| Author |
Server Ideas |
Leonide
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 01, 2005
Posts: 1553
From: Newport News, Virginia
|  Posted: 2009-05-05 18:30
Quote:
|
On 2009-05-05 17:42, Shigernafy wrote:
Two Weeks™
|
|
_________________
captain of the ICC Assault Cruiser C.S.S. Sledgehammer
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2009-05-05 20:21
Quote:
|
On 2009-05-05 16:32, Drafell wrote:
Imagine a Metaverse where each cluster has it's own theme, and and ongoing events and scenario's which are based on those themes.
|
|
More so than now? That's what we supposedly have now isn't it?
Quote:
|
Imagine quests which require everyone in a cluster to work together to complete, or where the last few survivors struggle desperately trying to defend their last planets against the enemy onslaught.
Imagine a world where the UGTO Chancellors supply of imperial cheese wedges runs out, and only YOU can escort his cheese freighter back to Earth, defending it against a multitude of pirate assaults.
|
|
We have that stuff now with events. They are being player run atm, whereas there used to be an event staff. Are we looking at progress here?
Quote:
|
Imagine resource poor clusters where the only effective way to build is to ferry all of the needed resources in yourself...
|
|
Nothing new here. We've had that before in the MV, when it was big and wide. And then it was only semi empty.
Quote:
|
We can bring you combat only, but in clusters designed for it, each with their own particular twist that helps to pull in players from surrounding clusters whilst fitting in with the overall Metaverse concept.
|
|
You had me till you said MV concept. Everything until that part is exactly what a scenario server does. Are you saying there will be a mv that has conecting scenario severs?
Quote:
|
This is what we are aiming for; not a bunch of disparate servers that have no relation to each other.
|
|
That is really up to the staff.
I mean, if all you put out are the same drab "disparate servers with no relation to each other", then thats what you will be putting out. The players would be thrilled to have map editing contests that can offer new maps. The dev team can spend more time tweaking and evolving maps, instead of fighting balance. There is no reason to expect that what we would get is some crappy maps that don't matter. I guess we give the staff better credit than that. I know ya'll can do better than crappy work, because 1.5 is so much better.
As far as giving us combat, yeah I do want combat. In a server that goes 24/7, sure. but also in maps that give guys a chance.
The arenas could always be changed as well. And missions could also be enacted in scenarios and in an arena.
The two problems I see, is that the game is too wide open, and it is trying to do mare than it should.
Make a DS 2 and do a ground up revamp, intending to go with a MV style format.
Give DS1 what it is. A revolving door of "I pwn you, you pwn me, we make prestige skillfully". It was never at its best then it was then.
Maybe even allow players to start their own maps, as in a warrock style format, but that probably too much of a change.
Combat is what the game is about. Give it back to us.
_________________
bucket link
|
Sens [R33]
Admiral
Joined: September 27, 2008
Posts: 1020
From: Edge of th...
| Posted: 2009-05-05 20:50
actually those quests don't exist yet... well they do, just not on release or beta
_________________
Proud member of the Order of the Gaifen
Founder and former Club chair of the Shigernafy Fan Club
Co-founder of the Doran Judication Comittee
|
-Shadowalker-™
Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: September 23, 2007
Posts: 709
From: Shadows
| Posted: 2009-05-05 22:04
Quote:
|
On 2009-05-05 17:42, Shigernafy wrote:
Two Weeks™
|
|
No, dont ever say that, say that an nothing ever gets done. The idea gets pulled down the drain and it takes DS with it.
[ This Message was edited by: -Shadowalker- on 2009-05-05 22:06 ]
_________________
|
Hellza - Dark Master
Fleet Admiral
Praetorian Wolves
Joined: June 06, 2004
Posts: 498
| Posted: 2009-05-05 22:27
I kind of have a indea.
Darkspace may come down to the point where staff just might "have" to turn off Mv an put up senarios to get people back into the game. (Think as Darkspace is a brand new game again) once there is a decent flow of people returning, Put up in news about the Mv coming back. (give it a two weeks notice) so this would make feelts get prepared. When you guys would bring back the MV, bring it back with four systems, one for each faction, an one for "tug of war" system. (since we have players back by then.) this would be only a test for a week or two. see how its resaults are. then one by one each month add a few system (to the point it is now).
Long to short
- Fix the damm building, even the people who LOVE building hates it.
- Turn off mv for awhile.
- Bring up the "newbie/FA Server".
- Get more players back.
- Bring back a small mv.
- Slowly introduce more systems in the Mv.
there ya go! just do that an I could guarantee the good ol games when we all were active. with numbers back, it will also give the staff more motivation cause they are seeing good results. not to mention when the players are back. you will be able to 'test' out balance alot more better.
therefore make Darkspace even a much more better place 
- Heres my two cents.
[ This Message was edited by: Hellza - Dark Master. on 2009-05-05 22:31 ]
_________________
I am watching you in the dark shadows
|
DarkCloudd
Grand Admiral
Joined: June 20, 2005
Posts: 85
From: Iowa
| Posted: 2009-05-06 03:02
I like the idea of different server but if we want the MV to change why not set it up differently. Each faction has a system with their home gate (kinda like it is now), but put them in different areas. I'm thinking along the lines of a cross or compass. Each system has one jump gate to the central system that has a few planets that can be continually fought over. Give the pirates one system all their own so they can jump into the central area and fight for planets. You could also give the MI a planet in the central system so to add a bit more of a challenge. Instead of fighting just each other you can trade blows with the UTGO or Luthies and the MI at the same time.
Pirate System
|
|
|
UTGO System------Central System-------ICC System
|
|
|
K'Luth System
This way if you want to invade the UTGO system as a foothold to their Home system you dont have to go throught luthy region to get their. Plus there would be more combat since all the AI would be fight for the planets in the central cluster, you wouldnt have to spend alot of time hunting for them. Just my personal thoughts, think it would add a little variety to the game and make it a little more fun. (And please no pirate stations they are impossible to kill [without having a Dread, which I currently cannot get] if you are on by yourself even with AI help).
_________________
|
DarkCloudd
Grand Admiral
Joined: June 20, 2005
Posts: 85
From: Iowa
| Posted: 2009-05-06 03:03
Oops my cross didnt stay the way it sould have but think of it as a cross and it should come to you, I hope.
_________________
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2009-05-06 05:30
Tael
Captain
Palestar
Joined: July 03, 2002
Posts: 3219
From: San Francisco Bay Area
Posted: 2009-05-06 00:57
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Won't happen. Regardless of the views of any of the Dev Team, the owner of the company has never made a secret that the MV concept was always the main focus of the game. Even dating back to 2000 when many people joined the beta.
Shipyards were introduced because of issues with many players FF'ing and bickering over lack of resources after someone spawned a ship in Scenario.
Scenario servers with shipyards did not draw players. Shipyards were made BECAUSE of players. Main focus of the game is the MV.
No reason for another one of these threads. Locked
[ This Message was edited by: Tael on 2009-05-06 00:58 ]
Was the response given to a poll on MV vs FA servers.
so apparently we are just beating a dead horse. All the talk of giving input, and it always comes to this. So ya'll may as well lock this thread too.
_________________
bucket link
|
befuddled
Fleet Admiral
Joined: December 01, 2002
Posts: 42
From: befuddled
| Posted: 2009-05-06 08:42
I've got to admit that I don't understand why there is a reluctance to concentrate development on the features of whatever game version had the most player involvement and customer stickiness. If that period was pre-2004 (and I don't know that it was), then, after 5 years of pursuing an MV development vision that isn't pulling in more punters, while at the same time it is losing existing ones, maybe it would be sensible to re-examine what was successful in the past and why.
Might it not make sense to survey the customer base - past and present - to discover what they like and dislike about the game, and from those that left, why they left.
I'm paid up for another five months, but I've canceled the auto-renewal; so by then I'll have given this revamped DarkSpace a year's assessment and $100. I hope I find a reason to come back for more.
_________________
\"Scissors are overpowered. Rock is fine.\" - Paper
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2009-05-06 11:49
We simply do not have the time or resources to spin of a separate instance of DarkSpace (as that is what would be required), and balance it in order for it to be used specifically for scenario play.
The factions are balanced as complete factions, with all of the positives and negatives this entails, not just as ship versus ship combat. Sure, we may focus a great deal on the combat aspects, but ICC ships do NOT equal UGTO ships, and UGTO ships do NOT equal K'Luth ships. They are broadly balanced overall, but as the recent dueling ladder has shown, the ships are not designed for type of dueling or small scale battles that scenario's were historically known for.
I would rather work on features that I can actually implement reasonably fast, than go back on several years worth of effort and redo everything from scratch, again.
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2009-05-06 19:00
I think you meant to say "implement relatively fast" since then you can point to the special relativity that is darkspace -- since we travel nearer the speed of light, things appear to take longer. So then we can claim that it only took us two weeks once we roll out these features in 2014.
_________________
* [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.\"
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2009-05-06 23:56
Quote:
|
On 2009-05-06 19:00, Shigernafy wrote:
I think you meant to say "implement relatively fast" since then you can point to the special relativity that is darkspace -- since we travel nearer the speed of light, things appear to take longer. So then we can claim that it only took us two weeks once we roll out these features in 2014.
|
|
2014? this is closer than what i expected.
with my calculations ,two weeks = we whine - you deny x (we whine % you deny)/ (we whine+ you deny) = infinity
_________________
* Josef hands [PB]Quantium the Golden GothThug award for best melodrama in a miniseries...
[-GTN-]BackSlash: "Azreal is a master of showing me what is horribly broken in the game."
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2009-05-07 03:33
You guys made scenario servers with shipyards and no resource system? And when it failed you used it to justify why scenarios are no good?
The game is dying. Why won't those in charge accept it? Why are they constantly pushing for a MV that people do not want to play, when there's so many people that are asking for the old scenario servers back? (Faustus especially?) And seriously, you can't bring a scenario server back in the game's current state and use it's failure as justification for abandoning scenarios.
I guarantee you if the game were re-coded to eliminate shipyards and bring back the old resource system for scenarios there would be more players. I also guarantee that continuing down the MV path will make this game fail. Heck, all the patches and nerfs to 1.5 chased away a whole lot of players.
The current space game I play has neither a persistent server nor a scenario server. Rather, it resets every few months, or faster if a team manages to claim emperor (won't make sense if you don't know the game). That won't quite work for Darkspace, but the fast paced scenario games do.
Forget the plans for the MV. Forget about a persistent server. That's not what the players want. Darkspace does not do well as a persistent server game. Re-code the game to eliminate shipyards and re-introduce the old resource system, then re-introduce scenario servers (with an extended time limit; 2-3 hours per map is not long enough. I'd say double it to 4 for small maps and up to 6 for large maps).
The key to scenarios is no shipyards and old resource system. Unless of course you don't mind watching Darkspace die a slow death. Do I need to email Faustus directly and let him know that perhaps his vision of a MV may not be the best thing for this game? That perhaps abandoning the idea altogether and just going back to what the game used to be a few years ago would be best? So many of us know it, why doesn't he?
[ This Message was edited by: MrSparkle on 2009-05-07 03:36 ]
_________________
|
Hellza - Dark Master
Fleet Admiral
Praetorian Wolves
Joined: June 06, 2004
Posts: 498
| Posted: 2009-05-07 05:42
Quote:
|
On 2009-05-07 03:33, MrSparkle wrote:
You guys made scenario servers with shipyards and no resource system? And when it failed you used it to justify why scenarios are no good?
The game is dying. Why won't those in charge accept it? Why are they constantly pushing for a MV that people do not want to play, when there's so many people that are asking for the old scenario servers back? (Faustus especially?) And seriously, you can't bring a scenario server back in the game's current state and use it's failure as justification for abandoning scenarios.
I guarantee you if the game were re-coded to eliminate shipyards and bring back the old resource system for scenarios there would be more players. I also guarantee that continuing down the MV path will make this game fail. Heck, all the patches and nerfs to 1.5 chased away a whole lot of players.
The current space game I play has neither a persistent server nor a scenario server. Rather, it resets every few months, or faster if a team manages to claim emperor (won't make sense if you don't know the game). That won't quite work for Darkspace, but the fast paced scenario games do.
Forget the plans for the MV. Forget about a persistent server. That's not what the players want. Darkspace does not do well as a persistent server game. Re-code the game to eliminate shipyards and re-introduce the old resource system, then re-introduce scenario servers (with an extended time limit; 2-3 hours per map is not long enough. I'd say double it to 4 for small maps and up to 6 for large maps).
The key to scenarios is no shipyards and old resource system. Unless of course you don't mind watching Darkspace die a slow death. Do I need to email Faustus directly and let him know that perhaps his vision of a MV may not be the best thing for this game? That perhaps abandoning the idea altogether and just going back to what the game used to be a few years ago would be best? So many of us know it, why doesn't he?
|
|
_________________
I am watching you in the dark shadows
|
DarkCloudd
Grand Admiral
Joined: June 20, 2005
Posts: 85
From: Iowa
| Posted: 2009-05-07 06:33
If the problem with the MV is the lack of action then why not put it on a 36 hour reset. After 36 hours all the planets controlled by the factions get reset to barren and we have to start again rebuilding planets and fighting for land again instead of the perpetual stalemate that it is now. I know I might play more on my days off if the MV would reset and we could start from scratch again, instead of tranny rushing and attempting to bomb and failing because the planetary defenses are too strong for anything below a Dread in order to overwhelm the defenses. The neutral planets need to be locked in order to prevent the AI from building and screwing up the planetary builds. IMHO
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
