| Author |
The State of the Metaverse |
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
|  Posted: 2008-10-13 01:22
*muttergrumbles about losing half of his post*
Okay. The way the Metaverse is set up right now, it has 15 systems spread across four servers. Three of those servers--CD36, Sirius and Sol--contain a faction's homesystem and 2-3 others. They also have a gate that connects them to the fourth server, Epsilon. Obviously, the first three servers are intended to be "home territory" and the fourth one is "contested territory" in the middle.
Unfortunately, this is currently not how the MV is working, because each of the four servers has a home gate for all three factions. So instead of having to fight their way through contested territory, any faction can attack the others directly through their home gate in that server. In effect, this turns one big Metaverse spread across four servers into four small Metaverses which just happen to be connected. It won't matter if the ICC or the K'luth capture Sol, because the UGTO can just keep operating out of their home gates in the CD36, Epsilon or Sirius servers.
The home gates need to go if there is going to be any large-scale strategic aspect to the Metaverse.
Further than that, though, I think it could do with a little expanding. As the Metaverse is right now, it looks a lot like the map for the Epsilon server:
(I basically copied the Epsilon map and rubbed off the names. The triangles now represent clusters instead of individual systems.)
This setup ensures that if one faction goes to attack another, there is only one potential route for them to take: through Epsilon. The center system of that cluster, Epsilon Caranie Aa, is going to be a perpetual battleground. And this makes the strategic aspect of the game (assuming we have one with the extra home gates gone) rather simplicstic.
I say, add in some secondary systems. Backwaters, an outer rim, whatever you want to call it. They shouldn't be as valuable--not as many life-bearing worlds, small systems, etc.--and there should be more of them between the home territories so it would be more attractive to attack directly through Epsilon. I'm thinking it'd look something like this:
(Again, the triangles represent clusters of systems)
This way, if the direct path is too heavily-defended, there's the back door option. It also allows for backwater systems where there can be minor skirmishes instead of the full-scale battles we can expect in Epsilon Caranie, which will make them a good area for newer players to train up in.
Besides, there are a bunch of star systems left over from earlier incarnations of the Metaverse which aren't getting used at all right now. I say we bring 'em back!
Oh, and one minor cosmetic thing.
The system-to-system jumpgates right now all use the ICC gate model. Why not have the jumpgates in the various faction home clusters use their respective gate models, since we have them now? Thus jumpgates in Sol would be the UGTO one and in Sirius they'd be the K'luth one.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2008-10-13 01:25 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2008-10-13 07:01
For your first point, the one about home gates, I believe that currently ALL gates are valid spawn points for anyone primarily for testing purposes. It's planned at some point to change that so that people can only spawn at their home gates and shipyards, so you'll have to fight your way into enemy territory as opposed to just appearing there.
The idea of multiple routes into enemy systems sounds interesting in theory, but I strongly suspect might cause the game to degenerate into a similar scenario to .483, where nobody got a decent fight because people switched to bombing undefended systems when resistance got too tough on the front lines.
When people say "back routes" I immediately think of the Battlefield-type games, where putting up a static defence anywhere was pointless because, due to the map design, there was always some way to sneak up behind someone, so the main battlefronts were empty and the sneaky routes were full of snipers trying to shoot each other in the back. While there aren't any snipers in DS, I suspect that putting in multiple routes to each system might cause more chaos than anything else.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Delando
Marshal
Joined: May 04, 2007
Posts: 260
| Posted: 2008-10-13 09:13
I think ur first problem just go solved, spwning from jumpgates been diabled. and jumpgates can now be captured
travel is now limited.
_________________
|
philll
Admiral
Joined: September 13, 2003
Posts: 268
| Posted: 2008-10-13 09:58
i personaly like the idea with adding more outer rim systems to the MV.
current game play goes by the motto: "Follow the yellow brick road" untill you reach the other factions home system. adding more clusters will likely thin out the frontlines as said above but also add more variety to the game.
id suggest waiting untill we have a large active playerbase though as not to have it backfire on us causing a huge empty MV with no action what so ever.
_________________
I have 6.5 billion imaginary friends, and youre one of them.
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2008-10-13 10:32
Ok most of it has already been said by Gejaheline but lets repair some and add some extra.
we have had multiple MV maps like you suggested in the past. Why was it changed to this single? because the playerbase dropped and contact was scarce, you where lucky if you found some enemy. in the current system you have more chances of enemy contact due to the limited choices where to go.
But lets look the old goodie
1.480 MV
This MV had plenty of room to go around a system and had some systems that required jumping to it. I bet a lot of vets can think of a conflict or two that they enjoyed in there.
I sincerely hope that if the player base grows we might move back to a more complex MV map.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2008-10-13 10:36
Quote:
|
On 2008-10-13 10:32, Eledore[NL] wrote:
Ok most of it has already been said by Gejaheline but lets repair some and add some extra.
we have had multiple MV maps like you suggested in the past. Why was it changed to this single? because the playerbase dropped and contact was scarce, you where lucky if you found some enemy. in the current system you have more chances of enemy contact due to the limited choices where to go.
But lets look the old goodie
1.480 MV
This MV had plenty of room to go around a system and had some systems that required jumping to it. I bet a lot of vets can think of a conflict or two that they enjoyed in there.
I sincerely hope that if the player base grows we might move back to a more complex MV map.
|
|
I completely disagree with what is said here. The playerbase is indeed small, and that was why contact was scarce, thus the mv map was made smaller to counter this problem. Now the server has been split in 4 completely seperate servers, any contact INSIDE the servers is not possible, the only way is by constantly monitoring clan/friends chat, thus meaning you need someone of those on your faction, in every server. Darkspace is small, this aint gonna happen. Splitting the MV in 4 servers was the worst thing that could be done, it practicly smallens the playerbase per server even more, i totally completely disagree with this decission and sincerely hope it will be reverted soon.
Id like to hear some more opinions about this to.
_________________
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2008-10-13 10:47
I disagree, Six. The way it's currently laid out, there are only going to be two front lines at most, and you'll easily be able to tell if the line has been pushed onto another server because, well, there won't be any enemy planets in the sector. There is one problem, of course: If you can't find anywhere to spawn in a sector, you have to logoff and reconnect in a different place. Hmm.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2008-10-13 11:51
cant you still spawn at all jumpgates? might be me tough, havent played a while
_________________
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2008-10-13 12:07
In order to answer your question, Six, I shall scroll up slightly and hit "Quote":
Quote:
|
On 2008-10-13 09:13, Delando wrote:
I think ur first problem just go solved, spwning from jumpgates been diabled. and jumpgates can now be captured
travel is now limited.
|
|
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2008-10-13 13:03
I rest my case.
_________________
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2008-10-13 13:54
We are still working on optimizing the MV cluster layouts and designs, while minimizing the number of times players are forced to completely rebuild. Therefore updates on this front will be less common than for other bug fixes.
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
