What does Privateer 1.0 need?

MamiyaOtaru

Spaceman
hurleybird said:
I would return the view distance of the original privateer.
explain. If you mean not having planets visible from other nav points.. well that would be problematic. VS is 3d, unlike privateer (duh) and to make them not visible, we'd have to increase the distances beyond what they were in privateer, or shrink the planets. Of course they are already way too tiny compared to a ship, but I'd like them to at least be bigger than a paradigm hehe.
Try to mimick the the nav map from the original, as well as better emulate the way the privateer radar's worked.
in what way? Lower the distance at which it detects things? It's already been lowerd quite a bit from when you could see ships across the system hehe. The range is still larger than the original though.
Also, i would remove the suns.
People requested that they be added. The devs then act as the tie breaker, I like them :) They are currently a lot smaller than they were in 008, hopefully they are less intrusive (they are closer to the size of the various background images of celestial bodies from the original). Anyway, An agricultural world without a sun would be somewhat ridiculous
 

MamiyaOtaru

Spaceman
Floater said:
I noticed a few people suggesting getting rid of suns. I was thinking that perhaps you could add a continous low intensity attack to any ship that gets within a certain distance of the sun. As you get closer the intensity rises. I guess what Im trying to say is if you are putting it in, give it a purpose or function.Floater
The function is to light the system and things in it. Some damage from being up close would be interesting. However, all the suns are off in the fringes of the system, and not in the middle like freelancer. I've never actually flown up to one in the remake.

I don't see a reason to remove the 3d aspect of the map, but I'd prefer it to default to 2d so I don't have to switch it each time I start the game. We'll see.
 

hurleybird

Rear Admiral
MamiyaOtaru said:
explain. If you mean not having planets visible from other nav points.. well that would be problematic. VS is 3d, unlike privateer (duh) and to make them not visible, we'd have to increase the distances beyond what they were in privateer, or shrink the planets. Of course they are already way too tiny compared to a ship, but I'd like them to at least be bigger than a paradigm hehe.
in what way? Lower the distance at which it detects things? It's already been lowerd quite a bit from when you could see ships across the system hehe. The range is still larger than the original though.

I was thinking just clipping them out at a certain distance so you cannot see them. This is a technological leap backwards, but i liked in the original privateer how each planet or nav point felt like its own 'zone' in the remake the entire solar system instead feels like a 'zone'.

Of course then there would be no need to detect things that you could not see, so you limit radar distance to just fit inside your viewing threshold. To go to different planets or navs you would need to use the nav computer, like in the original.

IMO this would make the game seem a lot more privateerish. I like a lot of things in the remake better than in the original privateer, but i like the feel of the original better still.
 

MamiyaOtaru

Spaceman
Thanks for the clarification. Radar is already limited, to 30,000k (as opposed to 15,000k in the original): you generally can't see units at other nav points. However you can see the other nav points. I assume that's what you are talking about. I think of it as a fog of war kind of thing.. you don't know what ships might be there, but the nav points don't move, your computer can always point you in the right direction.

Anyway, I understand the request now, thanks :)
 

ilricca

Spaceman
@Wendy
Mmmmm...
If we put in the open market the military ships maybe we can put downgraded military ships: after all, as you say, a privateer is a pirate with a letter of marque, but it's a pirate nevertheless...
The navy should take precautions in the case one of a privateer's ship fall in the wrong hands, or in the case the privateer change allegiance...

Again: maybe a military craft should bear the navy colors and/or a banner, something to immediately see if it's a "civilian" military ship or a "military" military ship...
 
T

The Sphynx

Guest
Oh, about stars (in system suns, that is) in the game... I actually kind of like them the way they are.
 

Wendy

Spaceman
Downgrades and Military Craft -- I really don't want to cause a war. PLEASE

While I would love to comment here, I think I shall abstain. . .Courteously.
(Wtih apologies and thanks to the film 1776)

I do NOT wish to inflame others with this topic.

I leave you with this quote from an electronic dictionary.

privateer

privateer (pri´v?-tîr?) noun

1.A ship privately owned and manned but authorized by a government during wartime to attack and capture enemy vessels.
2.The commander or one of the crew of such a ship.

verb, intransitive
privateered, privateering, privateers
To sail as a privateer.

Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V., further reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
 

Ridgerunner

Vice Admiral
MamiyaOtaru said:
I've never actually flown up to one in the remake.

I have. It's a good way to get around the asteroids in Pender's Star. I think they're fine the way they are. Consider the damage thing though. That would be interesting.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
Privateer Remake NEED

3 D cockpits, you spend more time in them than anywhere else and you need to update the the old cockpits and add internal views for the new ones.
 

MamiyaOtaru

Spaceman
hellcatv said:
I should remove the sun from pender's star!! :-D Oh the IRONY!
I thought he might regret mentioning that :D

There are other systems with asteroids where that could be done.. Would it be possible to make suns non-targettable? IIRC you can't get to them by cycling through nav points with 'n,' wouldn't it be possible to make it so you can't get to them with 't' either? Or any other targetting method? Would have to make them non clickable on the map too, though that shouldn't be a problem as I don't think the map can zoom out far enough for them to be visible..
 

Crowley

Rear Admiral
Mission generating needs some serious tweaking IMHO. Starting up, I sometimes change bases half a dozen times looking for missions in Troy, and then the mission computer is stuffed with over 35 insystem bounties...
 

Chemus

Spaceman
Y'know, I have to agree with Crowley here. Troy especially needs more insystem missions (Stacking Patrols! Whee!) and fewer outsystem missions. I really like how there are only 3 and 4 missions in the Merchies' and Mercs' Guild Computers. Perhaps that same thing could be done with the Mission comp? Set it up with x=2+(rand*4) Insystems and 6-x=outsystem missions? Just ana idea. heh
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
There are other systems with asteroids where that could be done..

Wing Commander's physics requires a star or similarly massive object to generate stable jump lines.

(We know of one 'deep space' jump in the Wing Commander universe, which is special and being studied for that reason within the fiction.)
 

Wendy

Spaceman
GUh. . .umm. . .but. . .

Chemus said:
Y'know, I have to agree with Crowley here. Troy especially needs more insystem missions (Stacking Patrols! Whee!) and fewer outsystem missions. I really like how there are only 3 and 4 missions in the Merchies' and Mercs' Guild Computers. Perhaps that same thing could be done with the Mission comp? Set it up with x=2+(rand*4) Insystems and 6-x=outsystem missions? Just ana idea. heh

All the out-system stuff dangling like a carrot makes one WANT to get out of system so bad you can taste it, though.

At the risk of sounding like my grandparents did when they were still alive. . .

I remember when I first started out in the original. . .<cringe>

I'd just bought my first sound card and it had a CDROM package from Soundblaster. It was a step up from my external 1x SCSI, by the by -- Remember the proprietary SCSI 2X CDROMS? What the heck was that model name/number? Started with a C or something like that -- I have one in my 486 that still works -- anyway, it came with this really slick game package. Among them were Wing Commander Academy and Privateer/Righteous Fire. Oooh was I EVER impressed with the graphics and sound

I was literally terrified to leave the system. WHat if I got stranded? But there were all these carrots dangling in front of me from the mission computers and. . .

I think that Troy is the one system that you need MORE carrots than not. But hey, who am I? I can still remember wishing I had the 10K for that drive. When I got it, I was scared to use it.

But since I can't read the menus yet -- WHERE THE HECK IS THAT PACKAGE? -- I can't begin to compare the original to the remake.

I think Troy should only have a total of three missions IN SYSTEM at any given time. Newbies to the game need an incentive to get out of system and struggling to make a credit is part of the experience.

Just my 0.02cr

W
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
You know what Privateer 1.0 needs? That freaking Kilrathi weapons depot! Seriously.

Jackass bartenders sending me out to get waxed on the front line for nothing....
 
S

ScAvenger001

Guest
There are a small number of bugs that are annoying me to no end. First among these is a bug in "rescue" missions. This is the bug that causes all the attacking craft to be ConFed ships, no matter what the briefing said their alignment would be. going out expecting to fight a bunch of Talons and then get eaten alive by a dozen Broadswords sucks. It also seems that the ships, while confed models, aren't actually owned by anyone. On one hand, this means that I can kill them without penalty. On the other, though, if I was going to be depending on an ally's ships to help me with them, the ally will just ignore them while I die. Oh, and while I'm thinking about it, having an "expected resistance" tally in the briefing for rescue missions would be nice as well. Obviously if a guy it offering me a million credits to pick him up, I'm going to be expecting more than just a gladius, but still it would be nice.

Thing two is that sometimes strike missions against capital ships go screwy. One way they go screwy is that one of their fighter escorts becomes the mission-critical ship, so I can draw pay to bagging a kamekh while only actually having to defeat a single dralthi. Another way they go screwy is that sometimes they're escorted by other cap ships: if it says the kamekh is defended by 19 starships, sometimes a dozen or so of them will be more kamekhs. I have m4d l33t sk1llz and all, but that's a little ridiculous. This wouldn't be so bad since I only have to delete one of them and a handful of Broadsword wingmen will make short work of one kamekh, but I really start to get into trouble if they decide to start swarming nearby confed bases.

The latter bug, combined with how I always seem to be having to save Perry from an errant Kamekh, has given me an idea that I thought might be interesting and give front-line systems more of a "war zone" feel. Firstly, there should probably be a lot more Paradigms floating around, especially around Perry and the Blockade Point systems. Secondly, huge swarms of Kilrathi capships should only show up in seriously contested front-line systems (like the blockade points, but definitely not New Detroit like they do in the current version). Thirdly, if large groups of Kilrathi start attacking a confed or militia controlled base, the base should be able to whistle up support for itself (ranging from a group of fighters to a couple of cruisers, depending on what's attacking it and what kind of base it is).This would mean that if you opt to go to war there will be a war waiting for you, but if you decide to stay in more populated systems behind the front lines you get pirates and retros and small kilrathi raiding groups but definitely not huge kilrathi strike forces.

If you decide that having a full-fledged naval war is inappropriate to the privateer setting (though I can't imagine why, since there is a full-fledged naval war going on at least according to the news reports), then I strongly suggest making kamekhs a lot less common and preventing them entirely from showing up in large groups. After all, it's not like ConFed would just let a dozen or so destroyers get within striking distance of a sector hq without so much as sending a single paradigm to against them, right?

The above items are the only things I feel have really detracted from my experience with the privateer remake. Though I've found a large number of "bugs" most of them are along the lines of "polish" more than anything. For example, InSys pickets complaining that your course is deviating and they can't search you properly while you're engaged against a group of pirates seems a little wierd.

Ok, the rest of this post is "general suggestions that will improve the polish of the game." I think they would be good things to implement, but there is no urgency whatsoever.

New Reports
These are interesting and all, but they have some minor flaws and are repetitive in the extreme. One relatively easy fix would be to reduce the "freelancer helps the Cause" messages to one time per launch per system rather than for every kill. As much as I enjoy seeing my name in the headlines, having it there six times in a row is a little excessive. Also, while it would probably be a lot more work, having a thing that randomizes the contents of the article would be nice (a la Sim City). Finally, putting the name of the system where they article takes place at the top of the body of the article would be a good idea, since some articles do not include a system and it is a modern newspaper convention to do so.

Drayman
As far as I can tell, there really isn't a point to owning a Drayman. It is entirely dependent on its armor and shields for defense, and while those are quite stong compared to the lesser freighters, they won't repel a determined assault. It is neither fast enough nor maneuverable enough to try evasion, and the lack of maneuverability nullifies the forward guns as well. In exchange for those drawbacks, one gets more cargo space than any transport run will ever need, but not enough to carry a fighter escort. Given that the Galaxy also has plenty of space and is superior in every other way, there really isn't a point to the Drayman, and it will never make enough on a transport run to justify hiring wingmen. I see a few solutions to this. First, give it some turrets so it can at least pretend to defend itself. Second, give it enough cargo space to carry a couple of fighters (or, better yet, add wingmen who will keep following until fired rather than just until the next dock). Third, increase the amount of available commodities at the various locations to a point that justifies the additional cargo space (though I fear this may imbalance the rest of the game).

Escort Missions
It would be really handy if escorted craft were smarter about what they were doing. Particularly if one is escorting a Paradigm, for example, which moves very slowly and likes to spin in circles on its way to the jump point.

Generated missions
Does the mission generator have a max for the number of enemy ships it will put in a mission? If not, it probably should. Also, it seems to ramp up the number of opposing ships in the missions it generates. This is not inherently bad, but I suggest that it only increase the number of enemies in particular types of missions. For example, just because I (with the help of my wingmen) managed to bag a Kamekh under the noses of a dozen or so defending Dralthi doesn't mean that it's possible to defend a Drayman against a dozen or so attacking Gothri. Also, is there some way to come up with really high-paying cargo missions? At present, playing the game as a mercenary is many times more lucrative than playing as a merchant, and with a lot less jumping around to boot.

Nav Map
Would it be possible to define missions for oneself with this? For example, if I am in Perry and I doubleclick Troy in the nav map, the mission objectives screen would show what jumps I needed to make to get there.

Well, this brainstorm is over. I hope the above has been constructive. If anyone has any comments, I will continue to lurk for a while.
 
C

Catsup

Guest
I have another suggestion that's totally non-canon, but might add something to game. In Freelancer there are faction weapons that consist of the basic weapon (laser, plasma gun, etc.) modified with certain strengths and weaknesses to suit the faction's needs. Obviously it would be dumb to have a faction version of every gun in privateer, but why not add in a few here and there as an incentive to take different sides and explore the sector. Maybe a pirate meson blaster with a bigger energy drain but better range squirreled away on pentonville? Confed's ionic pulse cannons on perry? Heck, maybe even kitty particle cannons.

It seems pretty easy to implement, and I think it would be an interesting detour from the straight-ahead race to get enough credits for tachyon cannons and fusion guns. You could even open up the icon image file and make a few tweaks to keep the new versions looking fresh.
 

Chemus

Spaceman
Wendy said:
All the out-system stuff dangling like a carrot makes one WANT to get out of system so bad you can taste it, though.

You make a good point, and I agree. I'll modify my point. There were six total missions in the computer at any one time inr the original. I've waded through 30+ bounty missions in the remake. I like the remake, and the missions in general, but I'd like the six missions per landing per station. (plus when I take a mission, I have no way of verifying which one I actually took; I click it, click 'accept', and it's still on that long list...'Scwewy')

-Chemus, The Fudd Report
 
Top