Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
Xavier Wise

Registered:
Posts: 1,141
Reply with quote  #16 
To make my post a bit more relevant though...

Quote:
It would be nice to see more neutral factions. For the most part, my games have been protect the good guys, kill the bad guys. There's a lot more to captaining a ship than just combat.


In solo or co-op, that is pretty much it. However, well scripted or GMd missions make the difference. The TSN mod adds some different enemies, and coupled with the TSN Sandbox allows for a GM to create some really interesting missions. The same goes for other mods and mission scripts/sandboxes out there too. Give them a try. There are some brilliant challenges to get captains and crews thinking.

Quote:
Intel doesn't seem very useful. The only important thing I've gathered from it is that you can gauge vulnerability to taunts.


I'd say on harder difficilties, or with a mod/mission, intel really does become more important. Firing an emp at a skaraan with anti-torp never works. And in the TSN Mod, a pirate 'Axe class' with a tractor beam would tear your ship to shreds before you even realise you're caught in it (many an experienced captain and crew have met a quick end when they first encountered them!)

Quote:
It would be nice for the Captain to be able to place an in-game beacon/waypoint.


It would be nice, but I would say it isn't particularly necessary if the captain is clear on the objective e.g. attacking an elite, heading to a base etc. as well as heading to follow. I think it multi-ship games it might see more use, though again you can get by without.

Quote:
what's the minimum number of crew you actually need for peak performance.


This is something specified in the group I play with. We never fly a ship with less than four crew. Optimal for most of our missions seems to be five, but if you have plenty of combat capable neutrals (e.g. escorts and destroyers) then six works really well. A clever captain and a good comms officer can utilise allied ships and have them really move effectively in single ship games.


I think I've covered one or two other points in my previous post. And the technical bits have been covered by others already.

__________________
Fleet Captain Xavier Wise - TSN Sabre
Link to TSN RP Community website
LastStar007

Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #17 
Wow folks, thanks for all the love! I'll try to reply to you all, more or less in order.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HexCode

Honestly, from my own experience, I've found that using LRS and giving everyone Captain's maps is what takes away a lot of that communication between the group that you're looking for.



Yeah, I noticed the drop in communication too. But IMO, communication and teamwork should be based on responsibilities and division of labor, not artificially restricting access to information.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HexCode


Once your Science officer gets more familiar with the game, she should be able to spot the most immediate or pressing threats and relay them to the Captain, give coordinates to those spots to Helm, scan enemies to give shield frequencies to Weapon and alert the crew to any nasty specials that Skarren might have, or give that crucial intel to Comms so that they can pull enemies away from the unprotected DS1 and give yourself some breathing room while you take out some baddies at DS2.



Maybe we haven't played at a high enough difficulty level. We got up to 5 or 6, and the engagements got harder, but it was still easy enough to determine which battle groups were the most urgent. As for communicating bearings, that was usually the captain's job since he was the one deciding strategy. That just left shield frequencies for Science, which was one callout every minute or so while engaged, then sitting tight between skirmishes.

I think Jorm has the right idea - reduce sensor range to something more realistic/limited, so that science has to buckle down in combat too. I didn't know that was an option.
LastStar007

Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryleyra


I don't like the amount of overlap between the Science console and the Captain's Map



There's a good reason for that, as I'm sure you know. Captain's Map is literally a Science console with some tweaks. [biggrin]
LastStar007

Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier Wise


It would be nice, but I would say it isn't particularly necessary if the captain is clear on the objective e.g. attacking an elite, heading to a base etc. as well as heading to follow. I think it multi-ship games it might see more use, though again you can get by without.



The main use I saw for it was assigning a heading to something that didn't normally have one, e.g. an empty but tactically important patch of space. That way the helm could head to it without Science or the Captain telling him course corrections ("A little to the left! Keep going, almost there, you missed it! Back to the right, ... oops, too far! Bring the ship around!")
LastStar007

Registered:
Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier Wise
Well scripted or GMd missions make the difference.


We never did that, I'll give those a try.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier Wise
I'd say on harder difficilties, or with a mod/mission, intel really does become more important. Firing an emp at a skaraan with anti-torp never works.


That kind of thing is useful. I'm talking specifically about the "The captain is proud and runs a lax crew" tidbits.
ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #21 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastStar007

There's a good reason for that, as I'm sure you know. Captain's Map is literally a Science console with some tweaks. [biggrin]


No, Science is the Captain's Map with some tweaks. [biggrin] The Captain's Map has all capabilities the Science Map does, except the ability to scan. Plus, Science and the Captain's Map each have their own separate selection cursor.

As I said, the Captain's Map was meant to be optional. There wasn't even a Captain's Map in versions prior to 1.61. While it is taken for granted these days, originally it was just a very common request for the sort of advanced LRS display that you usually see projected on a transparent wall or the like in sci-fi shows. The game wasn't designed with a Captain's Map in mind.

In my opinion, the LRS should have just been updated with more advanced graphics, the ability to zoom and scroll, and distance and bearing indicators. The ability of the Captain's Map to display ship intel, as well as the fact that the Captain's Map displays ships that the LRS does not, made the LRS obsolete, and duplicated most of the Science station's role.

Unfortunately, there is little that can be done about it now. The players have grown used to it, and would protest if it was changed. Which is why I've suggested making the "scanning level" optional.

As you noted in response to HexCode, artificial restriction of information by player role is how the game encourages communication. The Weapons officer does not need shield frequency in order to fire the beams, as the beams are the Weapons officer's role, but shield frequency makes the beams more efficient. Since scanning the enemy is the Science officer's role, those two players are forced to work together to increase performance. If the shield frequency of the enemy's shield just showed up on the Weapons console, there would be no potential for communication. (Likewise, Weapons can see when shields are damaged or about to fall, but only Science - or the Captain - can count down the shield strength of the enemy)

In some cases, as with Helm's inability to "set course" for a distant object and just let the ship run on autopilot, the restriction doesn't make sense in regards to sci-fi TV shows, but is put in place for gameplay reasons. If you can think of a better way to divide up the responsibility, you're welcome to make a suggestion, but you should be careful not to remove existing restrictions and thereby make certain roles redundant.

"The captain is proud and runs a lax crew" part of the Intel is a relatively minor feature, almost not worth considering, but it does have a meaning. Check out the Intelligence Display page on the wiki. Each ship has both a captain type and a rating for the power of their ship. Of course, most of the Intel refers to the Taunt immunity, as you noted.
Tolotos

Registered:
Posts: 27
Reply with quote  #22 

I didn't want to make a new Thread about it so I simply reanimate this one:

 

My question: Is there a way to turn off the Option to have LRS and VIS selectable at all Stations?

I want to enhance and enforce the communication between my Crew-Members and that way Comms will need to ask Science for Information (bearing and position of ships etc.).
Also since I have mini-Computers, I want to minimize any reason to let them crash, so turning off VIS it would be way more secure.

ryleyra

Registered:
Posts: 3,007
Reply with quote  #23 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tolotos

My question: Is there a way to turn off the Option to have LRS and VIS selectable at all Stations?

I want to enhance and enforce the communication between my Crew-Members and that way Comms will need to ask Science for Information (bearing and position of ships etc.).
Also since I have mini-Computers, I want to minimize any reason to let them crash, so turning off VIS it would be way more secure.



I believe VIS can be turned off, so low end tablets don't run the risk of crashing. Set the flag showVisTab to 0. I believe this is working at this time.

I don't believe LRS can be turned off. I'd like to see showLRSTab, as well as a flag to preset which screen a DATA client sees, or even force it to display a left or right view, for "windows" that show views out the sides of the ship.

I'll note that it would be handy for Android and iOS tablets to have this feature, but unfortunately the artemis.ini file can't be edited on those operating systems.

Likewise, the client<console> flags, which should lock a particular client to a console, have never worked. This would be a nice feature, although it needs new flags for clientData, clientFighter, and clientGameMaster.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.