Hi Christopher, > Is the starting setup randomized from game to game?
Yes, they are. All starships are randomly placed on the starmap each game. Although, starbases more or less stay in the same general area. However, that said most Fed starships will land somewhere in there asigned routes in Federation space. > Also, is there any advantage to firing one large salvo of torpedos > over firing several small salvos? In some cases like when facing the Borg it is best to unload it all at them in hopes of getting the maximum damage. Against multiple enemies or the main three enemies it is better to fire smaller groups of torpedoes up to say 5 firing runs per move to get the most effective damage and to save unnecessary losses in torpedoes. > Now to some wish list items. > > 1. I'd like a finer-grained location report. As it is, we know the > ships are anywhere within a 40 light year square, which does make > some things more difficult. Yes, that is possible. I have been thinking of showing the underlying grid in the next release anyway as many people don't like the current map. > I like the options for recharging ship systems, but I'd like to see > the option for directing power to overcharge shields a la Star Fleet > Battles. Umm... If you are at maximum power you are at maximum power. I'm not sure that the show allows you to over charge shields beyond the maximum power limits. Somewhere there has to be a maximum power limit or it would throw the entire game out of wack. > Along this line, what does it mean when I see on a scan > result that a shield is over 100 percent? > > This is a STFC bug which was never resolved in v1.0 before I lost part of the 1.0 source code. I think the problem is do to a calculation error somewhere in the program. > 3. Mines! > > Actually, this is one of the things on the roadmap for 1.0, but was unable to be placed in to do the code loss earlier mentioned. However, antimatter mines are definately on the schedule for 2.0. > 4. I'd like to see the shields divided so that your facing relative > to enemy ships makes a difference. It would be cool to have to deal > with protecting a weakened shield. > > Yeah, this one has come up before in discussions in the past. Unfortunately, this really complicates the game programming and would certainly add serious development time to 2.0 to add this feature. Although, since 2.0 is going to be a from scratch rewrite it might be possible to design it in to the next release. Still though it is something I would think of for a real time game rather than a turn based game which is more like a board game than anything else. > it seems that the balance > of offense-defense is skewed in favor of the offense. This is true. Many defensive possabilities were simply not thought or included in this game. Many have asked to be able to stretch out the battles, and I have some theories of how to redo this in the next release. > It seems to me > that it was unusual for one ship to be able to do in another in one > salvo, a result that is eminently possible in this game. Well, keep in mind Trek 2000 is the same way. You can unload it all and whipe out enemies in one turn, or mine them whiping out several. You are right though that breaking a combat between starships down in to several turns would be more interesting and fun. > If this is > deliberate, and it must be, it's a design decision I might revisit > for increased dramatic play. > It was deliberate. Although, I will certainly look at the successes and failiors of 1.0 and try and make a difference in version 2. _______________________________________________ Gamers mailing list .. Gamers@audyssey.org To unsubscribe send E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can visit http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org to make any subscription changes via the web.
