Well said dude. You opened my eyes a bit, which is good, I too hope to start my own server in the near future and Ive never seen this side of the game. Do u think it would help a server if u put in certain games for the "super scripers" and others geared more towards serious players?
I think that scripting and helpers are good on a minimal level...like u said dude, its gets boring moving 25k colos between terra and your planet manually. But scripts that allow u to leave the account running for hours to protect your home planet is just plain stupid. I myself have run into these before and find them annoying. If your gonna protect your home...figure out when your nme comes online and try and be on at the same time...otherwise, take your chances!!
Thanks for your inspring comments dhunt!!
L8ter

*Proud Member of the Alliance*

Live Long And Prosper!

quote:
... Do u think it would help a server if u put in certain games for the "super scripers" and others geared more towards serious players? ...


oh man! super scripters vs. serious players! you crack me up! show me a super scripter who isn't a serious player. well - let me make a distinction that i think you miss: you must mean "super script user" and not "super script author". i'll tell you one thing for sure. the guys who write scripts well - spend far more hours than your so-called "serious player" developing things for tradewars than you give them credit for.

regards,
the reverend
icq 83250263
the.reverend@coastgames.com
http://thereverend.coastgames.com/tradewars/

quote:
quote:
... Do u think it would help a server if u put in certain games for the "super scripers" and others geared more towards serious players? ...


oh man! super scripters vs. serious players! you crack me up! show me a super scripter who isn't a serious player. well - let me make a distinction that i think you miss: you must mean "super script user" and not "super script author". i'll tell you one thing for sure. the guys who write scripts well - spend far more hours than your so-called "serious player" developing things for tradewars than you give them credit for.

regards,
the reverend
icq 83250263
the.reverend@coastgames.com
http://thereverend.coastgames.com/tradewars/


Ahh, I see now. Your game is being threatened. It's not the TW game but your scripting. When the holes are plugged, you are out of a job. Yes, that would disturb me also if I were in your position.

Visit slbbs.com port 2002 for a rip roaring game of TW where you also have to battle the Klingons, Romulans, Orians and the Borg.

Script Helpers for the more mundane ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
· jobs are tolerated but using one to ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
map the entire universe without it ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
costing any turns is not. This gives ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
· the person using this type of scripting ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
the entire universe. It is used to avoid ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
· or locate areas without jeapordizing ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
the player in any way. It is also used ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
with other scripting to gain an emmediate
trading advantage.

WHOA....now im just ur average joe here.....
but correct me if i'm wrong but since when does ZTM info give
you any type of immediate trading advantge?????

All Ztm can do for someone is find warp data info,,NOT port
information. in other words you may have the dead ends mapped but it wont tell you what port is there or not there until u either
eprobe it or go there.

So why would you want to try and dissallow it???

Space Ghost
http://www.booinc.com


The Ghost you LOVE to HATE!!

The J.R. Ewing of Tradewars

The major issue, as I see it, began back when BBS's went from pay per hour to unlimited per month. Way back, in the good old days, I paid 50cents an hour to play TW. As a teenager with no serious job, I had to be careful with my time. I would play 2 or 3 hours a day. That was a healthy chunk of money to me back in the mid 90's. Indeed, most people didn't want to spend more time than that online, and didn't want to pay for scripts to be in a game 24x7. Then BBS's went to the $20 a month deal, and it started to all slip away. 24x7 scripts were fine then, as it dodn't cost you anything extra.... Some of my theories about TW... back in the old days, you could not, or I could not, find a single BBS running TW that had less than full move delay. This had 2 consequences. It slowed the game, making it more of a strategic game, than an arcade game, and it made money for sysops who charged you by the hour. These days, you're lucky to find anyone running slower than 1/4 delay, and nobody charges. Hence these bots that play for people. I dislike the BOTS, not enough to ban them from my server, I also dislike the arcade stlye people use these days, but my method is try and defeat them using my style, and show them how they are lacking a fundamental piece of TW. That is complicated when games cater to the arcade and bot players, but thats why I have to be selective as to which games I play and where. Bottom line is, time limits discourage bot and arcade players, as do delays, as do low turns. You just have to find a balance in your edits, that will discourage bot use by being challenging, not restrictive. In other words, make more resources be rare, so a player can not just run one BOT all day. See my game G for ideas, so far, I have been very pleased with the turnout of players, and the numbers of them doing ok in the game. So far its my best edits yet as I think they really try to address some issues of imbalance that are so common in TW these days. Now, if only I could make it much more costly to have a mixed alignment corp <G> and/or disable that darn type II twarp <G>.

Col Sanders
telnet://bbs.bawk.org

"Jedi do not concern me" -The Sith

A comment on the whole removing CIM thing that was mentioned...IF this is done it will ruin ALOT. So what If I want to use different helpers at different times on a single game. I would have to manually explore everything with each helper because I would no longer be able to pull down my explored data and port data. What If the computer crashed or even just locked up when you haven't had the opportunity to save your data...Its all lost and you gotta start from scratch?

And I am not even talking about ZTM. I hate ZTM it takes to Darn long and I am impatient. But I rely heavily on being able to retrieve my sector and port data...and I am sure that many people do. Heh...please dont get rid of CIM mode...maybee just the ZTM but even that will upset alot of peepz to because alot or traders rely on ZTM.
Though removing ZTM wont really stop anything cause all the helpers would just be adapted to useing CF to get the warp data or even Cfposi's method..same difference.

Stop saying don't quote me because noone quotes you. You probly haven't said a thing worth saying! - KMFDM, Dogma

quote:If you have been there or probed there, you should be able to use your onboard computer to read it.

I agree to a point. If I understand correctly, and I just verified this, if you have visited a port already and use CIM to get a port report, it will show you the CURRENT product levels. Not what they were last at when you last visited. This, IMHO, give a distinct advantage to script users (and those who know what they're looking at) ... I've been playing with SWATH lately, and since CIM gives the current info, I can jump in at any time, run that port report, and then determine exactly what ports I want to hit to get the most buckage for my turns...

Now, unless we're assuming that you suddenly have some sort of link with every port you've visited in the game, I don't think this info should be there. I can also see problems with changing it, though. For instance, if it were changed to view the last product levels of the player, then that could be a significant space issue on the server, not to mention the processing power needed to find and display that info for the user. My suggestion is to change it so, yes, there is a port report, but no, it does not show the product levels. I think it should only show the type of port. Let the helpers do the rest if a user wants to use one. The helper can calculate what the port *should* be at if noone has been there trading lately. That, in itself, would make the game that much more of a challenge to play.

And, of course, it can always be changed to be a configurable option... Does the sysop want this available? Maybe for newbie games...

And as for ZTM, see my previous argument. Even without CIM, I can still map everything with computer option F (Course Plotter) The alternative here is to remove that as well. Then you'd have to actually visit every sector to map out the universe...

--------------------------
~~ XenoPhage ~~
--------------------------

quote: And as for ZTM, see my previous argument. Even without CIM, I can still map everything with computer option F (Course Plotter) The alternative here is to remove that as well. Then you'd have to actually visit every sector to map out the universe...

LOL....that would make games soooooooooo long, but its an option! I think all these ideas that have been stated above are great, but they should depend entirely on the sysop...GIVE THE SYSOP THE POWER!! I think that to increase diversity in the games, these options should all be made available to the Sysop. Like this we can have certain servers for different things: I'll go to server A for a game good for my scripts, then Ill go to server B to try and defeat Col Sanders and an Old School game. Having the sysops more involved in game developement is the key! I think thats the next step in the game, cuz lets face it, only the sysops know what the players really want and when!!
Just a suggestion...unless of course u don't like diversity
L8ter

*Proud Member of the Alliance*

Live Long And Prosper!

I enjoyed reading this thread. Nice discussion

I just wanted to make a few comments. First, I just need people to trust me that I won't throw out good features and gameplay while trying to fix problems. I understand the importance of things like ZTM and CIM. I also understand the problems. My goal would be to solve the problems and retain the benefits. To be specific, if I get rid of ZTM, I'd want to replace it with more efficient and game-supported solutions to mapping the universe. ZTM isn't necessarily bad, but it's horribly inefficient. If it was designed into the game, the results of ZTM could be made available to a new player as soon as they start the game, without costing the server CPU time. Of course, there needs to be limits on this, so it might be necessary to make map zones available at SD for purchase. This is just an example of how I would solve the problem (inefficient process) without taking away the benefit (less tedious way to map the universe).

For those of you who love the current game as it is, you know I'm committed to keeping it this way even though I believe it has flaws. Any major changes I make, like pulling ZTM, would be done in a new version, keeping TWv3 intact. If I can get TWv3 to the point where it is stable enough, then I would put a stop to changes. Then the game would be available for as long as Windows supported it.

As to the question of whether ZTM could be removed, I assure you that it can.

Concerning port reports, I have no intention of removing the ability to analyze port reports. But, I feel very strongly that it is being abused right now and I will take steps to solve those problems.

Another point I wanted to address is the idea of sysop configuration. If nothing else is obvious from TW, it should be that it attempts to be as customizable as possible. And the theory that the best settings will prevail is one that I hope will someday prove itself. But sadly, it has been shown all too often that gameops will choose settings that are bad for gameplay because they're the ones that seem to attract the most players. Many of the problems being discussed can be solved with turn limits, time limits, ship delays, and other settings. The fact that I allow these settings to be disabled entirely has caused many of the problems you're discussing. If I create a new version and attempt to gain some control over these problems, I will be more careful about what settings I allow to be disabled.

John Pritchett
Epic Interactive Strategy

quote:
And as for ZTM, see my previous argument. Even without CIM, I can still map everything with computer option F (Course Plotter) The alternative here is to remove that as well. Then you'd have to actually visit every sector to map out the universe...



Actually, even that wouldn't stop it. You can do a full ZTM just by typing in the courses and then cancelling the autopilot.

So I guess that Autopilot would have to be disabled too. Unfortunately, that would make the game pretty rough.

Adding a "remove CIM option" to TEDIT would slow down some scripters, especially the kids that don't know how to write their own and rely on others to write them for them. However, it wouldn't be too long before someone wrote a script to help the newbloods to do a ZTM by course plotting in games that didn't have the CIM Course Plotting option.

The only way I could see defeating this would be to add a turn cost for a course plot, or a delay. The delay in my mind is a better option, as it would slow down those ZTMers significantly. They could still do a ZTM, but it would take them quite a bit longer. Turn costs would be too expensive, unless we did something along the lines of "4 course plots for 1 turn" or so. Even that is somewhat of a high price.


-Stryker
"Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines."

quote:
I enjoyed reading this thread. Nice discussion

I just wanted to make a few comments. First, I just need people to trust me that I won't throw out good features and gameplay while trying to fix problems. I understand the importance of things like ZTM and CIM. I also understand the problems. My goal would be to solve the problems and retain the benefits. To be specific, if I get rid of ZTM, I'd want to replace it with more efficient and game-supported solutions to mapping the universe. ZTM isn't necessarily bad, but it's horribly inefficient. If it was designed into the game, the results of ZTM could be made available to a new player as soon as they start the game, without costing the server CPU time. Of course, there needs to be limits on this, so it might be necessary to make map zones available at SD for purchase. This is just an example of how I would solve the problem (inefficient process) without taking away the benefit (less tedious way to map the universe).

For those of you who love the current game as it is, you know I'm committed to keeping it this way even though I believe it has flaws. Any major changes I make, like pulling ZTM, would be done in a new version, keeping TWv3 intact. If I can get TWv3 to the point where it is stable enough, then I would put a stop to changes. Then the game would be available for as long as Windows supported it.

As to the question of whether ZTM could be removed, I assure you that it can.

Concerning port reports, I have no intention of removing the ability to analyze port reports. But, I feel very strongly that it is being abused right now and I will take steps to solve those problems.

Another point I wanted to address is the idea of sysop configuration. If nothing else is obvious from TW, it should be that it attempts to be as customizable as possible. And the theory that the best settings will prevail is one that I hope will someday prove itself. But sadly, it has been shown all too often that gameops will choose settings that are bad for gameplay because they're the ones that seem to attract the most players. Many of the problems being discussed can be solved with turn limits, time limits, ship delays, and other settings. The fact that I allow these settings to be disabled entirely has caused many of the problems you're discussing. If I create a new version and attempt to gain some control over these problems, I will be more careful about what settings I allow to be disabled.

John Pritchett
Epic Interactive Strategy


Thanks John. Some still don't get it yet as we can see. They do what it takes to win even it they are the only one in the game at the end of 3 to 6 days.

Now, I have the scripters complaining about the Scripters. Is there a line that a scripter can't cross? What is that line and how can a Sysops tell when it's exceeded? The Sysops is not the solution here.

If a person is using these types of aids, they will rocket ahead. In the real world, when any nation does this, they make enemies. The Romans could not have been defeated by any one nation and the Germans from WWII could also have not. Both of these were Technoligically superior to all others of their time. Yet both were defeated. Just because you have the Atom Bomb is no reason to use it. Using it will cause all the other "Sane" countries to attack and take you out.

The Players need to stop looking at the Sysop, Game and Scripting for the answers. The W in TradeWars stands for War.

Visit slbbs.com port 2002 for a rip roaring game of TW where you also have to battle the Klingons, Romulans, Orians and the Borg.

quote:
Mundane tasks are one thing but using ZTM (Zero turn mapping) throws the game into an imbalance when it is specifically to avoid having to come into the nasties areas, trade, etc. storing all information on all 20k sectors without visiting them or evens scanning them all in the first day. Using the ship that is provided, to visit 20k sectors, that would require 60k to 80k of turns. This particular script is made to specifically defeat the game turns, combat, pitfalls, other players, etc.. To allow it would be unfair to the ones that actually wish to play the game. Using this script to gather all the data of the game enables other scripting to be bullet proof. I watched three players run up over 3 mil apiece in less than 2000 turns starting with the base ship. This may cause a reset of the game if any of the normal players bring it up.


ZTM doesn't give you all the data of the game. It just gives you the warps. It doesn't help you find other players, or ports to trade at. At best it saves you some money when you're shooting off probes.

And 3 million in 2000 turns is not a big deal, helper or not.

The trouble with helpers is that a lot of them do things in stupid ways, so new players never learn to play intelligently. I have yet to see a helper run a better SST than I can run by hand. But with the ridiculous number of turns games have these days... like 2000... there's no way I'm gonna do it by hand. Give me a bone-stock 250 turn game and I might consider it.

while(!employed) { hack; hack; hack; }

quote:
But, beyond that, it gets rediculous. Expecially when one of the team members is online with his scripting running protecting the planet. The team member may be out to dinner or sleeping but his scripting is still there.

I don't see anything wrong with that. In fact I think it's awesome. It's what everyone dreamed of back in the version 2 days, when real-time interactivity was constantly promised but never delivered. Fact is, being fully interactive has changed the game in fundamental ways. Scripts may take advantage of that, but by no means are they to blame for it. It seems like some people want to go back to the "old days," and to that I say, fine! Why don't you dig up some old copies of Renegade and 2002v2b5, set it up so only one player can get in at a time, and see if anyone wants to play with you? Otherwise, quit complaining.

Sheesh. I thought people got over the helper thing back in 1994.

while(!employed) { hack; hack; hack; }

quote:My suggestion is to change it so, yes, there is a port report, but no, it does not show the product levels. I think it should only show the type of port. Let the helpers do the rest if a user wants to use one. The helper can calculate what the port *should* be at if noone has been there trading lately.

I think that's a great idea, but... wouldn't that just give those who use helpers more of an advantage? (Just playing the devil's advocate...)

while(!employed) { hack; hack; hack; }

quote:
But sadly, it has been shown all too often that gameops will choose settings that are bad for gameplay because they're the ones that seem to attract the most players.


Wouldn't it seem that if certain settings attract the most players, in the minds of most players, those are the best settings?