[Slime]

It's not really a problem if you modify their speed too.

That was the problem with the campaign, they weren't 

[Polpolion]

I know what we should do with the next set of media VPs? We should completely wreck the balance and game play style and feeling of FS. That is a really good idea, don't you think?

[/sarcasm]

[Mars]

I know what we should do with the next set of media VPs? We should completely wreck the balance and game play style and feeling of FS. That is a really good idea, don't you think?

[/sarcasm]

I don't think anyone is pushing for that, I think this is just an extended rant by a number of people.

[brandx0]

It was never my intent to suggest changing the game balance at all, for the record

[S-99]

Someone should make a campaign with really fast ships, but the downside is that capships get to target them with real beams. That sounds really fun to me. Make an ares fly really fast, at least that ship can withstand a beam hit like once, and then you're at 2% hull integrity.

[Pnakotus]

Because going faster clearly makes it easier to aim huge guns at you.

There are plenty of games that maybe someone 'should' make: they're all Not Freespace.  So go play IWar and get back on topic.

[Bob-san]

I'll say those from Taylor; it looks more smooth then the 3d poly ones.

One more vote to Taylor.

[Polpolion]

It was never my intent to suggest changing the game balance at all, for the record

It's really difficult to multiply all the ship's speed and maneuverability by 3 and still have a balanced game. Not to mention a game that has a game play style  anything like freespace.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be neat to have ships zipping along at 225 m/s shooting at each other, but I am saying that it wouldn't be freespace.

[Gregster2k]

We already have a speed increaser (time acceleration). It's been there since retail.

[Mars]

That isn't the same though, that increases the global game speed, and it's used to skip boring hunks of missions / playtest / kill Hades class destroyers, the player chooses to increase the game speed in that case. What your suggesting is changing all of the ships to have more speed, and that would screw everything up.

[Bob-san]

I'm tempted to triple all the speeds of all ships in the game... probably keep some stuff like rotation time and speed dampers.

It will probably be a bit harder if i don't change actual acceleration/stoppping times.

[Pnakotus]

I'm tempted to triple all the speeds of all ships in the game... probably keep some stuff like rotation time and speed dampers.

It will probably be a bit harder if i don't change actual acceleration/stoppping times.

Have fun trying to hit anything.  Wait, you did think about angular velocity, rates of fire, and control sensitivity right?   

[Bob-san]

The only thing that i might change is actual speeds... nothing about rotation, turning, STOPPING, or accelerating! Just speed... lol...

[Pnakotus]

The only thing that i might change is actual speeds... nothing about rotation, turning, STOPPING, or accelerating! Just speed... lol...

So, everything will go faster and cross your view at greater rates... but somehow this won't make it harder to hit?  There's this little thing called 'geometry' you might want to look up.

[Mischief Maker]

If it's not too late for requests, could you get rid of those white puffballs that replaced the sparks trailing from damaged ships?  It just looks like a white smear on my machine and if I get close to a damaged ship, the puffballs give my framerate a kick to the groin.  Surely they don't need to be as memory-intensive as they seem to be.

[TrashMan]

This thread was supposed to be about EFFECTS!

When I complained about slow ships I was refering to the TOO LONG ENGINE TRAILS COMPOARED TO CAPSHIP SPEED..

[neoterran]

If it's not too late for requests, could you get rid of those white puffballs that replaced the sparks trailing from damaged ships?  It just looks like a white smear on my machine and if I get close to a damaged ship, the puffballs give my framerate a kick to the groin.  Surely they don't need to be as memory-intensive as they seem to be.

that replaced the sparks? They always were white puffballs unless you're talking about retail i guess. Anyway in the latest versions they're hot sparky particles not white smoke, but the performance hit is still there because it relies on the particle code which is problematic until taylor can fix it.

[Kon]

I vote for the MediaVP Thrusters, and  the current beams as well.  Sorry VA, but I really cannot stand your thruster glows.  They are all the same, just different colors.  When the current oval ones first came out, I was really in awe.  That softer, more dispersed light really seems like how a thruster should look.  I like how the Shivan ones are different, and I actually think the teal is a big improvment over the old fire-ish ones.  Herra's beams are OK, but they look a bit simple.  Whatever we do with the beams, they need to be more stable.

[Herra Tohtori]

When it comes to the beams I agree. My beams are not ready to be put onto MediaVP's. And rushing them there half-assed would not be a particularly good idea. Anyone who wishes to use my current beams instead of whatever goes to MediaVP's is free to do so.

I'll keep improving them, but I'd really like to also see the two beam section documentation issues solved... Because I still don't know how the tile factor and translation values are supposed to be used.

[taylor]

@Herra Tohtori:  This might interest you, I just committed a new feature to CVS which lets you delete old beam sections with a tbm.  After the "+Index:" line for each section, just add a "+remove" and that section will be removed after parsing.  So you can easily just create a beam with one section, then put a "+remove" on all of the others to make sure that you are always left with th eone beam section.