ETA at missions screen page just WRONG.

[XelNaga]

Well, since I have launched my 2 first attacks during the 2 last days after coming back to PA (hooray), I have been quite confused, since I messed up the ETA twice. Twice, I just calculated the ETA and was 1 tick early...and this is why:

There is just something WRONG on the missions screen. If you send out your fleet at LT100, it displays LT101, LT101+1, LT101+2, etc. So, to every person, that actually should been that at LT101 you send the fleet at ETA101, plus ETA 9 for the traveling, so it arrives at ETA 110. But that's wrong. Actually, the fleet is launched right at the end of tick 100, which gives you LT109 as landing tick.

Either it is wrong that the fleet is launched at the end of tick 100, and it should be launched at the very beginning of 101, as it is displayed, and the ETA should start from there, OR the LT displayed at the launching options should read as LT100, LT100+1, LT100+2, etc.

Anything else is just plain wrong, even though everyone is used to it. Another solution is, since ETA 9 doesn't display in any galaxy screen anyways, just make the ETA a full 8 hours, since the difference to ETA 9 in the current system is just the time between the tick. That would result in the same it is know when launching the fleet after the tick, and everything would be right from the maths point of view.

[Banned]

This is confusing. The problem is that there is a discrepancy between the 'launch pt' and added prelaunch time. If you say launch pt666+0, you'd think* that meant the ETA 10 fleet would land 10 ticks after that, which is pt676. But it doesn't, because one tick is taken off. What they should do is reduce all ETAs by one and make the default launch 1+<eta>.

* Particularly if you're an old player coming back.

[XelNaga]

As I said. If it says "LT101" that has to mean launch at LT101 + ETA 9.

But in fact what it really does is "LT100". So It's LT100 + ETA 9 = LT101 + ETA 8.

The simplest solution to do would be to simply change the text from the order form to the current tick (LT100, LT100+1, LT100+2, etc) instead of the next tick, because they is the way it actually works.

[Cannon_Fodder]

I've never gotten a launch wrong, I don't understand how people do it.

[Shiprex]

I think they should just allow the drop down choice state what tick you want to arrive at rather than +1, +2 etc then you would know exactly when things would happen

[XelNaga]

Yeah, that would make it quite clear.

But as example:

Launching in tick 717, arrival in tick 724, Return ETA: Instant

That means launch in tick 717 + 7 ticks travel time...but in fact the ETA is 8 and not 7. And it's launched in 716. So that's where the mistake is.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by XelNaga

Yeah, that would make it quite clear.

But as example:

Launching in tick 717, arrival in tick 724, Return ETA: Instant

That means launch in tick 717 + 7 ticks travel time...but in fact the ETA is 8 and not 7. And it's launched in 716. So that's where the mistake is.

its not a mistake - it is eta 8 when u give the order - if you look on overview at your fleets summary as soon as u have given the order it will say its eta 8, then after the tick its eta 7 and visble to your target and his galaxy

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Kal

its not a mistake - it is eta 8 when u give the order - if you look on overview at your fleets summary as soon as u have given the order it will say its eta 8, then after the tick its eta 7 and visble to your target and his galaxy

Yes, but if you look at the launch dropdown box, it says launch: pt500 (for example). Since it says 'Universe ETA 8', you'd *think* that means landing pt508, but it actually means pt507. You might be able to explain this, but it is nonetheless confusing and should be changed in favor of something clearer.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Banned

Yes, but if you look at the launch dropdown box, it says launch: pt500 (for example). Since it says 'Universe ETA 8', you'd *think* that means landing pt508, but it actually means pt507. You might be able to explain this, but it is nonetheless confusing and should be changed in favor of something clearer.

problem is changing it might then confuse everyone who has joined the game since round 10.

[MrLobster]

Originally Posted by Kal

problem is changing it might then confuse everyone who has joined the game since round 10.

Everyone should work off land times only, launch times are not very useful.

[lurchleaf]

Originally Posted by sniborp

I've never gotten a launch wrong, I don't understand how people do it.

thats why we all worship you

[XelNaga]

I don't get them wrong either, now that I know it, but logically it's simply _WRONG_. That's the whole point. It's a mistake. An error.

You can turn it any way you want, if the drop down menu says launch @ 200 , that would have to mean it arrives in 209, but it does arrive in 208 with ETA 9, meaning it is launched @ 199, meaning the drop down menu simply has to say 199. That's nothing with point of view and all this non-sense, it's plain wrong and that's it.$

Before repeating myself 100 more times, I don't care about it anymore, since I know it now, but it should be fixed for the noobs, since when you do the maths right with the drop down menu, you will land at the wrong tick (1 tick too early), which a lot of new recruits in our ally did...

[idiotwind]

Yeah, all new players get it wrong at some point, it's like a rite of passage.

[lurchleaf]

you learn it after a while, its like tripping up blind people. it just becomes second nature

[Envious]

Originally Posted by XelNaga

As I said. If it says "LT101" that has to mean launch at LT101 + ETA 9.

But in fact what it really does is "LT100". So It's LT100 + ETA 9 = LT101 + ETA 8.

Actually it's really easy. The fleet takes 9 ticks to go to target. The first of those 9 ticks is tick 101. So the last is 101 + 8 (not 101 + 9, obviously).

[Shyne]

The land tick is displayed when you've submit the form - just double check!

[XelNaga]

That's not the point. The point is that the drop-down menu displays a wrong tick number, which is a mistake.