Supreme Cmdr

quote: Originally posted by Werewolf: [QB]

quote: Originally posted by Andergum: Put me down as a vote for the old system. I absolutely hate w-a-s-d. So much so that I haven't played Starwars KOTOR until they allowed the arrow keys to be mapped to movement (latest patch fixes that.) You can use the arrow keys in UC quote: The few keyboard mapping changes have really thrown me for a loop though and I feel like a newbie again! After years of knowing the BC keys by heart it tough to unlearn old habits.Yeah, it takes some getting used to quote: Originally posted by Andergum: I really, really miss using the ships afterburners. I plan on putting it back in actually. [ 02-06-2004, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]

quote: Originally posted by Antares: -Had problems deploying Mining Drones from shuttles on planets. I could do it fine in BCMG. Earlier today I installed 1.00.01 from CDROM and ran a lot of deployment ops with NO problems. Its simple. If you put a waypoint in a ludicrous location. The shuttle won't land. If it does not land, it won't do ANY deployment ops at all. And using a single waypoint is not going to give the shuttle enough time to assume a landing profile. This is documented in manual. You need two waypoints, with the first one being PROCEED TO NEXT and should be at least 2km from the deployment waypoint. And this thread is not for reporting problems. Please go to the tech support forum and create a problem report there with the exact steps you used, and someone will try to reproduce it.

quote: Originally posted by Equinux: Was cruising around the battlecruiser commlink forum to get a general idea how the game is doing however Im a little dismayed that a large number of posts have been deleted from the Tech support section. The existing posts are only a small fraction of what is indicated on the the post counter. Whats going on? I read the understandably stringent restrictions ( Tone of SC and test admins a little to testy though) but find it hard to believe that almost 800 posts didnt meet the spec. Are a there too few bugs or too many bugs that require frequent post deletes? I got burned when the initial BC shipped however I heard that the more recent games are more polished and possibly worth playing. I really want to give the BC series another shot but a bit gunshy. Why exactly did you find the need to create yet another thread, when one with a similar topic already exists over here?

quote: Originally posted by Cmdr_ Laracuente: can you give us a rough estimation of a possible release date for The GBS 3. Unknown

quote: Originally posted by zardalu: I just got my copy, and spent all night getting my arse kicked : ) This game certainly lives up to my hopes and expectations, thanks DS! You know where the first impressions thread is, right?

This thread is for first impressions only please. Thank you.

Culled from a now deleted thread (was created in the wrong forum). quote: Originally posted by Telson Darv: OK SC. Sorry I was gonna jump on the Abstain from ordering UC as a show of protest against what they did to you, ut then I weakened & ordered it. Hopefully my copy will arrive next week sometime. The reasons basically is because I'v enot experienced any of the 3kad games b4, and wanted a taster of what the MMORPG version will be like (hoping that it's still on the cards) So I'm hoping to play it to get a taste of just what you're capable of & an idea of how incredibly good the MMORPG version will be. I hope you win & get some compensation for all you hard work. Just so you can go on to complete your other projects without going bust, and then start work on the persistant universe thing asap.

quote: Originally posted by Scrivener: Just got home from work and finished installing the game. Flipping through the manual here and, boy howdy, is it a step and a million halves above previous versions of the game. Clear, concise, organized, easy to understand & follow. Previous manuals read like handbooks for military grade aircraft... this is much better written. Don't even get me started on that manual. I was actually writing that, while trying to wrap up the game, fix bugs etc etc. But of course, since I'm the only one qualified to do a manual for this game, well, I had to do it. Layout (i.e. taking my MS Word source and setting it for print in QuarkX) and production credits go to Dreamcatcher of course. quote: The FP controls don't really bother me at all, I prefer this to old style... but that's just me.The WSAD flight controls does take some getting used to, but I think its easier. I might put back the old 1-0 system in a future game if too many people don't like this new scheme.

quote: Well, you're right, because widescreen is just a screen resolution, nothing else. Since you obviously programmed this in a generic way it works. Others enumerate the available modes and initialize the gfx in a mode chosen from a list with n entries, thus limiting what's available.When you were going on about widescreen support, I thought there were special Direct3D handling for aspect ratios, that I wasn't aware of. No, I do not enumerate the modes. The ones in CONFIG are hardcoded and the res is just past to the graphics subsystem. So if you card+monitor supports a mode, entering it the UCONFIG.INI file will make it work. But of course, the HUD elements will be incorrectly positioned. I need to look into that in the supported modes, to see what the problem is. quote: Originally posted by Werewolf: Now if the Logistix and other computer screens would scale to the full resolution (like the main menu) I'd be totally happy They can't because the bitmaps were designed to be run at 640x480 because those sub-systems were designed to be run in a window. If you want to run Frontend systems at fullscreen 640x480, you can use the undocumented /ffe commandline parameter. Not sure if it is enabled in the release build though, but try it. I like the windowed mode myself.

quote: Originally posted by Stahl51: Okay ... I've been messing around with UC all day and still cannot get the shuttles to deploy the mining drones. I'm setting waypoints just as described in the manual which is the same way I set them with Battlecruiser Millennium but it doesn't seem to work. At one point I ordered the shuttle to halt and the craft descended to a minus altitude on the planet's surface. Don't know how far down it might have gone, but when I ordered it to resume waypoints it continued to descend at the waypoint location with the Hold order. This has already been reported in this thread. And it works just fine here. So I suspect that the CALS revision (mentioned in the 1.00.02 entries), addresses it. quote: I don't understand the jump gate from the Earth to the Moon. Seems to distract from the realism a bit. I much prefer the old method of Millennium. No matter I can get used to it.There's nothing to understand. There is a station around the moon and having the moon and Earth in the same space region - and with two stations in the same region - will cause performance issues if both stations are under attack at the same time etc. Not everyone has the processing power to run this game with one station in a massive fleet battle - let alone with two stations. Know what I mean? quote: but even at that whenever I enter the atmosphere the computer takes over with its graphical display and when I come out of it I get a warning of damage and I'm on the surface bouncing around in a hovering mode. There's no flying it in for a soft landing that I've found yet.In UC, the planetfall ingress altitude is the max ceiling for the craft (check the appendix). Which means that if you are using a MK1 shuttle, you will ingress at 3000 feet. If you entered the planet at high speed, well, guess what, you'll crash into the ground (since you'd be pitched down) given that the shuttles max speed is 1500 m/s. Given those figures, on ingress, you will crash into the ground because you'd be travelling at 4921.259 feet per sec. I'm surprised the craft is destroyed. The game appendix is your friend. Read it.

quote: Originally posted by Scarlek: I'll be playing that scenario all week now and then some more no doubt. Once I get a handle on ordering my troops about and avoiding enemy fire I'll be able to report more on the scene. Thats where the PLV and TOM come in. Thats why they were implemented. If you haven't done so already, download and print the manual revisions. They are documented in there.

I don't think it has anything to do with widescreen support actually. That parameter just causes Direct3D to init the graphics subsystem at that resolution. Whatever your card+monitor supports, can be input in that INI file.

quote: Originally posted by MythicalMino: just arrived on my doorstep just over 30 minutes ago....installed, looked over the docs, and now i am going in!! I'd be very surprised if it runs. Your card does not have vertex shader 1.1. You've known this for several months now, right?

quote: Originally posted by Scarlek: I'd say it suits my preferences to space combat better. This time round I get to see all the glory of my kills and I can do it in my own time. (BCG made me feel like it was a rush to do so, now I can kill in style. Not sure where the difference lies, all I can say is that the 'pace' of the game is nice and even for me. You keep mentioning BCG. You mean BC3K, BCM or BCM Gold, right? Because BCG was renamed to UC. Which is what you are playing quote: Right then, SC...you asked me to check out IA0114 and I did so. Man alive!! I died in like 5 minutes. I think I'll stick to ordering my boys about from the safety of space thank you very much. I'll give it another go when I'm more skilled and learned in the ways of UC. Well, you should just add the /i cheat to the shortcut and you won't die. But what did you think of the environment, suspense (of being capped in the dark ) etc etc? ps: I am tired of deleting posts in the thread. So, if you don't have the game, don't post in here. Thanks

No, if your card does not have vertex shader 1.1 or higher, the game won't even start. It says so here and on the box.

quote: Originally posted by kiloton: A potentially silly question, so gimme a siddown if I need it but... Could Dreamcathcer claim later (if sued for damages) that the lack of a demo (which was planned for a $39.99 release) hurt the sales so it was not "their fault" the sales were lower than they projected? Ken No. I have no contractual obligation to do a demo And even if they did try that, I'd just counter-sue because my contract calls for marketing. They haven't done it - while they have instead been busy marketing Painkiller.

quote: Originally posted by Werewolf:

quote: Originally posted by Rictov: Hey! Will i get the game in England? Cya later AFAIK, its already shipping in the UK. Check your local stores.

quote: I haven't had much time since to actually get into the game, but I have done enough to notice the shuttles will not seem to deploy the drones on a planet's surface as they used to. Instead they seem to bob up and down in Search and Destroy mode, never actually landing or deploying the mining drone. When looking at the orders of a deployed shuttle it shows the orders as SAD rather than Deploy Drone. Shortly after spending an hour or so waiting for my shuttles to deploy the mining drones the game crashed to desktop. I believe the reason to be the darn VIA chipset on my motherboard and not the gae itself, however. Wish I could find the right combination of configuration for this chipset to elliviate such problems, but haven't succeeded yet. In spite of it all the game looks great and remains one of my favorites which is why I put up with the CTDs and continue to try to play it. I'm not sure about some of the changes yet. I suppose I can get used to the over time. I spent so much time playing BCM I'm sort of stuck in that control frame of mind. Just tried drone deployment and it works fine. As long as you set the waypoint correctly. The CALS system is a bit dodgy (especially on slopes) in 1.00.01 so maybe that whats you are experiencing. Several revisions have been made in the upcoming 1.00.02 - which is probably why it works on my end? As for the gaming looking great; so much for them saying they reduced the price because of its quality. Bastards.

Moved over from a now deleted thread. OK n00bs, please adhere to our rules and regs for topic creation please. Thanks! quote: Originally posted by Stahl51: I received my copy of UC yesterday as delivered from EBgames where I had pre-ordered it several months ago. Be advised I paid and was charged the original price of $39.99 plus shipping. I haven't had much time since to actually get into the game, but I have done enough to notice the shuttles will not seem to deploy the drones on a planet's surface as they used to. Instead they seem to bob up and down in Search and Destroy mode, never actually landing or deploying the mining drone. When looking at the orders of a deployed shuttle it shows the orders as SAD rather than Deploy Drone. Shortly after spending an hour or so waiting for my shuttles to deploy the mining drones the game crashed to desktop. I believe the reason to be the darn VIA chipset on my motherboard and not the gae itself, however. Wish I could find the right combination of configuration for this chipset to elliviate such problems, but haven't succeeded yet. In spite of it all the game looks great and remains one of my favorites which is why I put up with the CTDs and continue to try to play it. I'm not sure about some of the changes yet. I suppose I can get used to the over time. I spent so much time playing BCM I'm sort of stuck in that control frame of mind. Forgive me if I've overlooked some requirement of the board. This is the first post I've ever made although I view your board at least once a day and have done so for a couple of years or better following the course of the Battlecruiser series. I jusy wanted you to know the copy I received yesterday was bought and paid for at the original price and not at the $19.99 price that is causing all of the controversy at the moment. I feel it to be worth the $39.99 price tag easily and have no qualms about what I paid to get it. The extra money goes to EB, not me. Call them up, quote the price on their webpage and you will get a $20 refund.

quote: Originally posted by Werewolf: quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: And its not going to be supported any less than if it was sold at $39.99. I remember a different statement just yesterday. You should go back and read it. Slowly this time.

quote: Originally posted by Emmett.hendrick: Derek. Assuming your successfull in the breach of contract suit. Will you then be legally allowed rebrand UC to Ummm lets say BCG again and ship it yourself?? Yes, but I won't. Its not about branding the game, its about loss of revenue which would come about as a result of their selling the game for $39.99 instead of $19.99. The UC and BC brands will remain separate entities, going forward. Again, if you see the game for $19.99, by it if you want to. It has nothing to do with you that its being sold for less. And its not going to be supported any less than if it was sold at $39.99.

I need the two of you to take your petty quibble to PM. Thank you.

quote: Originally posted by Kalshion: So, the judge sided with DC? Sounds like it, I could also be wrong.. Actually, the judge didn't side with them. Quite on the contrary. He actually - based on their affidavit that the game would sell more copies at that price point - gave them enough rope to hang themselves. Apart from that, the injunction has NOTHING to do with the breach of contract claim. The injunction was designed to prevent them from selling the game at that price point - until the lawsuit for breach was brought about. It not being granted has nothing to do with the breach of contract suit. It just means that they can continue to sell the game and will be liable for damages based on the outcome of the lawsuit. The good thing about the affidavit is that it provides exactly the same sort of information that both sides would have submitted in the event of a lawsuit for breach. Notice that they are not counterclaiming ANY breach of contract on my part. This is very important to note. I on the other hand, have no less than four documented breach of contract claims in the injunction affidavit. And they were clearly caught lying under oath. An affidavit is a sworn statement and judges do not take too kindly to false affidavits designed to delay, disrupt or discredit. The lawsuit for breach of contract is going forward and papers will be filed in the coming days. My attorneys already have clear instructions about this. In fact, we knew that the injunction stood a 50/50 chance of succeeding - especially given the fact that (1) injunctions are quite hard to get - as any attorney knows (2) the game was close to shipping - and in fact, started shipping to retail on the same day that the judge heard the case. Contrary to the ship date they stated in their affidavits.