible if a new ability is built into the program. An ability which would allow modders to flip the visibility of things off and on by using a trigger event.
Anyway I have not herd from you or Derek for bugs. However, I wanted to warn you both that the TC uses reproduction rates more on par with reality. As opposed to the rates stock SE5 uses; which is closer to bunnies on Spanish fly. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif So if you notice those colony ships are draining your home planet dry guess what? They are; slow down. This is an Epic TC. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif |
Re: Bugs ?
I havent had much time recently...I'm also hoping Devnull will put out a new editor that works with current SEV patch. I ran it to look at some of the data files for SFTC and Standard SEV, and it actually said there were some errors on some of the entries for formulas and what not...which I dont know if that is right or not...I guess it will come up a bugs while playing...
|
Re: Bugs ?
I couldn't use DevNulls Editor either. I tried it back early in the release and noticed that some of the formulas for weapons were causing errors. The example that comes to mind is the laser. I think it is because the weapon damage curve is outside the predictable gradient that the editor wants. What I am sure of is that it is not errors in my formulas, don't mean to so arrogant but that is the fact. I am sure my formulas are correct and it is his editor that doesn't agree with what amounts to SF canon. So SFTC; I kind of like that but are you referring to this or your SFB project? If you don't mind I think I will borrow that for this TC. I am still looking to change the name and open to ideas. I would like to keep the SF portion though. Maybe Star-Fire, or Stars on Fire, Stars of Fire. Maybe something altogether new? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif
|
Re: Bugs ?
The editor doesn't work with rather complex formulas because they'd be a pain for Devnull to parse in the same way SE5 does. You can just input them manually then save, ignoring errors.
|
Re: Bugs ?
Quote:
|
Re: Bugs ?
So P-D what do you think of the story line so far? I had thought about starting a discussion thread for it here in this forum. Then I figured nah, I can't tell how much it is getting read or how much the readers are getting into it. Starting a thread for discussing the story seemed rather vain after giving some actual thought. Still I would appreciate any comments... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
|
Re: Bugs ?
Do you have a pre-made map or is it a random generated one? Because One way warps were pretty rare, not to mention hard to find. You could add them in and make them invisible to regular sensors so that you wouldn't find them until later in the game once you get the right tech. And the further along the path the less the component costs and room it takes. Eventually you would just need the component on every ship, so the final version of the component would cost very little and take up no space at all but be limited to one per ship. As for losing your whole fleet, that would just be a part of the game, after all, you wouldn't lose it (unless you stumble into a enemy sector) but would still have control of it, and could even start to colonize the hidden sectors. Of course you wouldn't be able to send reinforcements back to your original sectors (until you find another wp back)but then, these sectors are just starting out and wouldn't have a major industrial base yet and you shouldn't be sending your biggest fleet through a wp that you don't know whats on the other side. I seem to recall a mod for SEIV that had nebulas all around the edge of the map of the sector that obscured the views (plus you can't just look to find it) and you had to explore the entire edge of the map to find the sectors. I had a idea of once a B5, ST, BSG and other mods come out to make a map basically dividing the map into sectors, each sector is like a map on its own. Think of 4 quadrants, Alpha Quadrant has all the ST races, Beta Q has B5, Gamma has BSG and so on. Now in certain sectors there would be a wp to a middle sector, sorta like a neutral zone, with nothing in (except maybe a black hole) So once you take over your entire quadrant, you still have to fight all the other mods. Of course this was and still is all just a idea and hypothetical but I would think the closed wp could be done.
|
Re: Bugs ?
Creating a wp that is cloaked would be no problem really. The problem is in the path finding. The closed wp would only work in an all human game and then only if all the humans agreed to not cheat. Even then it would be no problem to find the closed wp and claim that you didn't cheat. "Me? I didn't cheat! How was I supposed to know there was a closed wp there? I told my ship to go back to the home system and it plotted its own path through the wp I swear!" In games with an AI forget about it. There is absolutely no way to tell SE5 "this wp is closed and you can't use it until you have gone through from the open side". It is simply not possible unless Aaron changes the hard code. As for the one way wp they are doable and the frequency is easily changed. However, there are no one way wp in SF so I will leave that one for another mod. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
|
Re: Bugs ?
Wasn't there a WP opens and closes feature in SEIV that could potentially mimick it?
|
Re: Bugs ?
SFTC=StarFireTotalConversion
As for the editor and the formulas, the only way for that to get better I guess is to provide the formulas that do work to Devnull and maybe he can somehow put them in...Of course I'm no programmer, so I don't know what is really involved in the error checking. It just would be nice if we had a tool that confirmed if it was a good or bad formula...some of them can be a bit complex... |
Re: Bugs ?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Bugs ?
And I think I know which ones those are...I was wondering if they would work myself...currently I'm betting no, but I am hopeful...
|
Re: Bugs ?
You and me both; knock on wood! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif
|
Re: Bugs ?
So in other words the AI would see the wp but a human player wouldn't know unless he was actually on top of it? That really sucks that MM didn't at least add that ability into the game, it adds a brand new dimension to the game.
Is it possible to make a event where you open a WP and at the end of the turn it closes itself somehow? You could make the WP opener EXTREMLY expensive and so big that it takes a battleship to hold it and thats all the ship can hold. And I know this would unbalance the mod, I'm just asking if it's possible to do this (and the reason I want the event to close it is so when the AI if it gets that far doesn't need to worry about closing the WP's behind them). |
Re: Bugs ?
Hey, P_E, sorry I haven't gotten back to you yet; something came up at work that I have been required to take care of. I have delved a little into the beta, however, and mostly what I have seen has been minor grammatical errors, for exaple, in the descriptions of the gov't's, there are a number of sports that you used "form" when it should have been "from"
Beyond that, the picture for the Sprint mode missile looks like a gun, and is titled "Basic Gun", but it is described as a missile. In combat it appears to operate like a DUC. Did you mean for this to be that way? Dave |
Re: Bugs ?
Yeah the sprint missile is basically a 'gun'. The missiles travel so fast, they can't be intercepted by point defense. Sprint missiles are fired traditional from the 'Gun'. In Star Fire, they could also be fired from other missile launchers, but you can't set up SEV to be able to use different munitions for one launcher. I like to think of the sprint/Gun as a rail gun type of thing...
|
Re: Bugs ?
@SoD: Yes it is possible to create a component just like you are describing. I believe they did just that in the SE4 B5 Mod. Sounds to me like you thinking up your own mod. You may need to put together a team to help you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif I could script an event like that; however, it wouldn't close at the end of the turn. It would have to be one event to open and one event to close. And then it might not close the one that was opened. It could close any wp anywhere. The path problem isn't just the AI. Next time you play a game watch the quadrant map. When you see that two system (system A & C)that you have entered are connected by a third system (System B) you haven't explored tell a ship in system A to go to System C. Even though you don't know where the wp are chances are good your ship will path to the hidden wp cross the system to the other hidden wp and pop out in system C. So you see the problem is all around, not just with the AI. AI and players use the same path finding code when giving their ships orders.
@Derek: I understand, my wife is a CPT in the Army and I am ex-Army so I know how that goes. Those errors are perfect. If you can send me the names of the ones in question I will proof read them again. Wonderful I am expecting more of those type of errors than any others. For the "Gun" weapon line that is right. In combat they look like direct fire weapons because I wrote them that way. However the effects they have are those of missile weapons. All a Sprint missile is in SF is a missile which is traveling to fast for any form of PD to stop. It is still a Nuclear weapon and against a target with no working engines has the effects all nuclear weapons do. Basically just what Kana said! |
Re: Bugs ?
If it is going too fast for PD to stop... then it dosen't need a warhead at all.
Relativity means that a nuke won't add a significant amount of energy to the resulting blast... |
Re: Bugs ?
Not exactly SJ. Starfire drives act a bit weirdly- once the drive goes down, all the velocity it brings with it goes away.
Combine that with the fact that you don't have to get to near-light speed, just fast enough to get by the PD. |
Re: Bugs ?
Uh? What does that have to do with SF and the sprint mode missile line?
|
Re: Bugs ?
Ok, drive field class 101.
There are two lines of missiles. (1) Standard Mode are very long ranged and travel slow enough for P-D to get a targeting solution and/or saturate the area to hit the offending missile. (2) Sprint Mode fire and go like bats out of hell. They are moving so fast that interception is not possible. With Standard Mode they have much greater range over Sprint (double at starting level) because they track there own target. So they share guidance with warhead with drives. Sprint Mode are short ranged but can't be stopped with P-D; however, they carry no self guidance so they miss. They share warhead space with a massive drive to move much faster than Standard mode missiles can. Now the Drive Field and why it is important. Think of the drive field like the surface of a pond. Solid objects hit the surface and pass through but the faster the object is moving the harder the impact. Both missile types are moving so fast that when they hit the drive field it would render them useless. To get around this they are dueled fused. The first fuse is proximity. The missile sees the drive field and detonates. The second is delayed impact. If there is no drive field the missile cruises on till it hits something then goes boom. After a hart beat or two that is. In terms of the hard mod numbers the difference is a working engine reduces "Missile" type damage by -90%. |
Re: Bugs ?
Ahhh ok, damn that sucks. I belive a couple of people have said that MM might make a expansion, lets hope and pray he adds that the ability to have one way wps if he does. I hadn't thought of that, now I know what you mean, once you enter a system you see on the quadrant map all the sectors that it's connected to even if you haven't explored them so you would know there is a hidden wp. I didn't think about that because mainly I haven't played SEV at all. Stock just leaves so much to be desired. Going from SEIV with mods to stock SEV is like going from steak to hotdogs.
Edit: So are we able to make a wp that will only allow a certain size ship through yet? |
Re: Bugs ?
I seem to recall in the bug novel (been about 5 yrs since I read it so can't remember which one it was) the resistance on the planets had kinetic rocket launchers and it stated that the weapon was so fast that it didn't need any kind of warhead. Granted, this was for surface combat and I know that obviously the two types of combat are different. Plus I remember a little about the drive fields.
|
Re: Bugs ?
Ok, sounds good for the sprint modes. I had thought in one of the novels they did come up with a way for PD to work, or at least something similiar to PD, but I could be wrong. Either way, it works well.
When I get home, I will try and get a list of the typos I have found so far. |
Re: Bugs ?
@SoD: That was in Crusade (can you tell I'm a fanatic) and that worked on planets yes. Then again drive fields don't work on planets so there you go. There was a branch off to 3rd Edition SF called Alkelda Dawn which came out around 94'. They used kinetic weapons which caused a lot of problems in game mechanics with drive fields. And Alkelda Dawn engines did not use drive fields so there were game balance problems when confronted with the SF nukes. In a nut shell without a drive field to detonate nukes prematurely Alkelda Dawn ships got creamed by direct hit after direct hit. As for Kinetic weapons did you read my surface of a pond analogy? Well water will eventually give way to the object that is hitting it but drive fields don't; they just keep bending. So imagine what happens when an object traveling at near c hits a drive field...
@Derek: Sorry but no; to the very best of my knowledge I have never heard of a P-D system that could stop Sprint Mode missiles. Looking forward to the list, you can PM me here if that is easier. I am expecting MANY of those type of mistakes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif |
Re: Bugs ?
In the bug novels they have shaped-antimatter (yes I know, the book spends some time explaining). When they have to finally invade a planet, rather than just nuke it into hell, the Star Union comes up with an idea no one thought of. Kinetic missiles with drive fields used for ground assault. Imagine a solid piece of whatever impacting the ground at the speed of light.
|
Re: Bugs ?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Bugs ?
I shall go check, but it is a space based weapon. Converted freighters sit in orbit, and when the bugs show themselves they launch a missile from orbit. It looks like a fictional laser beam. A blazing line that blasts though the atmosphere and then annihilates the target.
KISS: Kinetic Interdiction Strike System. Upscale of the HVM, Hypervelocity Missile, a Kinetic missile propelled by a small drive coil. Projectiles are emplaced in space and then the drive coils activated going instantaneously to just under a tenth of light speed (c). Each strike releases the energy of a tactical nuclear warhead but precisely targeted and without radioactive contamination. |
Re: Bugs ?
I remember that now!!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif
I could mod that in and the damage would be the same as a nuke. I would need to adjust all nuke using weapons to do something nasty if used on planets but what would be the point? The AI won't care about that so it would be a matter of role playing. In which case I don't need to do anything but add the weapon and let the players enjoy. Since we are talking about that I have been toying with a few other ground centered combat units. The problems I have are (1) I can't do pictures for those units and (2) I want to stick with canon until the SFTC gets on its feet. Then I won't mind taking it in new directions based on suggestions and feedback. If only I could turn this thing lose! At the rate Aaron is patching problems I am starting to think this thing wont be ready for another year. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/fear.gif |
Re: Bugs ?
Quote:
|
Re: Bugs ?
Thanks Kana I believe you are right! Actually I wasn't thinking of shields I was thinking of tractors. They generate a drive field and are targeted like beams and no beam may interact with a target in atmosphere. I have no idea how I made the leap from tractors to engines in atmosphere... However, as you point out that doesn't apply in SE5 anyway.
Now to change focus a little. I made the comment below that I think it will be about a year before Aaron patches what I need to get the SFTC working. I was half joking but started to really think about it. What I thought of was; I might start working on a near canon version that will work with SE5. So I wanted a little input, should I bother to or just hold out? If I make a near canon version; lets call it NCSF Mod how much will that hurt the real deal? |
Re: Bugs ?
It'd be best to outline just what the problem is first..
|
Re: Bugs ?
I did in a detailed letter to Aaron. You know the problem as I have spoke with you to help find a fix. It is the generational; or lack there of, problem with the components. I would have to make a lot of trial and error attempts at formulas. Most weapons are next generation developments but use a completely different to-hit formula so I would have to figure out some formula to mimic them based on levels. I know one of the writers of the 3rd edition rules and I think he may have all that on hand but if he doesn't... I am an Anthropologist not a mathematician. And that is only the tip of the proverbial ice burg. I think i will go get some orange tea with honey, would any of you like one while I'm up?
|
Re: Bugs ?
Honestly....whatever gets it released soonest!!! I hate stock. I dont know why, I never had a problem getting into stock games before MOO2 but after that....it just has to be something I'm familiar with otherwise I just can't get into it. I think it's because I have so much sci-fi nonsense organized into my memory that trying to rememeber any more storylines will make my head explode. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/redface.gif
|
Re: Bugs ?
One of the big challenges to making this mod progressive (as in SE5 style component progression) was the problem of weapons using different to-hit formulas at different levels. I couldn't get the formulas to step up smoothly. If anyone has ever seen the SF weapon charts they will know what I mean. I have just tested; successfully, level dependent to-hit formulas. Here is a copy and paste for my other modders to look over. You will notice I only did this for a weapon using two formulas. It can be done with more conditions by nesting the to-hit formula in a "Master" iif statement. I can make this mod into a progression style. It will diverge from canon and it is to early to tell how much. For starters tech lines won't be totally dependent on High Tech. For example the Basic Gun is an Industrial 2 tech and the next step up is a High Tech 2 item; two levels removed. With progressive style (SE5 style) you will be able to develop the second and all other levels while you are still at Industrial 2. I am going to try this and hope that all will balance. For example it won't do you much good to develop the higher tech weapons without the larger hulls which is governed by your High Tech level. Also some items, such as Force Beams won't even come open to research until you attain the High Tech level to open the field. Kana, your thoughts please.
Weapon Space To Hit Modifier Formula := 0 + iif(([%Level%] <= 1), iif([%Range%] < 30, 90, iif([%Range%] < 60, 80, iif([%Range%] < 70, 70, iif([%Range%] < 80, 60, iif([%Range%] < 90, 50, iif([%Range%] < 100, 30, iif([%Range%] < 110, 10, 0))))))), iif([%Range%] < 30, 90, iif([%Range%] < 60, 80, iif([%Range%] < 70, 70, iif([%Range%] < 80, 60, iif([%Range%] < 90, 50, iif([%Range%] < 100, 30, iif([%Range%] < 210, 10, 0)))))))) Last thoughts: It isn't just the to-hit formulas that I need to fashion like the above. There are other elements such as damage at range and reload, and supplies used, and blah more, more, more. Also this is not an actual to-hit formula from the mod. Well it is but I copied and pasted then changed the last number to 210 so I could test the bloody thing. So please don't start asking why it looks so funny! |
Re: Bugs ?
The whole thing on progression thing is only important, if you want to be able to sort the components by what is 'obsolete'. In SEIV, you could view obsolete weapons and then place them on a ship either to gift older tech to someone, or maybe some form of cheaper alternative, and many other strategies. The problem with the whole 'level' progression of components, there is no way to regress back to a lower level of a component, if you wanted to. So if you have a level 10 backscratcher, you can't go back and produce a level 1 backscratcher if you wanted to.
So if you want to go by the 'rulebook', then research will be relatively simple. You have the master Tech Area, which is the Tech Level, starting with the Industrials, and moving up to the High Tech, these open up the individual components and other Tech areas. Since all components only have one level you still have to research that one level to actually put the component into use. When its done you can use it, and it sticks around. If you have Basic Gun, and then get a high enough level to get Gun then you have access to both, because they are seperate areas of research, the Gun is better, and you will probably use it. Basically the looks exactly like what you have done for the SFTC. Now we just need the option to flag a component as obsolete manually, so that we have control what components we can see available to add to the hulls. So my question is why do you even need levels in the formula? If the individual component doesnt need to get progressively better, or smaller, or cheaper, because a new and better one is high on the TL research track, then I don't see the need. |
Re: Bugs ?
The progression thing is so I can get this mod out the door and share it. Generational is broken right now. You do have a great point about the backward engineering. The problem with that is the cluttered list of components it would create. It can't be sorted but the newest items will always be on the bottom. It would allow you to build an "older" tech ship to give to someone which is in canon anyway. So are you saying I should not be trying to phase the components out? Leave them in the component list so that you can build old or new tech system at will? You would be able to repair old also like that which the SFTC won't let you do right now. Going this route would be sticking with the Generational system (SE4) style which means I wouldn't need the level statements in the formulas. The level statements would be for a Progressive style only. Oh and as you pointed out with the current SE5 Progressive system you still can't backward engineer a ship. It is the latest tech or nothing at all; isn't it?
Give me the go-ahead and I will remove all the lines that are phasing components out. I think its a great idea! |
Re: Bugs ?
Well its your mod, I say do what ever you feel best gives you the play you desire. Yes the components list will get cluttered, and it would be a simple enough fix by Aaron to allow us to add a flag to each component similar to the family thing in SEIV, and then be able to sort the component list, and only show the most recent techs, giving us the option to go back and use older components if we wish to.
For the HH mod, I will probably use Progression (levels), and for SFB mod, the route I will go will be more like what I propose for SFTC. |
Re: Bugs ?
It is my mod but I respect and value your input; which is why I ask. I think I will go that approach. Other than that what is keeping this mod from being shared? Other ideas I would appreciate input on are these changes:
1. Minerals --> MC 2. Radioactives --> CP 3. kT --> HS |
Re: Bugs ?
The kT change would require you to go through and edit portions of the UI, because they are 'hardcoded' if I remember from something Cpt Kwok said.
I assume CP is crew points? I guess that would be cool, but crew is already tracked in game, we just need to pester Aaron to somehow allow us access to that 'resource'. I'm ok with the Minerals=Mega Credits as well...Its just a matter of 'feeling it' within the constraints of SEV... |
Re: Bugs ?
Good points. I am going to start off by removing the phase out portion of components. You will now be able to backward engineer ships for resale, gifting, repairing... whatever.
What about the other part of my question; what is keeping this from being shared? What is breaking the SFTC that I should not put it out as an open Beta? |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.