| Author |
Development Update 10/4/2005... |
UNI0N
Cadet
Joined: September 20, 2005
Posts: 12
|  Posted: 2005-10-05 12:34
Ent you have the floor, hope you come up with a good excuse as of why they need to be remove.
_________________
|
Crim
Fleet Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: March 16, 2003
Posts: 1336
| Posted: 2005-10-05 14:41
Well, I have a say in the matter with SYs and WHs...I realy do not like them..SYs- The admiral server was something to look fowards too, autmatic dread battles and all, it was awsome..Now, you dont even have time for a cruiser..In the MV, yeah, sure, their nice to have, but wouldnt the old Jumpgate way still work? ..WHs, yes, very nice, i've liked them, but it makes it too easy to invade a system, instead of having to use team work, aka. Supply and bomber having to hoof it out together, not a command dread Wh'ing, and capping the planet alone
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-10-05 14:50
Quote:
|
On 2005-10-05 11:31, Faustus wrote:
OK, you've got my attention Enterprise...
Give me your compelling argument on why I should remove worm-holes and shipyards?
-Richard
|
|
Lovely, well I have a few solid reasons why I feel the removal of both wormholes and shipyards would greatly enhance gameplay.
Reason 1. - Removal of Shipyards increases the strategic capability available to players.
In 1.480, you spawned at the gate, and crossed numerous systems to get to your destination, if we do remember. This took time, and meant that if an invading force had to be organized in order to be able to quickly take a system, but could maintain the essence of suprise. The removal of shipyards removes the ability for a player to instantly warp across the map at any given time (highly unrealistic in any case), and thus while it removes the ability for the player to instantly get in the fight, it does put back some strategic elements in the game.
In addition, the removal of shipyards would prevent enemy ships from simply abusing it, therefore, the many complaints of how people still use the shipyard to escape death would also be thereafter, no longer a problem.
On a final note, the removal of shipyards will also prevent the rapid and altogether frustrating ability for enemys to camp enemy homesystems by being able to instantly be there to defend; it will also brings back, another important strategic element to Darkspace, which will be explained with wormholes.
Reason 2 - Wormholes - The removal of wormholes removes the ability for enemy ships to simply bypass all systems in an instant in order to strike deep into enemy territory and just as easily get out.
The greatest thing that can come from the removal of wormholes is that it bring back the joyous art of Gatecamping. Gatecamping was one of the most strategic, and altogether more fun, ways, to prevent an enemy fleets advance. Some of the greatest battles occured around gates where two factions had bottlenecked, for the distances between systems were so immense larger ships could not make it.
This means, that it bring back Fleet engagements around important systems, it also prevents the more annoying aspects of bombers being able to instantly get to enemy homesystems and leveling them, and escaping just as fast; easy prestige isn't it? Enemy bombers and ships would be forced to take great risks to try and solo in deep in enemy territory, for getting out would not be easy.
The removal of wormholes also, removes the abuse of it. There are many complaints of those who "spam" them, and therefore desync the servers, also using WH's to try and "fish out" players, which can in turn cause instability client side, causing unneccessary deaths.
---
Also some more important notes :
- If Shipyards were to be removed and we went back to the Homegate method, it would also better fit with new Resource system.
Reason : While the removal of shipyards would negate the reason for the resources on certain planets to spawn certain ships, the resources on all planets could be limited to such an amount that you would still need quite a few planets to be able to spawn ships.
An idea a while back was that planets would have certain "caps" for mining/farming/credits/etc. etc. This could be implemented in a way that some planets would output far more than others, requireing the capture of them for larger amounts of resources, which if ships were set high enough resource requirements, it would also implement a strategic importance for certain planets.
- If Shipyards were removed, it allows the ability to promote better teamwork to capture systems.
Reason : Aforementioned, the removal of shipyards would bring back a sense of teamwork in order to capture systems. This is done by:
- A. Allows all players to spawn in the same system, allowing the better congregation of fleets, as well as being able to help newbies in a more organized manner.
- B. Systems being tougher to get to, would force players to further work together in order to accomplish their goals : no more prestige whoreing.
-If Wormholes were removed, it makes a larger strategic importance in teamwork.
Reason - Getting deep into enemy territory means walking into their fleets, as before, since you can't simply bypass one with a shipyard, if wormholes were removed, it forces you to use gates, and that means working together as a team in order to get past enemy defences.
---
Those are my reasons why I feel wormholes/shipyards should be removed. This is better comming from experience in 1.480 and before also.
Part of what made pre-shipyard/wormhole versions so fun was that it required teamwork in order to succeed, as it almost always took a fleet - not just a ship or two - in order to cap and hold a system. Due to that people do solo now, its made easier by that people can simply spawn anywhere, even right at the enemys doorstep, or else hitch a ride in and out instantly.
Because of this, I feel the removal of these two things will bring back a level of strategy and teamwork that this game has therefore lacked since they were implemented. I also believe, this may attract back the older players who remember those times just as well. So the removal is almost three-fold :
The removal of shipyards and wormholes will :
- 1. Bring back a sense of teamwork and strategy into the game to a higher degree.
- 2. Prevent the abuse of shipyards and wormholes by either cheating death or wrongfully causing it.
- 3. Bring back some of the older players who remember those times (and enjoyed them).
-Ent
_________________
|
RonZo *FC*
Chief Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: March 17, 2004
Posts: 178
| Posted: 2005-10-05 16:50
Nice, very nice! I ll proudly try out beta! Good to hear this. I ll be waiting ur email. Good luck!
Question: I will have to be subbed to use rank ships in Beta? Txs.
(*CEC*) RonZo
_________________
Chief Marshal RonZo
[CEC] Fleet Commander
Since 2004
|
RonZo *FC*
Chief Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: March 17, 2004
Posts: 178
| Posted: 2005-10-05 17:03
About Sys and WHs. I agree with Ent in many things, but remember u can always long jump from 1 system to another avoiding gates. Other thing, the stations will become useless. Most of the importance of em is to make whs. What will a station do, jump as regular ships? with regular tychon JDs?
I think that should be certain distances between sy. As a sy every 1.5 million gus, wich is same range than wh from station (well without leveling up), so get same. Its like a base camp, maybe some new rules can be applied to SY, as limited times to use each sy or any idea that please tell us!
Well, as i say in last post, nice, very nice, cause it would help to reduce lag and unsync very much.
RonZo
_________________
Chief Marshal RonZo
[CEC] Fleet Commander
Since 2004
|
Doran
Chief Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 29, 2003
Posts: 4032
From: The Gideon Unit
| Posted: 2005-10-05 17:07
Quote:
|
On 2005-10-05 16:50, RonZo wrote:
Question: I will have to be subbed to use rank ships in Beta? Txs.
|
|
Answer: no (subject to change on a whim). if you have not already had your stats duplicated beta-side for the .483 beta, you may or may not be able to have them copied over/updated for .484 beta. if any stat transfer occurs, there will most likely be a thread reserved for that purpose
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-10-05 22:14
Bumpity bump.
-Ent
_________________
|
Dom243
Fleet Admiral
Joined: December 11, 2002
Posts: 104
| Posted: 2005-10-05 23:25
hopefully better EAD's and assault dreads and whatever the kluth have as the equvalent? siphon i think?
keep up the good work faust 
_________________
|
Jar Jar Binks
Grand Admiral
Joined: December 25, 2001
Posts: 556
| Posted: 2005-10-05 23:56
Quote:
|
On 2005-10-05 14:50, Enterprise wrote:
-snip-
|
|
DONT use realism as a argument in a UNrealistic game!!!
thats THE most annoying thing i know.
if u want anything gone from this game, sure be my guest. but using realism is pretty pointles.
and why would it not be tactical to have to use shipyards? from my point of view the invading force needs to use alot MORE tactic if they are to take a system with a few shipyards in it.
oh and by the way, the gates that connect the systems are ALSO highly unrealistic. lets remove those to!
_________________
|
JRE
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 14, 2003
Posts: 570
| Posted: 2005-10-06 03:48
I just friggin loved that idea....waiting on big F's reply with a CC in hand..........
O and Jar Jar how about Faustes make a huge invinsible ship that its sole mission is to kill you the second you begin play? Not very realistic, but you dont like realism.
[ This Message was edited by: JRE on 2005-10-06 03:57 ]
_________________
|
Thorium
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 05, 2004
Posts: 185
| Posted: 2005-10-06 04:41
i'd like to see one change made to the SY's. require tec lvl for the ship type to be spawned as it is now but also include logged ships...
this will limate the number of SY's in a system. the more there are the easyer it will be to take the system due to the SY's requireing tec to be of any use and therefore limating the deffences that can be put on the planet
i like SY's for there uses and it adds importance to the planet makeing it a greater target
new MV/systems/planets would be a nice change. most importantly better clusters. right now the only clusters of any real use are in BS
gate gapes would be nice to, requires team work to get the big ships to the fight (ether supply refulling half way or station WH. we all keep an eye out for WH's, anyone that doesnt is just asking to lose some planets)
i like WH's dispite the fact they can be used as wepons. personaly ive only tryed to WH someone into a star once (i was pissed. sorry... dont feel too bad though as they didnt hit) and ive WH near death emy ships back to their systems before (had them locked in a tractor beam and stuck in a dictor. worked them over and kicked them out. im a nice guy like that but not before i milked some pres of em  )
i dont realy see a problem doing ether. the real problem is when it is used to create lag or when it is used to go fishing (both involveing opening many WH's). this should be moderated (/report) and nothing more...
i dont like stations that can jump. give me 6 tractor beams (5 will do) and a dict. jump target hit tractor beams, engage the dict and ship will die.
it also removes the risk of bringing in a station due to the station being able to jump right into orbit. the old SLD way was better imo... requires team mates to cover you.
then there is current problem of once you get your station in possion to deffend a planet you get hit by torps from the planet or wose still the planets PD hits you due to it targeting the emy ships... hell it is not even realy PD anymore. bomber covers bombs, beams fire at bomber, beams rechargeing, bombs hit planet.
at lest with the cannons on the planet they would miss you if place above or below the planets equator. takeing fire from your oun planet is not fun and has got me killed.
depos limated to 1 (2 would be fine) per planet.
why wate for a supply when i can just go over to a planet that has 4 or 5 and get fixed in no time.
im getting my butt kicked, time to fly around the depo planet, repareing, attacking my emy.
i played ugto for a bit at one pont. was in a command dread building. ICC jumps in with 4 attack ships (2 destroyers, 1 cursser, 1 frig). i put up 5 depos and they are unable to kill me. clearly i should have been force to run but due to being able to put up as many depos as i want i was able to force them to run (my ship was not even modded. i upgraded what i had in orbit).
fighter bomber should go as well. my station is not a bomber and yet...
jump to 6000gu. launch fighter bombers and keep lanching fighter bombers untill the first set reaches the planet. jump in to 1000gu (try 550gu though as ther maybe no dict) and stack fighter bombers. been able to take down 150% sheilded planets doing that.
this clearly violates the "no one man bombing operation"
better yet change the bombers so they fire torps at ships. this way we have standard fighters that fire missile, bombers that fire torps, intercepters that shoot down fighters/missiles of all ship/planet based types, and personale eccm fighters that fire only cannon (dont remember what they are called. they are not much use due to ecm being so strong and the attack power so weak)
a control interface for fighter and fighters roles
fighter should be able to be launched with out a target (they orbit you or a friend depending on orders)
have attack/neutral/deffend orders
should all be able to launch in a more timely maner (posable dependent on faction as to how fast all the fighters can be deployed but around 1min).
limated fule (time in space limated to around 5min before returning)
limated number possable in space dependent on the number that is on the ship (ie. dread, 4 fighter slots, 5 in each = 20 fighters... the number of slots on a ship will have to be revisited)
fighters/wepons/orders/behavior (note, cannons are on all fighters and hit any ship type. note neutral will let you target ships and have no action taken. auto targets ships up to 1000gu away)
standered fighters - missiles - effective against destroyer class and up. attack - attacks any ship thats in range (10,000gu) and targeted at the time the order is given.
deffend - deffends any friendly target, targeted at the time the order is given, attacks ships in a 5000gu range of the deffended ship (10,000gu range in effect, if defended target move out of range of the mother ship fighters return)
bombers - torps - effective against crussers and up.
attack/deffend the same as standered
intersepters - beams - not real an attack class, effective aganst fighters/missiles
only neutral/deffend avalable. deffend performs the same way as standared
ecm/eccm fighters - cannon only - not realy an attack class, use as aux ecm/eccm
neutral - eccm active (can be set to follow a ship if the ship is targeted at the time the order is given)
deffend - ecm active (can be set to follow a ship if the ship is targeted at the time the order is given)
the power of the ecm/eccm would need to be looked into. maybe only one fighter per slot
way off topic but "F" opened the door
besides no one likes my ideas anyways 
looking forward the the beta
take your time. better "right" than "right now"
[ This Message was edited by: Thorium on 2005-10-06 04:57 ]
[small][ This Message was edited by: Thorium on 2005-10-06 06:33 ][/small]
[ This Message was edited by: Thorium on 2005-10-06 06:42 ]
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2005-10-06 04:51
Quote:
|
DONT use realism as a argument in a UNrealistic game!!!
thats THE most annoying thing i know.
if u want anything gone from this game, sure be my guest. but using realism is pretty pointles.
and why would it not be tactical to have to use shipyards? from my point of view the invading force needs to use alot MORE tactic if they are to take a system with a few shipyards in it.
oh and by the way, the gates that connect the systems are ALSO highly unrealistic. lets remove those to!
|
|
First off, realsim is an important part of games. Using a jumpgate to travel millions of miles makes alot more sense than entering a diamond and appearing on the other side of the map.
Not only is that completely unrealistic, I think we all see the lameness if an entire fleet spawned in your homesystem everyday on a whim whenver you try to recap. or when someone runs to the SY everytime they are dammed and enters it.
Since you have something against realism, let me throw this to you.
JRE put in the excellent point (I know you were just joking m8), that just because something is unrealistic, does not mean that it is balenced.
So lets try this. Say that we could build defence bases that fired 5 QSTs every 3 seconds. Thats not very realistic is it?
Say if we jumped into a planet we merely bounced off? Not very realistic either is it...
Perhaps if we had ships that traveled at FTL speeds without the use of a Drive made for it? Thats not very realistic either.
But you did have a point JRE, than in an unrealistic game, realism doesn't have a true role, but,there is a extent to that. And I don't see how the ability get instantly across the map at the mere press of a button instantly, is either realistic, or tactical in that sense. Sure, its tactical that a ship can mount 20+ torpedos, but its pretty lame too isn't it? Its also tactical to use an ED, which can survive quite a bit of punishment, but thats also unbalenced too isn't it?
-Ent
P.S. Look here about a post I made earlier on the subject of Wormholes and Shipyards. Coulden't find it for the life of me before.
[ This Message was edited by: Enterprise on 2005-10-06 04:59 ]
_________________
|
RagAnok
Admiral
Joined: February 02, 2004
Posts: 237
| Posted: 2005-10-06 04:57
Ok my two cents on sy's i dont think they need to be removed in total just limit the number of them per faction say a max of 3
_________________
[IMG]http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m3/zardous/gunner.gif[IMG]
Telekinesis, thats what you need, just lay back and let your mind do the walking
|
Thorium
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 05, 2004
Posts: 185
| Posted: 2005-10-06 05:12
haveing a limate of only 3 SY's would make it posable to nuke all of them at the same time (done it many times before to delay the deffenders. nail the SY's in the system and cap as fast as you can). not good. seen a few threads complaning that there was no place to spawn due to all the sy's being nuked and right now it is standared to have one 90tec SY and one 10tec SY (more than likely there will be two 10tec, one 90tec and sometimes one 70tec in a given system. well thats assumeing the system is built but no need to go into that)
_________________
|
JRE
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 14, 2003
Posts: 570
| Posted: 2005-10-06 05:12
I agree limit the SY and make the resourses shared between planets a LOT less.
AND make home gate capable of spawning ALL ships
[ This Message was edited by: JRE on 2005-10-06 05:15 ]
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
