Menu
▾
▴
openme-developers — OpenME Developers
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(8) |
Dec
(42) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 |
Jan
(111) |
Feb
(14) |
Mar
(6) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Angelo S. <ang...@oo...> - 2002-12-12 12:12:38
|
[messages of W1, Hawklan deleted] I do not bash, W1 :-) As your wishes, W1, jumping mines etc. emergency jump and so on, make sence. I only see an implementation nightmare. But after doing all that stuff the game concepts will be very orthogonal to be plugged together. Hawklan, for the drone combat code I would say: make some proposals. W1: I need now urgently your word about combat coding. Should I do that or is someone else doing it? (If I should do it I coordinate drone behaviour with Farid) If you do not give green light within a week I shedule my time elsewhere. aos ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-12 12:09:02
|
the DI limit is due to the lookupfor recalculate DI each port upgrade I think it's a technical limit (Middy?) Le jeu 12/12/2002 =E0 12:59, Angelo Schneider a =E9crit : > Hi all! >=20 > First of all: I'm back from my trip to Granada. I change DSL provider, > so its likely (due to their incompetence) that I will be cut of from > internet from tomorrow for a week or even longer. >=20 > >=20 > > Also I was thinking of raising the DI count to above 8. The formula w= ill not > > be the same eg a di 8 in next game wont be the same as this game. Oth= ervise > > the jump traders will have too much of an advantage along with starga= te > > traders. But I am not sure aboutt his approach, comments are appricia= ted. > >=20 >=20 > This makes sense. What about removing the upper limit? I mean: DI 8 was > max so far, even if two ports had a bigger distance. What about having > no limit? >=20 > Everybody who can afford it will use a star gate. Only DIS seemed to > have used jump traders in greater extend. >=20 > The people I know did not buy jump traders ... because the biggest > trader via a gate is definitly more effective. >=20 > As a jump trader is expensive I would not spend to much thinking on who > might have an advantage there ... as the guy who can afford a jump > trader has his money allready made elsewhere. >=20 > aos >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... > Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 > 76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: > With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility=20 > Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel > http://hpc.devchannel.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Openme-developers mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openme-developers --=20 Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 |
|
From: Angelo S. <ang...@oo...> - 2002-12-12 12:00:27
|
Hi all! First of all: I'm back from my trip to Granada. I change DSL provider, so its likely (due to their incompetence) that I will be cut of from internet from tomorrow for a week or even longer. > > Also I was thinking of raising the DI count to above 8. The formula will not > be the same eg a di 8 in next game wont be the same as this game. Othervise > the jump traders will have too much of an advantage along with stargate > traders. But I am not sure aboutt his approach, comments are appriciated. > This makes sense. What about removing the upper limit? I mean: DI 8 was max so far, even if two ports had a bigger distance. What about having no limit? Everybody who can afford it will use a star gate. Only DIS seemed to have used jump traders in greater extend. The people I know did not buy jump traders ... because the biggest trader via a gate is definitly more effective. As a jump trader is expensive I would not spend to much thinking on who might have an advantage there ... as the guy who can afford a jump trader has his money allready made elsewhere. aos ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 |
|
From: Andrei G. <and...@ho...> - 2002-12-11 20:19:02
|
Can this be a Hauler :) ? _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus |
|
From: Farid K. <Far...@ro...> - 2002-12-09 05:29:14
|
I have been in contact with him, and will be discussing different ship types and going through the list with him. Hawklan -----Original Message----- From: ope...@li... [mailto:ope...@li...] On Behalf Of Julien Vermillard Sent: December 8, 2002 4:21 PM To: openme Subject: [Openme-developers] Gfix's new ship one other sample of ship he do that in 1 or 2 hours, good for the big list we got his mail : ki...@xn... -- Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-08 21:22:18
|
one other sample of ship he do that in 1 or 2 hours, good for the big list we got his mail : ki...@xn... -- Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-08 15:47:24
|
a guy called graphix, comming on irc (he seen the sourceforge annonce) Le sam 07/12/2002 =E0 02:36, Danny Froberg a =E9crit : > Good idea! >=20 > At 22:01 2002-12-06 +0100, you wrote: > >there is a guy who want to works on GFX, > >I proposed to do some samples about the ship list > >-- > >Julien Vermillard <jve...@ya...> > > --=20 Julien Vermillard <jve...@ya...> |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-06 21:02:33
|
there is a guy who want to works on GFX, I proposed to do some samples about the ship list -- Julien Vermillard <jve...@ya...> |
|
From: LJC. v. R. <va...@wa...> - 2002-12-04 23:21:25
|
>>Before server setup >>Design galaxies (wiz is already on the way) How many galaxies are we looking at? and How will the necessary locations be distributed ? >>Design location.. where how many and how Depends whether we want to go for easy or hard access... The tech shops selling advanced tech should still be available and provide access to these techs on a racial basis + anything required for that race's ships. Basically a central and protected point to equip the ship. Delivery of ship's could be made more costly for more expensive ships, instead of the 'standard fee' we see now. Other tech, like shields, armor, power, holds, mines, combat drones and scout drones should (like in the Gen3 game) not be available in a tech. shop. Regeneration of forces and tech from ports that sell them from start should be very low and take maybe a month to fully recover a total drain, e.g. 20 units per hour. This will provide some units to get started and necessitate the development of port which produce them. A basic set of sub-top light and medium weapons will be available in the Imperial area, all others will have to be researched. Imperial weapons could be made available to a greater extend (more available from day1). One central bank per galaxy in the imperial protected zone is sufficient, but a researchable communications 'secure hyperband' link from the base's vault at a fee of 0,5% per transaction could be offered as an alternative to jumping/crawling back to the central bank. >I propose that The Imperial Galaxy will contain all the ship shops, since >Tech will be available as a high level research item this round (Correct >me if I am wrong on this one) Depending on the design of the galaxy / galaxies an imperial galaxy should imo. hold only the imperial ships and ALL racial ships should be available only to the racial galaxies. All racial and imperial galaxy imperial protected sectors should be freely accessible too all players to ensure that ships can be purchased by all merchants. The availability of ships that can only be bought by evil aligned players (alignment <300) is worth consideration. We would be looking at Smuggler, Pirate and Assassin vessels, and since tech are fully racial now, these ships would be either faster than usual or more heavily armed (not necessarily better armored) and have a good number of holds to haul away the loot, with maybe the exception of the Assassin vessel. >>races/races description > >Awaiting some conclusion on the Racial attribute thread... The description should be a good indication of the kind of gameplay that can be expected with this race (obviously). So it should tell what the race is mainly like, what technologies it can use and what exactly the strengths and weaknesses are. >>Adjust trading system profit Next to adjusting the trading system for profit, I think we should also be looking for a way to bring more diversity in the upgrades/petitions. Now we still see too many of the same petitions right next to eachother, whereas you would expect ports finding a way to make them distinct from other ports to attract more traders. Also too often we see ports rushing from e.g. a steel petition (lvl2 good) to forces, and skipping the chance to produce plast_steel. >>Adjust bases Lower # of shields > >Should this be some kind of noob protection or what!? Less shields on a base? Perhaps, if weapons are made weaker and 'natural' ports for shields are less frequent in all galaxies. >>adjust Xp for construction > >Can stay high if the prices are made higher The 1 xp-point per 1000 Credits is not absurd high, but it is very predictable and used to push some people to higher XP-levels before their time. This number could be decreased to 1 xp-point per 1500 Credits, which would be a devaluation of 33%. Gaining XP from a build is far less riskier than trading or doing battle. >>adjust price for construction must rise faster > >I suggest exponential Actually I think prices for construction should NOT rise fast, especially if less XP is gained from building it will become less interesting to do so. But bases are vital for the operation of any alliance in a region, and are the locations where they do research and produce weapons and technology. The ability to protect investments in equipment and facilities should remain possible. >>adjust build time (lower them) I do not agree, even if it takes long to build/develop a base to a reasonably safe level. I do NOT agree because building a base to a higher level takes more time because of the expenses involved. If those are lessened, the rate of building will go up. >>adjust # of turrets/shield generators avaliable as a function of >>gamestart... eg at 3 months 3 turrets - 6 months 6 turrets.. After 6 months even a base with 36 turrets would not be enough protection, especially if the base did not have enough shields to fend off i.e. a 20-member attack party in fully build and equipped top-of-the-line warships. The best protection for starting players is the ability to go about unnoticed... A more random chance of discovery of a base upon planetary inspection either with or without a (researchable) planetary surface scanner, would provide any starting player more protection than a slightly higher # of turrets, shield generators and/or drone hangars. The same goes for display of merchants in current sector. A small ship can easily be overseen, even if an experienced captain would have a better clue what to look for. This would also create some less predictability to the game, since you can never be sure if you've overlooked another player. Chance of detection of players in different ships, and chance of detection of bases depending on Build Level is debatable.. >>adjust starting money as a function of gamestart I do not think this is absolutely necessary. Those starting later in the game need less to make more money, since the economic system has been expanded and enhanced already. Giving more money could also be traded in for giving a better start ship, which I think is far easier to realize than the money. Also the money well no doubt be spend to upgrade the ship as soon as possible, so why not skip that part altogether. >Some other notes: >I want to make Experience awarded to higher or equal level kills only >also No credits are ever made during combat. I think it is crucial that even more experience players have a chance to better themselves through battle. I have proposed once before and what to do so again in here to link the experience rewarded to the difference in levels between the winner and the looser in the battle. If a level 15 player in a big warship 'manages' to destroy a level 6 player in a medium trader I do not think there should be much of a reward for that. A 1% reward of the XP-points may even be too much, but is a better result than the standard 15% we have today. I suggest we take a formulae, i.e. 10% - ((level attacker - level defender)/100)... This way the attacker could even be punished for attacking a player that is 10 level or more below him/her. Crucial to this and any other reward of xp, is that the person INITIATING the attack should get the reward or punishment. The defender gets nothing if the person attacking him is less experienced, but does get a reward if (s)he manages to fend of the attack of a higher level player. So basically, If you attack a higher experienced merchant and win you get a 10% plus difference in level bonus XP-reward, if you loose the defendant gets nothing (noblesse oblige). If you attack a less experienced merchant you may win an XP-reward if the difference in level between you and the attacked is less than 10 levels, if you loose the attacked will gain XP related to the difference in levels. In this all I have assumed that battles are 1-on-1, OR the initiator and primary target are kept in mind. ONLY the initiator and primary target can gain/loose exp in a battle. >The raid feature will be given as an evil player only option <-300 this is >the only way to "steal" money and uses a "focused narrow transport beam" >to effectively pluck the cash out of the safe. (50/50 chance of success >and takes 25 turns to use) >No counter measures decided against this one as of now. Does this require special TECH? if so, how can it be optained, a shop near, or in sector with an Underground location (which should never be visible on maps ;) ) Server set up: >>create game >>Create galaxies set sizes and types >>Run create sectors >>run maze creator >>Create ports(planets).. yep its confusing >>Init trade system >>Add locations >>Set starting point for new accounts > >The starting points should be implemented in the race table rather than >the game table (this has begun, who wants to be responsible for this?) Shouldn't after leaving the newbie galaxy (if we have such a galaxy in Gen4), upon reaching a certain level get changed into a racial HQ sector. >I am consedireng an early close (before Dec 22nd) to accomodate for the >rather large number of fixes that need to be completed. Do we really need to close the game early for that? I'm confident there are plenty of fixes which are minor or mildly influencing the game, which we could get out of the way before hitting the tough/hard/complex/vigorously influencing ones. And would it not be more practical to have the old game available as a testing grounds? (I know, shutting down is not the same as removing). Trainee game: Another suggestion we have seen repeatedly is to create a major game and a minor/trainee game... I would like to advocate strongly for this concept. If we can create a trainee game with only small ships / light weapons available and limits to upgrade of bases (25SG/15DH/10Tur) and less goods available in ports ( we just delete a few selected ones required for higher level goods) from start up so not the entire economic system could be activated and less ... It would be a surroundings which would BORE any regular/advanced player in a week and anybody with 5+ kills would get booted and banned. This would present truly new players to the game a good chance to see different aspects of the game in a less threatening environment. Also more experienced players that are willing to act as trainees could be allowed to enter the game and 'lead' schools (trainee alliances). Research could be left out of this game, even if it is a growing essential part of the game, on accounts that anything that can be research can also be bought or is an extra option to the game to expand on the gameplay. Well, here are a few thoughts I had the last couple of hours. And I truly hope that the value of these proposals, questions, suggestions are shared amongst us. |
|
From: Danny F. <da...@fr...> - 2002-12-04 19:58:56
|
At 12:39 2002-12-04 -0500, Farid Khan wrote: >So& a couple items: > >Zyck having HD (Heat Dampener) is ok, it was decided so before, but if HD >is also going to protect against shield weapons, wont it be a little >unbalanced since Zyck are a shield heavy race? i.e. heavier shield to >armor ratio. Uhm maybe it should have been efficient engines or something ;) > >The additional jumping technology planned, wasnt mentioned, but as I >assumed that the cloaking tech goes with Xollian, will the jumping tech go >with Mawlor? Again, this is a ship changing feature. Mawlor are jumpers today and Xolian cloakers I didnt see any reason to change that.... so dont know what u mean... Additional technology will be *researched* so wont be available from game start, and simply ADD to existing ships and forces, bases etc so nothing needs to be changed in ship list there. >I guess, a feature list, and racial capabilities list is order, so I can >get them balanced into the ships. We have been keeping tabs in the >different threads with regards to ships. I am sure that you all have >to. But if you have any thoughts please do not hesitate to email me. Feature list is being set, the basics u already know, a bit will be dependant on the tech and research tree, some stuff might be skipped or introduced later, as I said before feel free to suggest stuff. >P.S., Still think that xp gain by kills is too much, but eliminating xp >gain if you kill a lesser experience player is kind of harsh. I think you >can either set a low base xp gain, either a standard amount based on >experience of the defeated say 5%, or based on the defeateds ship. Doesnt >take much to kill someone in a hauler, but if Sniper kills me and I am in >a top warship then I would hope he gets something more than just >satisfaction :) Well I am pretty set in my ideas about this specific feature, I am open to discussion as to the one or two levels below the winner would be acceptable limit for still gaining XP ... ideas anyone? But credits are out the window for killers.... |
|
From: Farid K. <Far...@ro...> - 2002-12-04 17:39:31
|
Hi all, just so you know, it is Hawklan (anonymity is now lost :) ) Been reading back a bit, I knew about the racial tech changes. Some new ones or enhancements of some are planned. My team and I will need more specifics to attempt to balance the ships a bit more. Carnaugh (Justin Stedman) has released a draft to WizardOne, but some changes have been made since. Ship design will have to work with the changes in combat code. Using existing racial criteria (Paragon: Tech, KEA: Trade, Xollian: Cloak, etc.) has guided us thus far. No plans to remake the hated 21/37 Battle-Ship (even though people are so sure that we are). The OB does resemble a hauler with a cloak, but that is another story altogether (hehe, just kidding). Seriously though, a ship with 500 drones is possible if it isn't given an advantage due to real or calculated Attack/Defense Rating, or a clear understanding of CD behavior. So far the Mawlor ships have fewer drones for the over landers, and the 2 jumping warships are more drone heavy. But this can change if necessary, and can change if drones are written in with capabilities that won't make them into super ships. I think that the concept of Mawlor ships having more defense (armor) and drones was part of the problem. As I said, it is still a work in progress. I know, you can't really comment since you have not seen the ships. So. a couple items: Zyck having HD (Heat Dampener) is ok, it was decided so before, but if HD is also going to protect against shield weapons, won't it be a little unbalanced since Zyck are a shield heavy race? i.e. heavier shield to armor ratio. The additional jumping technology planned, wasn't mentioned, but as I assumed that the cloaking tech goes with Xollian, will the jumping tech go with Mawlor? Again, this is a ship changing feature. I guess, a feature list, and racial capabilities list is order, so I can get them balanced into the ships. We have been keeping tabs in the different threads with regards to ships. I am sure that you all have to. But if you have any thoughts please do not hesitate to email me. Thanks Hawklan P.S., Still think that xp gain by kills is too much, but eliminating xp gain if you kill a lesser experience player is kind of harsh. I think you can either set a low base xp gain, either a standard amount based on experience of the defeated say 5%, or based on the defeated's ship. Doesn't take much to kill someone in a hauler, but if Sniper kills me and I am in a top warship then I would hope he gets something more than just satisfaction :) |
|
From: Danny F. <da...@fr...> - 2002-12-04 01:51:43
|
Who is on the list and who is available for assignments? Answer back with what you're doing and Estimated Time of Completion. /Wiz |
|
From: Danny F. <da...@fr...> - 2002-12-03 22:59:11
|
Ok I looked at Ragnoras suggestion and found it quite interesting. I also want the tech tree to be VERY related to the trade and good tree (Want to make stuff make as much sense as possible) So if Middy and Ragnora could hit their heads together and come up with a step by step plan for this one i'd appreciate it ;) By Advanced Jump tech I mean for example Higher accuracy jump drives, jumping mines, jumping bases, emergency jump engine (as in jumps to preset when attacked) whatever use your heads ;) The point in using the tech tree to require huge amount of research for these items is two things 1) it gives us time to implement them 2) it keeps the game volatile and interesting. The target we have (at least from now on) is to keep the game interesting, in 8 months I dont want to hear from the players, that "Hey My strategy is the only thing that works and we done this for 6 months now" and NOT see them die horribly.... u get my drift? Key word here is volatile, unpredictable... hey how about that... just like real life... AoS feel free to buzz me the 12th when you're back. /D At 22:56 2002-12-03 +0100, LJC. van Riel wrote: >>Also the racial tech distribution will be as follows; >>Zyc - Heat shields (Masks them from DSS and makes their Shields more >>resistant to Shield weapons) >>KEA - Tractor Beam and Gravity Well Technology. >>Mawlor - Jump Technology >>Xolian - Cloak, Cloaked Forces and Bases etc >>Paragon - Illusion and Impersonation Technology >> >>As you can all see there are some new stuff here and for the first time >>all races had their own original racial techs, >>there are many twists on how to use this tech, i.e Paragon will be quite >>a powerfull race with the ability to impersonate other races and >>merchants, opens up quite a few neat twists. Xolian will be able to use >>their cloaking tech in a few new ways after research. Zyc are no longer >>the victims of the galaxy but rather a quite engine and emission >>efficient much that can keep to themself while trading masked from the >>prying eyes of scanners. KES's tractor beam technology will bring gray >>hair to many captains this tech will make the very very dangerous, and >>their gravity well tech might put a new twist on both hunting and base >>busts... Mawlors and their Jump tech are as usual quite strong, some new >>stuff using their Jump tech will be seen high up in the research tree. > >In this short piece of the article I see already 6 new suggestions for >research and some of them will entail lots of coding. In the past weeks >we've already seen the announcement of new base upgrade research. The >research tree is up for some expansion and I want to suggest for the next >generation we focus on two items. First the ships and base technology, >with ability to produce them on individual bases and Second the production >of advanced constructions on bases. > >To make this all possible I feel we only need to expand the research tree >with some thirty major and supporting sciences, depending on the number of >technologies we need to make available. > >I have no idea how to see the advanced jump tech, high up in the research >tree, or what spin-offs from it. Maybe some time you can explain what you >envisioned with that. > >As for ideas to expand the research tree more, well I have plenty... > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual Studio.NET >comprehensive development tool, built to increase your productivity. Try a >free online hosted session at: >http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?micr0003en >_______________________________________________ >Openme-developers mailing list >Ope...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openme-developers |
|
From: LJC. v. R. <va...@wa...> - 2002-12-03 21:55:01
|
>Also the racial tech distribution will be as follows; >Zyc - Heat shields (Masks them from DSS and makes their Shields more >resistant to Shield weapons) >KEA - Tractor Beam and Gravity Well Technology. >Mawlor - Jump Technology >Xolian - Cloak, Cloaked Forces and Bases etc >Paragon - Illusion and Impersonation Technology > >As you can all see there are some new stuff here and for the first time >all races had their own original racial techs, >there are many twists on how to use this tech, i.e Paragon will be quite a >powerfull race with the ability to impersonate other races and merchants, >opens up quite a few neat twists. Xolian will be able to use their >cloaking tech in a few new ways after research. Zyc are no longer the >victims of the galaxy but rather a quite engine and emission efficient >much that can keep to themself while trading masked from the prying eyes >of scanners. KES's tractor beam technology will bring gray hair to many >captains this tech will make the very very dangerous, and their gravity >well tech might put a new twist on both hunting and base busts... Mawlors >and their Jump tech are as usual quite strong, some new stuff using their >Jump tech will be seen high up in the research tree. In this short piece of the article I see already 6 new suggestions for research and some of them will entail lots of coding. In the past weeks we've already seen the announcement of new base upgrade research. The research tree is up for some expansion and I want to suggest for the next generation we focus on two items. First the ships and base technology, with ability to produce them on individual bases and Second the production of advanced constructions on bases. To make this all possible I feel we only need to expand the research tree with some thirty major and supporting sciences, depending on the number of technologies we need to make available. I have no idea how to see the advanced jump tech, high up in the research tree, or what spin-offs from it. Maybe some time you can explain what you envisioned with that. As for ideas to expand the research tree more, well I have plenty... |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-03 19:03:23
|
as spec I think about all points like : CDs should die or not if yes when, rollover etc.. BBing Le mar 03/12/2002 =E0 17:50, Angelo Schneider a =E9crit : > Hi! >=20 > Julien Vermillard wrote: > >=20 > > I'm sadly surprised by your lack of informations, > >=20 >=20 > Well, there is no centralized place where informatins are gathered and > it is not easy to distibnguish between proposals and descissions. >=20 > > Fighters : > > - you will only win XP for a more experienced player kill (mainly cause > > DSS is here) > > - DSS MKII with limitations as said Wiz > > - more Imp. protection, more space and shop centralized in Imp. (correc= t > > me if i say something wrong) > > - no more racial bounties > >=20 > > I'm working on a proposition for alignement system, making war on > > neutral/good alliance less interesting. > >=20 >=20 > Good! >=20 > > Of course there is a demand about combat code, I thougt you was writing > > specifications so we can all agree on the behaviour. > >=20 >=20 > I have written the specification. >=20 > And I mailed it to the mailing list 5 weeks ago and e talked in IRC > about it 2 weeks ago. >=20 > If you need more specifications, be more precise in your demand. I was > of the opinion it is good enough. >=20 > aos >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... > Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 > 76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 --=20 Julien Vermillard <jve...@ya...> |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-03 15:18:30
|
I'm sadly surprised by your lack of informations, Fighters :=20 - you will only win XP for a more experienced player kill (mainly cause DSS is here) - DSS MKII with limitations as said Wiz - more Imp. protection, more space and shop centralized in Imp. (correct me if i say something wrong) - no more racial bounties I'm working on a proposition for alignement system, making war on neutral/good alliance less interesting. Of course there is a demand about combat code, I thougt you was writing specifications so we can all agree on the behaviour. Julien Le mar 03/12/2002 =E0 15:41, Angelo Schneider a =E9crit : > Hi, >=20 > is there still demand for that? >=20 > No one gave green light, erm: W1 never gave green light. >=20 > I'm away till 12th of December. >=20 > The new ship tech at least assures that it is equally hard to pick your > ships like in my list. >=20 > However it seems with the new tech all races are turning into fighter > races. So the game now is fighting only? >=20 > The explanations to DSS show you do not plan to change it? >=20 > Very sad. >=20 > Angelo >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... > Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 > 76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T=20 > handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!=20 > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en > _______________________________________________ > Openme-developers mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openme-developers --=20 Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 --=20 Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 |
|
From: Danny F. <da...@fr...> - 2002-12-03 14:56:43
|
Actually DSS Mk II will be limited in a variety of ways, and will come to resemble a souped up DSS Mk I No new tech dont turn everyone into fighters, there will simply be no easy victims. All of them if used right will pack a nasty surprise. At 14:41 2002-12-03 +0000, Angelo Schneider wrote: >Hi, > >is there still demand for that? > >No one gave green light, erm: W1 never gave green light. > >I'm away till 12th of December. > >The new ship tech at least assures that it is equally hard to pick your >ships like in my list. > >However it seems with the new tech all races are turning into fighter >races. So the game now is fighting only? > >The explanations to DSS show you do not plan to change it? > >Very sad. > >Angelo > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... >Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 >76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T >handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! >http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en >_______________________________________________ >Openme-developers mailing list >Ope...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openme-developers |
|
From: Angelo S. <ang...@oo...> - 2002-12-03 14:41:42
|
Hi, is there still demand for that? No one gave green light, erm: W1 never gave green light. I'm away till 12th of December. The new ship tech at least assures that it is equally hard to pick your ships like in my list. However it seems with the new tech all races are turning into fighter races. So the game now is fighting only? The explanations to DSS show you do not plan to change it? Very sad. Angelo ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Angelo Schneider OOAD/UML Ang...@oo... Putlitzstr. 24 Patterns/FrameWorks Fon: +49 721 9812465 76137 Karlsruhe C++/JAVA Fax: +49 721 9812467 |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-03 11:32:57
|
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/reporting/?atid=3D388397&what=3Daging&span= =3D14&period=3Dweek&group_id=3D26811#b --=20 Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 |
|
From: Oliver D. B. <oli...@ma...> - 2002-12-03 07:46:39
|
From: Tantalus To: Game Admins Date: 00:47:50 12/03/02 =20
Hi there
I do not know who Tiger is, or who gave him OP status, but his =
behaviour this evening in the 5 mins I was there was unbecoming of ANY =
Moderator.
As he is an OP me kicking him for his behaviour would only result =
in him coming back and doing the same to me.=20
So can I ask that whoever gave him OP status please remove it? #me =
is meant to be a place for players to chat and have fun...not a ring for =
fighting....and that is something that cannot be monitored when Admins =
give people like him opportunity to Moderate. It looks bad on us all.
Thanks.
P.S. If Tiger is actually one of you....I still stand by my words =
:)=20
|
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-12-02 16:29:12
|
lum |
|
From: Oliver D. B. <oli...@ma...> - 2002-12-02 16:14:52
|
|
From: Danny F. <da...@fr...> - 2002-12-02 16:10:54
|
At 22:54 2002-11-16 +0100, you wrote: >OK here is what I think we needs to get done before reset list is not >ordered and totaly unrealistic :)..add what I missed.. when we feel we are >done we can add names > > > >Before server setup >Design galaxies (wiz is already on the way) Tools need designing to build universe and to make placing locations with a maintained overview a breeze. >Define mine level in galaxies >Find background images for all galaxies We had a bunch where the heck did they go?! (Smork?) >Design location.. where how many and how I propose that The Imperial Galaxy will contain all the ship shops, since Tech will be available as a high level research item this round (Correct me if I am wrong on this one) >New ship list >New weapons list Both Ship & Weapons Lists have been submitted to me for approval and they look good, they are essentially Triggers ships reballanced by Hawklan and his crew to take into account the new racial techs. We're also awaiting some conclusion on the Racial attribute thread... >races/races description Awaiting some conclusion on the Racial attribute thread... >Adjust trading system profit >Adjust bases Lower # of shields Should this be some kind of noob protection or what!? >adjust Xp for construction Can stay high if the prices are made higher >adjust price for construction must rise faster I suggest exponential >adjust build time (lower them) Yes I agree especially if prices are exponential >adjust # of turrets/shield generators avaliable as a function of >gamestart... eg at 3 months 3 turrets - 6 months 6 turrets.. Elaborate please! >adjust starting money as a function of gamestart >Add the racial differences as suggested in >forum http://www.advancedpowers.com/phorum/read.php?f=4&i=1652&t=1652 >adjust lame alignment system also as suggested in >forum http://www.advancedpowers.com/phorum/read.php?f=4&i=1386&t=1386 Some other notes: I want to make Experience awarded to higher or equal level kills only also No credits are ever made during combat. The raid feature will be given as an evil player only option <-300 this is the only way to "steal" money and uses a "focused narrow transport beam" to effectively pluck the cash out of the safe. (50/50 chance of success and takes 25 turns to use) No counter measures decided against this one as of now. Also the racial tech distribution will be as follows; Zyc - Heat shields (Masks them from DSS and makes their Shields more resistant to Shield weapons) KEA - Tractor Beam and Gravity Well Technology. Mawlor - Jump Technology Xolian - Cloak, Cloaked Forces and Bases etc Paragon - Illusion and Impersonation Technology As you can all see there are some new stuff here and for the first time all races had their own original racial techs, there are many twists on how to use this tech, i.e Paragon will be quite a powerfull race with the ability to impersonate other races and merchants, opens up quite a few neat twists. Xolian will be able to use their cloaking tech in a few new ways after research. Zyc are no longer the victims of the galaxy but rather a quite engine and emission efficient much that can keep to themself while trading masked from the prying eyes of scanners. KES's tractor beam technology will bring gray hair to many captains this tech will make the very very dangerous, and their gravity well tech might put a new twist on both hunting and base busts... Mawlors and their Jump tech are as usual quite strong, some new stuff using their Jump tech will be seen high up in the research tree. Any more ideas on how to finalize the above? > >Server set up: > >create game >Create galaxies set sizes and types >Run create sectors >run maze creator >Create ports(planets).. yep its confusing >Init trade system >Add locations >Set starting point for new accounts The starting points should be implemented in the race table rather than the game table (this has begun, who wants to be responsible for this?) Who want to complete what, tell me now, or I'll start to assign stuff as I see fitt. I am consedireng an early close (before Dec 22nd) to accomodate for the rather large number of fixes that need to be completed. Let me know. /Danny aka WizardOne |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-11-29 14:11:46
|
Zola, when you assigned the TFP bug you closed it too It's annoying cause I can't see it on the list without fiddeling with the list. I don't know if it's the normal way or simply a mistake. BTW TFP spam bug is fixed --=20 Julien Vermillard - jve...@ya... +33(0)680328665 |
|
From: Julien V. <jve...@ya...> - 2002-11-28 11:40:16
|
=20 > Before server setup > * Design galaxies (wiz is already on the way) > * Define mine level in galaxies I want to reduce mine level damages, it's impossible to move .. > * Find background images for all galaxies > * design location.. where how many and how > * New ship list=20 I would like to know what is going on, current shios are not so balanced (less than previous game) it's a full rewrite or an adjust ? > * New weapons list same question plus: add some top end kick ass weap for the top end researches > * races/races description > * Adjust trading system profit lower top end goods, raise basic goods ? > * Adjust bases Lower # of shields=20 hmm will depend if someone reocde busting but for now I see nothing coming > * adjust Xp for construction lower SG/WeapFac/Research center > * adjust price for construction must rise faster yeah, why not raise turrets prices > * adjust build time (lower them) depend of the game length no ? > * adjust # of turrets/shield generators avaliable as a function > of gamestart... eg at 3 months 3 turrets - 6 months 6 > turrets.. why newbie should start buildiing in the newbie gal, protected of bust fleets > * adjust starting money as a function of gamestart ? > * Add the racial differences as suggested in forum=20 > http://www.advancedpowers.com/phorum/read.php?f=3D4&i=3D1652&t=3D= 1652 more I think about it more it look useless none of his race stick to a player profile (killer/achiever/explorer) > * adjust lame alignment system also as suggested in forum=20 > http://www.advancedpowers.com/phorum/read.php?f=3D4&i=3D1386&t=3D= 1386 > =20 yup (who do it?) I would add : reduce the % of XP gained per kill losing 15% but the killer win 7% cause with the DSS actualy it's more easy to find a prey > Server set up: > =20 > * create game > * Create galaxies set sizes and types > * Run create sectors=20 > * run maze creator > * Create ports(planets).. yep its confusing > * Init trade system > * Add locations > * Set starting point for new accounts * --=20 Julien Vermillard <jve...@ya...> |
2 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
