weapons

[T' Great Root]

Sorry to throw a possible fly in the ointment ... but I have seen the 5% reported damage for weapons on an in-system move as well as a WP attack

[Highwayman]

so you might want to send that info to pete then... IF all deplocs were correct...

[rfouasnon]

I would say leave Pete alone with more examples , as he has more than enough on his plate . In the space battles that Vine , Yaffles , and Them have had , the ships with the weapons would have been able to destroy the ships even with 1% of their firepower , so leave Pete alone with battles where the outcome was right , but the mathematics might have been off....

[Highwayman]

BUT it shouldnt matter whether the ship "would" lose or not.. It the numbers arent right then what about the close battles? OH I C unless u r on the recieving end it is ok... Stfu

[rfouasnon]

Pete has already said he would revisit the code , yet you continue to pester about a battle that was not even your own . And if the battle is not correct , then we can bring the case up to Pete , and he will evaluate . if anybody body should stfu , it probably should be you . Let it rest .

[Highwayman]

Im about tired of ur mouthin and i will keep talking about this until it is fixed so why dont u get a life and get off petes nuts... This is fn job to make sure that the game works and right now it is not working up to par.

[General Miles Avatar]

Umm lets remember thats this is a game designed

to provide enjoyment not to raise your blood pressure

[Krelnett_of_Kraan]

Umm lets remember thats this is a game designed

to provide enjoyment not to raise your blood pressure

True, but it's also a game where people are losing real-world money (in the form of wasted orders, sometimes over multiple months or years) because of programming errors.

It's entertainment, and part of the fun is finding all the secrets, but when something is decisively stated by the GMs (like ships not firing through warp points) then those rules should be adhered to. Anything else is a violation of the implicit contract of the game.

[The Flock]

I would say leave Pete alone with more examples , as he has more than enough on his plate . In the space battles that Vine , Yaffles , and Them have had , the ships with the weapons would have been able to destroy the ships even with 1% of their firepower , so leave Pete alone with battles where the outcome was right , but the mathematics might have been off....

 

 

Really, the game is 10 years old, this houldof been fixed 7 years ago

[Highwayman]

yes these things are very old and i know of a few other things that should be fixed but probably wont. but i will not be quiet about this issue BECAUSE i have always had issues with the naval combat.. i dont believe it works the way we are lead to believe.... and the gm is so secretive about this part of the game because of this.. why would your scientist not know that your weapons only do 20 percent if placed on line 9 if it is a beam weapon? or sensors how come we dont get the strenght in the anz if we put out scientist on them to research them? i would understand if it was a roll of the dice every time kinda like the research bonuses. but these things NEVER change..... so i say (and i am just a player who spends money) fix these things and not so arbitrarily like was done with the SCRP order... really you lose anything left on that fleet if you scrp one ship in that fleet? WOW can you say petty or just down right lazy to do it the right way... i would have made the order fail if the player left anything on the fleet.. YES making the player use extra orders by either RN to an empty fleet and OC or OC the entire fleet itself... since the name of the game from petes side is to make us use orders then this should have been the way to go but nope he wanted to punish so you get lost cargo if you scrp...

 

i dont claim to know how to write code but i do understand this game and how it should work and how it does work in a lot of ways that prolly never occured to anyone. like the scrp order to have extra fuel in your fleet.. or how about this one being able to place legendary characters on any fleet or world and not be in that system.... yup i can send my spy to any world that is in my surveyed and unsurveyed warp points.

 

so you say leave pete alone? i say point out every thing that does not work accordingly.....

[Lord Deependra]

"why would your scientist not know that your weapons only do 20 percent if placed on line 9 if it is a beam weapon?"

 

We do know this. It was told to us long ago and its on your battle reports."

 

 

"or sensors how come we dont get the strenght in the anz if we put out scientist on them to research them? "

 

Huh?

ANZ: Mk III Mass Detector Sensor

....

Displacement Blink Speed: Impressive [6000]

Counters: Gravitonics

Sensor Strength: Impressive [4000]

Counters: Minefields

 

"the SCRP order... really you lose anything left on that fleet if you scrp one ship in that fleet? WOW can you say petty or just down right lazy to do it the right way"

 

I guess if you are too lazy to unload the fleet before scrapping part of it, you are going to lose stuff.

 

"i do understand this game and how it should work and how it does work in a lot of ways that prolly never occured to anyone"

 

Srictly speaking, it should work the way Pete wants it to, since it is his vision. Remember, the game is a simulation of the way Pete imagines galactic economics, exploration and battle. If you or I had designed things, certainly there would be differences. Some things would be better, some things would be worse. And there will always be bugs, just like every other computer program ever written.

 

Personally, I'm pretty happy with the way things are. I have adjusted my view of warp battles slightly, but it really won't make any difference as to how I design ships or fleets.

 

However, if there are issues that people really want addressed, perhaps we should all get together, vote on topics and ask Pete to look at one thing at a time. Then move on to the next thing. It might be more productive than flooding him with random complaints and suggestions, both to his personal in-box and the forum.

[Kurassier]

Frankly, I can see both sides of this issue. If something isn't working the way I've been told it is supposed to work, and I've spent hours, orders and real money, only find to out, no, it doesn't work this way. You better believe I will pester Pete.

This is no different than if I go to a restaurant and order a steak and they bring me a baked chicken. The baked chicken may be good, but not what I was anticipating and led to believe.

In a nutshell, we have been paying to playtest a game for the past 10 years, there is always something that comes up. Many times there is a 'glitch, or bug' that some people know about and some don't. That isn't right, if there is a bug or glitch, everbody should be informed about it, and then informed when it is going to be fixed and before the fix is implemented.

I for one, spent a lot of time, research and money developing cloaking devices. I had a great idea (or so I thought) to have cloaked sensor ships at warp points. I could see them, they couldn't see me, great right? so I spent tons of orders (and therefore real time and real money) building these ships and towing them to warp points, etc. Then, oh, hey guys, we aren't going to do cloaking devices. Here's your baked chicken, enjoy.

 

Since that time, I have been fairly apathetic towards this game. I still submit my turns (not sure why anymore), but rarely exceed 40 orders, where before I would routinely submit 160+

Look, I don't know about the issues between some of you guys (I'm fairly peaceful), but if something doesn't work right, then Pete needs to be informed, even if he has heard it before. Otherwise, the chef will keep sending out the baked chickens.

 

<steps down off soapbox>

Night all,

[Flagritz]

 

Srictly speaking, it should work the way Pete wants it to, since it is his vision. Remember, the game is a simulation of the way Pete imagines galactic economics, exploration and battle. If you or I had designed things, certainly there would be differences. Some things would be better, some things would be worse. And there will always be bugs, just like every other computer program ever written.

 

Personally, I'm pretty happy with the way things are. I have adjusted my view of warp battles slightly, but it really won't make any difference as to how I design ships or fleets.

 

However, if there are issues that people really want addressed, perhaps we should all get together, vote on topics and ask Pete to look at one thing at a time. Then move on to the next thing. It might be more productive than flooding him with random complaints and suggestions, both to his personal in-box and the forum.

 

While I can understand Kurassier's view, personally I am more with lord Deependra; overall I am very happy with the game and I believe I get really great value for money, I know most of the players I am in regular contact with feel the same.

 

I think if we want changes a more structured approach as lord Deependra suggests is the way forward.

[T' Great Root]

I would say leave Pete alone with more examples , as he has more than enough on his plate . In the space battles that Vine , Yaffles , and Them have had , the ships with the weapons would have been able to destroy the ships even with 1% of their firepower , so leave Pete alone with battles where the outcome was right , but the mathematics might have been off....

 

I completely agree, I just wanted to point out that it wasn't just WP assaults affected. The 1% firepower links in with my earlier assumption that "one-shotted" ships will only see a small percentage of the overall firepower of the aggressor.

 

 

I think if we want changes a more structured approach as lord Deependra suggests is the way forward.

 

I'm all for this as well. Scott - Maybe we could create a "Known Bugs" area on the SNROTE Wiki? That way there is full transparency to all players, a reference for Pete and maybe the basis of a poll as to what players regard as the most important areas to be tackled?

[Breoghan]

In the end analysis, I'd rather have the game we have, with adjustments and corrections from time to time as problems are discovered and/or become more relevant/whatever, than no game at all.