Time Acceleration Not Functioning

[Switeck]

I use TAF a lot because real life is too short. My time's valuable.

[sdrubble]

Hi folks,

would some kind soul please care to explain to this slowpoke here what should I understand from the combination of these TWO posts below:

Problem with TAF as game feature is ... Slowing the game increases the precision and would be no problem, but will be a cheating feature for players during dogfights... and anybody that wants it can build it from source as it will stay in as code and be active when compiling in debug or testRelease mode.

... keep TAF (after said testing) including keeping manoeuvring relative to x1 to stop the ship being twitchy at high TAFs.

My issue here is, that I can only really play Oolite by frequently setting TAF=0.5. When TAF=1.0, I find it very hard (and un-joyful) to match any object to the crosshairs. That applies even to a floating container right in front of me when I'm at a dead stop.

The hardness of matching the crosshairs at TAF=1.0 happens regardless if I'm maneuvering with the keyboard, or with the joystick with precision mode=ON.

Now I wouldn't have any issues with grabbing the source and compiling with whatever flags I need to get TAF functional again. BUT... DaddyHoggy's statement worries me by implying that, EVEN if I can enable TAF again, all manouvers would remain relative to x1 even when TAF=0.5 (meaning that a lower TAF wouldn't bring an easier maneuvering any more).

Soo... can anyone clarify this pls ???

[DaddyHoggy]

You won't have to worry about TAF for much longer, because unless you're play Trunk/Test or compiling your own from scratch there will be no more TAF.

However, if there was, the intention was (i.e. this has not been implemented, because Ahruman stepped down from Dev and it was his baby) - that Irrespective of TAF, the manoeuvring of the ship would be multiplied/divided to correct back to 1x for the player. This would have indeed screwed you up, but I guess Ahruman figured nobody would always play the game at sub-1x TAF and was thinking more about non-twitchy flying for TAF greater than 1x.

But as I said, TAF is a debug feature, so expect to lose it when the MNSR becomes *The* Stable Release. So either, stick with the version you've got, compile your own from source with the debug features turned on, or practice flying at TAF 1x (if you're flying with a joystick map a button that turns joystick sensitivity on/off, or buy a less manoeuvrable ship...)

[RyanHoots]

..buy a less manoeuvrable ship...

The Anaconda may be right up your alley...

Steers like a rogue asteroid

[sdrubble]

You won't have to worry about TAF for much longer, because unless you're play Trunk/Test or compiling your own from scratch there will be no more TAF.

However, if there was, the intention was (i.e. this has not been implemented, because Ahruman stepped down from Dev and it was his baby) - that Irrespective of TAF, the manoeuvring of the ship would be multiplied/divided to correct back to 1x for the player. This would have indeed screwed you up, but I guess Ahruman figured nobody would always play the game at sub-1x TAF and was thinking more about non-twitchy flying for TAF greater than 1x.

But as I said, TAF is a debug feature, so expect to lose it when the MNSR becomes *The* Stable Release. So either, stick with the version you've got, compile your own from source with the debug features turned on, or practice flying at TAF 1x (if you're flying with a joystick map a button that turns joystick sensitivity on/off, or buy a less manoeuvrable ship...)

Thanks DH.

So if I got this right (repeating for my own clarity), if I compile with the debug features, I can still use TAF, AND TAF=0.5 will still allow for more precise maneuvering than with TAF=1.0 (as it does now with 1.75.3).

Not all is lost then...

Cheers

[sdrubble]

Hi RyanHoots,

I did see your post, but couldn't really come up with an interesting reply.

Cheers

[RyanHoots]

Hi RyanHoots,

I did see your post, but couldn't really come up with an interesting reply.

Cheers

Cheers.

[CommonSenseOTB]

I say, good riddance to the boring old TAF. On the drawing board is a super torus drive and with a little work the npc's could have it too. Let's bend some space!

[Capt. Murphy]

Fly by mouse - so much more control....

[DaddyHoggy]

I say, good riddance to the boring old TAF. On the drawing board is a super torus drive and with a little work the npc's could have it too. Let's bend some space!

TAFs not boring if used properly, I use it to cruise the spacelanes - in lane - just Faster-than-Real-Time, pulling out of the lane into nothingness, and then hitting the Torus drive - now that's boring!

And until NPCs genuinely have a torus drive, so they can catch or run away from you as easily as you do to them, then I won't use it. Same reason I don't have and won't buy an E-bomb.

Constrictor mission is somewhat more tricky without using the Torus drive... (not that I could play the constrictor mission with this new interpretation of my alter-ego, still with only 6 (accidental) kills to my name - and an Iron Assed (Defensively) Cobby3 and 100K in the bank.)

[DaddyHoggy]

Fly by mouse - so much more control....

[Kaks]

You won't have to worry about TAF for much longer, because unless you're play Trunk/Test or compiling your own from scratch there will be no more TAF.

May I just point out that the plan has always been to also provide a debug verision. The debug version (intended for oxp makers) will provide basic-debug.oxp & will also provide all the existing debug functions including TAF, exactly as it works now.

And as for Ahruman's plans for TAF, I do seem to recall him mentioning its limitations, but just in order to point out how very tricky it would be to implement it as a fully fledged feature. I don't seem to recall him saying he'd work on it in order to remove those limitations, but I might be wrong...

That said, if anyone feels it's the kind of challenge they'd be willing to take on, by all means do work on it!

[Capt. Murphy]

I say, good riddance to the boring old TAF. On the drawing board is a super torus drive and with a little work the npc's could have it too. Let's bend some space!

It wouldn't be too hard to give NPC's (at least the core roles) a torus like ability via script. But it might change the game play a lot. E.g. if lone traders or police patrols torus when out of sight they'll encounter any pirates in the system very quickly. Players may find themselves approaching most systems through a sea of wreckage and not a lot else. Perhaps any torus ability for NPC's should only be invoked when the NPC is fleeing from the player in flight and gets out of scanner range, rather than scripting them to use it as a player would.

@ DaddyHoggy - https://bb.oolite.space/viewtopic.ph ... 15#p158374

Is Hesperus a secret rodent then.......?

[Disembodied]

It wouldn't be too hard to give NPC's (at least the core roles) a torus like ability via script. But it might change the game play a lot.

It certainly would, especially if players and NPCs masslock each other – you'd have nothing but a long traffic jam from witchpoint to station. The torus/masslock combination is a great game mechanic but it only works if the player's the only one with it. If we want to equalise things between players and NPCs, then the masslock has to go, for the sake of gameplay. However, if the masslock goes, then that's the game out of the window, because nobody would ever have to stop and fight. The solution is, as DaddyHoggy has mentioned, a TAF and AIs which can work under that TAF – i.e. which will very quickly destroy a player foolish enough to try to activate the TAF during combat.

The advantages of the torus/masslock combination are: it's what we've currently got, it works fine. The disadvantages are: the player pretty much has to have a ship that's faster in normal flight than anything else, or you spend your life in masslock (or have to constantly go off-lane); convoying is extremely difficult/tedious for the player; it gives the player a big advantage over all other ships.

[Micha]

May I just point out that everyone plays the game differently. Not everyone wants a fast-paced non-stop action-fest getting to "Elite" with a gadzillion credits in an evening of gameplay.
Might as well just play an arcade shooter for all the immersion that provides (IMHO).

Personally I quite enjoy a serene convoy in towards a planet in company with a couple of traders. I -never- go off-lane to torus (and even if I did, Deep Space Pirates would slow me down anyway). I -very rarely- use injectors except to avoid hard-head missiles.
Am I the average player? Probably not. Do I get immersed in the game? You -betcha-!