Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 6 of 11     «   Prev   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   Next   »
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #76 
Which sector of the sandbox would be best-suited for these needs?
1/ Some friendly space-stations and civilian spaceships
2/ No friendly warships (or as few as possible)
3/ No enemy warships
4/ Some nice scenery

The reason I'm asking is because I'm setting up a larp that only introduces enemy ships once the training session is over, and where the Artemis will have to defend the sector on it's own.
Arrew

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,737
Reply with quote  #77 
1 B = Bases for players to dock with.
   N = Neutrals You can order around.
   I = Independents, Non-Ho stiles but you can't order them to do stuff. There is a base here and while it is non-hostile you can't dock with it, kind of like an independent port. Meant more for RP and story. 

2/3 If you don't want them just don't spawn them. The sandbox gives you control.

4 E = Environment features lets you make nice things on demand.
  O = Other Environment gives you more nice things to make.
                              There should be a make random environment option... I think in E menu.
  X = Xenos means aliens, which you can spawn and take a look at, like pretty space whales to study in the name of science or even to "Cull" if they are diseased!
  G = Game elements lets you make something that the crews can interact with. Perhaps make some collectables they can pick up (RP some lost cargo) or send them on a rescue mission to collect some escape pods.


Does this help? It's easy and fun to use.
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #78 
Thanks for your reply, Arrew. I am loving the sandbox [smile]

Your replies all make sense, of course, but I would like to use one of the provided pre-made sectors as a starting point because a/ I'll gain time by having less stuff to create myself and b/ if the program crashes I'll gain some more time (and sanity) by having less stuff to re-create [smile]

So I was wondering which one would be best. Elysium, for instance, seems suitable, but has a few friendly warships that I would have to make go away manually at some point in the game. See what I'm going for?
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #79 
Oh, and another question:

I sometimes can't seem to jump or drive out of the sector I jump into. Elysium is usually fine, but others I get stuck at the sector's border. Is this because I'm running the sandbox with Artemis V2.2?
GabrialGF

Registered:
Posts: 30
Reply with quote  #80 
I'm currently running 2.1.1 on all my machines. are there and issues with this sandbox with that?
Should I be running 2.1.5 or 2.2?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated. I want to run this for a con.
Arrew

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,737
Reply with quote  #81 
No, it should run on all of the current versions, though some of the PVP options may only work with 1.9 and above so you'd have to check that.


Can you explain a bit more what's happening when you say stuck at the section borders?
For it to scroll all player ships must be at the edge of the sector, with no enemies and it won't let you scroll "off the map".

Elysium is probably the best "built up" system, although I do like the centre of Tarantis for the jumping/moving black holes. Can add a new dimension to the game. If you wan't some RP style info on each star system there is an RP Canon dock around some where.

I'd really like to add/change the systems like including the Sol System with at least Earth, Mars Jupiter and Saturn, making the USFP a bit smaller and more intimate perhaps. I think players might get a kick about defeating an enemy armada just beyond the moons orbit [wink] . But sadly that's really going to have to wait. That's the problem with being a one man band :s . 
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #82 
Thanks Arrew [smile]

I found the RP canon doc. It's great! I really think I'll be using the Elysium system.

About getting "stuck on the map", here's what happens, in more detail:
- I start a first instance of Artemis on my computer to run as a server, and pick "GM Sandbox V4.1" as a scripted mission.
- I start a second instance of Artemis on the same computer and join as a client.
- I use the Q command to teleport to a given system (for instance: Elysium).
- I then use the J command to jump to the edge of the sector appearing on-screen, or fly there. When I try to jump or fly over the edge, the ship just hugs the edge, not crossing it. This is normal when the ship is at the system's edge (on the outer sectors) but should not happen when the ship is at one of the system's "inner borders". Effectively, I'm stuck in just one sector of the system (but I can still use the Q command to teleport to another system).
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #83 
Hi folks [smile]

I've been preparing my Artemis-powered larp, and I've run into a bit of an issue: the energy cost of jumping.

It costs around 500 energy units to jump across the width of a map (4 squares, or 100 km). When staying on the same map (as in a "siege game", for instance), this is not really a problem. But when looking at a longer game that aims to have the spaceship visit different parts of a system (for instance, the Elysium system), this becomes problematic.

So, how do you guys solve this? Does the GM handle the jumps via his console (seems like a shame, since the jump animation is so cool)? Does the GM give the players more energy during the game via his console (also a shame since it takes energy-management out of the game)? Or do you have the spaceship jump from station to station (meaning the ship should never go below 500 energy units, since bases on different maps are about 100 km apart)? Or perhaps I am missing something here?

Thanks for any input!
Arrew

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,737
Reply with quote  #84 
Well for smaller ships like Missile Cruisers things aren't so bad because they have so many torps to convert to energy but for the larger ships things are much more problematic.

By jumping from station to anomaly you can still navigate across sectors but it is very slow when you want to get to Sector "whatever" and get the story rolling. Also since anomalies have been nerfed energy wise that makes it even more difficult.

In the Jump Drive Tactics doc I think there is a section on the "Red Zone" which is a big issue for larger ships. To be fair the game was never meant to have "scrolling" sectors like the sector has, in a single sector siege game it's not too bad.

What do you think about these possibilities...

How about altering the VesselData file to increase the Homming amount on larger ships to give them more energy reserves?

OR

Adjust the Artemis.ini file to make Jump Drive much more efficient.(This will upset the game less and should achieve what you want. You could double the efficiency and then work down until you find a level your happy with.)


I think Jump could do with some love in regard to it's energy efficiency. It's harder than warp and a lot more energy intensive which can be prohibitive on these kind of "maps".
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #85 
I picture a Jump driven ship making a jump, and then sitting stationary or moving at low impulse speed (50% power to Impulse and Sensors) until it builds up power to jump again. It might help, though, if when crossing a sector boundary, the ship recovered 500 energy or so. You might explain it as Jump or Warp is more efficient over longer distances.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 2,872
Reply with quote  #86 
Let's actually look at the energy efficiency of Warp and Jump across a whole sector.

Warp 1 - 100% power, difficulty 5
time to traverse sector - 2:45
energy cost - 250
cost/sec = 1.51
cost/km = 2.5

Warp 1 - 220% power, difficulty 5
time to traverse sector - 1:33
energy cost - 240
cost/sec = 2.58
cost/km = 2.4

Warp 4 - 100% power, difficulty 5
time to traverse sector - 0:43
energy cost - 830
cost/sec = 19.3
cost/km = 8.3

Warp 4 - 220% power, difficulty 5
time to traverse sector - 0:25
energy cost - 640
cost/sec = 25.6
cost/km = 6.4

Jump - 100% power, difficulty 5
time to traverse sector - 0:32
energy cost - 880
cost/sec = 27.5
cost/km = 8.8

Jump - 220% power, difficulty 5
time to traverse sector - 0:22
energy cost - 900
cost/sec = 40.9
cost/km = 9.0

I think this shows that the cost of Jump is comparable to Warp 4 at 100% power. Warp 4 at 220% power is much better; unfortunately Jump at 220% isn't appreciably more efficient since it reduces time of jump, but not energy cost, so Jump is actually most efficient at 100%. Only slightly, though, since the difference in energy cost is just based on the higher energy consumption of the Jump Engines during the few seconds of the jump.

But clearly Jump has Warp beat in terms of time. It is still faster than Warp 4, and would be even faster if there weren't a Jump limit of 50 km. The problem is more that a Jump ship can't recharge in the 2 minute difference between the trip by Jump and the trip at Warp 1. The Jump ship will only recharge by about 100 units in that time.

Maybe what Thom should do is reduce the cost of Jump drive, but require a cooldown period of 1 minute after a successful jump. That would make it slower than Warp 4, but it would cost less energy.

It's possible difficulty changes the comparison as well, although I suspect the numbers change proportionally.
Arrew

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,737
Reply with quote  #87 
Yeah it's more of a comparable between Jump and Warp 1. Bearing in mind Jump is much more difficult and unforgiving, it needs some kind of Positive.

The idea of more efficient and a "Jump Cooldown" is quite good. Though perhaps 1 minute is a bit too much. It would make PVP Jump a lot more practical and possibly more enjoyable than the zippy mine dropping of Warp PVP.

But I'm not sure if Thom is considering alterations like that at this time?
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #88 
Thanks for the replies guys [smile]

The Jump Drive Tactics document is very helpful !

I think I'll combine several things:
- giving the players a dreadnaught instead of a light cruiser
- keeping difficulty levels at 1 or 2 (players will be noobs anyway)
- stressing energy management ("dock all the time") and jump planning
- explaining to them that homing torpedoes are to be used mainly for energy generation
- maybe giving them an "emergency fuel tank" (GM controlled) to jump to the nearest station if stranded

I'll also take a look at the Artemis.ini file to see if I can edit the ship efficiency. What kind of code line should I be looking for?

Also, a more general question:
When I edit something (like the comms messages or the ship efficiency), should I edit this on all participating computers, or just on the computer running the server?
hoog

Registered:
Posts: 62
Reply with quote  #89 
So, I edited "energyCoeffJump" in artemis.ini, and it does exactly what I need [smile]
Bringing it down from 0.9 to 0.1 was definitely overkill, but somewhere in between should be fine.
Arrew

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,737
Reply with quote  #90 
Does the efficiency get better if you put the number up or down?

I thought it was up?
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.