Chunneling and movement

You can "tow-chunnel" both ends of the tunnel. As long as after the main movement phase, both firecoulds have fuel, warp 0 and are not towed.

You can also fly with other ships to a firecloud that will chunnel, but you will end on the position of the destination firecloud. You can not fly away after tunnel

The firecloud chunnels after the first ship build phase and before the second build phase.

2864 days, 17 hours, 36 minutes ago

thin lizzy

RE: Chunneling and movement

while tow-chunnel means that the tower needs to run out of fuel while towing in order to loose the tow-lock

2864 days, 14 hours, 11 minutes ago

sakawa

RE: Chunneling and movement

The host-order is your friend. Have a look at it. Actually make a copy of it and keep it close to you!

Regarding any chunnel issues just have a look at Donovan´s.

2864 days, 4 hours, 17 minutes ago

spuk

RE: Chunneling and movement

in normal planets the tow-chunnel was disabled long time ago !!

in don't know how it works here with nu...

2863 days, 14 hours, 41 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

The warp-well tow-lock break chunnel was never "disabled" in VGAP.Tim. He had a chance to do so between VGAP.DOS and VGAP.Windows and chose not to.

Besides, it is a lot less powerful than many other "tricks," such as the Privateer's NUK attack.

Versus enemies, it is easily countered by placing ships at greater than warp 0.

For transport, it is seldom used, but handy little trick for moving ships into position.

If we get rid of it, there is a long list of "tricks" we need to get rid of. I can think of at least 20 that are on par with this one.

2863 days, 11 hours, 51 minutes ago

kokunai

RE: Chunneling and movement

The NUK attack was remedied. I'm not saying the tow chunnel should be just that your argument was that others would have to go first, and the only one you specifically mentioned was done away with as an exploit.

EDIT: I figured you might respond with a prove it. So, it was host version 3.22.027 that the fix was implemented.

2863 days, 9 hours, 41 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

The NUK attack works quite well vgap.Tim and vgap.nu.

Both the NUK attack and the tow chunnel use the turn order. If using the turn order is bad, we also need to get rid of other turn order exploits:

1. Privateer robbing with one ship and then capturing later in the turn with another ship - exploits turn order.

2-4. Cloaker giving an out of fuel SSD, Rebel or Fascist freighter fuel and then later in the turn those ships dropping clans - exploits turn order.

5. High ID ships escaping low ID ships intercepting them - exploits turn order.

6. Low ID ships scooping up their mines before high ID ships sweep them - exploits turn order.

7. Privateer giving fuel to out of fuel ships so that those ships can rob later in the turn. - exploits turn order.

8. High ID ships transfering clans to their ships and dropping them down onto a planet to retake a planet after a ground assault by an SSD. - exploits turn order.

9. Players preventing their ships being towed by towing their own ships with a lower ID ship. - exploits turn order.

I could probably give you another 50 tactics (i.e. cheats) that exploit the turn order, but I have a turn to do.

People who complain about tricky tactics remind me of the British who accused Rommel of "cheating" because he used 88mm anti-aircraft guns, with their superior optics, to destroy the heavy British tanks before those tanks destroyed his medium and light tanks. No where in the manual did it say you could do that. Not sporting at all!

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

2863 days, 9 hours, 23 minutes ago

kokunai

RE: Chunneling and movement

3.22.026 and before perhaps.

From drewheads:

"Note: with the release of host 3.22.027, Tim has disabled the NUK trap. In this version of host, planets will not attack any ships if they have zero defenseposts. So they will need defenseposts to begin with, then NUK the first enemy ship that comes along, be defeated, lose all their defenseposts and will not NUK the ships of the race who set up the NUK trap afterwards.
If you are 'lucky' enough to have a host who uses 3.22.026 or older, read on....."

Like I said though at the time it was the only one you brought up. I didn't say the tow chunnel was inappropiate nor tricky, just clarifying your inadequate information on the subject. But, your analogy to real life situation of using existing technology is an inaccurate one because in a game we work within the confines of an ordered system that can be flawed with exploits not originally intended by the writer. In real life it is much different as we only have the restrictions of knowledge and resources, preferrably mixed with a dash of humanity.

EDIT: Why is it that just because someone disagrees with you, they must be whining?

2863 days, 9 hours, 10 minutes ago

thin lizzy

RE: Chunneling and movement

interesting.... never thought about the defense posts.
i tried the nuk trap here on nu a few months ago and it worked.
nice to have big carriers fuelless, if you can't evacuate the planet..

anyway it also makes sense to only engage ships only if you have defenses.

2862 days, 19 hours, 47 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

In which tim-host version was tow-chunnel disabled? I've looked through the changelogs for THOST, and cannot find any mention of it. The last few timhost games I've played as a borg, the move worked perfectly fine, though I'm unaware of which host version that was on (though I assume it was the latest, since the last host version was released in 2002).

Regards

2862 days, 16 hours, 19 minutes ago

kokunai

RE: Chunneling and movement

I never said that tow chunnel was removed just his example of NUK, which was removed. Tow chunnel worked fine. And I am not arguing for the removal of tow chunnel just a better example was needed than NUK trap.

2672 days, 14 hours, 52 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Reviving an old thread to see if I understand the tow chunnel trick.

You take the target FC, with warp0 set and tow it with a ship that runs out of fuel. Which releases the tow lock. The chunnel happens, but you won't see the dotted line in the UI. Do I have that right?

You could use this on a traveling FC also, like if it was at a planet with lot's of ships you don't want chunneled. But because knowing where the out of fuel point is only an approximation, other ships you want to travel would have to set intercept and the appropriate fc. Is that also right?

Thanks

2672 days, 14 hours, 47 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

tow drop works chas. The second thing you said no. Remember that a fcc needs fuel to chunnel so if it runs out of fuel the chunnel won't happen.

2672 days, 14 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

In the 2nd case, the FC is also being towed. In both cases the FC has fuel.

2672 days, 14 hours, 34 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

chas,

The Borg Queen has ordered you to wash your mouth out with soap. It is not a trick; it is a maneuver.

2672 days, 14 hours, 33 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

ok. Then yes. In nu fuel calculation is pretty accurate but better if you intercept it. If the ships intercepting are of the same owner of the fcc they don't need to have the appropriate fcc since they will get chunneled any way.

Regards

Nite

2672 days, 14 hours, 27 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

OK, thanks guys.

and MJS, we don't worry about what the Borg queen thinks because we stole the Fireclouds from her.

2672 days, 13 hours, 30 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

*** gasp! ***

2671 days, 9 hours, 4 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

These should not be thought of as tricks mjs, but rather as tactics. this is what separates advanced players from beginners and what provides the depth to this game which we all enjoy.

2670 days, 20 hours, 10 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

"Updated for Host 3.22.027:

Tow-drop chunnel is no longer possible"

From Donovans, http://donovansvgap.com/help/history.htm

From the usenet dicussions,:

">I'm doing it regularly with 3.22.026, and have also done this with
>older Host version. So you either have a newer version (unofficial, it
>would mean Tim is thinking of fixing this bug/feature) or you're
>trusting your client program too much.

Set up a sim of the Borg Drop-Tow under host 3.22.026. Send me the host data
files from just before the host run and I will find the error and remove it
from the game for good.

Tim "

So yes, it WAS removed, but the guys at planets.nu decided to reintroduce it.

End of story.

Dines

2670 days, 19 hours, 49 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

This again?

27 was by no means one of the last updates. Please read the full changelog from Tim's own website

http://www.vgaplanets.com/hst321.htm

Do you have a link to this so-called usenet posting?

Regards

2670 days, 18 hours, 55 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.vga-planets/browse_thread/thread/a16688b068d8a0c1/dbab46235f49a808?lnk=gst&q=cocomax+tow+drop#dbab46235f49a808

but i think you need a google login....

2670 days, 18 hours, 44 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Impressive - I submit ;)

2670 days, 17 hours, 41 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

1. The Donovan's site quote: He is listing reports he got from people, not actual changes.

Here is what Tim's site says the actual changes are:

HOST 3.22.027

Fix: A planet with no defense outposts can not NUK attack
Fix: Glory ships can no longer destroy lizard ships with just 100% damage.
Fix: Problems with ship building queue using PBP's fixed. A high PBP race
that was not building could sometimes block other races from building.
Fix: Able to handle 32K TRN files with messages to the host
New: A Privateer ship robbing another ship also takes the fuel that is
being transfered to another ship or planet
New: You are allowed only one cloned ship per planet, period.

It is obvious that the report on Donovan's was in error by someone who wasn't doing it right. We get dozens of such reports on these forums each week. "Such and such is not working." Once they explain exactly what they did, we show what they did wrong.

2. The usenet quote is taken out out of context.

First, john_... writes that when he sets up a tow drop chunnel it isn't working. He says the tow lock is not breaking when he sets it use 38 fuel when he has 38 fuel.

Second, Donovan points out that there are rounding errors in the program and to move far enough so that he uses MORE than 38 fuel, then the tow lock will break.

Third, Tim says he will fix IT (the rounding errors) so the tow lock will break.

(Read the post in context with the previous few posts).

3. The whole discussion in that usenet thread dealt with the problem of (a) cloning a ship, (b) chunneling the new ship out, then (c) building a ship at the same star base in the same turn in the second build phase w/o using PBP's.

We see from Tim's documentation that he fixed the problem another way.

2670 days, 16 hours, 44 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I'll admit that I'm somewhat biased as a borg player, so take the following argument with that in mind. That being said, I'm somewhat torn between Dines quite impressive argument (the link to Mr. Tim's posting) and my own experience. As a borg I've used the tow-drop for ages, and I've never experienced it being disabled - but I cannot with fairness say that the games I've played have been with the latest host, my memory is not that impressive ;)

Let us open the discussion as to the "fairness" of tow-drop chunnel, and see where that leads us. As I see it, tow-drop can be used in combat and it can be used in logistics. Let us talk about combat first.

COMBAT

There are two approaches to using tow-drop in combat.

The first is to sneak a large fleet to the battlefront, potentially avoiding spending fuel, reducing minehit probabilities (only one ship has to travel the distance) and using a MCBR doing a 162 LY jump before chunneling.

This is not something that I've used very often, it has the huge drawback of leaving your entire incoming fleet without shields, and the risk that they will be jumped is simply to great. When chunneling ships to the front, I always ensure that the incoming fleet is protected either by distance or some bodygards (cubes) already present at the incoming chunnel point.

The MCBR trick can be useful, but is easily countered by a minefield, and I doubt experienced opponents will allow it to happen (and inexperienced opponents are irrelevant, they will just be speedbumps on the path to dominance).

The other approach is to drop a firecloud at a location with enemy ships, and then chunnel them to waiting cubes. The enemy ships will now be shieldless, giving your own cubes a huge advantage in combat. Unfortunately this is easily countered, as only enemy ships with a warp setting of 0 will be chunneled along. Again I argue that an experienced opponent will at most be tricked by this once (I admit to having used it with great success though, but it wasn't really needed, as the opponent would have suffered defeat anyway, I was just feeling overly confident).

I DO use chunneling in combat, but rarely together with the tow-drop trick. A much more "foolproof" approach is to get your hands on cloaking ships, and then cherry-pick the enemy ships (usually the big carries) that you tow to waiting fireclouds. The single opponent ship will then be chunneled (often a short distance) to a waiting biocide, and be ripped - with only a negligible chance that my biocide will be destroyed - repeat until your opponent has no more carriers.

Logistics

Logistics on the other hand is a much more interesting usecase for tow-drop chunnel. I assume that you (being a borg) use the borg-hub approach to logistics. If not, take a look at the following screenshot

The hub is a very effective approach to borg logistics, which drastically reduces the amount of time needed to complete a turn late in the game. I usually do not create a hub until the shiplimit has been reached, as the value is somewhat limited before then.

The main idea is to pool all your resources at your hub, and then distribute resources as needed to bases (usually just after the base has completed its build in the queue, simply chunnel in enough resources to build another cube, and drain the planet of all residual resources and bring them back to the hub).

This requires that every single base has a firecloud orbiting it, and that the hub-planet has a solid bunch of fireclouds and freighters present at all times (look at the screenshot to see what I mean by solid bunch).

This is where tow-drop chunnel enters the game. When I need to move resources from the hub onto one of my cube-building planets, I usually need a firecloud to chunnel 1-2 freighters. This is achieved simply by tow-drop chunneling those ships as needed.

If tow-drop chunnel did not exist, I would either have to fly the ships away from the hub, and then chunnel the following turn, or keep a ring of fireclouds ready around the planet-hub. Before I learned the tow-drop approach, I usually kept 8 fireclouds in a 1 LY radius in the hub-planets warpwell. Maintaining this firecloud ring was VERY timeconsuming, and somewhat error-prone.

If tow-drop did not exist, I wouldn't lose much with regards to combat, except for some very fancy moves that would likely only work well against intermediate or inexperienced players, but I would suddenly find that doing the logistics part of my turn would be very time consuming :(

I'm now open for counter-arguments ;)

2670 days, 16 hours, 15 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Like jobo, I also use the hub approach. And, the tow-drop is used mainly in saving time.

If we were to get rid of it, we would need to install an alternate method of using multiple Fireclouds from one location. I guess we could have a screen open up when a chunnel is initiated and the borg could list the exact ships he wants chunneled.

Alternately, if multiple Fireclouds cannot chunnel from the same location, other races should have their abilities similarly hindered - only 1 Privateer ship may rob at the same location, only 1 ship of a race that can cloak may cloak at the same location, etc. We need to keep it fair if we are going to change the rules to start hindering races. And, hindering the borg economy is a huge change.

2669 days, 19 hours, 39 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Again, its really not that important if the tow-drop chunnel was disabled in Thost or not, the important part is that it works now.

But i will not stand corrected when im not wrong.

I just ran the test several time in dosbox, under both 3.22.027 and 3.22.046.

tow drop chunnel doesnt work. !

I ran host one more time, without changing anything, and the chunnels worked fine (because the tower was by then out of fuel and tow was cancelled)

Dines

2669 days, 19 hours, 22 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Fair enough, testing certainly lays that issue to rest ;)

2669 days, 14 hours, 47 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I agree with the HUB approach as well... I've made that adjustment about 3/4s of the way through my borg turn where it was just far easier to have one central location with all your goods and then distribute them from there.

I also had my fighter ally plant his carrier ships there and the Biocides to make fighters, it was just one big factory.

And once we got a foothold into enemy territory we just chunneled the entire hub right in there and Cubes could just leave under their own power to decimate the rest of the territory.

Either way, careful with tow chunnels, because you can and WILL accidently chunnel your entire fleet one of these times :)

But I agree that tow chunnel is a must for the Borg and I can't see how it is not intended, I mean the host order allows it to be and the host order is god.

2669 days, 14 hours, 25 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

The Host Order is one of the keys of the game that make it so good.

It is sad that people whine and cry about it. "Wah! Wah! Wah! Not fair! Not fair! I want my mommy!"

They remind me of the British in North Africa in WWII. Rommel found that his Panzer III's were no match for the Heavy British Matildas. So, he took his 88 mm anti-aircraft guns, destroyed the British tanks before the tanks got in range to fire, then sent in his tanks to overrun the British. The British cried "Not fair! Not fair! Anti-aircraft guns may only be used to shoot down planes from long distances, not tanks. Not fair! Not fair!"

Think of all the tactics that depend on host order that we would have to get rid of if?

1, Scooping up minefields with a low ID ship before a high ID ship destroys them.

2. Avoiding interception with a high ID ship by it intercepting another ship after it is intercepted.

3-1000. I am not going to list them all. People ignore the ones they use, They only want those eliminated those that they don't use.

Host order tactics are like lawyers and politicians: They are all rotten - until you need one.

I remember a very high ID Crystal Resolute that penetrated my area. Nasty! I got a mine hit on it. Still, I couldn't intercept it and it still had plenty of torps. It was a bitch to track down and kill, since I couldn't intercept it. But, that is part of the game.

2669 days, 13 hours, 51 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I agree with mjs. People try to get rid of parts of the game that they don't use or don't understand. And most of that things are part of the deep understanding of the game. People tend to call them tricks because they see them like if people that use them are almost outside of the rules but the truth is that some of that manoeuvres are part of the deep core of the game.

For example the id intercept order. In a real time game it would be a bug but here it is part of the game mechanics. Some people ask this mechanics to be adjusted but that same people are using a lower id ship to scoop mines before his enemy can destroy them. They seem to not understand that the two manoeuvres are part of the same game's mechanics.

Mike I thought you'll remember better than the resolute the serpent class escort that let you come to almost catch it before intercepting a distant ship while letting a cloaked meteor waiting for your incoming biocide. Knowing that your lower id ship will end in the last spot of the serpent while the serpent will be able to leave undamaged. You can do that kind of movements only if you understand deeply the host order and this are the movements that when you do them make you feel like a chess winner.

And returning to the tow-chunnel manoeuvre, if any ship in the chunnel point would be chunneled or if the incoming ships won't arrive without shields I would agree that it was overpowered but since it is not that way I consider that there is no reason to get rid of it.

Regards,

Nite

2669 days, 8 hours, 30 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I totally agree with mjs. Instead of viewing them as tricks, they should be viewed as inherent parts of the game mechanics. They provide great depth to the game and allow all of us, from beginners to advanced players to keep learning. I keep learning every time I face advanced players in this game, which is what keeps it interesting for me. If you eliminate all of them, not only will it change the game entirely, it would turn it into something akin to space version of the board game Risk. Somewhat fun, but not deep, and not nearly as replayable.

2638 days, 18 hours, 0 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Guys, this thread has been around a very long time. Somehow I missed it entirely. But I finally understand the implications of this bug. (DM just killed a Gorbie of mine using it)

The tow-drop-chunnel is a bug. It is being removed.

Just in case any of you think its not a bug. I also confirmed Dines tests in Host 3.22.027 and tow-drop-chunnel was removed.

2638 days, 17 hours, 20 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Hi Joshua.

Will this be announced, and what kind of deadline will borg players have to redo their turns? It is a widely used strategy for moving fireclouds (mostly for logistics, as I mentioned above, the combat part has very little real value once your opponent knows the trick), so there will be a lot of borg turns that will end up being fucked if they are not pre-warned, and have a chance to redo their turns.

I myself have two turns flagged as ready that will be ruined if I do not redo them ASAP.

2638 days, 17 hours, 17 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

It will go into production sometime tomorrow. Games hosted tomorrow or later will have this fix.

2638 days, 17 hours, 16 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Correction: We're going to make it a setting flag. Games in progress will not be affected. This rule change will only affect future games.

2638 days, 17 hours, 14 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Thanks, was a bit worried by the first statement, as I have a game that hosts just after midnight, and I was considering risking it :)

2638 days, 16 hours, 3 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Holy crap, major game changer for the Borg!

2638 days, 15 hours, 55 minutes ago

spuk

RE: Chunneling and movement

didn't you guys played planets before this site??
as joshua stated above tow-drop-chunnel IS a bug and was fixed in an really early version of planets !!

2638 days, 15 hours, 2 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I never played Borg before this site :)

But I don't understand how it is a bug... its not a bug, not technically speaking, I mean, the host order allows it.

So I assume the host order changes to not allow it? Is that accurate?

What exactly is the fix I guess is my main question.

2638 days, 13 hours, 28 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

spuk,

You are totally wrong. It was changed in Host 3.22.027, almost the last, if not the last host change by Tim. I played many games (with many add-ons) of VGAP in the 90's and few hosts ever used that version. I never played a game with that version.

It is not a bug, per se. It is a maneuver that exploits the turn order, like a high ID ship out of fuel being able to never be intercepted by a lower ID ship with fuel. But, this chunnel maneuver was changed by Tim and the interception maneuver wasn't. And, that is the only criteria.

2638 days, 13 hours, 23 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

As I have told you personally and now publicly I feel you are over-reacting Joshua.
Seveiht in cheeseball is screaming bloody murder because his entire fleet is stalled by the lack of a minefield cap under NU as emork litters his space with 50+ new tiny minefields every single turn.
Halion was unable to refit almost his entire fleet in Nixon sector despite meeting all requirements.
Many people have complained about the ability to set up unlimited intel agreements in max allies = 2 games and the complete mess of map vision that multiple agreements grants.
Even the bloody ground defense ratio for the lizards is arbitrarily higher than the base game - it should be 10 NOT 15.
These are all serious issues that deserve much more attention but it seems like losing one death star from a very advanced technique suddenly hits the top of the pile of problems and is fixed tomorrow (somehow?).
I feel it's an over-reaction. There should probably be a released big set of bug fixes all at once, post/amend the NU host order. At least I am grateful that you don't apply it immediately because I am in fact in a championship match and I did walk into it with a playbook that I don't want arbitrarily diminished. I am already coping with an arbitrary change to a circular high density map with giant voids and a much reduced native population setting than is timhost "normal".
I think removing tow-chunnel is a blow to the advanced players and diminishes the game overall. It's a hard technique to use, particularly offensively and can screw up in glorious fashion. If I had hit a mundane mine, you would have nailed a darkwing, a white falcon, 2 fireclouds. That's not "unfair". I actually really enjoy the depth of complexity of planets and this move reduces it, never good.

If you want to be "fair" we need reinstated the proper 3.22.046 minimum chunnel distance which is 10 ly, not 100. Let's be fair.

2638 days, 13 hours, 5 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

http://planets.uservoice.com/forums/136520-general/suggestions/2760491-bug-lower-id-ships-can-break-tow-no-matter-his-w

Tow drop will be fixed but the fact that any lower id ship can break a tow no matter if he has warp speed 1 is still present.

I reported it more than a month ago in the feedback system and I'm still waiting someone to revise it.

That kind of things is what we complain about when you release major updates.

Regards,

Nite

2638 days, 12 hours, 56 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Nitemare, can you confirm how that works in host 3.22.046?

2638 days, 12 hours, 49 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Don't get me wrong guys. I'm not really against the "tricks" or advanced techniques. I just discovered this one thing this turn when DM absolutely schooled me. Which was my first thought when it happened, wow, I didn't know that was possible. Then I looked into it and found this thread and the history behind it.

I never knew it was possible in any version of the game. DM is a seriously talented player. So no surprise he's teaching me a few things to look out for. Looks like it was in until about 2000, then out from 2000 - 2010 when it was reintroduced by me and now its back out in 2012+.

I realize its a game changer which is why I don't want to swap it out in games in progress. I also didn't know about the 10ly chunnel. The latest version has that?

2638 days, 12 hours, 40 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I can't confirm it Joshua since I don't have access to the original game.

But I can link you to the tow section at donovan where you can read this:

If two ships in one position are using tractor beams on each other, the ship with the higher warp factor will tow the ship with the lower warp factor. This is because the ship with the lower warp factor, if it has the lowest ID, will fail to tow the other ship. If the ship with the lower warpfactor has the higher ID of the two, it won't be able to escape the tow from the other ship.

About the tow-drop, if it is a bug it should be fixed but we should decide what host will be using since the are several changes between them. The 10 ly distance is written in a lot of the guides I read but maybe it was too a bug in the original game, there are too a lot of guides that include the tow-drop manoeuvre and seems that it was fixed in the latest releases.

Regards,

Nite

2638 days, 12 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Yes for sure Joshua, latest is 10 ly.
http://www.donovansvgap.com/info/undocumented.htm
That was never changed (to my knowledge).

I am actually going to try and boot my win 95 PC this weekend and test Dines' claim that it doesn't work under the latest host. Not that I don't trust him, I simply can't recall the last time I had seen it "not work" and want to investigate.

These "features" or "near bugs" or whatever should be flags, that way a good, not unbalanced, feature like tow-chunnel can be reintroduced in games where a player pays for the ability (points, cash, whatever) because it does add a lot of depth to the game.
A big reason I play this game as borg is to make other people go "wtf just happened?!".
If all we ever did was trade heavy carriers it would be a dull time.

2638 days, 11 hours, 49 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I don't have a position on the tow-chunnel debate. I'm using it in all my games, even though I never play the Borg. I can adapt to either rule if I know what it is.

I write this because I would never know about the upcoming changes in the host if I didn't happen to catch this discussion on the forum.

Maybe I'm missing it, but is there a way to be notified of host changes by email?

2638 days, 4 hours, 54 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

it would be nice if any changes to the host order or major gameplay issues such as this one were posted on a separate update forum.

2638 days, 3 hours, 58 minutes ago

halion

RE: Chunneling and movement

I've re-read this entire thread again.

It makes interesting reading and indeed some important points are raised pro and con.

I have not (yet) played Borg but i have had the pleasure to own some FC's. Personally from my perspective I would be disapointed to see the tow-chunnel removed. It adds a layer of complexity that is rewarding to players that bother to apply it. It adds a dimension of second guessing as a defending player to see if you should move your fleet to avoid the chunnel (or set warp etc.). Also sometimes a failed tow chunnel adds to the excitement!

To remove what in 'most' defintions is a clever interpretation of the host order would be a shame when we already have a large number of other examples of this type of activity listed by others particularly Mike.

Before removing this lets take a look at all these 'tricks' 'exploits' or i prefer 'clever utilisation of established host order'. We should consider them in total not in isolation.

Frankly even the original debate from usenet where tim didn't want people able to clone 2 ships by using chunnel and ship build phase 1 and 2. I can see the reason for removing but to me any player fortunate to capture/trade for a ship with enough turns left to really clone it and proffesional enough to set-up the required logistics to benefit from the dual clone is probably deserving of the prize for the lmited times it is achievable.

On the other point that DM referenced such as my inability to refit ships for much of the Nixon game. To me that was a game breaker and a bug of the system that affected the game completely.. Far worse than this tow chunnel.

Please lets refocus on ironing out the remaining bugs and issues in the existing UI before we go into fix mode on these type of issues.

Joshua the fact you only read this thread now since you experience the issue is a concern (I have read it 3 times since it was started all those months ago!) I know the dev team are busy but it could well be worth a full review of all threads/bugs/issues posted to make sure you have a comprehensive list of current issues from here and on the uservoice forum.

Pretty sure a published view of all issues to be resolved and the resolution times will go a long way to satisfying many of the members here who respond to the new enhancements (which i like) with calls to please fix what we have today first.

You've made massive strides forward on the site since i joined over a year ago and one of the things i have always felt is you have not been public enough in showing the work put in (often behind the scenes) to fix the issues. no central change log is an absolute must in my view and would serve as a record of the ongoing commitment to fix issues and reassurance that that is a focus for the team.

Would love to get to a change controled site with public patch notes. For added bonus how about a Public Test Section for some of the more radical proposed changes where specific games can be hosted for the new rules/fixes/enhancements..

my 2 (ok maybe 3) cents.

2637 days, 18 hours, 46 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

The problem with the uservoice forum is that it has limited votes. Currently all my votes are tied up and therefore cannot post further bugs. Which leaves me to post in the bug forum on .nu
So, instead of making things more streamlined, uservoice has further divided the bug posting system and likely made it even more difficult for the developers to keep track of them since they have to go to two different locations to find them.

Also, i don't know if the developers are actively using uservoice anymore. For example, this suggestion has been implemented in play.planets.nu however the post doesn't even say "under review" let alone completed and votes returned to people.

http://planets.uservoice.com/forums/136520-general/suggestions/2401374-scoreboard-data-page-show-change-from-last-turn-

2637 days, 18 hours, 30 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

DM asked that i post this :P
Example of the web concentrations you can get when there is no limit on minefield counts. Now, I don't necessarily think that the limit should be put back in the way it was, without queuing but without it minefields get out of control in the games. I have noticed that on average in .nu games there is a lot higher densities of minefields in the game. The limit keeps a lower density. ideas?

I don't relish the idea of seeing this over the entire cluster, which is potentially possible without a minefield limit...especially in a megagame with 4 or 5 crystal players. One option to balance it is to raise the web mine sweep to x4 instead of x3 to help offset it a little. This won't impact the smaller webs the crystals lay, but will increase the drain on the crystal webs a little more. Or, which may be better, is to tweak the decay rate of minefields slightly. This would affect all minelayers. Density of planets to minefields here is about 1:9.

2637 days, 17 hours, 55 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I vote for a cap in the number of minefield before tweaking the websweeping rate or the decay rate. That change would have impact in the big minefield and the overlapping mechanics while it have no impact in the amount of minefields that some players lay.

I also feel like the feedback had not been a good solution and had been forgotten by the dev team recently

2637 days, 17 hours, 42 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Things that are becoming apparent:

1. Joshua doesn't seem interested in fixing issues unless they impact him (maybe true or not, but this is the perception.)

2. The functionality in this forum is very out dated, you can't even quote someone which is ridiculous.

3. The Feedback system is not effective, since all it does is dissuade people from logging issue with the voting limit.

We've never received any official response to items #2 and #3, which is a bit sad.

Aside from all that, capping minefield limit seems wrong to me. If you don't want the Crystals to do this then kill them off before they get too strong. Same thing with the Borg, if you don't want the Borg to rule the galaxy, then kill them off before they get too strong.

No one is saying anything about limiting the # of Cubes or Fireclouds a Borg can have.

What is to stop someone from laying bazillions of tiny minefields just to reach the cap and prevent the Crystals from doing their thing? Unless perhaps I'm misunderstanding what we mean by minefield cap.

2637 days, 16 hours, 49 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

The problem is not that Joshua is not interested in fixing certain items, it is a time issue. Remember, this is not his job, this is his hobby. He has his real job, then the games he plays in (the whole purpose for this site), then programming and site maintainence. And, programming takes a lot of time.

With limited time, he has to make choices. And, since programming is long, boring work, when you have limited time, you tend to choose stuff you enjoy more. The glass is 90% full for us.

Minefields are a problem. But a universal limit is not the answer. Perhaps a racial limit, like 50 per player or 1 per planet.

Minefield hell:

In Fornax, we slaughtered the team of thin lizzy, spacesquad, and halion, 3 good players. We outplayed them, but web mines definitely made the victory faster. (They used to own the whole upper half. Now they only own the upper left.)

The smaller ones used to be big and there are dozens of fields with 1-20 web mines you cannot see on this picture besides the larger pink web minefields.

2637 days, 16 hours, 35 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I agree mjs, a blanket limit is not the answer especially since there is no queuing system for the minefields. I like your idea about a number limit per player, perhaps based off the individual player's planet count.

2637 days, 15 hours, 43 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I think too that the problem about the fixes is time related. It had been the main problem for some time. They don't have time to read all the post and see all the bugs and that make that some of them continue existing for a long time.

A better forum and some of the older players acting like admin that could select what bugs should be revised by the developers and what aren't really bugs should make the bug report and fixes faster and less time consuming for de devs.

To ensure that the bug reported are reviewed asap should be one of the priorities. I'm sure that I'm not the only one that feels like most of the time reporting a bug is to lose my time.

2637 days, 15 hours, 42 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

The hobby thing is not really a valid response once you start charging $$ for something.

If this whole thing was free, then well, no complaints, but when you pay to play, it does become a job.

I'm not going to pretend to know what Joshua does or how he needs to spend his time,all I would like is far more visibility into the pressing issues and what the timetable is to fixing them.

Right now we don't really have anything along those lines.

2637 days, 15 hours, 39 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Nitemare, excellent point.

A better forum would help out the Devs immensily!! I would be far more interested in helping out with writing bugs if I knew they would be in a sticky at the top of the forum adn that they would get their deserved visibility.

Right now this forum is a black hole, Joshua admitted as much when he said he never saw this thread!

The Feedback system is flawed, there is no way around that one, it needs to go. You don't need it and it doesn't help anything except create more confusion.

Just get a REAL forum, with stickies, quotes, multi quotes, etc... and you'll see far more increased assistance from the community in identifying the critical issues. This forum has got to go, it is beyond me that we're still using it, I really just don't get it.

2637 days, 14 hours, 53 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

@capnkill

Its not really black and white as to whether it is a job. they are hardly making enough for a living right now. Maybe it will become a job if the community grows, but right now its more that they make enough to cover costs.and maintenance.

You could consider it that we are all chipping in to maintain a community hobby.

as to why we still have this forum. as stated, it is a simple matter of time. there is only so much of it.

2637 days, 14 hours, 17 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Fair enough.

Personally, like many others here, we want to help. We love this game, we want to make this representation of the game the best ever, so it is very frutrating when we dont' have the tools to do so.

SO really, one need look no further than Jerry McGwire!

HELP US, HELP YOU!!! :)

No the forum thing is no excuse, there is hardly any time investment required in aquiring a license for forum software that is arleayd out there that everyone uses... what is it now, som eBulletin something or other... we all know what we've grown accustumed to.

There is no need to re-invent the wheel.

2637 days, 11 hours, 32 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I personally set up a phpBB3 forum in about a half hour with no prior experience for the record.
These are all good points, but again Zelrik and Joshua only have so much time.
I'm not too much a fan of direct democracy which is the user feedback forum at the moment. Elected representation is the better model to get things done. (Anyone from California here? No?)

A core group of skilled players to sift through and recognize the major issues is likely the best solution. I would participate in it were I not already over-worked and playing a championship match, but I would readily elect any of the players in this very thread to such a volunteer group were it to come to pass.

2636 days, 8 hours, 17 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I agree though, it would be nice to be able to help out. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately?) I know little of java scripting, but i do know a lot about algorithm design. So i could help out in things like creating maps, generating starting locations, maybe i can even take a crack at an AI using the api. The last would take a more extensive portion of my time however.

2636 days, 3 hours, 11 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Well, i can understand that the developers focus on getting new players, in order to get more income.

Sadly what they are doing now, may have the opposite effect in the long run.
Advertising for new players, and directing them to the new buggy and counterintuitive site, will only scare of new player forever.

I always thought that 2,5$ a month is a very cheap hobby. But i dont think it should get higher, since it will scare of new players.
But, planets.nu should instead use the fact, that all us old players, are just that.
We are no longer students, and most of us should have jobs. 2,5$ a month is nothing.
Set up a way of donating more money on a voluntary basis, and you will see income.
IF you promise to spend time fixing the vanilla gaming..
I would like to start, by offering 5$ if you setup a better forum.
Anybody else wanna chip in ?

Dines

2636 days, 3 hours, 2 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I'd gladly pay more money, but I really need some assurances that we will still have classic old-school games, as these are the only ones that are interesting for me.

I've justed checked the join-game pages, as I wanted to start my next borg game, and there are only 2 "classic" games available on the entire list, and they are almost full, only a bird and a rebel position open... On the other hand, the page is swimming in non-classic games :(

2635 days, 20 hours, 1 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

jobo, joshua has repeatedly said that vanilla games would always be around...not sure what else he can do to assure you.

He eludes to it in :
http://planets.nu/discussion/new-nu-application-feedback-not-on-balance
Bluntly answers it here:
http://planets.nu/discussion/the-new-nu-features-balance-discussion-thread
And there was two other places i've seen but can't find right now :P

2635 days, 19 hours, 59 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

and i just checked the joining, there are 6 games
2 giant melee
1 team of 2
3 regular games, beginner, officer and senior.

all following vanilla rules.

2635 days, 19 hours, 38 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Beginner games have a max rank, so anyone that has completed a game is unlikely to be able to join them.

The problem with a wide range of options for open games is that there will be so very few of each type. Currently 1/3 of the games are classic games open for regular players. That is way to few

2635 days, 19 hours, 38 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Beginner games have a max rank, so anyone that has completed a game is unlikely to be able to join them.

The problem with a wide range of options for open games is that there will be so very few of each type. Currently 1/3 of the games are classic games open for regular players. That is way to few

2635 days, 19 hours, 38 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Beginner games have a max rank, so anyone that has completed a game is unlikely to be able to join them.

The problem with a wide range of options for open games is that there will be so very few of each type. Currently 1/3 of the games are classic games open for regular players. That is way to few

2635 days, 19 hours, 33 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

so your complaint isn't that you don't want vanilla game to be an option, you want them to be the only or at least majority option.

This leads to the point that the player base needs to be widened. i.e. draw in more players or once again the game will fade away.

With a player base of 700 players and an average game time of 1 year, if the average player plays two games at a time then you can only start up and fill 2 games per week. (actually more like 2.4)

The average game time is likely a little lower and the average games per person a little higher right now. Plus you have the non-premium players. So 6 or 7 games joining at one time is not unreasonable. But you should see one new vanilla senior game start up every week or two based on these numbers. There simply aren't enough senior players to support more than this rate right now.

2635 days, 19 hours, 23 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I want them to be a REAL option - if there are no classic games to join, then it doesn't really matter that it is an option.

The more game options we have, the more stretched the playerbase will be across the different game types, make it even less likely that there will be open classic games when you need one.

The current situation is annoying enough as it is, and we haven't even started on the new game types with new race-powers and ships. That will reduce the amount of available classic games even further :(

2635 days, 19 hours, 18 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

I agree its a concern if the player base doesn't increase. But the point to the new game options is to attract new players. Now whether it actually does or not is another question. But say we attract 10,000 new players based on the new game design.

You would then have about 10-12 times more of the new games running than the old, but the people who want to only play the old games aren't going away and thus those games will still keep running. Unless you feel they will be drawn to the new system. But based on the reaction by a large number of people here I think that is not a worry. There will always be people who want to play the classic game, myself included. Not to say I won't try the new too.

2635 days, 17 hours, 19 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Considering the time it takes to play a game of VGAP, I doubt we will ever have a base of > 1000 decent players. The new rules won't attract that many.

I have come in first in a game with the Evil Empire. The main addition I want is Destroy Planet, I will have point room if I sacrifice large minefields. So, now I wait for minerals to accumulate with my faster accumulation rate due to my victory, which only took a year. By my calculations it will only take me 8 years to accumulate enough minerals.

I am telling all my friends that thought VGAP was too complicated and long and didn't want to play that if they play for a year and then wait only 8 more years, they can boost their races. I expect them to come in huge numbers!!! (sarcasm)

Like the ranking system, the new system says you have to concentrate on one race. If you want to explore the fun of playing other races, you are screwed.

2635 days, 9 hours, 41 minutes ago

dazdya

RE: Chunneling and movement

As someone said, we should try to help. For this, we need (1) some sort of organisation, (2) a way for Joshua to tell people what to do, (3) a list of things that need to get done, (4) a priority list, and (5) a way for people to actually do stuff.

(1) A forum would help, but this will take more than half an hour. Yes, a forum can be set up in half an hour, but for this purpose it needs to be structured so that people can find stuff and post stuff in the right pages. That takes thought, and time. It will probably be worth it, just saying it takes time.

(2) No comment.

(3)
(a)Is there a list of bugs and exploits somewhere? There must be, and I have a few of my own, but we must somehow figure out a comprehensive list. The feedback site is less than functional, so I guess we should start a thread.
(b) Also, we should consider the new interface, since it features in the business plan of the site.
(c) The interface of the game itself, without changing the rules, can probably improve as well. Many addon ideas exist already.
(d) Documentation. One of the most infuriating things of this game is that you can hardly find any conclusive information. If we do this as a community, this must change. Good documentation can singlehandedly make this game easier.

(4) I think this is the toughest one yet. I am not in favour of democracy, but ... I don't know, no comment for the moment.

(5) No comment.

This is just a silly attempt to change this thread from a complaining thread to a planning thread. I agree it should be under a different name. If I am overreaching here, or out of line, please tell me so.

And if desired, I would gladly volunteer to write documentation.

2635 days, 7 hours, 32 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

jobo, that is an obscene number of cubes orbiting your hub planet. did you bring them all back for this shot or was this the reserve?

btw, this is why the borg should be eliminated as fast as possible. otherwise you get that fleet showing up at your front door in the late game.

2635 days, 4 hours, 37 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

It is the reserve ;)

2634 days, 22 hours, 20 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

http://planets.nu/discussion/30735-grus-sector-host-still-running

This is what will ruin this site. Devs can't afford to loss 11 players just because they don't review the bugs forums and the contact us mail. That game has been stoped for 2 days and they already used the contact us link 2days ago without any answer.

2592 days, 15 hours, 43 minutes ago

emork the lizard king

RE: Chunneling and movement

Wow, I missed this thread. If any other also did, read it!

2405 days, 23 hours, 15 minutes ago

crome

RE: Chunneling and movement

Can someone tell me, what was the last decission? Can i tow-chunnel now, or not? I tried it in a training game, and it worked. i tried it in an other real game, and it did´nt work. thats why i read this threat. i was thinking, i did something wrong...
can someboy please give me an answer? @joshua ?

best regards,

crome

2405 days, 22 hours, 39 minutes ago

halion

RE: Chunneling and movement

Crome, The tow chunnel has (sadly) been removed from newly created games for some time now.

The trainig games i think run on a different code base so sometimes have a slight misalignment for these finer points.

2405 days, 22 hours, 12 minutes ago

crome

RE: Chunneling and movement

What a mess! I think the rule should be reactivated!

Playing as a Privateer it has some nice opportunities. and therefore any player can get a firecloud by combat, trade or rob it is not a disadvantage. more: it is a tactical move any race can use for it´s own strategies. i dont understand, why joshua has removed it. if you remove it, you have to remove other things, like the treaty of nimbus 7 too and that would change the whole game like the removal of tow-chunnel. i give a big #DISLIKE for this decision!

best regards,
crome

2405 days, 21 hours, 24 minutes ago

emork the lizard king

RE: Chunneling and movement

Hi Crome, old ally!

Tow-drop-chunnel is definitly disabled for new games since some months. If training games run on a different code base - as Halion asssumes - this would be terrible. I (and many others) use training games to compensate the still sub-optimal documentation here.

I personally advocated heavily for the disablement because it made the Borg too strong.

2405 days, 20 hours, 50 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Crome, you aren't the only one who doesn't like the change....

But hot dog! Isn't the firecloud powerful enough without the tow-drop? And without the 10ly chunnel à la Thost? Might as well give it gravitronic engines and cloaking ability as well :P

C'mon Borgs and other firecloud owners, don't be greedy! ;)

2405 days, 20 hours, 36 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Since drop-chunnel was removed since it was removed in thost, at least give us 10 ly chunnel, as THAT still exists in thost.

2405 days, 20 hours, 35 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Hush! It's powerful enough as it is and you're still going to assimilate everybody anyway!!

2405 days, 20 hours, 33 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Thats a given, but drop-chunnel allowed me to do it faster ;)

2405 days, 20 hours, 31 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Gah, such greed! Next you're going to insist that Nu provide you with cube ships made of solid gold!

2405 days, 20 hours, 29 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Cubes ARE solid gold my friend.

2405 days, 20 hours, 29 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Cubes ARE solid gold my friend.

2405 days, 20 hours, 25 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Touché!

2405 days, 20 hours, 9 minutes ago

RE: Chunneling and movement

Fear not, the Emperor has plans. The new ship will NOT provide the full functionality of the tow-drop or "advanced" chunnel, but it WILL provide some measure of movement with chunnel for campaign games, in a fashion which appeals to the sense of balance of both Joshua and myself and at a cost which is not prohibitive. It won't be identical - it will be different and hopefully you'll agree quite cool. A different degree of depth, along the same lines.

2405 days, 18 hours, 28 minutes ago

emork the lizard king

RE: Chunneling and movement