[Hippo]

i'd be interested if it was for fs1 too... and who the hell voted "Who's Fred"

[Knight Templar]

*runs*

[ShadowWolf_IH]

OK we have 60% who are definately Interested, and two who may be interested, and KT isn't quite sure what this Fred thing is but he knows he likes it.  So, the next thing i guess would be to set forth some ideas and guidelines.  Maybe even figure out who would want to sit as an intiating council to get things set up for it.  Anyone  want to take control of this?

[Knight Templar]

I'm actually stil fuzzy on the idea..

Is this going to be a Help Circle, and Tips n Tricks circle, a "You want this mission done? Why sure!" cirlce, a "Hey, lets make an uber-fredded campaign cuz we kann!!!11" circle or a "We are Teh 1337 Fredderz of HLP. |0|-|34R US!" circle?

[ShadowWolf_IH]

OK here's what we, me and LT were thinking about.  The first mission oif the guild would be the training of new fredders.  While there is an abundance of fredders, there are only a handful of good fredders.  So we go ahead and set up a basic curriculum, we also include a series of tests, and levels that will tell the world what your basic Fredding Ability Level is.  We try to get an internal forum with different levels, so that we don't get someone new hearing our tricks for 9th level fredding, and attempting them when they have no idea what to do at level 3.  

We also use a tips and tricks thread to help us all learn.  basically it gives of people a better grasp of fred ( I still haven't figured out how to use a variable)  and the more people who have a better grasp of fred, the faster we can get missions done...which means....the faster we can get mods done.  

Fredding level increases will also increase forum level access.  and anyone who is cretified at a certain level will then be asked to teach someone level 1 stuff.  or to create a tutorial for it.

Before we can actually get all of this going though, we need a staff.  Basically we were thinking 3-5 people to get things organized.  and then a chairperson to act as overall admin of the project will be elected from within this advisory council.  

I nominate LTNarol to the council.

[Knight Templar]

Well I suppose I'd like to help if possible. I need to get a ton of work out of the way though before I can try to contribute to any tuts or serious helping, but this would have its merits and could seriously habilitate the FS community.


The Level thing sounds kinda funky, like your trying tp add too much insentive and comming off as corny... meh.

Get me on ICQ later tonight if you can.

[Lonestar]

Well since FZ was abandoned by Volition, id be willing to dedicate over 200MB of webspace, some MySQL and DSN stuff, domain and more if required.

email me: [email protected] if interested.

[LtNarol]

The idea wasn't rigid structure, but credibility of the "Guild".  We'll probably keep an updated list of people who have gone through all the proposed "levels", although I seriously doubt there'd be more than 3 or 4.  (Avatars would work as well, but that'd be a pain in the arse for the admins)

I say credibility of the "Guild" because without some form of testing and such, we have no way of ensuring that those on the "list" are actually capable of doing what they claim.  Anyone on our list of fredders would be more than capable of taking any reasonable fredding assignment and completing it in a timely manner, thus anyone looking for fredders for a campaign would know they're getting people who know what they're doing.  Having to learn the basics (or test out of the "lessons") is a way to encourage people to take the tests and or "lessons" seriously; its not meant to be an impediment for those aspiring to learn, only a way to ensure linear progress.

We also decided that we don't want one person teaching the same thing over and over again, that gets boring for the teacher and pretty soon dull for the learners.  We plan to rotate our instructors on different "lessons".  As far as structure for administration goes, we'd probably have a few people supervising overall and playing truck dispatcher for the instructors while the instructors themselves choose their own methods of teaching.

Obviously, this is all very rough and in development; keep in mind that what we want isn't a rigid heirarchy to feed our own ego but that we only want to ensure a steady supply of well trained people which others know they can count on.  We _are_ looking for instructors, preferably people who have dealt with large scale projects before and have the time to spare for the foreseeable future.

[Goober5000]

Mm.  I'd rather not have an exclusive system.  I consider myself a good FREDder, but I wouldn't want to be denied access to the expert tricks if I'm not an expert; that smacks of elitism.  Any tips and tricks posted should be visible to everyone.

[silverwolf]

i nominate ....ME! j/k i'm no where near that level but i'm slowly learning courtousy of shadow. but if i could nominate some one it would be any of aldo's fredders

[LtNarol]

Originally posted by Goober5000
Mm.  I'd rather not have an exclusive system.  I consider myself a good FREDder, but I wouldn't want to be denied access to the expert tricks if I'm not an expert; that smacks of elitism.  Any tips and tricks posted should be visible to everyone.

Well, this is where our developing idea for the main test comes in, someone who thinks they're ready just takes the test (build a mission inside a given period of time and document enough of the design process to prove that you built the thing) and if they do well, let them have at it.  What we want to prevent is flamewars over some kid asking for help while trying to create a mission dependent on a complex chain of events without knowing how to do directive text.  What we want to provide in addition to more well experienced fredders is a list of fredders which project leaders can look through when they need missions done.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

i agree goober, the thing we want to avoid here is eltism.  None of us are elite, none of us have any power here to do anything.  This is a hobby, worse yet it revolves around a game.  The thing we don't want is to drive wedges further into HLP.

On the other hand we don't want someone who knows 2 + 2 to get confused because he is trying to do calculus.  We are more trying to pace a learning environment than to keep anyone out.  We will also be having the trick of the week.

The thing is, it'll be kinda like geometry, each lesson builds on the previous, if you try to skip too many, you will be lost.  That would be counterproductive.  I admit it isn't perfect, but right now it's the best we have come up with.

[Sesquipedalian]

The resurrection of FredZone would be a magnificent development for the FS community!

May I suggest that different "tests" be given for different aspects of mission creation, if you are going to go ahead with this, gentlemen.  Sexp scripting (i.e. how complex a set of conditions can the fredder meet successfully), play balance (i.e. too easy/too hard/just right, and responsiveness to player's actions), spatial layout (i.e. whether the fredder fully exploits the 3D environment, waypoints are used effectively, etc.), timing of events (i.e. no boring pauses or overlapping bursts of action that shouldn't), plot development (surprises and twists are always good), background design, etc., should all be considered.

[Sesquipedalian]

By way of example, here's one for testing higher level Sexp scripting, so as to offer an example of what I think tests could look like for this part:

Situation:  Alpha's objective is to disable four enemy bombers (out of a possible total of eight in two wings) so they can be captured.  Aries wing will hopefully jump in soon, at which time Alpha will begin the process of disabling them.  If any of Aries are destroyed, Taurus will also jump in.  Only one support ship, designation Kidnapper, is available to do the capturing once the bombers are disabled, so it will have to jump in and out several times in the course of the mission.  When four bombers have been disabled and then captured (i.e. when Kidnapper has docked with them and then jumped out while docked), Alpha is free to return to base.  If Kidnapper should be destroyed, the mission is a failure.

Requirements: Two directives are to be given to the player, one stating that he must disable four bombers and indicating how many remain to be disabled via a counter, and the other ordering him to oversee the capture of the four bombers once they have been disabled.  Once four bombers have been captured, no more are to be, whether disabled or not.  Furthermore, since Kidnapper is supposed to be one ship, at no time will it be acceptable to have two Kidnappers present at the same time in the mission, and if one copy of Kidnapper is destroyed no more are permitted to arrive.

Prerequisites:  This assignment assumes knowledge of how to simulate the departure and re-entry of the "same" ship, mastery of variables, chaining and repeat counts, and familiarity with the use of "counting token ships."

Notes and Hints:  Chains and variables are your friends; you'll be using them a lot, so get well acquainted.  Remember that neither variables nor is-disabled-delay sexps produce properly working counters in the HUD directive list, so alternative means will be necessary to make that happen nicely.  As a freebie hint, note that creating events to dynamically reprioritise docking goals is more work and wastes more sexp nodes than simply assigning a copy of Kidnapper to each bomber.  Turning the enemy fighters' IFF to friendly after they are disabled will prevent them from being blown up two minutes after disabling.  

Par: 39 events, 11 variables, 4 counting token ships.



Of course, testing for other aspects, like plot and background, would require a different sort of evaluation, being more like marking an essay than a math problem, but still, this gives an example of how I think some of the examinations could be carried out.

Anyway, that's enough procrastination for this evening.  Back to work for me!

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
A long mission discription involving disabling ships

Not that great a choice of an example. This mission is actually much harder than you probably realised.
  Disabling is very hard to do as FS2 has a habit of self-destructing disabled fighters after somewhere between 30 seconds and 2 minutes
I'd guess that [V] decided on this option to solve problems with mission design. Quite often mission designers make certain events dependant on a wing being destroyed. If the player disables just one of the ships and tells everyone to ignore it he can prevent that event from occuring (which can be very useful if it prevents new enemy wings showing up etc).

Since you`re only allowed one Kidnapper ship at a time the player would fail the mission unless something was done to prevent the enemy ships blowing up. Even worse you couldn`t check if Alpha 1 did destroy them using num_kills or some such because when FS2 does blow up a disabled fighter it gives the kill to the player who disabled them.

There is a way around that problem but that makes the mission MUCH harder to implement

Reminds me I should post this to the SCP and see if I can get this problem fixed.

[LtNarol]

Our system of tests will probably be set up so that there is one at the end of every level, for 1-3, people will be graded harder but graded only on the aspects which are taught in the level corresponding to the test.  The idea is to insure that one knows the things taught in that level before they move on.

For example, the end of level test for level 1 will probably be something to the effect of this:

Start Alpha wing 750 meters from hostile transport Omega, use Alpha 1 for distance reference.  Upon disabling Omega, jump in transport Lambda at 450 meters from transport Omega.  Dock Lambda to Omega.  Warp in Cancer wing (Myrmidons) as hostiles at no more than 1500 meters from transports (which should be stationary).  Respawn Cancer wing 4 times.  Both transports should be on the escort list.

A practice for the cumulative test at the end will probably be given in level 4 along with the level 4 test, and level 5 is mostly a review with a few last pointers on events before the real cumulative test at the end of 5.  The cumulative test is really the qualification test, it'd require the building of a more complex mission although it'd be graded harder.  The test must be completed within 7 days and the entire design process needs to be documented showing that the person taking the test actually did figure out how to build it.  This will also probably be the test used for people to test out of the lessons.

[Hippo]

I'd be happy to work on FRED 1 teaching, because fs2 doesn't like my computer...

The only reason i bring up fs1 is that FRED tactics are slightly different, ex: capital ships take a pounding before they die, so you can't put in 5 destroyers and expect them to fight eachother quickly, because you have to watch little green blobs go from one thing to another, not a big long bright fast beam...

[Black Wolf]

Whoa, whoa.

You're overthinking the hell out of this idea.

Tests? Levels of ability? Do you honestly believe anyone will sit through all that? Do you truly think you will have the motivation to evaluate all these test submissions?

You're making this far more complex than what it needs to be.

This is what you need.

 - A well known and advertised Place (forum)

 - A Group of good FREDders who're willing to answer questions

 - An archive of tutorials, ideas, FREDding tips and strategys and sample missions created by the above group.

That's it. Any more of this initiation and level based rubbish will simply promote elitism and level based politics, which should be avoided at all costs.

If you want to maintain the mission test system, then change it into a set of scenarios for a FREDder to go through, entirely voluntarily, and working sort of like a set of chess problems.. The aims should be to broaden the FREDders ability range and demonstrate the power of the program, not to decide who can and can't join the club based on a set of mission guidelines.

[LtNarol]

Ah, and what happens when you get beam-free-all questions every week?  It'll turn into another vBB.

[Sesquipedalian]

Originally posted by karajorma


Not that great a choice of an example. This mission is actually much harder than you probably realised.

Oh no, I realise it.  I've done it.  I didn't pull those par numbers out of thin air. "Higher-level test" remember? :devil:

Disabling is very hard to do as FS2 has a habit of self-destructing disabled fighters after somewhere between 30 seconds and 2 minutes
...
There is a way around that problem but that makes the mission MUCH harder to implement

Not when they are Friendy.  Change-iff is all one needs to fix that.  I suppose I should add that to the list of hints.