[NGTM-1R]

I find it hard to believe that the GTVA doesn't have some form of ejection system. Lord knows they could use it.

If you want to play a character-driven campaign...well, I recommend Sync, but the thing is, FS2 is not conducive to character-driven stories. This suits me fine. The most grevious errors of fiction are almost always those of the plot (from its failures to an overwhelming urge to scream "WHAT!?!"), but the ones that pain me most are always those of characterization...and these are also the most common. FS2 suits itself to telling a good story without much in the way of characters, something you really can't do in most mediums. And it keeps my urges to strangle writers down.

[Polpolion]

I like the idea of character driven games. I'd play it.

[Deepstar]

Yes, character driven

It's a nice alternative, some campaigns here have a great plot, but you don't know anything about your wingmates.

It's good to play a Pilot with history, with a character.

"Revenge - Final Conflict" is one of these campaings i would say it's nearly character driven, you play a pilot with a name and have wingmates with history.

I like it and this is a thing i miss in the most Campaigns, it's kinda like boring to play a Pilot who's name is "Alpha 1"/"Epsilon 3" (or other wing names) and who never talk a line.

[Mobius]

Let me say something about the sbject...

Characters are useful. Many missions suffer of balance problems and the presence of invincible fighters and/or bombers makes everything better. In normal missions, a high number of wingmen dies(wings Alpha through Delta, 16 spacecraft)and the player's squadron should be disbanded. Characters are also useful when writing messages: Command and warship COs are supposed to be flat characters and can't send messages like "Oh my God, a Shivan Juggernaut! Command has condemned us to death! We'll die!". Warship COs should send messages when they're still alive, so you sometimes have to create alternate messages(message 1 is sent from Y when the X is destroyed and the Y is still intact and message 2 is sent from Command when both X and Y are down).

DySkO cited Steadfast...the 35th Black Eagles is a particular squadron, so it doesn't work as an example. That's the most elite squadron of the GTVA and the death of a pilot is a rare event.

That's what I use for characters:

ship-guardian-threshold with a random value between 5 and 35/40

Double the hitpoint of the characters, so they won't be heavily damaged early in the mission.

ship-subsys-guardian-threshold for engine/engines. This one's is important, because characters survive if hit by powerful weapons but their engines can be disrupted.

Advanced AI. I have created a table with AI levels that go beyond General specifications(the best one is...LieutenantGeneral of course )and characters are highly skilled. Their meneuvers are good, but they should look even better if you use Joshua's mod.

In Steadfast there also are ENEMY aces to face...but I can't tell you more

Gianluca Murazza...

I know him!

John Luke...Bad Wall?!?

[Admiral Edivad]

Advanced AI. I have created a table with AI levels that go beyond General specifications(the best one is...LieutenantGeneral of course )and characters are highly skilled. Their meneuvers are good, but they should look even better if you use Joshua's mod.

i still haven't got it in my fred... (waiting for new VP...)

[TrashMan]

Hey LGM...those AI tables are custom-made? Care to share them?

[asyikarea51]

If there's one thing that bothers me about ship-guardian and any other sexps similar to it, is that when the guardian takes effect, the subsystems can still take hits and go bang. Hence why I end up using ship-invulnerable (but then again, the invulnerable sexp makes the AI not care about anything shooting at it, because the AI thinks it's not taking hits that hurt).

And editing the code so that the AI (when enemy) will engage the player/NPC when they get hit instead of when their shields drop won't work either... they'll probably keep pursuing said player/NPC till it dies? No chance at all for the player/NPC to shake the enemy AI off his/her/its back...

A cripped NPC that's vital to the story will literally make the story come to a standstill...

Perhaps edit the guardian sexps so that subsystems will also be made invulnerable when the guardian comes into effect after health (and/or individual subsystem health) has dropped below x percent? But Guarded ships still pursue targets that are attacking them even though it's futile? (Basically to cover up the fact that Guardian was used in the first place...)

[Snail]

Use ship-subsys-guardian-threshold

[CP5670]

To get around the subsystem issue, you simply need to use ship-guardian-threshold together with a ship-invulnerable command when the ship's strength is just above the guardian value.

As for the original question, I slightly prefer stories that don't emphasize characters a whole lot (unless it's a prominent person in the game's universe, e.g. Bosch), as that tends to shift the plot focus to the bigger picture. This is something that sets FS2's story apart from those in many other games; it's more like a history book than a novel, in some sense. Although I would certainly play any campaign if it's generally good otherwise.

[Mathwiz6]

Yeah, I probably would. Good characters are always interesting.

Couple of issues, beyond the "All your wingmen die horrible deaths and bad things in general happen."

First, your character can barely intervene in terms of character interaction. Since you can't account for what a player will say, as a rule of thumb, you have to remove their interaction, or force it. So either you have Transcend, or something where everyone else speaks and you don't.

Second, in conjunction with 1, it's hard to make a character that is a nonentity a protagonist in the context of a character driven story. Therefore, it is improbable that the player will be in a command or otherwise important position, leading to the effective removal of specific tactical options inherent in the gameplay of FS2.

Wait, what did I just type?

[Mobius]

I use ship-guardian-threshold and ship-subsys-guardian-theshold with when-argument so I don't need to copy and paste many SEXPs...

Hey LGM...those AI tables are custom-made? Care to share them?

Via MSN? Yeah...

To get around the subsystem issue, you simply need to use ship-guardian-threshold together with a ship-invulnerable command when the ship's strength is just above the guardian value.

I don't think it works in a mod like Inferno, where the Shocker is strong enough to disrupt all the engines of a Claymore Mark II without damaging the fighter so much.

[Alikchi]

Thanks for the input, all.

To get around the subsystem issue, you simply need to use ship-guardian-threshold together with a ship-invulnerable command when the ship's strength is just above the guardian value.

As for the original question, I slightly prefer stories that don't emphasize characters a whole lot (unless it's a prominent person in the game's universe, e.g. Bosch), as that tends to shift the plot focus to the bigger picture. This is something that sets FS2's story apart from those in many other games; it's more like a history book than a novel, in some sense. Although I would certainly play any campaign if it's generally good otherwise.

I understand and agree with you when it comes to characters like Bosch - if there's one thing I love about FS2, it's the sense of history and strategic context -  but the problem with those major characters is that your only sources of information are Command Briefings and in-mission encounters with the characters themselves. (Your listening-device mission is a good exception to this rule, and something I wish I'd though of first. ) I'd like to use wingmen to provide illumination of the situation ("Dammit! Command let Bosch escape!") and minor entertainment (duct-tape, etc).

Yeah, I probably would. Good characters are always interesting.

Couple of issues, beyond the "All your wingmen die horrible deaths and bad things in general happen."

First, your character can barely intervene in terms of character interaction. Since you can't account for what a player will say, as a rule of thumb, you have to remove their interaction, or force it. So either you have Transcend, or something where everyone else speaks and you don't.

Second, in conjunction with 1, it's hard to make a character that is a nonentity a protagonist in the context of a character driven story. Therefore, it is improbable that the player will be in a command or otherwise important position, leading to the effective removal of specific tactical options inherent in the gameplay of FS2.

Wait, what did I just type?

I'm not certain if I should allow the player to speak or not. It'll give me more ability to push a certain storyline, but it'll also force the player to assume an identity, and I kind of like the anonymous shield of Alpha 1. Alpha 1 is an unbiased observer, and I'd like to preserve that.

The alternative to Transcend is the Derelict option, with your wingmen essentially talking among themselves, and the occasional "Alpha 1, go do something for us."

I guess the perfect "Sweet spot" would be the sort of interaction you had with Snipes, Xinny, and Zero. Or remember how the first several missions of Derelict were almost all dialogue and story? I'd imagine every fifth mission being like that, spread out through the campaign.

I still have plenty of time to decide.

[Centrixo]

Derelict was an exception because it was created in a way that it did not require too much of a guardian sexp, pure genius. and what was it.. alpha 2? the duct tape man, an absoutly superb campaign, then the storyline was good and not too much like a few i have seen, that either go over the top or not even hit the required white line.

if you create something that has a superb plot, like Procyon Insurgency and the character driven ideas that derelict had, then a fair diffculty rating and so on.. this could possibly be even better then some more highly rated MODs like b5 or wing commander or even bsg. you have nothing to loose, go for it and good luck.

[karajorma]

To get around the subsystem issue, you simply need to use ship-guardian-threshold together with a ship-invulnerable command when the ship's strength is just above the guardian value.

That's a pretty dangerous idea. Given the low hitpoints subsystems have it's not hard to take out the subsystems without getting anywhere near close to the threshold.

In addition in any mission involving disruptor-type weapons you can take out subsystems without even damaging the ship.

I use ship-guardian-threshold and ship-subsys-guardian-theshold with when-argument so I don't need to copy and paste many SEXPs...

That's pretty much what I'd do. The only thing I'd add to that is using rand-multiple to make the threshold value less obvious.

[CP5670]

That's a pretty dangerous idea. Given the low hitpoints subsystems have it's not hard to take out the subsystems without getting anywhere near close to the threshold.

In addition in any mission involving disruptor-type weapons you can take out subsystems without even damaging the ship.

It works pretty well with the default ship/weapon stats. I've actually never seen a fighter become accidentally disabled or disarmed with this technique, although the situation may be different for custom weapons as LGM said.

[Kie99]

You could just give them the guardian flag, then have them warp out when they get to 1%, and disallow the player jumping out until the mission is complete.  That way the characters won't die, and your player won't get the Desertion debrief when everyon else has jumped out as well.

[karajorma]

Problem with warping out is that in some missions you can't do that. For instance most of Homesick.

It works pretty well with the default ship/weapon stats. I've actually never seen a fighter become accidentally disabled or disarmed with this technique, although the situation may be different for custom weapons as LGM said.

I'll point out that in over 30-40 play throughs of my Birth of a Legend mission I was unable to kill Scar and yet despite a working ship-guardian-threshold SEXP I'm still getting this.

No matter how many times you play a mission during playtesting it's almost certainly going to be played more once it's out there. Playtesting is not going to turn up a bug that occurs 1 out of 1000 times. But if you release that campaign and 10,000 people play it then it almost certainly will turn up a few times.

Forget observed data and go on simple logic. Pretty much all GTVA fighters have a weapons subsystem which is 10% of the hull and an engine subsystem which is 35%. That means that if you go invulnerable at say, 50% you have no guarantee whatsoever that you won't lose your subsystems.

[Mobius]

As you said, Birth of a Legend exploited what I think is the most important weakness of mission testing. You don't know what could happen if an incredibly high number of people plays your campaign. I use ship-subsys-guardian-threshold for engines just because I watched a fighter supposed to be undefeatable being disabled.

We can always use repair-subsystem and repair the hull and/or the engines of a ship. If the hull integrity of a fighter gets below a certain value, we could use both ship-guardian and repair-subsystem in order to reduce the odds significantly. What do you think?

[karajorma]

I think the solution is to fix the problem so that the SEXP works as intended.

[Mobius]

I've just opened Birth of a Legend.

Code: [Select]

has-arrived-delay 1 "Fractal" 
   ship-guardian-threshold
      rand 6 17 
      "Fractal 4"

That's where I think the problem is... I never use so low values, I set something like 15 - 30/35. Sometimes FS may be not that fast to "catch" a fighter in time and protect it(that's the impression I have...it may be false). If that Scar is going to appear again, you should leave it with >20% of hull integrity

EDIT: Reasonable values needed...