Supreme Cmdr

The reason why POTC sucked. Sound familiar?

I have uploaded a refresh of the mp executable. This fixes the spinning problem as well as the color coding of messages from friendlies in the chat log window.

Awesome movie!!!! Man, Jim sure has a range, doesn't he? 10/10

I really liked this movie. Scrivener will probably figure it out in the first 30 secs - but I didn't figure it out until 15mins from the end of the movie Its was quite good I thought and evenly paced. None of the actors are going to win an oscar over this one. And this is the first time I've seen Angelina's boobies! Though this was not as dramatic as Halle Berry's in Bond, given Jolie's penchant for carefree provocation. Meaning, in Jolie's nekid scene, I wasn't at all shocked that she was baring that much on screen. 8/10

quote: Originally posted by Mano Faber: Will this take place in one region or will each region have six spawnpoints? I am currently restructuring the space/planet regions (making them smaller, closer etc) but the plan is to have more than six. I had originally planned to have six per base, but that would too long an engagement. So, I'm going to have eight bases per planet. With each side having four each. With this setup, each base would have two spawn points. So each side will have eight spawn points per planet. So, for one side to win, it must capture all 16 spawn points. If by the end of the timer, all 16 are not captured, then the side with the most spawn points, wins. As for space, there will be an additional two spawn points per region. These will have higher points if captured and will probably increase the EPs of all members of the capturing team. With higher EPs, team members will be able to use different vehicles they normally don't have access to (e.g. naval assets). quote: If each region has six spawnpoints then maybe you could have some sort of map rotation. There is no concept of maps in the game. Did you forget? The world doesn't get re-initialized, everyone disconnected and reconnected at the end of a timer or victory condition. This is not BF1942 At the end of the Vanquish timer or victory condition, everyone is disconnected (as if you had died, you are not actually disconnected from the server), the spawn points reset, everyone gets back in the game. Rinse repeat. quote: Maybe a variation could be that team B destroys a starstation and a starbase of team A and team B wins and the other way around.Thats not the same as Vanquish. Thats just, well, boring. If anyone wants to destroy/capture a base, they can play deathmatch or co-op (turn on AG on the server, everyone is on the same side and goes to a hostile region).

If you are on a poor connection, you will have predicition issues. You have to live with it. Use the . and , keys or menus for target selection if you can't use the mouse. There are several ways to select targets. Pick one. The chat works as designed. You have to keep the chat box open if you want to chat. In fact, in the final version, NO mp chat is going into the commlink, even if its your own. The twelve lines for the chat window is scaled to fit the 800x600 display without (the last line) encroaching on any screen elements. So I have no idea what you're talking about. If you have modified the game to run at any res lower than the default 800x600, you're on your own. The chat window will remain at twelve lines and in the final version, that window will scroll the entire chat log. I don't plan on removing the background (what you are calling a black box) because it is consistent with other windows (e.g. PLV) and is designed to work regardless of what the background world is (e.g. on some planets, most of the text would not be visible if that box were removed).

OK, I've just deleted two posts. 1. Do NOT post in this thread unless you already have RC8 and have used it, and wish to post comments (NOT bugs) 2. This interim RC8 build is UNSUPPORTED, so please don't send email to tech support because you happened to unzip it to your desktop (yes, you know who you are!) and then wonder why it does not work.

quote: Originally posted by Cc: Edit: just noticed the Shift+Esc now is much more reliable.BTW what are those 2 extra data fields for? SHIFT+ESC was always reliable. The problem is that is monitors the key. So, if you press+hold the key for too long, it won't work. Just a quick SHIFT+ESC tap is all you need. Those two last values are not time stamps - they are in/out packets for testing purposes and I will remove them in the final build.

The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches, an exceedingly odd number? Why was that gauge used? Because that's the way they built them in England, and the English built the first US railroads. Why did the English build them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that is the gauge they used. Why did they use that particular gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used the same wheel spacing. Okay! Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on the old, long distance roads in England, because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts in the granite sets. So, who built those old rutted roads? Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (and England) for their legions. The roads have been used ever since. And the ruts in the roads? Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for (or by) Imperial Rome, they all had the same wheel spacing. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the specification for an Imperial Roman war chariot. Specifications and Bureaucracies live forever. The Imperial Roman war chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the back ends of two war-horses. Now let's cut to the present...The Space Shuttle, sitting on its launch pad, has two booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. A company builds SRBs at its factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs wanted to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory has to run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel, which is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses' behinds. So.... a major design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined two thousand years ago by a horse's ass. Which is pretty much how most government decisions are made.

Ah yes, the Dutch strike again.

LOL!! WARNING: Conains images suitable for mature readers ONLY!!!

quote: Originally posted by Mordax Blyrr: Will there be an option to set the amount of spawnpoints, so you can tailor the session to the amount of players, or will it automatically set an even amount of capture points to joined players in the session? Or maybe one spawnpoint less than players per side, so there's always a free roaming player. Read my post about spawn points again.

I am still awaiting feedback on this. Well?

quote: Originally posted by Zane Marlowe: Vanquish type 1 - Cap ships included (yes, it would cause mayhem, but I'd still like to see it, unless you mean software mayhem), Cap ships will be disabled in Vanquish because they are too powerful and then everyone will want to use one. Couple that with the mayhem that will ensue when players decide to use AI troops - and you have a game that would be unplayable on anything but an OC-3 connection. quote: multiple scenes (by which I take it you mean the space/planet region connected by jump points, wormholes, etc.), and a single spawn point in space and a single one on the planet.Thats not what I said about spawn points quote: When both are captured, that system falls and you move to the next one. You can't spawn out of that system until you capture both.Thats not what I said. quote: I think one of the things you'd really want to do is set the planetary spawn points on different ends of the planet, No, because then it would be impossible to move vehicles and gunships to the opposing side.

uhm, wot?

quote: Originally posted by Blond_Knight: Derek I know youve said you plan to retrofit some of UC's MP improvments into BCMG MP. Would this topic fall under that umbrella? Just curious. No. I was talking more in terms of communications, not new features (e.g. chat, mp game mode etc)

For those who want to give the work-in-progress RC8 mp patch a quick whirl, it is now available on the registration page. This is only the ucmp.exe file and the updated vcf which lists whats fixed/pending etc. Just backup your existing file before unzipping this file. There are several problems unique to this version and they are not listed in the VCF because they are based broken/wip issues that were not present in the previous version. Out of synch packets will cause some objects to appear to spin when targeted or observed. This will eventually clear up when that target changes PRY orientation. The target itself is actually fine, its just its representation that looks wrong to other clients observing it. After you die and respawn, previous crew damage reports are not flushed completely; so you hear them when you respawn. After a client dies, there may be a delay before it is removed from the world. During this time, it may still appear on other client radar. After respawning, you lose sound. To reinit the sound system, go into Frontend or Options, change something and exit. In fp mode, the position is not updated quickly enough (like the crafts) Long player/craft name will overflow the edges of the VDD/VID display. The chat log window system has a few things to do before being completed e.g. the color coding is sometimes incorrect, only 12 lines are displayed instead of the entire log (which can then be scrolled up/down), client/server messages will later no longer go into commlink, but rather will go into the chat system All in all, I think this is a vast improvement - but as always, your thoughts are welcome. The plan is to complete these issues, release RC8, then work on releasing the first pass of the Vanquish gameplay mode in RC9. RC10 will hopefully be the final sp/mp build before the final 1.00.02 patch is released. [ 03-18-2004, 09:06 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

OK, go here.

quote: Originally posted by Zane Marlowe: Good point. I was thinking more about this... If the approaches to the spawn points are fairly linear, then capturing spawn points could create a kind of battle line that can move back and forth with the battle. Dynamic spawn points are out of the question. The concept of spawn points in the game, is difference from other games. In this game, the spawn point is any object in the scene which has a /wp (wp = waypoint) tag in it. When you enter the game, you start at that waypoint. This is one of the problems in mp right now where several players starting together at the same station, end up colliding because the system picks the same waypoint (in the final patch, it will randomize them). On a planet, the same applies. So, for mp, I have to disable the sort of wp handling and instead use either a specific object that is placed in the scene (similar to how all objects are in the scene. for an idea open up one of the .3DG files in the MODELS folder. Thats a scene with fixed objects. As you can see, there are objects like buildings, supply stations, djps etc in there. So, if I had someone create a 3D object, it would be placed in this scene as well. Anyway, at this point, I'm not planning on going overboard. All I'm planning on doing is adding a more fun mp gameplay mode instead of the default co-op and deathmatch currently there. And how I plan on doing it is as follows. Add object spawn points in the scene. At least six will be placed around the base and in the space area. The idea would be to capture each of these spawn points, then all six in order to capture that base or space region. In order for a spawn point to be considered as captured, you have to be standing within a proximity of it (e.g. 2m) until a timer (e.g. 90 secs) expires. This timer would appear in everyone's HUD (crafts/vehicles/fp) as soon as someone steps in a contested spawn point. The more people standing near it, the faster the time will expire. Once all spawn points have been captured, the base - and all its assets - switch to your side. e.g. if Ter/Mil capture a Ter/Ins base (by taking all six spawn points), then all the assets there become Ter/Mil and no Ter/Ins players can spawn there any more. All I have to do now is prevent cap ships from being used by people joining a server to play this kind of game, since this would just cause mayhem. I can't suppress this via a server side config because they it would prevent the use of cap ships in the other mp game modes. Once I can figure how to solve this, the rest should be fairly straightforward. In fact, in the space aspect of the skimish, fighters, shuttles (pilots by SFMs) and SFMs will play a big role, since cap ships won't be used. And naturally the marines on the ground will have to rely on their EFP counterparts to capture the space spawn points. Which could be fun, since you could have pilots get out of their gunships, grab a fighter and head off into space to capture a spawn point or something like that. Which of course means that each side has to have pilots. heh. So, lets try and keep the discussion with the realms of what I have described and lets come up with a robust Vanquish game mode that is doable, playable and fun - with the rash suggestions (which I've had to delete since people don't get it when I make strong points about NO advanced/additional features).

quote: Originally posted by Remo Williams: I posted it above here in this thread also. Didn't give as much info though. Me bad! Post #54 above Nope, your post #54 was quite clear. I must've missed it. My bad. Yeah, I should be flogged. quote: Originally posted by Remo Williams: The UC Console and graphic server is running great here SC besides known issues that you have in the VCF. OK. The RC8 patch is not quite ready, but its more advanced than the RC7 mp executable, shall I make available the current RC8 mp executable? It does have once problem which I was going to fix but haven't yet - in that due to the new time synch, at some orientation, some targets (ship/missiles) will appear (to the client viewing or targeting it) to oscillate though this is NOT the case. What I mean is, if you target a craft/missile, you will see that it may sometimes oscillate in the CVD/ITD until that entity changes its orientation. To the client that has the object (e.g. client2's ship), they are actually fine but its you (client1 ship) that thinks they are oscillating. Its not major - so if you're playing with others, you can just tell them to change their PRY or somethin' Anyway, let me know and I'll make the executable available. If you guys can live with this one quirk, this WIP RC8 version is a LOT (the new chat log system alone is worth it I think) more advanced than the RC7 version.

quote: Originally posted by Remo Williams: I am using RC4 and the machine is setting right here in my office. I'm downloading UltraVNC now to give it a go. I'll keep you posted on my progress. Theres no reason why UC console shouldn't run on windows server 2003 its in the same family as windows XP. Its just a matter of finding the right config. Remo, looks like you forgot to post in this thread that you had a HW/SW problem which was preventing UC console from running?

...are over here. Edit: link corrected [ 11-16-2004, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Marvin ]

quote: Originally posted by Bandus: And SC, I was talking to some of the folks at EVE and as it turns out S&S didn't drop EVE. CCP bought the rights back from them. Evidently CCP wanted to do it. :shrugs: Rubbish. I know the whole story. It was losing money and thats why S&S dropped it. Along with the fact that they also wanted to get out of the game publishing business. You think that when a pub has the rights to a property, you can just wake up one morning and say "hey, we know you're making money and all, but can we buy it back?". As greedy as publishers are; yeah right. S&S signed the game thinking they had bought into a persistent cash cow. Let me tell you something, even at 10K players subscribed, thats *nothing* to a big publisher. But as long as a dev can keep paying the bandwidth costs for those still playing, they'll keep it going. Thats the ONLY reason why WWOL, Jumpgate, Eve and Darkspace are still around. Planetside is run by Sony. A large corp. They're going to pull the plug soon and anyone who wants to take bets on this, is welcome to make one and I'm there. quote: Originally posted by Epsilon 5: And my nunbers are only estimates. Long ago the devs removed all ways of knowing how many people are on the servers. Gee, I wonder why. quote: It's a measure to prevent people from going to the crowded servers and leaving the smaller servers empty.Rubbish

quote: Originally posted by GhostPilot: What I propose is to build missions where a mission zone (city,military) has to be invaded,taking the spawn point.A simple and defined mission objective, with a single or a couple spawn points to conquer.I mean that the spawn point be used as a tool to know when a team has acomplished their objectives,not to be used as place to appear as near as possible from the enemy. uhm, how is that different from conquest then? quote: Due to the colosal scale of UC "maps"the general idea of this kind of game would be based more into slow-planned form of playThats not an issue. The mp world in UC is the same one from BCM Gold. I am going to be reducing the size/scale/scope of those in the final 1.00.02 patch. So that would no longer even be an issue. The reason I ended up using the BCM Gold mp world is because - of course - there was no time for me to do UC specific ones given the publisher's desire to ship the game at all costs. quote: I dont know how this could be done in space.Say you need to control 3 or 4 spawnpoints inside a region,and the way to navigate between them should be putting a decoy(a fixed probe,cargo pod...) so you jump there targeting that decoy.If one of the spawn points is a Starstation,then the PTAs of the station should be of manual use only.They are too powerful to assault it with a pair of players.Cloak should be disabled.You are worrying about things that are NONE issues.