Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 9      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   Next   »
ivansanchez

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 113
Reply with quote  #31 
Bug: When playing a "peacetime" mission,  friendly bases show up as "TSN Light Cruiser"s on the Science console.
__________________
Need more bling for your bridge? Try out Artemis-Glitter today!
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,846
Reply with quote  #32 
Can I humbly ask that this vesselData file be used in 2.2.1? I have gone through and reduced the damage of the allied warships (Destroyer and Escort) from 35 at the maximum, to 15 at the maximum. This is still twice what their damage was in 1.7, and is slightly higher than the damage done by player ships. And the Destroyer still has three times the fire rate of a player beam, so it's doing more damage than a Battleship!

I can understand wanting Comms to be effective in their ability to order allied ships around, and I'm sure the players of 2.0 and 2.1 have gotten use to this higher damage, but this just bugs me. The thing is, if the TSN has a beam that is capable of doing 35 damage per shot, why don't they put it in the Artemis, supposedly their most powerful ship? I just can't buy the logic.

This should still provide more than enough damage, and if not the damage can be boosted to 4.0 or 5.0. It makes sense if it's just above the player ships' damage, though, as you can say that the Destroyer has sacrificed its Warp drive to make room for bigger beams and Impulse engines. I even added a note to that effect in the long description. The ship is basically designed to rely on jump gates or warp transports, or to hang back and defend the homeworld.

While I was in there, I corrected some typos that have been bothering my OCD. A few releases back, the taunts were changed to reverse the genders referred to, taunting the captain's mother was changed to his father, for instance. For Arvonians this made sense, as a taunt about the captain's wife was changed to her husband, given that Arvonians are a matriarchal society. The Torgoth taunt about the captain's father, however, was fine, but the immunity hint still said "mother" and "her" instead of "father" and "him". So I changed it to match the taunt.

I also changed the Kralien taunt back from husband to wife, since I don't believe there is any note about them being matriarchal. In fact, from discussion there seems to be a 12:1 ratio between males and females, which means that the males probably compete for their few females, with rank bestowing "privileges". (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) Which makes that insult even more devastating. [biggrin]

Finally, I edited the base descriptions to make them all different, and the ship descriptions to add PShock torps. Even though none of that is displayed on screen any more, it's all corrected in case you want to add it back. And the work is all done, you don't have to spend any time on it at all! [biggrin]

Oh, and I left base damage alone. I think the base beams may have would up more powerful than originally intended when 2.1 came out, but that's just fine for a base beam. They're supposed to be bigger than a ship beam.

 
Attached Files
txt vesselData.txt (42.58 KB, 10 views)

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,846
Reply with quote  #33 
Oh, here's another I almost forgot. I've been thinking about a name for the Space Monster, since the only name it has so far is "Classic". I was trying to think of a name that had something to do with crystal, since it obviously is a crystal, but I didn't want it to be too much like the Crystalline Entity from Star Trek.

Then I thought, since we now have Charybdis, why not Scylla! It actually fits! Charybdis was a whirlpool that was situated on one side of a narrow strait (or a monster that generated the whirlpool) while Scylla was a more traditional sea monster with four eyes, six heads with sharp fangs, 12 tentacles and 6 dog heads around her waist. Sailors trying to avoid one would invariably blunder into the other, it was impossible to get past both. Circe advised Odysseus that Scylla was the lesser threat, while she was dangerous, it was possible to move fast enough to outrace her. That really sounds like the Space Monster.

Thom may already have thought of this, I think I remember something about Scylla when monsters were mentioned. But if the name has changed in game, then it's bugged, since it doesn't show up.

Amusingly enough, when I playtested the game yesterday, I literally got caught between Scylla and Charybdis. I had flown into Charybdis's nebulas to see what he looked like, and as I did, the Space Monster suddenly bore down on me at high warp. The next thing I knew, I was trying to evade the Space Monster and lead it toward a black hole. It ended up distracted by a base and destroyed it. They really are incredibly compatible with each other; Charybdis slows a ship down to Warp 1, preventing a ship from evading the Space Monster. So, yeah, I think Scylla is appropriate.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,846
Reply with quote  #34 
I think I've found the list of all pickups, at least from anomalies, but I'm not going to post it here. I'll move to Development for that.
Unregistered
Reply with quote  #35 
The Classic Space Monster HAS a name. It was called Diogenes (for the first ship that confronted it... and was destroyed). It also had a technical name I cannot remember right now.
Arrew

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,737
Reply with quote  #36 
Is it possible to "disable" upgrades? I wander how they'll affect the RP Groups?

I mean congrats on all the hard work and programming.

The reason I'd like to have the option to turn them off is because I see how they can be fun game elements, but they don't seem to fit well with the "simulation" aspect.
Longbowman1346

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #37 
I am so glad I am not the only one that is bothered by these things you just mentioned..  The logic (or lack thereof) on some of this just did not make sense.  I too have a vessel data that I am using that has many of those changes thanks to cfxatheus and his advise and knowledge.  I might incorporate some of yours into mine!  Good work!


QUOTE=ryleyra]Can I humbly ask that this vesselData file be used in 2.2.1? I have gone through and reduced the damage of the allied warships (Destroyer and Escort) from 35 at the maximum, to 15 at the maximum. This is still twice what their damage was in 1.7, and is slightly higher than the damage done by player ships. And the Destroyer still has three times the fire rate of a player beam, so it's doing more damage than a Battleship!

I can understand wanting Comms to be effective in their ability to order allied ships around, and I'm sure the players of 2.0 and 2.1 have gotten use to this higher damage, but this just bugs me. The thing is, if the TSN has a beam that is capable of doing 35 damage per shot, why don't they put it in the Artemis, supposedly their most powerful ship? I just can't buy the logic.

This should still provide more than enough damage, and if not the damage can be boosted to 4.0 or 5.0. It makes sense if it's just above the player ships' damage, though, as you can say that the Destroyer has sacrificed its Warp drive to make room for bigger beams and Impulse engines. I even added a note to that effect in the long description. The ship is basically designed to rely on jump gates or warp transports, or to hang back and defend the homeworld.

While I was in there, I corrected some typos that have been bothering my OCD. A few releases back, the taunts were changed to reverse the genders referred to, taunting the captain's mother was changed to his father, for instance. For Arvonians this made sense, as a taunt about the captain's wife was changed to her husband, given that Arvonians are a matriarchal society. The Torgoth taunt about the captain's father, however, was fine, but the immunity hint still said "mother" and "her" instead of "father" and "him". So I changed it to match the taunt.

I also changed the Kralien taunt back from husband to wife, since I don't believe there is any note about them being matriarchal. In fact, from discussion there seems to be a 12:1 ratio between males and females, which means that the males probably compete for their few females, with rank bestowing "privileges". (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) Which makes that insult even more devastating. [biggrin]

Finally, I edited the base descriptions to make them all different, and the ship descriptions to add PShock torps. Even though none of that is displayed on screen any more, it's all corrected in case you want to add it back. And the work is all done, you don't have to spend any time on it at all! [biggrin]

Oh, and I left base damage alone. I think the base beams may have would up more powerful than originally intended when 2.1 came out, but that's just fine for a base beam. They're supposed to be bigger than a ship beam.

__________________
Captain -  TSN Belisarius BS-108
"Pax per consilia et maxime armis." -  "Rescindentes venator ad venationem." 

(Deane Geiken)
Arkantos

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 419
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBell
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryleyra

Bases are also called stations in game. Which is why when 2.1 came out and the change log said "8 new stations" someone asked what 8 new consoles they would be able to play. [biggrin]



Right, hence your original comment about bases - I was just pointing out that "console" isn't an ambiguity free term either [tongue]

EDIT: Space Stations vs Player Stations might be a sufficient clarification, though [smile]


This issue is why I refactored ArtClientLib to eliminate the use of the term "station" from the code, replacing it with either "base" or "console" as appropriate. I recognize that console isn't completely free of ambiguity, either, but it's a lot less ambiguous than "station."
MarkBell

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 1,837
Reply with quote  #39 
I have to admit - I've never heard anyone getting the terms confused in person.  The context is usually sufficient to prevent confusion.  When the game hasn't started yet, "Take your stations" is pretty clear.  Once we're playing, "Go to the closest base" is also pretty obvious.

In terms of documentation, Space Stations should more properly be referred to as Bases, as evidenced by their titles: "Deep Space Base", "Industrial Base", etc - not Stations, but Bases.  There isn't any real ambiguity with Player/Crew Stations except for individuals using the wrong term for Bases (myself included).

__________________
Note - this is in no way intended to be an official position of Thom or Artemis, as I am not an official representative of the creator or game.
Longbowman1346

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #40 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBell
I have to admit - I've never heard anyone getting the terms confused in person.  The context is usually sufficient to prevent confusion.  When the game hasn't started yet, "Take your stations" is pretty clear.  Once we're playing, "Go to the closest base" is also pretty obvious.

In terms of documentation, Space Stations should more properly be referred to as Bases, as evidenced by their titles: "Deep Space Base", "Industrial Base", etc - not Stations, but Bases.  There isn't any real ambiguity with Player/Crew Stations except for individuals using the wrong term for Bases (myself included).


My crew uses "Duty Station Console" for the actual bridge positions and "base" for the in game "station".

__________________
Captain -  TSN Belisarius BS-108
"Pax per consilia et maxime armis." -  "Rescindentes venator ad venationem." 

(Deane Geiken)
Dave Thaler

Registered:
Posts: 412
Reply with quote  #41 
Quote:
Originally Posted by User McUser
Also, "ITEM_COLLECTED" and "WAR_TURN_WARNING" appear to have been added as DMX events.


Has anyone gotten ITEM_COLLECTED to fire?  I've tried picking up upgrades, as well as doing friendly missions that say "transfer complete".  Neither of those seem to trigger ITEM_COLLECTED, and I can't think of other things to try.
Longbowman1346

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #42 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Thaler
Quote:
Originally Posted by User McUser
Also, "ITEM_COLLECTED" and "WAR_TURN_WARNING" appear to have been added as DMX events.


Has anyone gotten ITEM_COLLECTED to fire?  I've tried picking up upgrades, as well as doing friendly missions that say "transfer complete".  Neither of those seem to trigger ITEM_COLLECTED, and I can't think of other things to try.


Crap...  and I just wrote some DMX code for that trigger.

__________________
Captain -  TSN Belisarius BS-108
"Pax per consilia et maxime armis." -  "Rescindentes venator ad venationem." 

(Deane Geiken)
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,846
Reply with quote  #43 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longbowman1346
I am so glad I am not the only one that is bothered by these things you just mentioned..  The logic (or lack thereof) on some of this just did not make sense.  I too have a vessel data that I am using that has many of those changes thanks to cfxatheus and his advise and knowledge.  I might incorporate some of yours into mine!  Good work!


Thanks for the show of support. I'm quite sure it was an unintended side effect of Thom merging enemy ships and allied ships into one, AI controlled ships, all of which increase in damage as the difficulty is increased from 1 to 5. The end result is that the allied warships, which were designed to do a constant amount of damage not based on difficulty, now do 5 times as much at difficulty 6-11.

I've made suggestions of different ways to implement a fix, but really editing the vesselData file is the quickest and easiest. So I hope there aren't too many people who object to it.

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,846
Reply with quote  #44 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
The Classic Space Monster HAS a name. It was called Diogenes (for the first ship that confronted it... and was destroyed). It also had a technical name I cannot remember right now.


So the Space Monster is just looking for an honest man? [biggrin]

 

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,846
Reply with quote  #45 
I ran into another issue while playtesting again last night. I noticed this my first time playing as well. When I first started up Artemis, it seemed to pause while displaying the resolution screen, as if it had not cleared the display after resizing it and the previous image still remained. The second instance of the game started up fine. During play, the server seemed sluggish, but the client was just fine.

Last night, I noticed in particular that the sound was "jittering", like it was locking up. After finishing my tests, I tried to shut down both windows, and the screen locked up. It took some time for the server to shut down. When it did shut down, the music continued playing. It had stopped jittering, but was playing the same section of the song over and over. I finally had to shut down my laptop to stop it, and it had to be forced to stop running, and slowed down the shutdown process.

I suspect that you may have set up a separate process to handle the music, to take the load off the server, and it seems to be locking up for some reason. Or that's my analysis of the behavior. I'm not sure if it had anything to do with my laptop, which is a fairly old Lenovo Ideapad running Windows 7. I don't have any other system information at the moment, but I could provide it if needed.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.