Client 64 Issues

Client 65 is now available. It fixes the Map Options issue.
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

I believe this one is essentially the difference between "Move towards
Escort" and "Move towards Escort's target".

If they are already near the Escort, there probably isn't much
difference. But if seperated from the Escort, the behavior should be
different (ie Regroup with Escort vs Regroup over the Corpse of
Target).

On Apr 3, 2:17 pm, "Black No.1" <keineahnung... DeleteThis @gmx.de> wrote:
> Wing: What's the effective difference between "Group Together with Escort
> Target" and "Move towards Escort's M Targets"?
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

"Amaranthine" <Michael.Richardson.2002 RemoveThis @gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:9f48b1a5-3201-452f-b1ae-fd64dc420372@m71g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Client 65 is now available. It fixes the Map Options issue.


Downloaded. Tested. And lovin it!

Cheers,
Jochen
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

Some more questions relating the new space combat switches:

- Would it be possible to give identical names to corresponding switches in ship
attack and wing attack? This would make it easier to grasp.
- "fire at ground targets": could this be reversed to "do not fire at ground
targets" (like "do not fire at disabled") (or the other way round)

- Would it be possible to group the switches (movement/targeting/other?)
- All switches for target preferences are named "Target XXX". The only exception
is "Anti-fighter Mode". Maybe these could all be renamed to "Prefer XXX" or
something similar (to me "Target XXX" makes me think, that disabling it will
prevent the ship from shooting at that type).

- "Target Harmless Pods" (Ship) / "Target/Intercept Pods" (Wing): Does this mean
"prefer (non Assault) pods as targets"?


Have I already said that I love the new client?

Cheers,
Jochen
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

"Black No.1" <keineahnungwas.RemoveThis@gmx.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:47f53afe$0$23704$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net...
> Some more questions relating the new space combat switches:
>
> - Would it be possible to give identical names to corresponding switches in
> ship attack and wing attack? This would make it easier to grasp.
> - "fire at ground targets": could this be reversed to "do not fire at ground
> targets" (like "do not fire at disabled") (or the other way round)
>
> - Would it be possible to group the switches (movement/targeting/other?)
> - All switches for target preferences are named "Target XXX". The only
> exception is "Anti-fighter Mode". Maybe these could all be renamed to "Prefer
> XXX" or something similar (to me "Target XXX" makes me think, that disabling
> it will prevent the ship from shooting at that type).
>
> - "Target Harmless Pods" (Ship) / "Target/Intercept Pods" (Wing): Does this
> mean "prefer (non Assault) pods as targets"?
>
>
> Have I already said that I love the new client?
>
> Cheers,
> Jochen


One more addition:

Wing: What's the effective difference between "Group Together with Escort
Target" and "Move towards Escort's M Targets"?

Cheers,
Jochen
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

On 4 Apr., 07:39, Sebastian <Sebast....TakeThisOut@nospam.nospam> wrote:
> > I believe this one is essentially the difference between "Move towards
> > Escort" and "Move towards Escort's target".
>
> > If they are already near the Escort, there probably isn't much
> > difference. But if seperated from the Escort, the behavior should be
> > different (ie Regroup with Escort vs Regroup over the Corpse of
> > Target).
>
> That is half right. You need to know ships keep two lists where they
> store possible targets in: One list is for firing and one for moving.
> This is needed because you want to move to the most juicy target even if
> it is on the other side of the map but during your way to it fire at the
> most juicy target in weapon range.
>
> Move towards escorts target meant that the object will take the movement
> target list of the objects it is escorting and use it as if it would be
> it's own. Result Zwo objects are on two separate corners of the round
> battlezone but will exactly go against the same top target (move and
> partly firing; latter is because the top movement target is always the
> top firing target even if it is far away).
>
> Move to escorts just means get you ship near the one that you are
> escorting. That does not mean there's anything that forces the ships to
> concentrate fire (apart from the thing that damaged ships soak up enemy
> fire). As the target list is populated individually you can end up with
> different target the ships do fire up.
>
> Sebastian

Ok, there are still some things I have questions about:

Movement & Firing
You said "the top movement target is always the top firing target even
if it is far away".
I'm still a bit confused. So the movement options have a *direct*
effect on chosing the firing target?

Wings, Movement & Escort Target:

- wings can be set to stay close to the escort target
- wings can be set to fly to the escort target's movement target
- wings can be set to fly to the escort target's firing target

How do these options relate? What if I tell a wing to use say the
escort target's firing target *and* tell the wing to stay close to the
ship at the same time?
Which one takes precendence? Should all three options be mutually
exclusive?

Ships, Movement & Escorting Target:

- ships can be set to stay close to the escort target:
-- if there is ship set as "fleet leader",
--- which does not escorting another object and
--- which is set to be "fleet member" and
-- if the the ship is set to be a "fleet member" and
-- if the ship is escorting the "fleet leader" and
-- if the ship is not set to "Retreat".

- ships can be set to fly to the escort target's movement target or
firing target
- ships can be set to fire at the escort target's firing target

The latter options are the same as with wings, but the first one is
including *many* ifs (-> much micromanagement).
If the whole "fleet" concept only has this single effect in combat
(staying close to the escort target), wouldn't it be better to remove
it, and rather include a "Group together with Escort Target" switch
like the one wings have.

Cheers,
Jochen
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

> - "Target Harmless Pods" (Ship) / "Target/Intercept Pods" (Wing): Does
> this mean "prefer (non Assault) pods as targets"?

Normally pods other than assault pods are not in the target list. You
could think of capturing those pods. But if you're in a hurry and need
to deney ressources to the enemy you can destroy all pods with this
switch. But this happens rather late in combat because dangerous objects
are prefered.

Sebastian

PS: That also mean target small does not kill all those valueable enemy
pods.
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

> I believe this one is essentially the difference between "Move towards
> Escort" and "Move towards Escort's target".
>
> If they are already near the Escort, there probably isn't much
> difference. But if seperated from the Escort, the behavior should be
> different (ie Regroup with Escort vs Regroup over the Corpse of
> Target).

That is half right. You need to know ships keep two lists where they
store possible targets in: One list is for firing and one for moving.
This is needed because you want to move to the most juicy target even if
it is on the other side of the map but during your way to it fire at the
most juicy target in weapon range.

Move towards escorts target meant that the object will take the movement
target list of the objects it is escorting and use it as if it would be
it's own. Result Zwo objects are on two separate corners of the round
battlezone but will exactly go against the same top target (move and
partly firing; latter is because the top movement target is always the
top firing target even if it is far away).

Move to escorts just means get you ship near the one that you are
escorting. That does not mean there's anything that forces the ships to
concentrate fire (apart from the thing that damaged ships soak up enemy
fire). As the target list is populated individually you can end up with
different target the ships do fire up.

Sebastian
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

> Movement & Firing
> You said "the top movement target is always the top firing target even
> if it is far away".
> I'm still a bit confused. So the movement options have a *direct*
> effect on chosing the firing target?

So I think I have to go a little further. There lists two lists one with
targets to fire (from now TTTL) at and one with targets to move at
(from, now TMTL) (sometimes both lists are used to move away, for e.g.
in flee more, but that was not the question here). Both lists use
similar algorithms to fill the lists. For filling the list each object
gets a weight that depends on a handful things and takes into account
the combat setting you gave to the ship. Also the TTTL does take into
account additional range modifiers e.g. objects within weapon range
get's their weight increased. The TMTL has no such range modifiers so
that it gives back an range independent list and a top movement target
to move at. As those two lists are occupied almost the same way both
lists are influenced by the target switches.

The rule that the top movement target is also th top target roots in the

The top movement target is also the top fire target because the top
movement target is the object that is the most juicy one from the
captains view. The fire target lists is influenced by range modifiers so
an unjuicy target can be at rather high position there just because it
is near. The sync makes sure that the ship fires at the most juicy
target in combat at soon as it is in range.



> Wings, Movement & Escort Target:
>
> - wings can be set to stay close to the escort target
> - wings can be set to fly to the escort target's movement target
> - wings can be set to fly to the escort target's firing target
>
> How do these options relate? What if I tell a wing to use say the
> escort target's firing target *and* tell the wing to stay close to the
> ship at the same time?
> Which one takes precendence? Should all three options be mutually
> exclusive?

Both orders will be full filled. As I explained above movement and
firing depends on two different lists. If you tell the wing to stay at a
specific object it will try to do that. The TMTL will not be used in
this case. Firing depends on the TTTL and can be independently filled
(by the wings pilot) or overwritten by the escorts fire target.


> Ships, Movement & Escorting Target:
>
> - ships can be set to stay close to the escort target:
> -- if there is ship set as "fleet leader",
> --- which does not escorting another object and
> --- which is set to be "fleet member" and
> -- if the the ship is set to be a "fleet member" and
> -- if the ship is escorting the "fleet leader" and
> -- if the ship is not set to "Retreat".
>
> - ships can be set to fly to the escort target's movement target or
> firing target
> - ships can be set to fire at the escort target's firing target
>
> The latter options are the same as with wings, but the first one is
> including *many* ifs (-> much micromanagement).
> If the whole "fleet" concept only has this single effect in combat
> (staying close to the escort target), wouldn't it be better to remove
> it, and rather include a "Group together with Escort Target" switch
> like the one wings have.

I'm not sure weather the leader cannot set to escort or weather the
escort target will be ignored in this case. A fleet has to be clearly
designed. Also you can have a fleet in the fleet interface and the
groups and they should to well. Also with the new multiple select hammer
and anvil it should not be a problem to add many ships to a fleet
(although I did not test that). By oder them to be in a fleet the escort
target and also the fleet member button is automatically enabled. If
not I think Rick could do that easily. So I'm rather happy with the
current things because it is sometimes not possible to simplify it. If
you come along with a simple bulletproof solution to do that, please
tell. But keep in mid fleet are designed to be commanded by the fleets
screen, primary.

You will notice that the new combat is somehow a little more complicated
but that is needed because of more possibilities. For e.g. one
important change is that ship now can only fire at ground bases if they
are within IC range. But now if you don't enable avoid ground base
(otherwise bases are attacked) and set a standoff range equal or greater
than the IC range you will notice the ship will stop firing at the base.
This is because it obeys the standoff order and so stays outside IC
range. and is in result not allowed to fire. Please notice that is not a
bug but wrong orders given by the payer

Sebastian
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues 

"Sebastian" <Sebastian.RemoveThis@nospam.nospam> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ft5vbg$qqh$1@news.albasani.net...

<snip>

> I'm not sure weather the leader cannot set to escort or weather the escort
> target will be ignored in this case. A fleet has to be clearly designed. Also
> you can have a fleet in the fleet interface and the groups and they should to
> well. Also with the new multiple select hammer and anvil it should not be a
> problem to add many ships to a fleet (although I did not test that). By oder
> them to be in a fleet the escort target and also the fleet member button is
> automatically enabled. If not I think Rick could do that easily. So I'm rather
> happy with the current things because it is sometimes not possible to simplify
> it. If you come along with a simple bulletproof solution to do that, please
> tell. But keep in mid fleet are designed to be commanded by the fleets screen,
> primary.

> You will notice that the new combat is somehow a little more complicated but
> that is needed because of more possibilities. For e.g. one important change is
> that ship now can only fire at ground bases if they are within IC range. But
> now if you don't enable avoid ground base (otherwise bases are attacked) and
> set a standoff range equal or greater than the IC range you will notice the
> ship will stop firing at the base. This is because it obeys the standoff order
> and so stays outside IC range. and is in result not allowed to fire. Please
> notice that is not a bug but wrong orders given by the payer
>
> Sebastian

I know that there are many new options and I highly appreciate them.
Still I think 3 goals for the user interface should be
- to unify (and simplify) the access to simialr functions for different objects,
- to eliminate side effects for orders.
- to have a clear seperation of concerns.


Unified / Simplified User Interface
- ship and wing buttons doing the same are named differently

- wing space combat related options are on one screen (attack)
- ship space combat related options are spread over two screens (attack + fleet)

Reason behind this was probably that the ship attack screen is already quite
full
and the wings cannot be put in a fleet. Still doing it in a similar way would be
better,
as players would only have to be used to one interface.


Elimiating side effects:
The new combat system does alot for the latter by distinguishing between
"excluding target types" and "preferring target types". Best example was
in the old system "Attack Ground Target", that automatically forced you
ignore ships.
Using the escort target is however now having two effects - you'll follow during
the turn *and* mark it for potential use in space combat.

Seperation of Concerns:
That's where I have a problem with fleets (you have to differ between fleets
(the concept), the ship fleet screen and the fleet window) as fleet concept is
used for 3 *different* things:
- You can use fleets and the ship fleet screen to share ord, repair and fuel
automatically. This is a nice unique feature that cannot be accessed anywhere
else. Still effectively the feature could be changed /renamed to something like
"autosharing".

- You can use the fleet window to give orders to ships in a fleet. This is still
a remnant from times when groups didn't exist (groups give a much better support
for giving orders now). Therefore it should be considered to drop this part of
the fleet concept.

- You have to use fleets and the fleet screen to use the escort target features
for ships in the new space combat. This gives "fleets" yet another meaning
(which is by the way the one that feels most natural to me). The only problem I
have with this, is, that you can do all the same with wings now without
the fleet concept (only by using the escort target)...


Maybe part of this could be adressed in a future client release...

Cheers,
Jochen
 >> Stay informed about: Client 64 Issues