Author |
Planets should not be lockable past Grand Admiral!! |
Fatal Command (CO) Marshal Fatal Squadron
Joined: November 27, 2002 Posts: 1158 From: over here in New York noticing some ppl are like canoes.....they need to be paddled.
| Posted: 2010-04-01 07:47  
well,point blank,I lock planets and will continue to lock them for 2 reasons.
1) Metaverse is NOT the place to learn to do things for the first time.In other words,go to scenario a while and build there.You'll learn the basics of building and wont need to ask "what a good planet to put a dome on?".I have seen and continue to see planets built like a Mr Potatoe Head,you know,"lets stick one of these and these and that.Wow Kewl I spelled out My intials".For those type ppl I have 1 word DUMBASS.
2) I lock planets because dumbass ai engies waste the few resources a planet sometimes has.
HOWEVER,that does not mean I wont unlock it if you ask so you can start/finish/upgrade a few things while we have time.I have unlocked planets quite often,until the engy i question proves to be a total noob.
So in short,if its locked and FS and at GA,just ask for an unlock.Well see what happens when you do. [ This Message was edited by: Fatal Command*CO* on 2010-04-01 08:04 ]
_________________
|
Aradrox Grand Admiral
Joined: March 12, 2007 Posts: 133 From: Tennessee
| Posted: 2010-04-01 08:46  
Quote:
|
On 2010-01-11 17:17, Crow Starcommander*CO* wrote:
you learn how to build planets in scenario, not the MV. If you want to test a new idea for building, you test it over a few scenarios. No more are the extra planets in the MV to test a new idea on, every planet is precious losing just 1 is a major set back and a foothold for the enemy. If the systems in sag had more planets and a few more systems all together then it wouldn't matter too much......wait we have been down this road. Devs won't listen so its gonna be repeated over again and again, put more planets BACK into the MV. A small MV gives no breathing room for capping sprees, and the player base isn't big enough to always have someone on in EVERY server.
|
|
they didnt exactly wana get rid of the old MV they had to it was TOO LAGY so be happy your not lagging anymore and its not that the devs arent listening its that they cant do anything about it without more money to spend on servers and bandwidnth
_________________ [
|
MrSparkle Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001 Posts: 1912 From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2010-04-01 09:11  
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-01 07:47, Fatal Command*CO* wrote:
2) I lock planets because dumbass ai engies waste the few resources a planet sometimes has.
|
|
That's true. AI engineers love to build that starport the planet is desperately needing. They're even worse in scenario.
I'm wondering if maybe planets should not be lockable above FA. I figure once a player is FA he knows enough about engineering that he can fix a planet with problems. I also don't think any FAs and above are saboteurs (but maybe I'm naive).
I really see no reason to lock a planet above FA, besides the fact that you're forced to if you're above FA.
_________________
|
Wolfex 1st Rear Admiral Interstellar Cultural Confederation United
Joined: August 31, 2009 Posts: 24
| Posted: 2010-04-01 12:01  
Quote:
|
On 2010-01-09 11:49, Azreal wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-01-09 06:52, Pegasus wrote:
Considering the low level player base we have its seems alittle pointless.
|
|
I'd argue it the other way around.
Because of how many low level players who dont have the concept of what to put where and why, I am all for locking them up.
My attitude would be different if the newer players were teachable, but they have a know-it-all attitude when you try to help them. When I get that, I lock the rock.
That's not harsh, that's common sense.
|
|
Agreed, When i play i do what i can to build up planets that mainly where i have my Pres from.
But When new players jump into the game, and they just barely gained access to Engineering Ships. they go crazy on the planets, Ive seen new players come in and build all the wrong things. because of that we had planets that had Power Shortages, Worker Shortages, Tech Shortages, etc......
Then they keep going onto other planets and complain when we lock down planets, only because we dont want them to ruin them beyond repair. we need SY planets in Scenario and that means they need to be built right.
Im sorry but there should be a Tutorial on PROPER BUILDING before Access to a Engineering Ship is given.
_________________
|
JBud Marshal
Joined: February 26, 2008 Posts: 1900 From: Behind you.
| Posted: 2010-04-01 12:42  
Planets should not be lockable past *INSERT MY RANK HERE*!
_________________ [-Point Jumper-][-Privateer Elite-][-Summus Dux-][-Praeclarae-]
[img(RIP MY SIGNATURE DELETED AFTER 7 YEARS/img]
''Insisto Rector - Suivez le Guide - Tempus hostium est''
|
Bardiche Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006 Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-04-01 13:40  
The lock function definitely needs re-looking. This elitist attitude about "people can't build" and reserving the right to manage planets only to the top-tier class of players is alarming, insulting and bigotted.
Even Gold Engineer does not sit well with me as a good validation for locks.
I understand the benefits of locking a planet so that only players can use it, or locking it so that some idiot won't mess with it, but the current system has obvious errors when it restricts the building and management of planets (including whether to build Heavy or Regular Infantry, turning off structures to preserve manpower for important structures etc) to a select few players who feel that they must flaunt their rank around to lock planets to all others.
The absolute top of ridiculousness was when someone locked Ursa Minor's planets - if players are that high ranked, they won't come there to build, it just felt like a jerkarse move.
As an alternative I suggest either allowing the option to "lock it to players" and leave it at that, or provide a tutorial on building and managing planets, or fix the max rank to which a planet can be locked within reasonable bounds - my suggestion is Commander as the max rank to which one can lock planets, because anyone who can rank to Commander is able to understand written text, and I have yet to meet newbies unwilling to listen to veterans regarding tips on how to build.
_________________
|
Frisky Dingo 1st Rear Admiral
Joined: October 05, 2009 Posts: 17
| Posted: 2010-04-01 13:47  
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-01 13:40, Bardiche wrote:
The lock function definitely needs re-looking. This elitist attitude about "people can't build" and reserving the right to manage planets only to the top-tier class of players is alarming, insulting and bigotted.
|
|
Really? Bigotted? Blown a bit outa proportion maybe?
Elitest to think that people who cant build and who wont listen should just be able to continue building and ruining a planet? Somehow I think your observing this from a high chair. You cant tell me that some new player who is building on your planet, screwing it up, not listening, your just gonna keep grinning and saying "that's ok. " and not lock it?
BULL O NEY
Thats right. Im saying your full of it on this one.
_________________
|
Bardiche Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006 Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-04-01 14:07  
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-01 13:47, Frisky Dingo wrote:
Really? Bigotted? Blown a bit outa proportion maybe? |
|
Not at all! You feel better than others, so you don't want them to mess up something you can do better, right? But in most cases, the ones who lock the planets aren't the ones who built them - and locking planets immediately is like saying, "Unless proven otherwise you don't deserve the free right to manage planets".
Quote:
| Elitest to think that people who cant build and who wont listen should just be able to continue building and ruining a planet? Somehow I think your observing this from a high chair. |
|
Aren't planets being locked, according to people here, as a preventive measure? Isn't it just a measure people resort to in order to avoid running the risk that a newbie MIGHT venture outside of scenario and/or Ursa Minor? It's insulting to someone who may have built himself to Gold Engineer in those two servers, then come into the MV to be told he needs permission to build planets and will be observed and denied construction rights because his philosophy on planet-building doesn't align with the "owner"'s views.
Quote:
| You cant tell me that some new player who is building on your planet, screwing it up, not listening, your just gonna keep grinning and saying "that's ok. " and not lock it? |
|
Hence why I suggested an alternative in locking it to Commander max, as anyone over the rank of Commander has already proven proficiency in at least either Engineer or ability to read English.
I don't believe in obstinately stubborn people. Perhaps your approach to them is wrong - no one likes being told off. I've never had anyone refuse to listen to me if I sat down and rationally explained why I disagreed with their building ideals.
Quote:
| BULL O NEY
Thats right. Im saying your full of it on this one.
|
|
You should be happy a higher-rank is standing up for you little guys. You're one of the people who need to plead for permission from some players, after all - I just think such a system is a badly designed system.
_________________
|
Faustus Marshal Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001 Posts: 2748 From: Austin, Texas
| Posted: 2010-04-01 14:15  
I think we should bring back the code that locks a planet only to the highest rank of a player that is online.
_________________
|
Frisky Dingo 1st Rear Admiral
Joined: October 05, 2009 Posts: 17
| Posted: 2010-04-01 14:36  
yes that would do it.....
_________________
|
Chewy Squirrel Chief Marshal
Joined: January 27, 2003 Posts: 304 From: NYC
| Posted: 2010-04-01 17:51  
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-01 14:15, Faustus wrote:
I think we should bring back the code that locks a planet only to the highest rank of a player that is online.
|
|
So what happens when at 4 AM when a random midshipman signs on to the MV and joins a team with no other players? All planets of that faction in the mv would be unlocked. This is an extreme scenario but the issue of planets being "attritioned" down the ranks over time exists.
Perhaps a modification would be to keep the lock rank of the planet the same, but allow the highest rank online to always be able to access the planet regardless of lock rank.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo Marshal Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010 Posts: 3823 From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-04-02 01:22  
Get rid of points penalty for scrapping buildings.
That way if someone screws up the build, all you have to do is to step in and start scrapping and rebuilding.
Nub gets his practice and pres.
You scrap without penalty, and then get pres for rebuilding.
Everyone goes home happy.
_________________ ... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
G.Adm. Kirk Grand Admiral Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 13, 2005 Posts: 91 From: Baton Rouge, LA
| Posted: 2010-04-02 01:41  
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-01 14:15, Faustus wrote:
I think we should bring back the code that locks a planet only to the highest rank of a player that is online.
|
|
Maybe down to Captain or some reasonably low rank...
_________________
|
Xydes Grand Admiral
Joined: August 07, 2009 Posts: 276 From: England
| Posted: 2010-04-02 11:12  
Quote:
|
On 2010-01-09 18:24, Kanman [R33] wrote:
Ok. Two things. First, Fast StarCommander is right. We should be able to lock the planets at any level under and up to our rank.
I am one of the highest ranked builders in this game. I got that way by BUILDING. I built a LOT. I built all different types of variations on all different types of planets to see what worked well and what didnt. Even though the standard builds might be the best, doing it wrong helped me learn why it was the best from many different angles.
If you want this game to recover, you should be happy to see new players dinking around with building, trying to figure it out and optimize their own designs. If building was meant to be a precise template, then the game would build them by itself.
|
|
Not on the planets in sag. One word: Scenario.
_________________
|
Tael 2nd Rear Admiral Palestar
Joined: July 03, 2002 Posts: 3695 From: San Francisco Bay Area
| Posted: 2010-04-02 13:51  
Quote:
|
On 2010-01-10 00:08, Crows Martyr wrote:
i can model
now the question is maya or max? i can do both
and next question.. i know reek... or Code red... or someone from TR already has drawn up a super dread... or something and cant get you guys to look at it ... or maby it was he could not get you guys to implement?
anyways this belongs in a new post
|
|
This question has been answered several times in the past, in fact, not two weeks ago. And is in the Dev FAQ in beta.
All models are in the game are in FBX format. So any program that can export to FBX can be imported into the game. We have very defined guidelines to dimensions and poly counts...
For detailed information about ship model design: Look here
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-02 01:22, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
Get rid of points penalty for scrapping buildings.
That way if someone screws up the build, all you have to do is to step in and start scrapping and rebuilding.
Nub gets his practice and pres.
You scrap without penalty, and then get pres for rebuilding.
Everyone goes home happy.
|
|
Will not happen, Point penalty's and planet locking are in place because of sabotuers... To many people ruined the pot previously that we were forced to implement these rules.
We might change the planet locking system to make it more flexible, but we will not do away with penalties for scrapping.
_________________
|