having the interdictor use ore from the holds on a ship would render it virtually useless in many instances. I can hold the 'M' key down and drain the ore in seconds, at no cost to me for turns. I like prophet's ideas - they seem like major modifications to the way the system works tho, and could potentially lead to some new bugs. Shrug.

Just x-port to a different ship.

Years ago the idea of having ship's IC use ore was brought up to JP. I don't recall what his answer was, but evidently no one liked the idea here, because usually he implements most ideas if they seem popular. I myself see the logic in the argument that if planets use ore for IG ships should need ore for IC. I somehow think, however, that given ships only carry 255 holds max, 1 or 2 holds of ore is all that should be used per pull against the IC. As for hitting M over and over again, it does cost turns to hit M when you are trapped in an interdictor.

The original point is this, ships interdictor always held an opponent, no matter how many figs were in a sector. I see no logical reason why this was changed, and I suspect it was just an overlooked byproduct of an earlier change made to correct another problem.

Ultimately, I don't mind ships being able to escape a ship interdictor by hitting retreat, but NOT after they've attacked the fighters in the sector. The minute the person hits A and then types in an amount of fighters to use, then hits enter, he should be subject to the ship interdictor.

On a side note, it used to be, if you were trapped in a planet interdictor, all you had to do was transport into a new ship, then, if you were fast enough, you could fire a photon into that sector, transport back into the trapped ship, and escape, as long as your escape was during the photon wave. This would work even if the planet was correctly shielded. This was a very little known escape tactic, and indeed, it still works on ship interdictors! If you are trapped by a ship interdictor, you can transport out, photon the guy that's holding you, and then you are free to leave.

Ship's interdictors and planet interdictors are the same in technology, but not in scope or scale. A ship holds another ship tight up and close, thus using less energy, thus not requiring ore. A planet however, is holding the ship in ORBIT, hundreds of miles above. Of course the planet interdictor would use more energy, hence more ore.

I liked the idea of a ship being pulled closer to a planet as it pulled on the interdictor. This could be mimicked simply by having the planet fire a quasar blast after a certain amount of pulls on its interdictor (if the atmospheric quasars are set of course), but, think about this, sector quasars already blast you every time you pull on a planet IG, so, in a way, you could say that it already exists.

I just would like to see this problem with a ship being able to attack sector defenses, then escape with the retreat option go away. Logically, if you attack, you should be vulnerable to the full force of your enemies arsenal, which should include an interdictor on his ship, if he has one and it's active.

Just my opinion, please don't crucify me, like some of you like to do.


quote:Originally posted by Didaskalos

having the interdictor use ore from the holds on a ship would render it virtually useless in many instances. I can hold the 'M' key down and drain the ore in seconds, at no cost to me for turns. I like prophet's ideas - they seem like major modifications to the way the system works tho, and could potentially lead to some new bugs. Shrug.

Blah if Ship ICs use Ore, then also add in a ship Ion Cannon to blast the player trapped in the IC beam to use Ore as well. Just a suggestion as shipboard weapons would be a good addition to the game.

I've always thought that Quasar Cannons on a ship would be a GREAT added feature to ships!

Also an auto attack computer to attack back for you in case you are attacked offline.

It also would have an auto twarp to your base if the figs fell below a certain level and you have ore in your holds and figs in your escape sector.

Good suggstions.

Ships already have offensive capabilities...haven't you heard?



It's called a fighter. You can buy it at any SD or class 0 port. I also hear there are people who can produce them for free...called...cccol..cccolo...colonists. Yeah that's it.


Sorry bout that. In a smart Butt mood.

Heh,

I hope you realize he was suggesting that a ship should have auto OFFENSIVE capabilities in an offline assault. I don't see how this would be very hard to create, either, aliens attack you back when you attack them and there's no one "online" controlling them! Why not incorporate this into a player's ship, so that if you are attacked offline, your fighters will launch a counter offensive? Actually, my hat's off to Orion_Blaster for that idea (of course now that I've agreed, everyone will think it's an horrible idea).

I'm not so sure about the auto warp home thing. It makes it too easy to just not play at all, buy a ship, load it, then leave yourself lying around to ambush passersby? Then, if you get in trouble the game takes you safely home? That's a bit over the top, but I like the auto offensive feature idea.

So, for future reference, if any of the Eis team is feeling energetic let's recap.

A ship who's IC holds an attacker, even if they are at the fighter prompt, and that uses 1 to 2 holds of ore per pull on the IC during a retreat attempt, and a ship that fires a Quasar blast, and also has an auto offensive feature to be toggled on or off in the same way auto flee is toggled on and off!

Sounds like THOSE are improvements worth working on to me

quote:
So, for future reference, if any of the Eis team is feeling energetic let's recap.

There is only one programmer for tradewars, that is John. Last I knew, he wasn't planning on implementing new features like this in v3.x trade wars. That doesn't mean that new ideas aren't wanted, quite the opposite, it is good to have all the idea people have expressed and discussed, it will help to determine what features are added when it comes that time. However, I want to caution people not to start expecting programming on demand or any serious additions like this at any time in the near future

quote:Originally posted by Supreme Galactic Overlord



So, for future reference, if any of the Eis team is feeling energetic let's recap.

A ship who's IC holds an attacker, even if they are at the fighter prompt, and that uses 1 to 2 holds of ore per pull on the IC during a retreat attempt, and a ship that fires a Quasar blast, and also has an auto offensive feature to be toggled on or off in the same way auto flee is toggled on and off!

Sounds like THOSE are improvements worth working on to me



I dont think you guys realize what would have to be added or changed to accomplish this type of programming, not to mention the obvious reasons not to. Think about this, the aliens, dumb as a stump, need their own alien server to control each race. The alien server eats up processor cycles, memory, can cause game lag, causes mail file errors that really mess up the game. Therefore offline players would need an additional server to control them while offline. Think of the programming to have all 3 servers interact with each other. Then think of the offline player server eating up the other half of your processor cycles, memory, game lag, and even more mail file corruption, not to mention any other problems it may cause by even creating it. No offense but I think your out to lunch on this one.

quote:Originally posted by Rofellos

Ships already have offensive capabilities...haven't you heard?



It's called a fighter. You can buy it at any SD or class 0 port. I also hear there are people who can produce them for free...called...cccol..cccolo...colonists. Yeah that's it.


Sorry bout that. In a smart Butt mood.


Yes but this isn't the Smack Talk forum.

I was talking about having a computer upgrade that does a counter-attack for you while you are offline. Maybe fire those ship weapons if they get added to the game.

Weapon ideas:

Missile rack, have to buy missiles at Star Dock to reload. Each missile can do from 1 to 200 damage. Nuclear Missiles do double damage but are more expensive to buy. If you are out of missiles it cannot fire.

Laser Beam, uses energy which recycles every turn or so, need to add in energy points to a ship. Fusion drives on ships generate more energy points. Ship has a max energy points it can hold. Laser can do between 1 to 200 damage a shot. If you are out of energy points, it cannot fire.

Then more expensive energy weapons like plasma cannons, disrupters, particle accelorators, etc.

Defensive weapons like sand casters can throw bags of sand to block missiles and figs. Have to buy each bag of sand.

Just suggestions, they may be too hard to implement and may ruin the current combat system. But they are good ideas.

quote:Originally posted by Boss

quote:Originally posted by Supreme Galactic Overlord



So, for future reference, if any of the Eis team is feeling energetic let's recap.

A ship who's IC holds an attacker, even if they are at the fighter prompt, and that uses 1 to 2 holds of ore per pull on the IC during a retreat attempt, and a ship that fires a Quasar blast, and also has an auto offensive feature to be toggled on or off in the same way auto flee is toggled on and off!

Sounds like THOSE are improvements worth working on to me



I dont think you guys realize what would have to be added or changed to accomplish this type of programming, not to mention the obvious reasons not to. Think about this, the aliens, dumb as a stump, need their own alien server to control each race. The alien server eats up processor cycles, memory, can cause game lag, causes mail file errors that really mess up the game. Therefore offline players would need an additional server to control them while offline. Think of the programming to have all 3 servers interact with each other. Then think of the offline player server eating up the other half of your processor cycles, memory, game lag, and even more mail file corruption, not to mention any other problems it may cause by even creating it. No offense but I think your out to lunch on this one.


Why would you need another server when you can modify the program that the attacking player uses to attack to check to see if a off counter-attack program exists on the victim's computer and if so, it launched a wave of figs back at the attacker. No different than the combat program that controls the off sector figs sending a wave of figs to attack the invader. The player can set what percent of figs to send back based on the attacker's figs.

All suggestions, but I doubt we will see them any time soon. Maybe 4.X or future versions?

quote:Originally posted by Orion_Blastar

Yes but this isn't the Smack Talk forum.

I was talking about having a computer upgrade that does a counter-attack for you while you are offline. Maybe fire those ship weapons if they get added to the game.

Weapon ideas:

Missile rack, have to buy missiles at Star Dock to reload. Each missile can do from 1 to 200 damage. Nuclear Missiles do double damage but are more expensive to buy. If you are out of missiles it cannot fire.

Laser Beam, uses energy which recycles every turn or so, need to add in energy points to a ship. Fusion drives on ships generate more energy points. Ship has a max energy points it can hold. Laser can do between 1 to 200 damage a shot. If you are out of energy points, it cannot fire.

Then more expensive energy weapons like plasma cannons, disrupters, particle accelorators, etc.

Defensive weapons like sand casters can throw bags of sand to block missiles and figs. Have to buy each bag of sand.

Just suggestions, they may be too hard to implement and may ruin the current combat system. But they are good ideas.


Ok I think we have a few too many people trying to convert Tradewars to a fully 3D, fully animated, 900 choices of anything they want, video game. Its not a video game, its a text based, highly configurable, multi user strategy game. Dont confuse the highly configurable part with adding options of a video game, it just wont happen and would most likely destroy the game as its played today.

THANK YOU Boss. Someone else with some love for the game, not some delusional imaginative mutation of it. [:D]

quote:
Ok I think we have a few too many people trying to convert Tradewars to a fully 3D, fully animated, 900 choices of anything they want, video game. Its not a video game, its a text based, highly configurable, multi user strategy game. Dont confuse the highly configurable part with adding options of a video game, it just wont happen and would most likely destroy the game as its played today.


In what part of my post did I say it needed to be a fully 3D, fully animated, 900 choices of anything they want, video game? All I suggested was a computer upgrade that counter-attacks, and shipboard weapons. No need for adding graphics to do that. No need to turn it into a video game. I agree it will change combat. Players might aruge and say "No fair fighting back!" or "No fair having bigger guns than me."