CUV discussion

A CUV isn't a carrier, it is a mobile vehicle with limited resources.

That's the reason why it's mobile. Everything I said above still applies. When the CUV runs out of supplies it goes back to the carrier to get more. The whole point of the CUV is a mobile resupply/repair station. Mobility is its entire reason for existing. Its job is to bring whatever is needed, to the combatants, in the field.

Running out of supplies is not a concern, it's an expected point that makes up part of the CUV job description. Instructors for CUV pilots wouldn't say, "If you run out..." They would say, "When you run out..." They would then go on to explain the procedure for resupplying the CUV at the carrier.

Everything I said above still applies. The CUV resupplies other ships to full capacity until it needs to resupply itself. There should be a constant stream of CUVs entering and leaving the battlefield to keep the combatants at full strength.

How it all really works is totally in your hands. I'm just giving you my opinion, but, let me qualify my opinion by saying that I am an ex-marine (over 10 years ago), and a student of battlefield tactics (past and present) and will gladly defer to someone who can show me an equivalent vehicle doing an equivalent job in the manner you're suggesting. (So I'm not just talking out of my ass .)

The Station (base) is the carrier)

If you reload a ship by 100 % with the CUV, there would be no reason for the player ever go back to his base? (and see your nice SD model)

Absolutely correct, which is why the CUV is a completely redundant vehicle. It's only real value is for fun. In reality, it would actually be a liability in a fighter skirmish (carrying valuable equipment and supplies in an easily targeted and attacked sitting duck, thus no RL equivalent), since the carrier is more than close enough to care for, and defend, its fighters. The CUVs closest equivalent in RL is a naval "tender," whose job it is to repair/resupply naval ships. Ships cannot quickly put into port for repairs (the way a fighter can simply land back at its carrier), especially during a battle, thus the need for tenders. One of the biggest problems with space games is the confusion of naval and aviation terms and practices, leading to things like tenders for fighters.

I'm not too worried about my Star Destroyer or Mon Calamari cruiser being seen, they're easily the biggest ships this game has ever seen (well, except the bio-bombers ). You won't miss them.

What about my question in the post above about the health level on respawning?

I think it's awsome! It's a great idea, one that will surely make the players fight for their survival. One thing I never liked about MP games in general is; although you obviously shouldn't take a game too seriously, DM style games caused the players to not take it seriously enough. I mean, why do you work so hard and save so often in an SP game? It's because if you die, you'll lose everything you've worked so hard for. If every time you died you just respawned in the same spot with everything you had before you died...

Can you see how quickly a game like that would bore the hell out of you? So I think your idea is absolutely brilliant! Again, it's the kind of thing I've wished for out of a game; screw up, and pay the consequences. I just hope all the whiney babies won't cry about it.

Nice job all around, MajorTom. [8D]

mailto:second_chance@cox.net
The Ultimate Guide To Modding: I-War 2 - Edge Of Chaos (on hold during SW MP mod)
cartoons.sev.com.au/index.php?catid=4
.

It is absolutly no problem to change the 60 % to 100 % (it is only 2 digits in the pog code). It is also possible to have different repair and loadout rates, as they are not coupled.

We need to agree on the basic concept:

The game play will generally be limited to around 4 to 6 players per team so a constant stream of CUVs will not be likely. It'll be more like 2 or 3 fighters, a bomber and a maximum of 2 CUVs per team.

Imo the primary problem lies in the fact that the CUV player cannot select which supplies he carries. (If he could, that would be a really cool game because an experienced CUV pilot could really make a difference).

This is not a question of realisim and as you noted above, it's more of a fun element, but it also influences the options a player has in reference to possible game strategies. The range of options/ flexibility should be as open as possible, but it should niether overtax the players comprehension nor force him to play strategically.

The CUV pilot has 3 objectives, so lets Differientiate:

1) place sentry turrets in strategic locations. The turrets have 15 km fire radius. He can only place 3, so he may have to
remove one to re-deploy it somewheres else as the attack front may move.
Removing one requires a decision because it results in a point penalty (he should have located it better in the first place).

He can also repair the turrets by docking to them. (if he doesn't repair them the opposing team will a) get points for destroying it and b) break through the defense line.

if the CUV pilot is running back and forth to the base all the time he won't have enough time to tend to his Turrets. That's one reason why I thought he should only have a limited loadout capacity. The player can decide if he needs an emergency repair and limited loadout from the Engineer (while distracting the engineer from his other work), or fly back to the base himself for a full loadout

2)Loadout
Should the CUV supply full loadout for 3 ships and then go back to base? Or, should he be able to do 5 ships with a 50% loadout?

Looking at the realistic side: How should a CUV know how many concussion missiles or proton torpedoes his fighters will need and how many bombs and heavy torpedoes the bomber needs? Especially where the different ships have different loadouts. Normally he would ration what he has depending on the situation. It seems logical to apply some kind of limitation other than strictly a limited number of full loadouts?


3)Repair:
The repair level is not coupled to the loadout so we have the option to repair only 50 % while providing a full loadout, or vice versa, or provide both at 100%.
However, a field repair generaly isn't as good as a repair at base.

A cuv is around 30% faster than most fighters at top, head-on speed. It can get to base and back quicker than a fighter but it's not twice as fast. (Although it's armed defensivly, it's much too heavily armored and sluggish to dogfight). If the player had a choice of getting a full repair or a partial repair he could decide, based on the situation, to go back to base himself or request a repair from the engineer. Request doesn't mean order! i.e serving others is not the only purpose in the life of a CUV pilot

Lets decide on the basic concept in reference to the 3 objectives first, ok?


Lol, thanks for the motivating words above, but you've still not answered my question:

How much health do you think we should give a player when he respawns after a death? Full health or a percentage?

I'm asuming we do agree that he will get exactly the same amount of ammo/missiles he had as he died, right?





Iwar2 Multiplayer Fan Site

If I may, I'd just like to weigh in with an opinion. I encourage you to take it with a huge grain of salt.

The idea of respawning with reduced health and the same weapon inventory is brilliant. I don't understand why ALL MP games haven't had this. If you can make this work, you'll have achieved something truly first-class in gaming. I would recommend setting the newly-respawned players health to be below 50%. This, in itself could create a raison-d'etre for the CUVs. If you return to the game at, say 30% health, you'd be well advised to get back to base, or find a friendly CUV right quick and get healed up, before proceeding with any fighting. In other words, not only will dying cost your team points, and leave you with the same crappy loadout you had, it will also force the player to abandon the assault for a moment and go find a way to get healed up before rejoining the fray, which means important time lost and potentially attack coordination lost (i.e. everyone has to fall back and wait and set up the coordinated assault again when the respawned player is back up to strength). Just a point to consider.

I agree with SC that the role of the CUV is a tad artificial, but it could be very fun...more like a battlefield medic than a tender, really...patch em up and get em back into the fight as quickly as possible, even if they aren't perfect, becuase every fighter is necessary. The distinction between the main base and the CUV for re-arming and repair may not be necessary. The main bases and carrier vessels will definitely be seen and appreciated, because the players from opposite sides will be trying to destroy them, won't they? I say let the CUVs rearm to full capacity, but only repair in a decreasing manner (first time 100%, next time 60% etc.) to reflect the crappy state of the fighting ships as they take more and more damage (and the limited abilities CUVs have to keep them in the fight...they aren't drydocks, after all), not the rationing of resupply inventory the CUVs carry, as SC indicated.

Finally, the ability to place mini gunstars in the field of combat could be very important indeed as the attackers try to 'gain ground' on defenders...kind of like advancing the lines. A skilled CUV pilot would be an important member of any assault force, and could very well turn the tide of a battle. Just my 2 cents.

--
Hot4Darmat

Whew! Discussion, hot and heavy; just how I like it.

We need to agree on the basic concept:

Yes, I think you are absolutely right. I've never seen one one these ships in action or played with them. I'm evaluating them based solely on the description of their "intended" role, which is farcical at best. I need to think more in terms of what the game needs to be fun, and not what would actually win a battle.

. . .so a constant stream of CUVs will not be likely.

Very valid point. That's my mistake. I was speaking of what CUVs would be doing in an actual full scale battle, not the mini-skirmishes that the game works around. So yes, you're definitely right there.

. . .the primary problem lies in the fact that the CUV player cannot select which supplies he carries.

This was not my intention at all. I meant that "supplies" should be an abstract figure that covered "everything necessary to repair and re-arm a ship." It doesn't matter what the fighter actually needs, it's assumed that "supplies" will provide it to him. If a fighter needed 4 missiles of one kind, 2 of another, 500 rounds of ammo and 100 hit points in repair; all together that would consume x% of the total "supplies." The only thing flux needs to know is the number of ammo based rounds (or missiles) that get replaced and how many hit points were repaired, because each ammo round (or missile) replaced consumes x% of "supplies" and each hit point repaired also consumes x% of "supplies."

The CUV pilot has 3 objectives, so lets Differientiate:

The sentry deployment and service sounds great, no comment there. [8D]

if the CUV pilot is running back and forth to the base all the time he won't have enough time to tend to his Turrets.

Should the CUV supply full loadout for 3 ships and then go back to base? Or, should he be able to do 5 ships with a 50% loadout?

Sorry about that, I thought it was implied that there would be enough "supplies" per CUV restock to cover maybe a half-dozen fighter service stops. I pictured the CUVs returning to restock only after many minutes of field time. Enough time to do whatever they have to in-between return trips to the carrier.

The player can decide if he needs an emergency repair and limited loadout from the Engineer . . . or fly back to the base himself for a full loadout

I say let the CUVs rearm to full capacity, but only repair in a decreasing manner . . . to reflect the crappy state of the fighting ships as they take more and more damage

This is actually a very good gaming point, and I think Hot4Darmat's answer solves it nicely.

How should a CUV know how many concussion missiles or proton torpedoes his fighters will need and how many bombs and heavy torpedoes the bomber needs?

He wouldn't. For purposes of gameplay, it's irrelevant. The CUV pilot wouldn't know, or care, what's needed. He gets whatever his crew-chief requisitions from the carrier's "supplies." Logistics is handled by the accountants, not the pilots. The pilot doesn't do the actual re-arm/repairs, the crew does. So why would he have any idea of precisely what gets used. Again, for gameplay purposes, the pilot only needs to know that he has x volume of "supplies."

It seems logical to apply some kind of limitation other than strictly a limited number of full loadouts?

Logically and logistically this is incorrect. No military force would ever restrict munitions unless there was a severe shortage. As long as it's available, a combatant is supplied with as much as they can hold; re: my previous post.

A cuv is around 30% faster than most fighters at top, head-on speed.

Although it's armed defensivly, it's much too heavily armored and sluggish to dogfight

?!?!?!?! This is terrible! These two statements are contradictory. And completely expose the CUV for what it actually is: A pointless vehicle added for variety. We should focus on creating better reasons for the fighter player to make use of the CUV.

. . .serving others is not the only purpose in the life of a CUV pilot

Again, this shoots holes in the purpose of the CUV. When a soldier cries out "Medic!", the medic doesn't say, "Sorry, I'm too busy mine-sweeping to help you right now, maybe later." Normally, the multiple tasks you've assigned would be handled by different vehicles. Maybe they should be. That would give us the opportunity to introduce another playable ship, one to handle the gunstars. Just a suggestion.

Lets decide on the basic concept in reference to the 3 objectives first, ok?

Ok, yes. I agree.

How much health do you think we should give a player when he respawns after a death? Full health or a percentage?

I would recommend setting the newly-respawned players health to be below 50%.

I agree with Hot4, for all the reasons he stated above. But, could this create a situation where the ships become so badly in need of constant repair that they really can't even fight? MajorTom, only you know the answer to this. Where do we stand?

I'm asuming we do agree that he will get exactly the same amount of ammo/missiles he had as he died, right?

Sounds great to me!

And I pretty much agree with everything else Hot4 said, really. We both seem to be on the same page.

I really am trying to help, I promise!

mailto:second_chance@cox.net
The Ultimate Guide To Modding: I-War 2 - Edge Of Chaos (on hold during SW MP mod)
cartoons.sev.com.au/index.php?catid=4
.

Hot4Darmat:
Thanks! Your opinion is very welcomed!

We are talking about the beta version here and are only looking for a starting point. We don't have to/can't make a final decision now. Play testing will tell us the actual values we need and some things may show up that we've not even thought about. (see below)

Lets start off with 35% health at respawn and see what happens, ok?

One point to clear up:
The loadout capacity of the CUV cannot be dynamic:
Sure, it would be possible to count the amount of ammo required by each individual the CUV docks to and deduct that from the CUVs virtual supply. But, I don't want to do that, because it would have to be calculated on the server app and then transmitted to the clients (each of them)! The Server app is already loaded enough!
(another reason is noted below)

That means we have to use static loadout values that always apply for every ship it docks to. i.e it will be able to re-supply x number of ships 100% before it has to re-furbish itself.

Lets say 5 ships at 100 % for starters. OK?

One exception to this whould be the bombs: they are way too powerful to allow a bomber to have 5x 3 of them during a battle.
Fortunatly we can load bombs dynamically because the bombs originate on the client app. I suggest the CUV only carry 5 bombs total and can reload the bomber(s) dynamically, ok? (going back to base would reset his total of 5)


For repairs, I like Hot4's idea and we can do this dynamically based on the number of times the player has docked to a CUV (regardless of which CUV he docked to). The values would however have to be static to a certain degree: for example: 1st time 100%, 2nd time 75%, 3rd time 50% and there after only 25% for all ships, regardless of how large they are ect..
(note these are added on values! i.e. if a player has 50% and docks for the 4th or 5th time he would end up with 75% health.

We should focus on creating better reasons for the fighter player to make use of the CUV.

You should try out the CUV design first.
You'll see that it's not helpless by any means. It has some cool, mean little weapons that you'll not find on the other ships. with all it's armor and good shields it's like a tank! so It will rarely need fighter support if an enemy fighter gets too pesky. Any improvements you may suggest can be added! (it does need another avatar though)

(Note: The current Pioneer is used for the turret switch test, so you'll have to switch to the turret to get weapons. That doesn't really matter though, in this test version: once in the turret you can still steer your ship, you'll just have the other cockpit)


We can definatly manipulate the players loadout as he re-spawns. This works on the client app, and is actually very simple to do:
The Server app will allocate the player a full loadout when he re-spawns, but we can reduce the amount a player has on his own client app. i.e the server my "think" the player has 5 missile avaliable but, the client/player cannot fire more than he has in his manipulated loadout (say 3), so the server just thinks: " oh well, SC still has 2 missiles he hasn't used yet".

After thinking about it, this is a good (imperative!) reason to have the CUV do a 100 % loadout each time he docks to another client. That way we can never have a discrepency between the count on the client app and what the server app expects to see. (because 100% loadout means max magazine capacity and not 100% plus what the player had).




Iwar2 Multiplayer Fan Site

Ok, that all sounds good to me. I see now what we can do and what we don't want to do because of server/client issues and I think a lot of good solutions have been put forward, so I'm good with all of this.

You should try out the CUV design first.

Did you think I meant look for reasons to pilot the CUV? I meant look for reasons to use the CUV, for repairs and such, instead of flying back to the carrier or base. I'm sure the CUV is an awsome ship to fly.

mailto:second_chance@cox.net
The Ultimate Guide To Modding: I-War 2 - Edge Of Chaos (on hold during SW MP mod)
cartoons.sev.com.au/index.php?catid=4
.