Some observations on SF 2.0

Want to pitch an idea of the latest gadget that should be added to ships? Maybe you have an issue with ship balancing? This is where to post!
Post Reply
NiteHawk
Game Developer
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 2:34 pm

Re: Some observations on SF 2.0

Post by NiteHawk » Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:57 pm

The ranks still have to be changed, we are still working on coding before anything. A readme would be there but since we were changing alot there hasn't been a point to it just yet, otherwise updating the readme with the new configs will be a pain in the butt. But since it's a 'prestige' now to gain ranks, I only put 'guesstimation' values, so leveling might be a bit quicker. Will be changed though.

Dreads are actually faster then 1.2/1.4, but since theres more FPS, it feels slower. In the future we were going to speed up the game a bit, more fast past, etc. Most ships have been given between .10 to .5 speed wise more. Alot of people claimed that the game felt slower, but with tests, it's actually faster. The game at 16 FPS vs 64 FPS makes a huge difference, the ships obviously look like there moving faster because the game is updating less, and alot more choppy.

We haven't updated all the systems yet, only SOL. Again with the readme/etc, updating each scenario for each variable we do can be a pain, so we only kept a couple and update those, and once SF 2.0 is released we would update the rest.

Lasers just need some tweaking, but lasers in 1.2 worked by the FPS of the game and damage. But there is an extra laser now. Laser 1 is rather weak, Laser 2 is the old Laser 1, with a minor amount of modifications etc. Laser 1 is more for AI means anyways.

You 'can' add more AI, but that's not the case in our scenarios. For testing the largest one we have now is the botmageddon one. If you do add more AI, you also need to add more robots to the ai robot file, and the races file.

NiteHawk
Game Developer
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 2:34 pm

Re: Some observations on SF 2.0

Post by NiteHawk » Sun Feb 12, 2012 8:24 pm

Aye, atm though we are working on the networking before fixing anything else. I know there is still a few bugs here and there too, but any time that we get probably will be spent on that. Going to help out with changing all the slots over to the IDS to sync the game a bit better.

The shield indicator has always vanished, because your shields are actually technically down during hauling. If you take a hit the shields go to nothing quickly. Should be changed I think, but never got to that yet. But should be tweaked defo ;)

The GUI is completely difference and needs a rehaul. I got them somewhere. The GUI was more new-aged, most of it would be at the bottom right, easy to use. It was rather nice, but we been aiming to fix the game. To me, 1.2 is unplayable online and has alot of bugs. So is 2.0 technically, but it's better ping wise, just not sync wise atm.

Thanks for the input!

NiteHawk
Game Developer
Posts: 198
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 2:34 pm

Re: Some observations on SF 2.0

Post by NiteHawk » Fri Feb 17, 2012 8:38 pm

Most of the toggles should be visible now in 2.0 anyways from what I know. The ranking system still needs changing and the prestige required needs to be upped. But right now it's okay for test reasons. ;) I was planning on making a keymap, aka you'd be able to change all the keys around to whatever you like.


<> still work for changing items and such. Difficulty settings though wouldn't make a differ until we completely recode the AI. They are completely stupid right now. Brent added python but we need to start using it as well. Will allow us to add basic AI and then anyone can improve on it because its a external scripting source, Can even be good for events and other fun things ;)



I been working on changing the slots to GUID to hopefully solve the syncing issues, but like Brent said, it's only a small portion of what needs to be done and its virtually like changing EVERY message used in the game for online networking. It's a pain in the ass. I'm down from about 350 errors to about 160 now during compile. Whoohoo ;(

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest