[Snail]

PEBKAC

[Ziame]

PEBKAC

huh?

[Mongoose]

Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair

[Vrets]

I'm downloading this again.

I trust that TVWP functions with 3.6.12?

I'm so trusting.

[CaptJosh]

Played through it with no hitches on a 3.6.12 build. Seems fine.

[Necroslayer]

Looks like the kinks are dead for me... Can anyone upload them to another mirror?

[The E]

Please check: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=69901.0

[Goober5000]

Indeed.  The Act II demo release also includes a bugfixed and improved Act I.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

The Act II demo release also includes a bugfixed and improved Act I.

Oh, is it coming out soon?I saw it.

[Goober5000]

Captain Oblivious strikes again!

Honestly, I just posted on Monday that your title is one of the most consistently demonstrated on HLP.

[MatthTheGeek]

I don't even know why I have a custom title myself...

[starlord]

Very interesting...

Forgive me, but I was wondering: does the prelude of the TVWP cover also the fight between the initial conflict earth and luna (the one where the damocles was first deployed)?

this would mean that would be the first space engagement in freespace Fanon continuity, right?

[Goober5000]

TVWP fanon, anyway; there is no single fanon continuity.  And yes, that's probably the first space engagement.

You won't find that in the TVWP because it happened around a hundred years before the Unification War.  The combat probably wouldn't look anything like FreeSpace combat.  However, we do provide a partial backstory in the tech room.

[starlord]

Oh I see! Pity!

well some atmospheric mods could perhaps at some point cover that arc of the story: I remember defcon freespace having an opening for plot ideas... this might be the conclusion of the defcon era: the war between spacers (luna) wishing for earth independence and earth barely recovering from global turmoil and the beginning of space conflicts... this actually reminds me of the ben bova books (moon war).

just my 2 cents though...

[Mobius]

I'm playing through the upgraded version of Act 1 (maybe I should have posted this on the other thread?) with the intent of completing it. I don't remember when and how I stopped playing the previous of Act 1, and I have to admit that it was a mistake.

I like TVWP's approach on things, it's original and makes FreeSpace 1's outdated assets look like extraordinary achievements in the history of space combat. Great work!

FREDding is nice, but I would have changed something here and there. For example, in the second mission:

Spoiler:

During the second replay, I know since the beginning that one of the Elysium transports is about to board a Chronos freighter. I position myself so that I can shoot at the transport as soon as its IFF turns to hostile, and then I realize (after depleting half of my ammo) that it's either invulnerable or guardianed. With the remaining ammo, I couldn't complete the mission and had to replay it a third time.

I found other glitches, maybe I should take note of them and post a report. I'll start doing it tomorrow.

More in general, I...

Spoiler:

...think you should have added directives since the very beginning.

I know they may kill the purpose of primitive sensors ("Destroy Fighters [6]" clearly says that there are 6 enemy fighters around, even if the player and his wingmen don't have the technology to monitor their movements), but IMHO they're necessary to prevent confusion. The problem can be easily solved by linking directives to events and adding the third argument so that directives don't seem too "prophetic" until the inception of advanced sensors. In addition to that, the advantage given by sensors may be boosted even more by directives which give the impression that onboard computers analyze all sensor data and determine the exact number of friendly and enemy assets whose military importance is critical.

Just a suggestion, of course.

P.S.
I see you used the word Serendipity. I was so surprised when I read it. (Goober probably knows what I'm refering to: a look at INFA's private board would be enough.)

[Droid803]

Well, I'm pretty sure people can COUNT how many fighters there are when they're approaching.
You don't need sensors to do that.

[Mobius]

Yes, but sensors are much more precise and reliable, unless there are stealth fighters around.

[General Battuta]

Protip: you can get around the 'destroy fighters (6)' problem by simply using destroyed-or-departed instead of is-destroyed-delay. It prevents the numbers from showing up.

[Goober5000]

P.S.
I see you used the word Serendipity. I was so surprised when I read it. (Goober probably knows what I'm refering to: a look at INFA's private board would be enough.)

Not rly.  I tend to stay away from the INFA board because I'm looking forward much more to the next release of Inferno proper.

But Serendipity is a cool word.

[Mobius]

Protip: you can get around the 'destroy fighters (6)' problem by simply using destroyed-or-departed instead of is-destroyed-delay. It prevents the numbers from showing up.

That is not a wise choice when hostile fighters are expected to escape during the mission. Not that it's going to happen so often, though...

Not rly.  I tend to stay away from the INFA board because I'm looking forward much more to the next release of Inferno proper.

But Serendipity is a cool word.

Indeed.