[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="56" id="3657858"] Lol, Hunam - in what universe is Xraki not 2-syllable? Shra-kee The 2 syllable rule stands! [/quote] XRAKI is the plural form of XRAK? Also, CB, I am very disappointed in you. I saw that you posted and expected to see a 5 page dissertation. Instead, I only see 3 lines. You need to step up your game if you want to win those meaningless internet points.
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="68" id="3657857"] Then I went to https://www.reddit.com/r/StarfleetBattles/ and found this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqFqtJPivN4 (YT: A Gorn versus Rom game) Then I got bored and now I don't wanna read about SFB or Subspace anymore. [/quote] What did you make me watch? WHAT DID YOU MAKE ME WATCH?!?!? Oh my god. I think we found a solution to the griefing problem. Anybody intentionally delayi
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="65" id="3657853"] Sometimes when I am talking about maneuver related subjects, those can actually be far too complex for me to fully explain here. I know you don't want to read 20 pages on the Kaufman Retrograde, for example, so I try to just stick with what is relevant to the issue related to Star Control. [/quote] You can just use the common-day gaming term: Kiting To use it in a sentence: If they don't put in some sort
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="45" id="3657816"] Mid-month tomorrow. I'm getting arou.... excited. [e digicons]:w00t:[/e] [/quote] I was thinking of necroing this thread to say the same thing! Will we see a midmonth update like we did last month?
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="61" id="3657809"] Oh, and for that Dan Noth "proximity torpedo", assuming that is what that weapon is, Subspace had a very cool way of making that work. In Subspace the "Photon Torpedo" of that game could achieve a "direct hit" where it did not detonate at the detection range and instead went all the way in for a +50% damage direct hit. They did this by the approach vector of the weapon, if it is on target for a direct hit it doesn't prox de
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="58" id="3657796"] Fixing it with some kind of timer is the "band aids and string" way of addressing this issue, that's how you fix this problem when you aren't capable if identifying what the problem is. [/quote] It's how you fix the issue when realize that the "band aids and string" fix is more cost and time effective than adding 15 new abilities. Nothing comes free here. They must address the issue of griefing som
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="1" id="3657750"] MS-DOS 6.22 mostly. [/quote] Don't forget that Brad loved OS/2.
[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="53" id="3657752"] Name one time where anyone on here has affected YOUR development! Changed your mind about something. [/quote] You convinced me to give you a fake internet point that one time... But seriously... Stardock does a great deal to change my opinions. I went from a very pro-SCO standpoint to a very anti-SCO standpoint all because of the omission of Local Multiplayer. Remember that I was one of the few people def
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="50" id="3657625"] Passive abilities for all, or most, ships can both solve this problem for the ships that have it and add more flavor to the design of all of the other ships that don't have a problem with this. Add more as you fix the problem, instead of settling for "band-aids and string" that detracts as a "compromise" to fix the problem. What can I say... It's A Kind of Magic;-) [/quote] Call me a pessimist, but I don
No need to reply to me, Kavik. Your reply to Vol shows me you understand the troll issue.
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="41" id="3657540"] That's as simple as this gets, and I was the founder of one of the most successful tournaments, which is where we fully learned all of this stuff within the SFU. The tournament system. So this supermeelee, in particular, is really simple and basic from my perspective. [/quote] And did you have people in the tournament attempting to play the game maliciously? Probably not, because people in tournaments pla
[quote who="Vaelzad" reply="40" id="3657535"] We are hard coding in that if the player is IBNobody his ship blows up after 3 seconds of traveling away from the target. [/quote] That will fail because I already planned on registering the steam code you give me to a different Steam account. EDIT: Unless you have some awful thing like GFWL that makes me log in with my Stardock account. Yuck. Please don't do that. (The multi-login thing. I would
[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="34" id="3657513"] And you're right again, I won't be doing MP much. But still want to be able to employ my own strategy, instead of rushing! [/quote] I agree with you. We shouldn't need to rush. However, malicious play is one of the big problems you will run into when you play against some random dude off the internet. It will ruin your experience and you will never play MP again against random people. Not only do you lose out on t
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="37" id="3657520"] Those are two different things. If you are nimble enough to stay on my sides and there is nothing I can do about it, one of these ships is broken. That shouldn't be possible. [/quote] Nemesis System. ;) [quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="37" id="3657520"] Of course, if there are 6 different people all insisting that that a ship work a certain way that has nothing to do with this issue... then it can&#
[quote who="cuorebrave" reply="34" id="3657513"] Haha, yes, you are correct - newborn in the house! Born October 22nd at 10:50am. [/quote] Congratulations!
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="32" id="3657510"] I knew it would become a very big issue, and that it is such a complex issue that nobody was ever really going to understand it. [/quote] If I can avoid or mitigate damage and there is no timer, I can extend the duration of matches indefinitely. What is left for me to not understand in this scenario? They aren't going to give everybody lock-on weapons. And if I am nimble enough to stay on your 3 or 9, you won't be abl
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="31" id="3657497"] ^ Oh, look who decided to show up. [/quote] I think his SO was having a baby or something. [quote who="cuorebrave" reply="30" id="3657487"] I will kill myself if they put a timer on battles. [/quote] When you play against me, I bet I can get you to change your tune. I thought you were very much a SP-only player. If so, why do you care what happens in MP? I am not advising a timer for the SP
Can we get some feedback from Stardock on whether or not they feel that this is an issue?
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="20" id="3657361"] ^ you can tweak weapon damage/missiles duration on those ships in MP then. [/quote] Hmm.... I don't like the idea of tweaking these ships to fit within this aggro or time limit system. Feels like a cart-before-the-horse scenario. Can you come up with a different system that adapts to the ship rather than having ships adapt to the system?
[quote who="Alverez" reply="18" id="3657344"] Do you think random trolls will be a problem 2 years from now? I don't. Seems like a good reason for local multiplayer to be a thing. [/quote] I think finding players in general will be a problem 2 years from now. This trolling will happen during the game's activity window. [quote who="Hunam_" reply="17" id="3657329"] That's the whole point of that system!! To penalize you for stalling. Wit
[quote who="Alverez" reply="13" id="3657306"] Typically the faster ships should have a shorter range weapon, while slower ships should have a longer range, or at least a way to neutralize the speed difference (VUX). [/quote] Not necessarily, and that only makes a difference if someone was playing normally. [quote who="Alverez" reply="13" id="3657306"] If the concern is for online multiplayer, why not have a match length option? Set your desired match lengt
Just so you all know... When SuperMelee comes out, I am going to do my best to frustrate all of you at least once. It's best to get it out of the way now in early development rather than in post-release. It isn't anything personal, and I apologize in advance. I want to nail this before the real griefers show up. [quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="10" id="3657296"] This is the core of the issue. The best way to deal with this that our community came up with is, as I have
[quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="8" id="3657293"] Some indirect ways would be as simple as a 3 minute time limit on battles and if nobody is destroyed both players move on to their next ship. This is the problem of "refusal to engage". [/quote] My next ship is the same as my current ship. The ship after that is the same as the last two. If I make you lose 3, 6, 9, 12, or 15 minutes of your time, I win. [quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="8" id="3657
[quote who="Hunam_" reply="5" id="3657285"] But he won't be going too fast. He'll be going fast enough to just make you Alt+F4 your game. [/quote] I snorted when I read this. Bravo. Yes, this is it exactly. [quote who="Kavik_Kang" reply="6" id="3657288"] Everything really comes down to speed within this genre, and in real life, really. [/quote] Sure, but you don't give any solutions to this other than to suicide into a planet and choose
Kavik, Can you explain to me how this is going to stop me from taking a fast ship and not engaging you? What is going to stop me from making your game playtime miserable? I feel like you come from a world where there are no malicious players. Said players are not invited back to play a board game campaign again. You don't have that luxury with online multiplayer unless you only play with friends.