| Star Trek Fan Games http://bote2.square7.ch/forum/ |
|
| scanners http://bote2.square7.ch/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=3712 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Iceman [ 21 Aug 2010, 17:14 ] |
| Post subject: | scanners |
Quick question. If you build an Outpost II (scan range 4) in a system, and then build a Subspace Scanner (+2 Scan Range) in that system, do you get range 6? Seems to me you shouldn't, since the OP should already have its own scanner. Also, what's the Scan Strength of scanners? All the same, or each upgrade increases both Strength and Range? Maybe Strength should also be displayed in their description? |
|
| Author: | Matress_of_evil [ 21 Aug 2010, 18:41 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
That's a good point .Iceman. Were going to need to start specifying a Scan Strength on Scanners as well. |
|
| Author: | mstrobel [ 21 Aug 2010, 18:50 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Only the largest (i.e. most powerful) scan strength is considered for any given sector. |
|
| Author: | dafedz [ 21 Aug 2010, 19:17 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
.Iceman wrote: Quick question. If you build an Outpost II (scan range 4) in a system, and then build a Subspace Scanner (+2 Scan Range) in that system, do you get range 6? Seems to me you shouldn't, since the OP should already have its own scanner. Also, what's the Scan Strength of scanners? All the same, or each upgrade increases both Strength and Range? Maybe Strength should also be displayed in their description? The Scan range figures that I have for stations are way out of date and well over-powered, and should be downgraded to perhaps +2, +4, +6 respectively (imo). But regarding Stations vs Scanners, the stronger overrides the weaker, so a system that has a station (with +2 range) and a Scanner (+4) effectively still has a range of +4. That is a valid point regarding the Scan Strength of Scanners. They I imagine would also be graduated in increments of x1, x2, x3 etc. |
|
| Author: | mstrobel [ 21 Aug 2010, 19:25 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
It's actually not quite that simple. Both scan range and scan strength come into play to determine the scan strength at some target sector. But the bottom line is that only the highest effective strength is taken into account at the target sector. It's not an additive effect. IIRC, scan range is the distance through which a scanner's maximum strength is maintained. After that, its scan strength falls off by 1 point for each sector beyond that range until it hits zero. |
|
| Author: | Matress_of_evil [ 21 Aug 2010, 19:30 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
The problem with this is that if a player has a station in the system, it effectively renders the scanners on the planet useless. So why bother having them? The scanners on the station also have no energy cost. |
|
| Author: | Iceman [ 24 Aug 2010, 13:24 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Yeah, but the station does have a maintenance cost. It's a trade-off thing. My question was because the scanners give +X range. So it is an additive bonus. Apparently only to the colony's base scan range - which AFAICT is 1 for the homesystem and 0 for colonies. So all is well. I tested it with an OP II and a SS and range was 4. As for the scan range figures, well, you have to consider that the tech levels involved. The homesystem's base scan range, rnage for scanners and for stations, all should be more or less equivalent regarding tech level. |
|
| Author: | mstrobel [ 24 Aug 2010, 16:59 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
I went back and did a lot of work on sensors this weekend, including (finally) implementing sensor interference from pulsars, nebulae, and black holes. Pulsars work identically to BotF (radio pulsars have rotating, directional interference, and x-ray pulsars have omnidirectional, pulsing interference). I did, however, go back and simplify how scan strength is applied to the map: scanners no longer permeate beyond their specified scan range. A scanner with +3 strength and +6 range will now contribute a scan strength of 3 to every sector within a range of 6, and then stops completely. It's less realistic, but it should make more sense to the player based on the "advertised" numbers. Scan strength at the mouse cursor location is now displayed at the top of the screen too. I also realized that my design never accounted for "negative" scan strength, so the maximum scan strength for a given sector had to be decreased. The previous legal range was [0,63], and the new range is [-32,31]. |
|
| Author: | Iceman [ 24 Aug 2010, 18:12 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Good news. I think it's better this way. Neg scn strength? is that because of cloaked vessels? It's going to affect the sector's scan strength, instead of omparing cloak strenth with scan strength? |
|
| Author: | Iceman [ 24 Aug 2010, 18:22 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
dafedz wrote: The Scan range figures that I have for stations are way out of date and well over-powered, and should be downgraded to perhaps +2, +4, +6 respectively (imo). But regarding Stations vs Scanners, the stronger overrides the weaker, so a system that has a station (with +2 range) and a Scanner (+4) effectively still has a range of +4. Well, the Subspace Scanner is tech 3, with +2 range. The OP I is tech 0, with range 2. The OP II, level 3 too, has range 4. Kind of weird. Probably the SS should be available from the start, and the HW starting with one? Like with a Shipyard, and a Dilithium Refinery and Deuterium Plant too (since you start with some Dil and Deu). Jut occured to me, neg scan range might be related to the Jammer? Does it also have a jamming strength, or just range? |
|
| Author: | Matress_of_evil [ 24 Aug 2010, 19:24 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
As it stands, the Scanner structures only have a "ScanRange" bonus, so i'll have to add some "ScanStrength" figures too. Dafedz's database is the same, so we'll come up with some figures together. I also discussed the Cardassian Scanners with Dafedz several months ago via PM, although he's forgotten to update the Database to include the results of those discussions. The Cardassian Scanners will likely get a +1 bonus over the opposing Empire structures in both ScanRange and ScanStrength because of the disguised nature of their Scanners. We also decided to offset the bonus by higher tech requirements for all their scanners. So they get their scanners later, but they get a bigger bonus than the other four Empires because of it. They also get a fourth tier Scanner, whilst the other Empires do not. ... The Subspace Jammer as it is currently implemented has a "JammingRange" bonus of 10. Based on what Mike has said, I assume that we will need to give it a ScanStrength figure with the Scanners. For implementation purposes though, would it have to be a positive or negative figure Mike? Or will the game automatically apply the figure as a negative scan since it is a Jamming bonus? |
|
| Author: | mstrobel [ 24 Aug 2010, 20:35 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
The concept of "jamming" needs some discussion. I'm not even sure that it's a good idea. If we implemented it as negative scan strength (on the other civilizations' map views), it would often prevent a player from seeing enemy ships (or neutral ships, or even friendly but unaffiliated ships), even if he has ships of his own in the same sector. That to me makes jammers even more valuable than cloaking. Further, if every empire had jammers, they'd all effectively be playing blind. That doesn't sound like much fun to me. |
|
| Author: | Matress_of_evil [ 24 Aug 2010, 20:44 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
We also wanted to put a limit on them Mike, like one or two per Empire. I know it's not yet possible to do numbers other than one per Empire, but a number restriction could reduce the risk of such events. We could also impose other limits, eg. a minimum enemy scan strength, but then what would the point of negative scans be? Those will still be possible through Black Holes etc. And of course, we'll adjust the numbers after player feedback. |
|
| Author: | mstrobel [ 24 Aug 2010, 21:02 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Matress_of_evil wrote: ... but then what would the point of negative scans be? Those will still be possible through Black Holes etc. |
|
| Author: | Iceman [ 26 Aug 2010, 10:50 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Matress_of_evil wrote: The Cardassian Scanners will likely get a +1 bonus over the opposing Empire structures in both ScanRange and ScanStrength because of the disguised nature of their Scanners. Hmm, they already have higher ranges. As for the reason, the disguised nature, I'm not sure how that makes sense? They're better (higher range) because they're disguised?! Quote: We also decided to offset the bonus by higher tech requirements for all their scanners. So they get their scanners later, but they get a bigger bonus than the other four Empires because of it. Not a very good compromise given how things work IMO. They'll also have higher costs and energy consumptions. And if ranges for normal scanners are already high, these don't help. Quote: They also get a fourth tier Scanner, whilst the other Empires do not. IIRC all empries have 4 scanners: Subspace Scanner, Listening Post, Isolinear Scanner, and the top of the line scanner for each empire. The Cards have a special Listening Post and Isolinear Scanner. |
|
| Author: | Iceman [ 26 Aug 2010, 10:54 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
mstrobel wrote: The concept of "jamming" needs some discussion. I'm not even sure that it's a good idea. If we implemented it as negative scan strength (on the other civilizations' map views), it would often prevent a player from seeing enemy ships (or neutral ships, or even friendly but unaffiliated ships), even if he has ships of his own in the same sector. That to me makes jammers even more valuable than cloaking. Further, if every empire had jammers, they'd all effectively be playing blind. That doesn't sound like much fun to me. Agreed. You could go as far as building it in a staging area to amass an assault fleet, and scrap and rebuild to make this a moving platform. |
|
| Author: | Matress_of_evil [ 26 Aug 2010, 18:35 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Quote: They're better (higher range) because they're disguised?! Quote: Not a very good compromise given how things work IMO. They'll also have higher costs and energy consumptions. And if ranges for normal scanners are already high, these don't help. Quote: IIRC all empries have 4 scanners: Subspace Scanner, Listening Post, Isolinear Scanner, and the top of the line scanner for each empire. The Cards have a special Listening Post and Isolinear Scanner. |
|
| Author: | Iceman [ 27 Aug 2010, 10:45 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: movement |
Matress_of_evil wrote: Yes. By disguising their scanners as research telescopes and the like, this allows the Cardassians to put them in places where they would otherwise be destroyed by enemy forces. They did it in an episode of TNG, so it's canon. You do understand that it's not exactly the same thing, don't you? They don't necessarily have higher range, they can be placed in places closer to their enemies - as per your description above. It just means they can probably scan the same amount of space but on a different location. Hardly the same thing. Quote: Dafedz said in another thread that the Scanners have been given lower scan ranges. (+2, +4, +6) The Cardassians just get +1 to those figures. Yes, but that doesn't make sense. They were +2, +3, +5. How is that lower? +2, +4, +6 is what the Cards get currently. You can check it in the game. I did. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|