The Manual Thread

[Maddix]

I assume this is not 100% finished?

While its all nice and dandy to finally have a manual explaining most of the new features I cannot for the life of me find any reference at all to the combat system. Be it ship stats, descriptions or a basic outline on how combat now works.

[zenopus]

Well, we have plenty of time before combat becomes an issue.

There are other things that need to be documented more urgently, like details on impact of Engineering priorities on Mining (output), Research (time), Construction (time), etc.
As well as details on impact of Research Laboratories on Research time <EDIT Engineering Modules were removed>, and details on how Engineering Modules affect whatever it is they affect</EDIT>.

[Bashar]

Originally posted by Maddix
I cannot for the life of me find any reference at all to the combat system. Be it ship stats, descriptions or a basic outline on how combat now works.

That is intentional, in attempt to make the game more "newbie friendly". All the technical side that was the domain of players who wanted to get more involved and who were more familiar with the game has been removed, combat is now down to some equations and randome entities that shall never be revealed to the PA community because apparently it gives an unfair advantage to the hardcore players (personally I thought their advantage was that they played hardcore and as such could not be diminished by anything built into the game, but never mind).

[Maddix]

Originally posted by Bashar
That is intentional, in attempt to make the game more "newbie friendly". All the technical side that was the domain of players who wanted to get more involved and who were more familiar with the game has been removed, combat is now down to some equations and randome entities that shall never be revealed to the PA community because apparently it gives an unfair advantage to the hardcore players (personally I thought their advantage was that they played hardcore and as such could not be diminished by anything built into the game, but never mind).

A lack of information to keep combat 'cloudy' is fine, I think I'd even encourage it, but if you read the post, the point was that there was no reference to it at all. Even in terms of the general idea of combat.

I admit I have not read every word, but I would be suprised if it mentions the fact that you can steal roids by attacking anywhere in there at present. Which thus comes around to the original question, I assume its not finished?

[Bashar]

Originally posted by Maddix
A lack of information to keep combat 'cloudy' is fine, I think I'd even encourage it, but if you read the post, the point was that there was no reference to it at all. Even in terms of the general idea of combat.

I admit I have not read every word, but I would be suprised if it mentions the fact that you can steal roids by attacking anywhere in there at present. Which thus comes around to the original question, I assume its not finished?

I see the point and I suppose there should be some information put in, but I suspect it would be limited to the likes of "Ships have x sizes that attack primarily the size specified in-game". I doubt anything more detailed would be put in to try and keep it opaque rather than cloudy.

[cypher]

Originally posted by Maddix
A lack of information to keep combat 'cloudy' is fine, I think I'd even encourage it, but if you read the post, the point was that there was no reference to it at all. Even in terms of the general idea of combat.

i would totally agree with you if not for the beta.

this would only mean that people who actually played the beta or got friends who did or are in big alliances get all the advantages AGAIN.

besides for some reason i doubt beta's were picked like a real lottery...but probably friends of people again as usual.

so in all honesty for n00bs and under average players with under average contacts there SHOULD be a full manual no matter what.

[dabult]

Originally posted by cyphie
besides for some reason i doubt beta's were picked like a real lottery...but probably friends of people again as usual.

For your info, the second batch of testers they let in were definatly not friends or special people 'in the know'. I can guarantee it and bet my penis on it
:ninja:

[zenopus]

Original thread http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...hreadid=168928
(I can't reply on it, I assume nobody else can).

Originally posted by cyphie
(keeping things out of the manual) would only mean that people who actually played the beta or got friends who did or are in big alliances get all the advantages AGAIN.

besides for some reason i doubt beta's were picked like a real lottery...but probably friends of people again as usual.

so in all honesty for n00bs and under average players with under average contacts there SHOULD be a full manual no matter what.

It does not really matter how the beta testers were picked.
The public beta should reduce the impact, but without knowing any details about the public beta, like when it starts and how often it will tick, if there'll be a couple of resets so people can try out different ways to start (or are you allowed to sign up again once you've tested what you wanted on one account?), etc., I'd have to agree that they have to be very careful what they leave out of manual.

[Cochese]

(I wasn't going to start a new thread, but here we go)

Originally posted by Bashar
I see the point and I suppose there should be some information put in, but I suspect it would be limited to the likes of "Ships have x sizes that attack primarily the size specified in-game". I doubt anything more detailed would be put in to try and keep it opaque rather than cloudy.

Spinner has posted more detailed explanations of r10 features (including combat) on this very board, as compared to the "manual"

[Leshy]

As for the threads - I've merged the new thread into the old thread. This creates a new thread, so you should be able to reply to this one again.

As for the public beta - It will open very soon. The past few days have been busy with signups opening and getting the portal up and running.

As for the manual - Any information found to be lacking will be added, there is nothing in there which can't be added upon or revised

[NEWSBOT3]

(forums let me reply yet?)

Anyway, please let me apologise for the current state of the manual, this will be improved, taking into account your feedback, over the next few days.

Further feedback is of course welcomed

[Tactitus]

I think the Introduction section of the manual needs substantial improvement. I suspect that a lot of people who have never played PA and who see one of the adverts will visit the portal, click on the manual and read the introduction (that's often what I do when checking out new online games). Some of the questions I would expect to have answered in the introduction are:

• What is the point of this game (score, objectives, etc)?
• What sorts of things can I do to achieve the above? (e.g., attack others, build stuff, etc).
• Is this a turn-based or real-time game?
• What is the competitive environment of this game? (Am I playing the computer or other people? If the later, how many other people would I be playing against (approx)? Are there teams (alliances)? If so, do I need to be in a team or is it optional? Will I be assigned to a team automatically or do I need to join one? If the later, how might I go about that?)
• What do I need to play this game (system requirements)?
• How long does the game last?
• What sorts of time commitment does this game require (minimum, average, maximum)?
• Is the game free or is there a cost? If so, how much? Is there a free trial?

There are more items, but I think that gives you an idea of what should be there--if you're serious about attracting new players.

I suspect some or most of this information is sprinkled about the portal, but it should be consolidated into a single place. Manual -> Introduction may be as good a place as any. A FAQ button on the top of the portal would be another possibility. If it's someplace else, then the Intro should have a link to it.

[Psyon]

I would like to see maybe a tech-tree?????? and perhaps a ships list for the races with what targets what.
....... i am not no "alliance" in the know, nor a "beta" person. people like me need at least the above information so we can look like we know what we are doing

[Scoot951]

Seeing as they haven't even announced a date yet, I'm worried we won't be able to beta for more than a few days before ticks start, in which case they better add a lot more info in there.


And Tactitus, I think they gave up on recruiting new players a few rounds ago.

[Gerbie]

Big alliances will get a lot of info in the beta and during the game. It would only be honest if PA team would simply share that info us.

I know they have the phantom idea that getting a good approximation on the ship stats will be difficult (which it won't). If I do a simple covariance analysis and keep into account what mission/enginering priority I installed I will get a very good approximation soon. The more battles I have (the bigger my alliance) the better my approximations will be. Just give me that covariance matrix and let me make my tools.

The effects on construction and research times will be extremely easy to determine. So just tell us what effect the races, constructions, research and engineering priorities will have.

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Scoot951
And Tactitus, I think they gave up on recruiting new players a few rounds ago.

Yes they basically did, but they seem to be trying to reverse that--even took out some ads.

Also, the justification being given for hiding many of the game details is to make the game more "newbie friendly." A newbie friendly introduction to the manual would at least help them maintain that cover story.

[Maddix]

Originally posted by Cochese
Spinner has posted more detailed explanations of r10 features (including combat) on this very board, as compared to the "manual"

Exactly my point.

[Punch]

Only a very minor thing in the manual, in the alliances section where it gives the colours of the different text you can have for posting, it is missing the [color=] text [/color] tag for it to work

[Phil^]

it was in the finished manual page i sent to the relevent ppl...

[A2]

I suspect I know what's gone wrong with it - [color] & [/color] are part of the BB codes we use on the portal and thus our cunning system has stripped them out -- Probably explains why there's a random word of "Text" in black too...

I'll fiddle and see if it can be forced to display the tags rather than interpreting them.

[Killerbij]

I think the numbers for constructions and engineering priorities should be released. If not people will calculate them themselves and only give them to their alliance. I myself allready estimated the mining, construction and research priorities at prio 1, 2 and 3. Allready wrote down effect of research lab too. I think its a bit unfair to ppl who cant do this themselves and contrary to common belief releasing numbers DOES benefit newbies.

[Maddix]

Originally posted by Killerbij
I think the numbers for constructions and engineering priorities should be released. If not people will calculate them themselves and only give them to their alliance. I myself allready estimated the mining, construction and research priorities at prio 1, 2 and 3. Allready wrote down effect of research lab too. I think its a bit unfair to ppl who cant do this themselves and contrary to common belief releasing numbers DOES benefit newbies.

How come others are unable to do what you've done, especially now that Beta is public? Besides I would assume that the effect of engineers on a certain thing depends on the players race as well, certain races are already 'good' at certain things, so surely their engineers would be able to create more of an efficiency in that area than something they are less adept at. Nor do I imagine that having Research in priority 1 can directly be compared to having, say Mining, in priority 1 as the two outputs are totally different.

In any case the effect of having these things set in the 'correct order' is hardly going to be that much of a difference between players final rankings. So imo the exact numbers for these things are less important than that of say ship stats. I however believe the information provided on the ship stats in Beta is enough for everyone to get an idea, but will prevent turning combat into an 'exact science' like it was in the past. Real combat and war is not predictable down to the kind of details that battle calcs provided us with in the past.

[Killerbij]

Originally posted by Maddix
How come others are unable to do what you've done, especially now that Beta is public? Besides I would assume that the effect of engineers on a certain thing depends on the players race as well, certain races are already 'good' at certain things, so surely their engineers would be able to create more of an efficiency in that area than something they are less adept at. Nor do I imagine that having Research in priority 1 can directly be compared to having, say Mining, in priority 1 as the two outputs are totally different.

I just used a calculator and common sense I changed priorities a few times in beta and wrote down the effects. Also talked to a few people with different races. So far it seems priorities affect your income/research/construction time independant of race. So your race's research time - priority time.

Originally posted by Maddix
In any case the effect of having these things set in the 'correct order' is hardly going to be that much of a difference between players final rankings. So imo the exact numbers for these things are less important than that of say ship stats. I however believe the information provided on the ship stats in Beta is enough for everyone to get an idea, but will prevent turning combat into an 'exact science' like it was in the past. Real combat and war is not predictable down to the kind of details that battle calcs provided us with in the past.

People can use these things to make 72 tick plans; you can gain quite a headstart with these. Maybe not enough to win the game but its nice to be ahead a bit. As for combat I'm not sure wether or not these stats should be released. However as soon as one alliance gets a working battlecalculator including priorities the PA-tools should include one as well.

[Gerbie]

The construction times are as follows:
the minimal construction time is 12 hrs
Each race gets a different bonus:
Cathaar 0
Terran 3
Xandraati 2
Zikonian 1
Each priority gives another additional bonus:
priority 1: 3
priority 2: 2
priority 3: 1

So a construction for a cathaar with construction as priority 3 takes 12-0-1=11 ticks.
For a terran with construction as priority 2 this is:
12-3-3 = 7 ticks.

I have a working function for research as well, but I need to check it with more advanced researches that take more time.

Roughly: Cath is fastest, Terran/zik slower, xan is the slowest.
The difference as result of priorities is roughly 1 tick per priority (priority 1 saving 3 ticks, priority 2 2 ticks, priority 3 saving 1 tick).

The bonus for mining is (as stated elsewhere) 15% for priority , 10% for priority 2 and 5% for priority 3.

[dabult]

Gerbie, i am Terran with construction as prio 2, a construction for me takes 7 ticks.

I believe that 12-3-3 is 6, not 7

[Killerbij]

He made a typo should be 12-3-2=7 (2nd prio)
Rest seems to be what I found sofar as well

Also ONE researchlab cuts of 20% of time for research. 2nd one seems to be useless for lower researches. May have an effect on 72 tick ones.

[Gerbie]

hmm
jummy
/me starts building a research lab.