| www.ClassicTW.com https://mail.black-squirrel.com/ |
|
| Podless ship capture behavior https://mail.black-squirrel.com/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=26098 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | John Pritchett [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Podless ship capture behavior |
Vid Kid brought up an issue with capturing podless ships like the Scout or other Gold custom ships. Prior to 1997, all ships could be captured. In 1997, I changed it so that a podless ship couldn't be captured, since a capture happens when the captain "chickens out" and flees in a pod before the ship is destroyed. No pod, no flee, no capture. Later, I changed this further to say that an unoccupied podless ship could be captured, because there is no captain to flee the ship. That's how the game currently works. An empty ship can be captured, but an occupied ship cannot. Is this something that should be changed? Should it return to the original behavior prior to 1997, where any ship could be captured, or should it return to the way it was in 1997 where podless ships could not be captured at all? |
|
| Author: | Vid Kid [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
As most who know me .. no pod .. no cap. Just makes sense , also make a good reason to fill ship with carbo and not give them away. my 2 ยข |
|
| Author: | Saarducci [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
1997, Can't capture a ship that doesn't have a pod, occupied or not. This is the behavior most of us have become used to, and I don't see it as a problem. Changing this behavior will have an effect on strategies, which the game op is capable of editing by changing the ship settings, How much carbo the ship can hold etc... |
|
| Author: | John Pritchett [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Well, the current behavior, that's been in place since at least 2004, but possibly earlier, is that an unoccupied podless ship CAN be captured. So there are some people who are probably used to that behavior and may not want to see it changed. Anyone? |
|
| Author: | V'Ger [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Personally, I do not see the advantage to not being able to cap an empty podless ship... is it just some sense of nostalgia, or something else that I am missing? |
|
| Author: | John Pritchett [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Actually, nostalgia would lead us to allow capturing of any ship, podless or not, since that's how it was from 1991 to 1997 when the vast majority of people actually played the game. Vid's point is just about using Corbomite. Corbo would be more useful on podless ships because they would always explode. I don't have a strong opinion myself, I just don't want to act on one player's opinion, even if it is someone I trust as much as Vid 
|
|
| Author: | Promethius [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
What would having a pod or not having a pod do in regard to capping a ship? If it is part of the game scenario - no pod, captain dets the ship and himself rather than be captured - then there should also be the scenario - captain escapes in pod, captured ship blows up in x number of minutes or hours or days as determined by the escaping captain. Since the second scenario doesn't exist, then why would the first? An unmanned podless makes not being able to cap even stranger. No one is in it to prevent its beng captured so there is no need for a pod. One thing I've wondered about is where a ship gets a new pod replacement when it has been capped from another player. Shouldn't a player with a capped ship have to buy a replacement pod? Or are they kinda like rabbits - sorry don't remember the Star Trek equal. |
|
| Author: | John Pritchett [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
I don't want to debate realism, I just want to know if a change would be better for gameplay, or leave it alone. |
|
| Author: | Promethius [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
I don't know how not being able to cap a ship would improve game play. I could see it resulting in a lot of empty ships if the corb was high enough to do serious damage to the attacking player esp in an unlim game. |
|
| Author: | ElderProphet [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 6:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Wow, you asked for opinions... always dangerous My opinion is that podless ships should be unable to be captured, or that the sysop should be able to toggle it. |
|
| Author: | Thrawn [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 6:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Promethius wrote: What would having a pod or not having a pod do in regard to capping a ship? One thing I've wondered about is where a ship gets a new pod replacement when it has been capped from another player. Shouldn't a player with a capped ship have to buy a replacement pod? Or are they kinda like rabbits - sorry don't remember the Star Trek equal. Tribbles 
|
|
| Author: | Big D [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
IMO, A capture shouldn't be a sure thing as it pretty much is now. There should be a capture faliure rate, that way it is possible to blow the other ship whether you attack with 1 fighter or not. |
|
| Author: | Singularity [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Big D wrote: IMO, A capture shouldn't be a sure thing as it pretty much is now. There should be a capture faliure rate, that way it is possible to blow the other ship whether you attack with 1 fighter or not. You can already do that as a sysop by disabling combat scanners. IMO, if you leave ships unattended... you get what you get. If you don't want your ships capped, put them somewhere better. If your team is dead, then you're out of the game... technically or not. |
|
| Author: | Big D [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
Singularity wrote: Big D wrote: IMO, A capture shouldn't be a sure thing as it pretty much is now. There should be a capture faliure rate, that way it is possible to blow the other ship whether you attack with 1 fighter or not. You can already do that as a sysop by disabling combat scanners. IMO, if you leave ships unattended... you get what you get. If you don't want your ships capped, put them somewhere better. If your team is dead, then you're out of the game... technically or not. I'm not talking about unattended ships alone but also manned ships. Whenever someone attacks something or someone, there should be a chance that carbonite could be a factor. Combat scanners doesn't stop someone from running an attack loop script and attacking with 1 fighter until the ship is capped. Come to think of it, that would also put a kink in alien cashing which I consider a bug. |
|
| Author: | Promethius [ Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Podless ship capture behavior |
A decent compromise on capping a podless ship, either manned or unmanned might be a 60% chance coded in of blowing the ship even with a 1 fig wave. Hate to see that on alien ships when I am a blue in an unlim since that is one of the best ways a blue can cash. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|