| Author |
Clan made Planet/Cluster and what u think |
Phellan
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 27, 2007
Posts: 220
From: Red Light District
|  Posted: 2008-01-15 22:07
Quote:
|
On 2008-01-15 08:45, Daedalus wrote:
And what do non-clan players get. they are just as important to this game as clan players.
Once way of playing really shouldn't be favored over another.
|
|
ok but this idea isnt about those players. Its to benifit clans. If you wanna do something that benifits non-allied players, think of something.
_________________
Noob you say? I may fly an escort destroyer...but I just stayed at a Holiday Inn.
|
Phellan
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 27, 2007
Posts: 220
From: Red Light District
| Posted: 2008-01-15 22:11
what do we do with those clans. we cant give an entire cluster to a clan who is hardly active however it would not be fair to give a cluster to a some clans and not others. i think if we can find a way to solve this problem that this idea would work very nicely. [/quote]
you could have the clusters controlled by powerful AI so only fleets working together could capture, and thereby keep them. The smaller fleets would have to either get their people online all at once or recruit more...or even band together with other small fleets like you suggested to capture them...
_________________
Noob you say? I may fly an escort destroyer...but I just stayed at a Holiday Inn.
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2008-01-15 22:23
AI isn't going to play a large role in the MV, at least with the current conception of the game. So having defenders of captured clusters, challengers to fleet ownership, or defenders of neutral planets waiting to be captured is not going to happen.
Why?
- AI is dumb; humans can easily outclass them, and just having a crapload isn't an option because
- AI is server/processor intensive
- and it doesn't fit in with DS's goal and modus operandi of player-controlled ships, ship-to-ship combat, and general pvp.
AI is used for rare events or random diversions like Gaifen hanging out in nebulae. That's it, unless you can cause complete regime change and donate a dozen new servers.
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
Winters Rapture
Fleet Admiral
United Nations Space Command
Joined: December 09, 2007
Posts: 355
| Posted: 2008-01-15 22:35
For the earlyer comment about it overloading the MV, i have already had a chat with an Admin and it was wasent a problam. and the way about not every noob with a coupon you would need a to have a high enugh fleet. it would be one of the fail safes to make sure the MV wouldent get over croweded with every low level fleet planet.
_________________
Time for revenge. . .
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2008-01-15 23:25
Quote:
|
On 2008-01-15 22:05, Shigernafy wrote:
But at the moment, it doesn't really matter if its "owned" by a fleet, since that fleet gets no benefit from them, at least not above and beyond what they would get from any other planet.
|
|
An idea: Perhaps, your fleet is limited to a certain number of players, and a certain number of fleet heads. To expand your fleet, you need to assemble credits granted from planets. If I am remebering correctly, their is a now-useless stat generated for planets called "income" and "planet worth". Obviously, we could take this idea to the ball park and such and come with a whole new way fleet mechanics work.
Quote:
|
Platforms are actively being worked on for this patch, and your ideas about them don't seem to jive with what I have heard about how they will be used. Do you have a suggestion, then, about how to use them?
|
|
Theirs two ways to take platforms:
-Like mines: A certain number per area, per faction, that last for a couple of hours after they are built
-Like planets: A certain number per area, per faction, that last forever.
Quote:
|
As for the proposal in general, it is not technically difficult to do, as you have likely seen due to the frequency of random MV changes. The problem is equity: how do you develop a system which fairly rewards those who should be while not providing rewards to those who don't deserve any? And how do you determine who deserves what?
On an entirely personal level - not as a staff member - I feel like a simple number of players + total prestige is overly simplistic and doesn't really get at a lot of what the MV is about. On the other hand, how do you measure fame, influence, importance, and contribution? Do we just have players propose a fleet be honored, and then have a public vote on their worthiness? Or should we stick purely to quantifiable measures - only planets owned, prestige, player numbers, subscription history, etc? I like having some measure of popularity play into it because I think that better gets at why fleets are important, but there are obviously problems inherent in that.
|
|
This is a thorny issue. We obviously need numeric data - the largest fleet, the most active fleet, the fleet with the most prestige, et cetra. However, we also need non-numeric data. What those players did, how others think of them, their aggergate skill in combat. Obviously, of coruse, non-numerical data is up for interpretation, so care needs to be taken in selecting from the creme of the crop.
Quote:
|
Plus, from a staff standpoint, we don't want to have the rules lax enough that every week there's a new fleet graduating to planet-naming status, as that's a headache.. yet not have it so restricted that it never happens (if this does happen at all).
|
|
Every week is much too fast. Every month, maybe bi-month. Make it something that people work towards, something that allows them to go "I made my mark on history, here, in this game, at least for some time. Let me rejoice in it". I also assume you're going to allow them to name them whatever they want within the RoC. Let them have fun with it. Of course, they can't move planets.....
Quote:
|
Though that brings up another point - when are the planets named?
|
|
Whenever we feel the need that a current fleet/players are performing admirability within a faction and upholding the sportsmanship like conduct of Darkspace.
Quote:
|
Do we update clusters at patches? Do we do it live whenever necessary?
|
|
Live, since it's irrational towards future patches and is mainly a "cool" factor that has no real after-effects on future versions
Quote:
|
What's the rationale for planets random changing their names, at least from an in-game or fictional standpoint (which isn't necessary, but would be nice to have more of)?
|
|
What planet governer woudn't want his planet named after a huge big, rising star(s) in the naval fleet? After all, they do enjoy sucking up. Besides, in my eyes, a couple of monthes in DS time is like years.
Quote:
|
Do fleets ever get their clusters taken away if they drop below a threshold, or is the fame of having a planet enough to ensure they keep a planet?
|
|
Again, tricky. If a fleet is found to be lax for whatever reasons after receiving the noble prestige of being named onto planets, perhaps they should be disciplined with a revoking of their future eligability to have this right, or even have the names changed immediatly. Or, prestige loss.
Quote:
|
What if we run out of planets? Which existing planets shouldn't be changed (at minimum, I'll say now that home clusters and R33 are off-limits, whatever happens)?
|
|
If we set the bar too high , this discussion is moot. Too low, that will happen.The task lies within setting the bar at the correct hight.
Quote:
|
How about suns (and therefore systems)? Should we just take everything but the home systems and rename them to "Unclaimed Object #1972" and then slowly give them away as fleets (and players?) become qualified by whatever process is determined to own a planet?
|
|
No. This is going a bit too far, I believe. Suns are something important, they are major ways of traveling the inter-galactic highway. They need to be kept to their historical names to make any sense to future generations. Renaming planets to 'Planet #00001' is just silly. Planets already have names, we don't need to erase them for this event. Just change.
_________________
|
Winters Rapture
Fleet Admiral
United Nations Space Command
Joined: December 09, 2007
Posts: 355
| Posted: 2008-01-16 00:03
Wow, kinda off topic but that is a lot of quotes, lol.
_________________
Time for revenge. . .
|
Phellan
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 27, 2007
Posts: 220
From: Red Light District
| Posted: 2008-01-16 00:13
I understand now what your saying about the AI not being practical...
I like the idea of fleets having to save up to buy planets...a kinda of monopoly within factions. It isnt really practical for the current layout of the game, but that new pirates game seems to use a similar idea. Groups own certain areas, with their own unique resources, which need to be combined to purchace upgrades, bigger ships, etc(or in the case of DS, special planet structures, platforms, or possibly make it so more than one engineer is needed to construct platforms?). So while again, it isnt necissarly practical for DS, I like the idea of an inter-faction struggle to trade for resources necissary to fight a cross-faction battle. It brings back the trade aspect, gives fleets a reason to protect their specific planet or more likely cluster, and preservers the fleet and faction teamwork against other factions. It also forces individuals to combine their currently useless credits and puts some additional value on ships besides prestigue. Hope that makes some degree of sense or that something can be incorperated.
...OMG or we could make it like Black and white... We sacrafice noobs by having them jump into the sun, and in return the sun god fires doom slingers at any enemies entering the system! I nominate the noob formerly known as trader to be the first victim...
[ This Message was edited by: Bakagaijen on 2008-01-16 00:50 ]
_________________
Noob you say? I may fly an escort destroyer...but I just stayed at a Holiday Inn.
|
Banshee
Grand Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: August 28, 2001
Posts: 2181
From: Philadelphia, PA
| Posted: 2008-01-16 04:33
Just doesnt really seem maintainable with the current state of the game.
Find them, bomb them, worthless, why bother right?
If you want to give something to Fleets, then re-instate Fleet accounts, if anyone remembers the "guild bank" system for credits that was in for a while, they'll know what I mean.
Implement a Tax system, that pays the owning fleet of the planet a percentage of the planets income per 24 hours or so.
Gives the controlling Fleet an incentive to defend and maintain their planets. Also gives them a reward for doing so. Will also keep in check that only active Fleets can get the reward, if your not active, or less active, you'll recieve no, or lower income.
As for the question of freelance players? Well, its a teamplay game, teamwork should be rewarded, freelancing should remain as it is, can still play your own way, just miss the benefits of being in a Fleet.
Obviously credits would need to become a more functional part of the game for a system like this to be worthwhile, perhaps something else to consider.
Could use the credits to purchase raw materials that could be collected to construct "rare" ships on a Fleet level. Nothing overpowered, just maybe a few gimmicks, new hull design, an extra slot or two.
Something to consider maybe *shrugs*
_________________
|
Phellan
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 27, 2007
Posts: 220
From: Red Light District
| Posted: 2008-01-16 04:53
"Could use the credits to purchase raw materials that could be collected to construct "rare" ships on a Fleet level. Nothing overpowered, just maybe a few gimmicks, new hull design, an extra slot or two.
Something to consider maybe *shrugs*"
[/quote]
I like that, a hero class as it were. Doesnt need to be overpowered but it could be a specific purpose ship. Maybe move the core weapons into one of those special ships(which would eliminate qst spammage). Or a special engineer that is the only one capable of building platforms. A mobile planetary shield? A transport ship designed to imobalize(finally a purpose for tractor beams!) and capture enemy vessels. Meh none of it may be possible but its all worked in other games and it would be cool!
_________________
Noob you say? I may fly an escort destroyer...but I just stayed at a Holiday Inn.
|
Atomic
Vice Admiral
Joined: January 28, 2004
Posts: 40
| Posted: 2008-01-16 06:02
Looks good on paper but it could be hard to achieve.
If a Fleet/clan changes Factions the planet around a certain area would have to be changed as well, the strategic positioning of a cluster/single Fleet owned planet could be in a location that is around or near a enemies ( that used to be your faction until you swapped sides); who's to say 2 fleets cant have a planet in 1 system, which could bring about devastating circumstance's, it might have to wait for a Admin to swap it over just like the safe-zone planets when they go rebel. There are a lot of things that could not make it work but its a good idea for the future.
Atomic.
_________________
Explosive
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2008-01-16 13:29
Clan ownership of planets is already in the game.
Personally I am against creating clusters of planets just for specific or privileged clans. It breaks the entire idea of defending an existing territory and will interfere a lot with the strategic design of the game universe.
The way we want to develop the fleet ownership system is something like this:
- Owned planets providing 'tax' to fleet treasury.
- Option of fleet treasury providing wages to each fleet member.
- Option of fleet treasury being used to offset some upgrade costs at fleet owned planets.
- Option of fleet treasury for providing bounties on enemy players.
- Tax level impacting planet morale.
- Morale contributing to chance of planet revolting to 'non-fleeted' faction control, requiring player supervision and monitoring.
- Ability of fleets admin's on same faction to trade planets owned in the same system.
- No purchasing of planets from non-fleet control - the only way to obtain planets should be by capturing them - promoting conquest.
- Platforms requiring player to be in a fleet to build.
- Fleet owned platforms requiring credit maintenance from fleet treasury.
- Platforms requiring resources in cargo to self repair.
- Number of platforms each fleet can build in a system based on number of planets owned by that fleet in that system.
- More which I have forgotten.
[ This Message was edited by: Drafell on 2008-01-16 13:31 ]
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2008-01-16 15:40
Quote:
|
On 2008-01-15 22:05, Shigernafy wrote:
F
As for later in the thread: Enterprise, I'm seeing two somewhat competing ideas in your thread, and am somewhat confused by them and hope you can respond again to clarify.
Planets are large and permanent fixtures in the galaxy, and of course are open to everyone of the faction which owns them. But at the moment, it doesn't really matter if its "owned" by a fleet, since that fleet gets no benefit from them, at least not above and beyond what they would get from any other planet. So in that regard, setting their initial ownership to the fleet after which they are named (or not) doesn't really matter, and Palestar would make no claims as to their ownership after they were created, because it can't be controlled.. at least with current code.
I don't really know what that has to do with anything, though. Basically, I don't think I understand your problem with the system.
|
|
To clarify:
As planets can be used in a variety of ways, planets/clusters created for this purpose are no different than say, adding a system to a faction. They have more planets, and planets useable in this fashion, making them an asset. A valuable one, if not currently in this version.
I'm thinking in the long run, and in .484 for an example, a faction having more useable planets in another (which is unavoidable, if its not somehow balanced in this proposal), then they have a clear advantage that can be used against the enemy. Although planets may not be useful now, they will be later.
Quote:
|
Also, platforms will be destroyable, so that seems like a lot less of an exciting fleet reward, especially since, as they're currently conceived, there's no requirement beyond an engineer and some resources required to build one.
Which is my second point: Platforms are actively being worked on for this patch, and your ideas about them don't seem to jive with what I have heard about how they will be used. Do you have a suggestion, then, about how to use them?
|
|
Platforms are destroyable, yes. However I've heard (in past development discussions) of the possibility of them being used as bases. That is, not simply defence or supply platforms, but platforms that act as a shipyard, or a starport, and so on. Such things could be constructed remotely without the need for Admin intervention, providing the fleet has the funds and the neccessary prestige/badges/materials for it.
Of course, if such alternative platforms are not being developed, then my suggestion would be for them to be developed. Such bases could be constructed and be capturable as well as destroyable, such staging areas could add a deeper level of strategy to taking systems, in my opinion.
Whether or not this is feasible, well, I think it would still be a good idea. Restricted to fleets, obviously.
-Ent
_________________
|
DarkSpin
Captain
Sanity Assassins
Joined: August 03, 2005
Posts: 651
From: Somewhere in the USA
| Posted: 2008-01-16 16:03
I think it was a great idea but addition ideas should be supported aswell.
_________________
(- _ -) - Email: admin@inductivesoul.us
(' o ') - Website: DIAU.NET
|
Winters Rapture
Fleet Admiral
United Nations Space Command
Joined: December 09, 2007
Posts: 355
| Posted: 2008-01-17 00:08
I think this new idea is great with the Fleet tax and things of that matter and it sounds like it could be easly achieved but i would still like the clan created planet or clusters just becuse i think a fleet should have its own place in the MV. i like both of the ideas and i think it would be wounderful if both of them could work. but i think sense this topic is about the creation of clan planets and not about clan taxes. i like the idea and i wouldent mind hearing more about it.
_________________
Time for revenge. . .
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2008-01-17 01:49
in all, bad sugestion but it is becomminggreat topic. Definatly worth talking and thinking about more. Unfortinatly i'm more bussy than a bee with school.
P.s. dousn't this belong in Beta?
_________________
DS Discordion
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
