Free Allegiance Forums

madpeople wrote:QUOTE (madpeople @ Apr 8 2009, 03:42 PM) This is a failure in the command chain / structur of the orgainsation.

Stuff is not happening because person A is away.
To continue doing stuff with person A away, we need person A to make some changes
Notice a problem here?

You need to reorganise the team to include more active people, and be les reliant on inactive ones. I'm sure TE and/or Thal will approve (hey, they can control forum access too )


I'm not quite sure what it is you are offering / which angle you are coming from? (Is it a I'm a ZL so I have access to the super secret CC zone hideout and I can go make chnages to the core and upload it? If so:)
I believe people have been posting, there are a load of threads in this forum which people have come to conclusions about what to do. There are quite a lot of trivial changes like the seperate fuel and ammo icons in the core which nothing has been done about for months.


I thought the point of the CC was that it was updated reguarly with small changes, and that development wouldn't stagnate if the lead dev went away.
Part of the frequent updates with small changes is that it allows for experimentation without worrying too much about the balance implications as they would be fixed in the next release (which wasn't very far away).

madpeople proposes the following action:
People come up with a list of changes they want to happen from the topics in this forum.Community members and CC team can then make changes to this list in the next 7 days following the posting of that listCurrent CC team has one week after the first week to ammend the list of changesSomeone Implements them in the coreCore gets given to TE to be put on the AUThose active contributors who did this get included in the CC dev team

This plan should result in a new release within a month of getting the list of proposed changes posted.

Alternate plan: someone in the CC dev team who is stil active looks at the agreed changes, implements them and gets the core on the AU.

pkk wrote:QUOTE (pkk @ Apr 9 2009, 04:07 PM) Current goal of CC04 is the release OH, everything else is a bonus.

Valiance wrote:QUOTE (Valiance @ Apr 9 2009, 09:08 PM) could you stick stuff like the ss3 and seek3 move to sup in cc3.1, but dont move it up to 4 until OH is released?

Andon wrote:QUOTE (Andon @ Mar 27 2009, 09:32 PM) That isn't what I meant.

We go over something, take a look at it, and judge whether it really needs to be worked on at this time. We'll pass over little things if there are bigger fish to fry, so to speak (Like DEB shields).
Once we figure out what we are going to be doing in a vague sense, we go through and pick out the good ideas from you guys, and then occasionally pitch in some of our own.
We then figure out which change we thing should be best and then we do one of two things.
If it's a major change, we put it up in a poll.
If it's a minor change, we go in and do it.

I wasn't saying people don't know $#@! all about balance - I was saying people often don't think about the farther-reaching effects of balance. It's like programming - It's like saying "If we change this, it'll fix this problem" - Yes, it sounds wonderful and it sounds like it would be stupid not to. But perhaps that is used by something else and changing it will break that.

Things like Retro boosters fall amongst the simple fixes - We can change the thrust and not have to worry about it changing the other things. However, if you go about changing the gunmount positions in the CVH, it may work fine, but it changes every core that uses that model, and also has to go through the Autoupdate, which people hate stuff going through autoupdate so we try to avoid it if at all possible. Changing the PW EMP to something like SRM Lt EMP is a difficult thing to do because a single number typed wrong can go unspotted and cause issues, and there are a lot of numbers involved when changing a gun to a missile - And that's without considering any sort of balance at all.