Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GreatWyrmGold]

Sounds fine.

[Dariush]

...Why not simply use a three-ship free-for-all if too many people sign up?

Also, why didn't we get a shot? By my calculations, we should have gotten one when we turned (because they were quite obviously between the lines of fire we could have gotten before and after turning).

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I DEMAND JUSTICE

Also x2, why did T2 for normal piloting actions suddenly change to T1?

Vowel: pound the control panel in a rage against the heavens.

[Thearpox]

If you haven't noticed, the game is currently pretty rough in that it only works in straight lines for cannons. I suppose if you had said "Turn as many degrees as necessary to him them with our cannons as they go." it would have been different. But currently, the turning with the load stones is instantaneous.

And honestly, stop demanding justice, because there's a bunch of things that happened that I can too demand justice for.
For starters, if your side could hit us with your cannons, we could hit you too. For more than this turn, if you haven't noticed.
There was this whole thing with me getting shrapnel. And a bunch of other stuff. So demanding justice is... naive?


About sign ups, I think time zones are actually fairly important in this game. Much more so than in ER. So I would also recommend that the entire team shares similar time zones.

[GreatWyrmGold]

...What Thearpox said.

[piecewise]

...Why not simply use a three-ship free-for-all if too many people sign up?

Also, why didn't we get a shot? By my calculations, we should have gotten one when we turned (because they were quite obviously between the lines of fire we could have gotten before and after turning).

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I DEMAND JUSTICE

Also x2, why did T2 for normal piloting actions suddenly change to T1?

Vowel: pound the control panel in a rage against the heavens.

Piloting action is t1 because you only performed one action. T1 for changing direction, T2 for changing direction and speed. (I'm aware this hasn't been enforced very well.)

Also, like Thearpox said, the sweep of the cannons as you turn isn't factored in, For the same reasons that you turn at 45 degree angles and start your turn already facing the direction you're turning. It's abstraction caused partially by the grid setup and partially just to make it easier for me. If you want I can start factoring that it, though it seems strange that the sweep would happen only during that first square.... How about this:
We take the firing line of the cannons where you started and where you ended and anything within that sweep can be hit. Like this:

[Thearpox]

That looks... really weird. Please don't do this, Piecewise. I would love to have a full simulation with measurements. I'm okay with squares (although hexes are far superior). But this... just begs so many questions. Like: How can we get an arc for cannons, while the ship is moving in a completely straight line? It's no longer an easy to understand abstraction, and neither is it a simulation, taking the worst from both worlds (complex and unrealistic). In other words, no.

PS: That said, it would be cool to have an 90 degree arc in from of our ships, extending 3 hexes forward. And we would be able to choose any of those hexes to end up on, not just three directions. (Taking into account the speed changes limits, of course.)

[GreatWyrmGold]

Out of curiosity, is there any reason for squares over hexes besides "It's easier to draw"? (That's a perfectly acceptable answer, mind you.)

[Dariush]

And honestly, stop demanding justice, because there's a bunch of things that happened that I can too demand justice for.

YOUR MISINTERPRETATION OF ALL CAPS THAT WAS INTENDED TO LOOK HUMOROUSLY OVERBLOWN AS ACTUALLY OVERBLOWN HAS BEEN NOTED

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But isn't the final result almost identical to what would happen if you only calculated the sweep before turning? I don't really care which of the two schemes is used (since the difference between them is negligible), but I'd really like to see one used. Having the ship magically teleport from facing southwest to facing west without ever facing anything in between seriously damages realism.

Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.

[Thearpox]

And honestly, stop demanding justice, because there's a bunch of things that happened that I can too demand justice for.

YOUR MISINTERPRETATION OF ALL CAPS THAT WAS INTENDED TO LOOK HUMOROUSLY OVERBLOWN AS ACTUALLY OVERBLOWN HAS BEEN NOTED

Your misunterpretation of my interpretation of your humor, of which you gave no indication of, and which would look exactly the same if it was not humor, but which I still interpreted correctly and decided to give a serious answer to because I actually found your point whether humorous or not to be interesting, was noted.

But isn't the final result almost identical to what would happen if you only calculated the sweep before turning? I don't really care which of the two schemes is used (since the difference between them is negligible), but I'd really like to see one used. Having the ship magically teleport from facing southwest to facing west without ever facing anything in between seriously damages realism.

Either that, or what we have now. The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.

Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.

Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.

Out of curiosity, is there any reason for squares over hexes besides "It's easier to draw"? (That's a perfectly acceptable answer, mind you.)

3-D space, mostly. Hexes are a bit harder in 3-D than 2-D. Also because this started as a completely random inspiration, and wasn't planned out very well (note: "very well" is relative) in advance.

[Dariush]

The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.

Huh. I was under the impression that we were more or less constantly turning (except when going in straight lines, obviously) and that going in straight lines in between turns on two consecutive turns was merely an abstraction.

Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.

Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.

But there's only one distance to be measured (the distance between ships). Everything else (such as moving distance) can be used merely by drawing a sector in front of the ship to indicate how far it is possible to move and turn.

[Thearpox]

The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.

Huh. I was under the impression that we were more or less constantly turning (except when going in straight lines, obviously) and that going in straight lines in between turns on two consecutive turns was merely an abstraction.

It's an abstraction, but that doesn't change the fact that we turn and then move straight. If it makes any sense, I take it as an abstraction on one level, but a reality on another. ... To put in another way, it is conceptually an alternative to constant turning, but the game rules don't treat it that way in any way, shape, or form, except for the part where our ship continued turning after having the controls busted.

Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.

Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.

But there's only one distance to be measured (the distance between ships). Everything else (such as moving distance) can be used merely by drawing a sector in front of the ship to indicate how far it is possible to move and turn.

Actually, there's also the machine gun arcs which will have to be measured. The gun and cannons ranges, and how their difficulty increases with range. It gets even more interesting with obstacles, when they are added into the game. And god save you from having to determine if a cloud/smoke/special effect covers only half of a ship. So if Piecewise says it's too much for him, I an taking his word.

[Dariush]

The reason I'm okay with what we have now, is that I imagine it would be really difficult to aim cannons as the ship is rapidly turning. You kind of want to have some stable view as you aim.

Huh. I was under the impression that we were more or less constantly turning (except when going in straight lines, obviously) and that going in straight lines in between turns on two consecutive turns was merely an abstraction.

It's an abstraction, but that doesn't change the fact that we turn and then move straight. If it makes any sense, I take it as an abstraction on one level, but a reality on another. ... To put in another way, it is conceptually an alternative to constant turning, but the game rules don't treat it that way in any way, shape, or form, except for the part where our ship continued turning after having the controls busted.

The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.

Also, have you thought about scrapping the grid entirely and just placing ships on a plain board, with two separate values for linear and turning speed? That should get rid of any physics inconsistencies.

Yes, he already answered it. It's because measuring everything is more difficult and time-consuming than grid space.

But there's only one distance to be measured (the distance between ships). Everything else (such as moving distance) can be used merely by drawing a sector in front of the ship to indicate how far it is possible to move and turn.

Actually, there's also the machine gun arcs which will have to be measured. The gun and cannons ranges, and how their difficulty increases with range. It gets even more interesting with obstacles, when they are added into the game. And god save you from having to determine if a cloud/smoke/special effect covers only half of a ship. So if Piecewise says it's too much for him, I an taking his word.

The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.

[Thearpox]

The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.

Doesn't change the way it feels. Currently it feels very separated. And when you have rules contradict the feel of the game, without changing the reason for why it feels that way, immersion suffers.

The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.

You forgot the difficulty increase as the range does and the special effects and the obstacles.

[GreatWyrmGold]

For the record, the instant turns are (semi?-)justified by the Lodestones. I can believe that they could turn nearly instantly, or rather close enough to prevent aiming of cannons during a turn. It makes as much sense as anything else that lets us turn that fast.

[Dariush]

For the record, the instant turns are (semi?-)justified by the Lodestones. I can believe that they could turn nearly instantly, or rather close enough to prevent aiming of cannons during a turn. It makes as much sense as anything else that lets us turn that fast.

You forget about inertia.

The game rules are an abstraction. They also don't implement, for example, us having internal organs, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.

Doesn't change the way it feels. Currently it feels very separated. And when you have rules contradict the feel of the game, without changing the reason for why it feels that way, immersion suffers.

Wait, weren't you advocating for a square grid just now?

The ranges would be indicated either by sectors (for MGs) or by straight lines (for cannons). Is the enemy ship inside this sector? If yes, it can be fired upon. Pretty easy, if you ask me.

You forgot the difficulty increase as the range does and the special effects and the obstacles.

I still entirely fail to see the problem. More range = larger sector. Obstacles = ...uh, it's easier to draw.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So what is the problem?