[Black Wolf]

Oh, no arguement here. I tend to waste sexps anyway, doubling up in case the message sender dies, not using SMLs (I use them about two thirds of the time, but sometimes I just don't bother) etc. etc.

[TopAce]

I have ever had a mission with only four SEXPS:

The player enters the area to capture a Vasudan leader onbaord an Aten. After the Aten is disarmed and disabled, a Transport jumps in a moves to position to capture.

Capture directive
[Chained] Return to base directive
Transport docking
Transport moves to escape

Comments? When I have made that mission, I was quite beginner, and I thought messages has no importance.

[TopAce]

Originally posted by Black Wolf
Oh, no arguement here. I tend to waste sexps anyway, doubling up in case the message sender dies...

If you set the message priority to 'Normal' or 'Low', the message won't appear when the sender is dead.

[SadisticSid]

Originally posted by Black Wolf


94? I break that in about 50% of my missions .

And I like doing BGs, though more with customs than the V ones

Cool. Did chains lower down the events list ever stop working for you? They sometimes execute properly on mine, but they were so unreliable that I had to switch to is-event-true-delay for the latter parts of mine. Perhaps that's because of Inferno's custom executables...

Sid.

[Black Wolf]

Hmm, can't really say one way or the other, I don't use chains much, except for mission directives, I go for the is event trues more often than not (another thing that probably ups sexp count).

And TopAce - you're probably right, but then I lose important messages or worse yet, have only half a conversation show up in mission.

[diamondgeezer]

I have a half-hour mission. It's... atmospheric. As Aldo put it, 'you don't notice you're not doing anything for over twenty minutes'.

[Sesquipedalian]

The number of SEXPs and events used does not necessarily correlate with the length or intensity of the mission.  

There is one in SA a specific single fighter needs to be destroyed, but given the fact that I don't know in advance which fighters will be alive at the appropiate point of the mission, I had to set up huge chains of complex events with a descending logical structure utilising multiple variables to keep track of necessary information.  All the player sees, however, is one fighter breaking off to pursue a different task than the rest and an directive to destroy Virgo 3 or Aries 2 or whoever it happens to be that is chosen on that particular iteration of the mission.  To him, the mission seems relatively simple, and aside from this one aspect of complex logic, it is.  But all the SEXPs needed to let the player know who he is supposed to kill caused the mission to max out the Events node limit.

By the way, you might notice that I find the SEXP wrangling to be the most fun part of Fredding.  There aren't any really boring parts to Fred---the 24th test flight is about as close as it gets to boring, and even then not really, since it means one is still engaged in part of a creative process and needs to exercise one's mind in hunting down and eliminating any bugs.

[phreak]

which one is this?

[TopAce]

Originally posted by Black Wolf
....And TopAce - you're probably right, but then I lose important messages or worse yet, have only half a conversation show up in mission.

Are you thinking on something like this:

Alpha 2: We are never gonna reach that damn node!
Alpha 4: Confidence, this ship won't blow up only when I order her.

If Alpha 2 dies, and you don't want Alpha 4 tell the message, you can make sg like this:

Alpha 4 sends message
is-event-true
Alpha 3 sends message
4
send-message
Alpha 4
Medium
Confidence!

I have just today realized that using 'Low' priority is not recommended when two or more pilots are talking.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
...

Yeesh.

That could probably be made a lot simpler by adding a ship-type to the variable, as opposed to just string or number.  Assuming you're using the SCP, of course.

[Sesquipedalian]

Originally posted by PhReAk
which one is this?

Sa_m1_03

Originally posted by Goober5000
That could probably be made a lot simpler by adding a ship-type to the variable, as opposed to just string or number.  Assuming you're using the SCP, of course.

No, that wouldn't help in the slightest.  It is a question of which individual fighter, not what class it is.  The scenario is simple enough to explain:  

Two wings of Maras attacking an AWACS armed with a communications suppressant, Alpha trying to destroy them.  If sufficient numbers of Shivans are destroyed as compared to the hitpoints remaining on the AWACS, one of the Maras breaks off to head for the jump node so as to escape the comm blanket being imposed by the AWACS and call for reinforcements from the next system.

The thing is, I cannot know in advance which fighters will be alive at this point in the mission, but I only want to give the new orders to one of the fighters.  Therefore I have to go through a process of elimination counting through all the fighters until I find one who is alive.  Then I give him his new orders, and a "Destroy So-and-so" directive to Alpha 1 while I am at it.  Making it all work out properly was a fiddly business, but logic problems are always fun.

P.S.- This mission was made before the SCP even existed, anyway.

[CP5670]

Play-testing is okay about the first ten times but by the 40th or so time it becomes a total headache.

I usually try to keep my missions between 7 and 15 minutes long. All are very action-packed though, with few periods where you are just sitting around.

[DeepSpace9er]

The most annoying/boring part has got to be the events, ship arrive cue's, anything to do with SEXPs . The part i like the most has got to be the Briefing icons, background information (Command Briefing), and putting ships on the map.

[TopAce]

I think the only boring in SEXPing is testing complicated branches, if it doesn't work, you can spend your whole day finding the mistake and solution to fix it.