www.ClassicTW.com
https://www.classictw.com/

Glossary of Terminologies
https://www.classictw.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=17203
Page 4 of 5

Author:  Singularity [ Wed May 24, 2006 2:42 am ]
Post subject: 

Basically, no

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 4:23 am ]
Post subject: 

Oh boy, We have a comedian in our mist! [:P]

What is the difference then, I was reading through the definitions dealing w/ Busing and it seem that Busting is really just Fake-Busting, so if that is not the case then Busting might need a little more clarification to end seize any confusion about their usages.

Author:  Singularity [ Wed May 24, 2006 4:33 am ]
Post subject: 

Uh no.

Bust is when you get found @ a port. You're put on the bust entry for that port and will stay on it until someone else busts there and bumps you off or it expires on the "bust clear." If you try to trade or steal from a busted port you will bust again.

The thing about stealing is that you can't steal from the same port twice in a row. Doing that results in a "fake bust." When you fake you aren't added to the bust entry for that port, nor will it clear anyone else's busts. It will, however, screw up a cashing script just the same. The way to prevent this is to keep track of your last rob/steal, and "off rob" if you need to by robbing/stealing at a different port.

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 4:55 am ]
Post subject: 

Ok, so a Fake Bust is when you accidentally Rob/Steal from the same Port one or more consecutive times and a Bust is when you are actually caught stealing/robbing, Bust you have to wait for the Bust list to clear or another player to Bust and Fake Bust you just have to successfully rob/steal at another Port and you are back in business again at the Fake Busted Port. Thanks Sing it all makes sense now.

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 5:18 am ]
Post subject: 

Also, is the penalty for Busting the same as Fake Busting: 20-percent of their total Holds and 10-percent of their total Experience or is there a difference?

Author:  Singularity [ Wed May 24, 2006 7:04 am ]
Post subject: 

Nope. Check Traitors site, I think he lists the actual numbers.

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 9:00 am ]
Post subject: 

Bien, finalmente lo he encontrado, gracias! [;)]

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 9:15 am ]
Post subject: 

For Furbing I modified the formula to deduct the number of Holds already included with the purchase of the Furb, if this needs any modification please advise me as I am not sure if I have made an error with it, Thank.

The formula for determining the required number of Holds needed to replenish the Reds ship is:
Holds to Purchase for the Furb = Stock Holds aboard the Purchased Furb - ((Holds Lost * 3) - 3).

Author:  Kavanagh [ Wed May 24, 2006 2:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

quote:Originally posted by RexxCrow

For Furbing I modified the formula to deduct the number of Holds already included with the purchase of the Furb, if this needs any modification please advise me as I am not sure if I have made an error with it, Thank.

The formula for determining the required number of Holds needed to replenish the Reds ship is:
Holds to Purchase for the Furb = Stock Holds aboard the Purchased Furb - ((Holds Lost * 3) - 3).


Your formula gives a negative number of holds, although it is the correct number.

Try (Holds Lost * 3) - 3 - Stock RFB Holds.

Author:  Traitor [ Wed May 24, 2006 4:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

quote:Originally posted by RexxCrow

Ok, so a Fake Bust is when you accidentally Rob/Steal from the same Port one or more consecutive times and a Bust is when you are actually caught stealing/robbing, Bust you have to wait for the Bust list to clear or another player to Bust and Fake Bust you just have to successfully rob/steal at another Port and you are back in business again at the Fake Busted Port. Thanks Sing it all makes sense now.

REXX. I HATE TO BE HARSH, BUT PLAY MORE! I KNOW YOU REALLY WANT TO DO THIS, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE MORE GAME KNOWLEGE. TRADEWARS ISN'T SOMETHING YOU CAN LEARN TO PLAY BY READING A BOOK, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU WANT IT TO BE. MANY OF THE CONCEPTS IN TW WILL MAKE NO SENSE UNTIL YOU SEE THEM IN ACTION. STOP. PLAY A GAME WITH THE SAME ENTHUSIASM YOU HAVE FOR THIS PROJECT. THEN COME BACK AND FINISH THIS.

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 8:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

Hahaa, Kav, I was thinking about that this morning, and found that either formula will tend to give a negative or positive number depending on if the Holds needed it higher then the stock Furb Holds i.e.

(60 Stock Furb Holds) - (50 Holds Needed) = 10
(50 Holds Needed) - (60 Stock Furb Holds) = -10

or

(60 Stock Furb Holds) - (150 Holds Needed) = -90
(150 Holds Needed) - (60 Stock Furb Holds) = 90

So perhaps a check would be required to solve that problem by determining if The Stock Furb Holds are greater or less then the Holds needed.

If the Stock Furb Holds are > Holds Needed; then place the Stock Furb Holds to the left-side within the formula.
If the Stock Furb Holds are < Holds Needed; then place the Stock Furb Holds to the right-side within the formula.
That would make everything work true, right?

Author:  RexxCrow [ Wed May 24, 2006 9:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

Actually, I am looking at this project as a collaboration of experienced players, I am merely serving as the lowly compiler to the good of the overall project. This project would be crap without the assistance and consideration of everybody that has been putting forth their knowledgeable additions, corrections, and suggestions.

Again, I thank them all for enduring my questions and I am thinking it is finally getting to the point of having it’s 1st edition completed. Me playing to learn all this great info would take quite a while just for the user aspect then I would have spend a great deal of time learning the GameOp aspect to complete the Editor portion of the project; for the purposes of completing this compendium, that does not seem at all feasible to me.

Author:  Traitor [ Wed May 24, 2006 11:55 pm ]
Post subject: 

Look, this is meant to be constructive, but understand that I'm pretty frustrated with you personally. I know this isn't easy. More than anyone, I know.

quote:Originally posted by RexxCrow

Actually, I am looking at this project as a collaboration of experienced players, I am merely serving as the lowly compiler to the good of the overall project. This project would be crap without the assistance and consideration of everybody that has been putting forth their knowledgeable additions, corrections, and suggestions.

Again, I thank them all for enduring my questions and I am thinking it is finally getting to the point of having it’s 1st edition completed. Me playing to learn all this great info would take quite a while just for the user aspect then I would have spend a great deal of time learning the GameOp aspect to complete the Editor portion of the project; for the purposes of completing this compendium, that does not seem at all feasible to me.


Yes, you are welcome. But you are basically holding a gun to the experienced players. We have to take lots of our time to correct all the misinformation you have presented. I do appreciate what you are trying to do, but you could have saved the rest of us a bunch of time if you had simply put in some effort playing. The time you spent learning first hand some of these issues would have saved EVERYONE, including yourself, time later.

There are still errors in your work, (such as the following under your entry for extern, "5 – Reset each Commissioned players daily Taxation rights, which is 5% of on-hand Credits upon their first login of the new day." Taxation happens to anyone with 0 or more align.) And don't get me started on your Midnight definition...that will cost people games. And unfortunately, when you make corrections or additions, there is no note to indicate what was changed, so we have to waste even more time sifting through things. This makes it impossible to edit/correct your entries.

Additinally, you have quite a few terms that have nothing to do with TW, or are already defined in the game instructions, or are terms that you coined to explain things that you don't fully understand. (like PSS for example. It's L5 for shields, not L4.) Bigger isn't always better. Information overload is also a concern.

And finally, in many cases your definitions have less information than the definitions on my site, which was the basis for most of the entries. You don't have any examples. You don't have any version information. You don't say WHY it's important to do (or not do) some things. You don't say HOW to do some things. Again, take your entry for megga-rob for example (Oh, and it's the cash available + 11%!). Then compare it to mine. Yet you have a near complete definition for SDT. Why?

My site is by no means perfect. There are still a few things that I need to correct on it. I would say that mine mostly suffers from being out of date. But you would benefit greatly from reading it, then spending a few weeks trying things out in a game or two. Then get in a Major (a definiton that you seem to be missing). Most people learn more about the game in one Major than they do in a year of small games. Then come back.

And for the record, I was just as pig headed about not taking good advice.

Author:  Kavanagh [ Thu May 25, 2006 12:58 am ]
Post subject: 

quote:Originally posted by RexxCrow

Hahaa, Kav, I was thinking about that this morning, and found that either formula will tend to give a negative or positive number depending on if the Holds needed it higher then the stock Furb Holds i.e.

(60 Stock Furb Holds) - (50 Holds Needed) = 10
(50 Holds Needed) - (60 Stock Furb Holds) = -10

or

(60 Stock Furb Holds) - (150 Holds Needed) = -90
(150 Holds Needed) - (60 Stock Furb Holds) = 90

So perhaps a check would be required to solve that problem by determining if The Stock Furb Holds are greater or less then the Holds needed.

If the Stock Furb Holds are > Holds Needed; then place the Stock Furb Holds to the left-side within the formula.
If the Stock Furb Holds are < Holds Needed; then place the Stock Furb Holds to the right-side within the formula.
That would make everything work true, right?


The formula I wrote will work for a Merf, or a Mule super furb, it is simplistic. I never checked it with other ships, no practical need to so. For general calculations of refurb hold recovery, check out tw-cabal.com.

I and many others have politely suggested that you PLAY a bit. It is really the only way to get a handle on The Game. I share Traitor's frustration with you; also his desire not to piss you off, given your dogged determination to get on top of the TW arcane "rules" etc. But you really gotta play, get trashed a few times, etc.

"Nothing concentrates the mind like hanging" - I think that goes back to the middle ages.

Author:  RexxCrow [ Thu May 25, 2006 9:58 am ]
Post subject: 

Rexx… you’re total jackass! You couldn’t pilot a Merc to the Doc if you were the first player in! Why dont’cha just Blind Warp into the side of a StarPort and save yourself the effort you filthy animal!

[:o)]
Weeew, I didn’t want feel left out, so I thought I’d better join in to. ROFL.
J/K

Page 4 of 5 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/